Archive for May, 2013

Media bias … new proof

May 19, 2013

Henningham confirmed, although we always new it.

Now it is official.

34 ABC journalists who had the courage to declare their voting intention said they would vote for:

The Greens  –  41.2% 

Labor – 32.4%

Coalition – 14.7% 

A new study br Folker Hanusch, a Senior Lecturer and Program Leader in Journalism at University of the Sunshine Coast, has published a new study that confirms earlier studies by Prof Henningham from the 1980’s on the beliefs and cultural values of our journalists in Australia.

Recently I blogged on this issue citing work from America on the leftist culture of of contemporary journalists that is clearly present in Australia. In this new study, all has been confirmed.

The report went on , commenting on senior editorial staff:

Among the 83 senior editors who took part in the survey, the Coalition was the party of choice on 43.2%, followed by Labor (34.1%) and the Greens (11.4%).

This suggests that Australia’s media bosses are more in line with the broader electorate, at least according to recent Newspoll results.

However, with the clear complacency of Mark Scott at the ABC in the face of sustained accusations of bias and the protected workshop mentality of that organisation, there is nothing much that can be hoped for from this organisation.

Advertisements

Denial of reality: a common thing

May 19, 2013

Greg Melleuish pins the problem of the Left

In a new book published by Connor Court,  Australian Intellectuals: Their Strange History and Pathological Tendencies, Greg Melleuish explains the tendency of academics and the Left generally to dismiss any criticism of their pet theories or ideas. As he says in an extract appearing in The Australian:

 “they are increasingly addicted to theory and to making the world bend to their theories”.

I have noted that this same tendency has completely distorted the scientific method, particularly with regard to climate science.

Carl Popper, in his magisterial book, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, first published in 1934, is surprisingly prescient about present day climate science and warned that falsifyability is the criterion of demarcation between science and non-science.  The irony is that this is just what is vehemently resisted by climate scientists. They set out to prove that their theory of warming is correct rather than openly testing it even as their hypotheses fail. But according to Popper, “the wrong view of science betrays itself in the craving to be right”.

Micheal “Hockey Stick” Mann, Tim “Empty Dams” Flannery and even Robyn “100 Metre Sea Rise” Williams, courtesy of our ABC, are the most obvious examples that come to mind. The scandal is that they undermine our confidence in the way science should be done. It is such a pity that these warminists are so completely unaware of what they are doing and why, in the end, the sceptical camp is the only one doing real science.