Why rely on other countries’ news sources?
Jane Quin writes: Re. “The ABC debate: we have Mamamia and BuzzFeed, we don’t need the ABC anymore” (Friday). James Paterson argues because we can access news etc globally, we don’t need an Australian version that is funded by taxes and not corporations. Why? Why is it OK for other democracies to fund their news services and thus provide us with information, e.g. Treasurer Joe Hockey on BBC’s Hard Talk, and not us?
What is it with conservatives? Oh, I guess, they and their families never watch ABC/SBS but thoroughly enjoy commercial offerings such as those promulgated by Alan Jones? Sucks boo to Media Watch, hurrah, hurrah for My Kitchen Rules?
The real problem with Tassie wind farm
Roy Ramage writes: Re. “Wind goes south in Tasmania” (yesterday).
The decision by Hydro Tasmania may have less to do with community debate and more to do with Hydro’s perilous financial position. The Grattan Institute’s July 2014 energy report positions Tasmania with the highest energy costs in the nation.
Like other power generators, Hydro failed to anticipate energy demand declines driven by efficiencies, renewables (solar/wind) and sadly the continual demise of our manufacturing industry.
Hydro has borrowings of $905 million and Basslink commitments of $920 million with interest fixed at double rates now available. Hydro’s finance costs are now nearing $100 million per annum! Topping this off is the recurrent “hire” of Basslink at $76 million yearly for the next 17 years!
The one hope for the Hydro was the RET being retained enabling Hydro’s advantage with renewable energy to be sold into the national grid. Even this lifeline now looks increasingly threatened by the Abbott government.
Being the poorest state in the union saddled with the highest energy costs indicates Tasmania will remain our most mendicant state for the foreseeable future.
Whitlam shrugged
Les Heimann writes: Re. “‘Unmitigated disaster’? We fact-check News Corp’s Whitlam haters” (Friday). The real Atlas who shrugged was Gough Whitlam. Bolt, Sheridan , Devine, Henderson and the rest are not Whitlam haters. They are much worse than that.
They join Jones, Albrechtsen and a whole lot more Murdoch minions as slavish sycophants to the neo-con views exhibited by Genghis Rupert. These people pervert the airwaves and news waves throughout Australia. They are zealots slithering around the ankles of the great Murdoch slavering over a morsel of praise from their he who must be obeyed.
Of course they know Whitlam was a giant of his time; upending forever “the right to rule” mentality of the private school class. The current crop of silvertail wannabees making up this federal government yearn for yesteryear; the pre-Whitlam era. They will fail and fall as will their fawning scribes who will eventually return to reading Ayn Rand.
Les Heimann, well said.
A certain personality type needs Rupert Murdoch in their life as it saves them the effort of objective thinking.
What was it, that political neoplasm, Murdoch asked the night Whitlam won – “How many seats did we win?”?
… When it comes to wit, this current crop wouldn’t have Whit between them.
True oh true klewso! However, the problem with the whole miserable collection is that they are simply lazy journalists of less than stellar skill. Devine and Henderson in their Fairfax days appeared to have lost touch with reality. Henderson’s final efforts there really did seem to be so far off track that I felt quite uncomfortable. Sadly the right wing press makes no sensible contribution to debate because they cannot process information logically. You can put the recent Fairfaxers like Reith in that category, so one eyed the comments are irrelevant and no background of fairness in public life. Woe is us!
Don’t buy the Oz, Fairfax papers, and don’t mention any of the table thumpers they employ….and they will eventually go away.