Privatise the ABC? The case for and against

Crikey readers are in complete agreement: hands off the ABC. But writer Roger Colman says the matter is still open for debate.

Privatising the ABC: the debate

Roger Colman, media and internet analyst for CCZ Statton Equities, writes: Re. “The ABC of why we need public broadcasting” (yesterday). Bernard Keane makes two salient points regarding my piece on the ABC. Correct: the ABC no longer runs orchestra, and does not run remote radio services, only some regional radio stations. Therefore my expense comparisons make the ABC even less efficient than I presented.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

11 thoughts on “Privatise the ABC? The case for and against

  1. Michael Lew

    Roger Coleman concludes with this: “And the ABC, through its strategic placement of programming, is trying to drive out commercial plurality to ensure that its ALP/Greens propaganda message is what’s left. This is not good for Australia.”

    Really? Is that really what he thinks? He thinks that the ABC deliberately drives out commercial plurality in order to promote the interests of the ALP and the Greens? I sincerely hope that he wrote that as hyperbole, but I suspect that he may have let frustration drive him to show his true thoughts!

  2. Will

    The personal leanings of journalists is not a valid measure of bias even if we accept them as accurate. And it’s an outright falsehood to suggest the ABC does not employing conservatives or provide a platform for regular conservative commentary. This is raving lolbertarian lunacy and crikey shouldn’t dignify it.

  3. Tamas Calderwood

    David Salter – we all pay GST, so we’re all taxpayers.

  4. Jill Baird

    Can Roger Coleman please learn some basic statistics, like what constitutes a valid sample, before he embarrasses himself further? That survey was based on replies by just 34 journalists at the ABC. Meaning, it’s meaningless.

  5. klewso

    And what do we do when a government won’t “encourage as much media plurality as possible” for fear of upsetting the dominant player now, editing so much PR?

  6. pertina1

    I assumed you were having us on by publishing Roger Coleman yesterday; to stir up the punters perhaps? Bernard elegantly demolished his ravings in the following piece and a good laugh had by all! Now he’s back, with a further load of tripe. Is this publish a dope week?

  7. Blair Martin

    Ah! All is revealed. Roger Colman is a good old fashioned Thatcherite! “All for me and none for you” right wing thuggery. While Michael Lew has picked the eyes out of Colman’s truly nonsensical closing statement, the magnificent egregiousness of “[t]he ABC stacks current affairs programming, to drive commercial broadcasters out of that segment of the market.” must be acknowledged. Barking mad is a less erudite but exact definition.

  8. Malcolm Harrison

    Colman argues using a series a strawmen which he knocks down. he seems to have no tolerance or understanding of differing points of view. indeed he seems to argue from a position that takes for granted that there is a right and wrong answer, and he has the right one. His concluding argument is not an argument, it is an assertion. The notion that governments should not own businesses, and that government ownership of the ABC is bad for Australia has no basis anywhere except his opinion, which personally I find both valueless and offensive. m.

  9. klewso

    …. that wasn’t “Jonathan Coleman”, was it?

  10. CML

    @ Tamas Calderwood. The GST is collected by the federal government, but every last cent goes to the States.
    The ABC is funded by the Commonwealth government. Get your facts right before you start attacking people.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details