On the decline of Insiders
Jan Kent writes: Agree completely with this article. Insiders is its own hermetically sealed world that seems to be a policy-free zone. I find myself yelling at the screen in frustration. But the political games seem to be all they are interested in, when most watchers want intelligent analysis of actually proposed policies. No wonder people turn completely away from so-called paid talking heads as experts. They draw from a very narrow pool.
I’d like to see more analysis from people like Barry Jones and John Hewson who delve into deeper problems besetting our country. The individual bubbles that social media has created mean common content is now lost and the rise of individualism undermines our democracy. We have lost the ability to debate and disagree in a civilised manner.
Like the coliseum, winning at all costs is the norm by whatever dubious means are to hand. The negativity as a tool to reach government is such a cynical ploy but it isn’t called out by mainstream media — rather the combative approach is encouraged. It’s time to call time on these tactics.
David Trembath writes: Sadly it has come time to put down the faltering nag that is Insiders. One watches in despair as the gravitas and intelligence of Barrie Cassidy is replaced by a haircut in search of a headline in David Speers. Distinguished guests are noticeably absent in the new-look ABC. Instead we have a roll call of ex-Murdoch journalists or those wishing to become paid inhabitants of the Murdoch stable.
The rot is deep within the ABC. It seems after Ita Buttrose and the Morrison government had their way, poor old Auntie has been left with the work experience kids. I imagine a ghostly newsroom with a parking area for skateboards. Analysis has become a corrupted term.
I’m afraid it is root and branch, search and destroy that is needed.
David Simpson writes: There’s a hole in our Sunday mornings where Insiders used to be.
Insiders, as often as not, seemed to set new agendas. To surprise and delight with a range of opinions on topics that weren’t washed out by other media exposure. Watching Insiders was a positive experience that made us think we had invested our time in something useful.
The current Insiders seems more interested in bouncing around on the ripples in the mediaverse caused by other players. Insiders seems past caring about causing ripples of its own.
On AUKUS
Steven Brennan writes: AUKUS is ridiculous from so many angles. Yes, the Collins-class submarines are outdated so must be replaced. But why should Australia seek to build a replacement from scratch based on a whole new design?
I opposed the French project for this reason and argued that we should simply purchase an existing design like the Virginia-class sub from the Americans. These boats tick the major boxes. It’s the same when we buy military aircraft from the US.
With AUKUS we are outsourcing everything overseas at a cost we simply cannot control and won’t know for years. All for eight to six boats. To suggest the budget is $368 billion is stupidity and an insult — it’s a politician’s number. The cost will at least double with no upper limit.
Yes, you can say “protectionism” is bad and we have no capacity to do these things and bringing in foreign labor is bad, or a political hot potato. But if Australia keeps outsourcing critical national projects and technological developments, we will not only be exposed to the other government’s internal priorities, but also end up a dumb nation that can’t control or maintain its own critical defence and other infrastructure.
Australia needs to invest taxpayer money in building a country that can stand on its own two feet — not just going for the quick fix all the time.
We have been caught in the flushing toilet of the Morrison government’s wedge politics — thought up over a taxpayer-funded lunch somewhere probably. I won’t be around to see it, but if one day these nuclear submarines are built, people will look back and realise it was one of the biggest defence policy disasters in Australia’s history.
I don’t want to see Insiders axed, but I do want Speers to be replaced by a new generation Barrie Cassidy or Kerry O’Brien. Does such an animal even exist?
I also want to see an end to the constant parade of stale, pale and mostly male Newscorpse hacks.
I agree 100%. Also…why did the ABC abolish THE DRUM? At least we had the occasional expert discussing major issues of the day, which were relevant to most people. Instead we get Afternoon Briefing…just another version of what is wrong with The Insiders.
I met David Marr at the Moruya Saturday market three years ago and asked him why he was not on Insiders any more. He replied that he was writing a book (since published) but added that he didn’t really know why he was on it in the first place, He described himself as “just a blowhard from Sydney”. The same could be said for Gerard Henderson – guests who, strictly speaking, were not “insiders’ as in the Press Gallery at Parliament. And wasn’t the show a jolly side more interesting.
Now we are only offered employees from the N-e-w-s Ltd organisation whose stated aim, as a member of the corporate (read self-interested) media, is to abolish the idea of an independent public broadcaster; Nine, whose 2GB (ie Ben Fordham and Ray Hadley) is a cheerleader for the RWNJs; and a token from the ABC in an attempt to showcase its talent and give them more exposure.
The fact is that the “Insiders” are only inside their own little bubble. One minute they’re talking about who said what in Parliament or some hot topic like NDIS, and the next they’re pontificating about Hamas or Trump or Ukraine, as though they are experts on everything, when all they’ve done is read the same stuff that I have from people who really know the issues.
You want a suggestion for Speers’ replacement? Steve Cannane, currently reporting from somewhere between Kyiv and Dublin. Was a time in the early days of The Drum when he hosted/presented/led the discussion and I thought he was very impressive. Then they could send the execrable Greg Jennett over there, where as a foreign correspondent he was quite good. And Speers can be shifted to Afternoon Briefing.
And The Drum? Replacing a worthwhile and informed discussion about issues of the day with endless repeats of Backroads and Hard Quiz tells you all you need to know about the state of the ABC. It can’t be dollars because The Drum would have been as cheap as chips to produce. It is getting to the stage where I’ve stopped looking forward to new episodes of Hard Quiz on Wednesday nights.
I agree about The Drum. Members of my family who rarely watch current affairs would watch The Drum. Instead of Newscorp hacks there were people who truly worked at the grassroots of the community and could be their voice. There were a couple of questionable ex pollies but they were well balanced out by having people who were knowledgeable about the issue through their own experience and education.
Too true. Are they being paid by the (spoken) word? Worse than Q&A, at least there they have politicians shouting at each other and an occasional blood spill.
Ten points for the description “a haircut in search of a headline”.
It recalls John Kerry – “a haircut in search of a brain.”
The real end-game for AUKUS is somewhere to dump all the existing and future nuclear waste sitting around in the US and UK. And we’ll be paying them a trillion $$ to take it. And we won’t need our own boats because we’ll already be a solid part of the US military command. Sovereignty anyone? How good is that?
Indeed. People used to say “never believe anything until it’s officially denied” (until accountability was so 20th century). Marles’ promise, or offer, or suggestion about nuclear waste is not worth the electrons used to propagate it. He’s either lying, or catastrophically misinformed. As I posted in another comment (can’t find it now), Australia is mostly empty, and there’s plenty of ruined land around Maralinga, so who cares? Not the lambs still voting for Tweedledum & Tweedledee!
“Radioactive waste generated through the program including spent nuclear fuel would be managed on Defence land, he confirmed.”
https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/sea/aukus-details-unveiled
What ever happened to the CSIRO invention of Synroc? It was apparently a long lived permanent encapsulation of highly radio active waste but was ignored by the Americans in favour of their failed vitrious product.
Synroc was developed by ANSTO, not CSIRO. It’s still around – see https://www.ansto.gov.au/products/ansto-synroc.
The Swedish Gotland submarine is an existing proven submarine which has successfully sunk two American aircraft carriers in war games and retreated without detection by the Yanks. Much to their embarrassment.
These are smaller, cheaper and less detectable than the enormous unavailable American noisy monsters and are defensive weapons suited for operation in Australian waters. Additionally they use modified diesel engines .
No no no,far too sensible.
Sweden, the last bastion of quality. Is there nothing they touch that is not improved with their logical thinking.
I never used to miss watching Insiders. Now I never watch it.
The Lying Nasty Party destroyed our car manufacturing industry and our oil refining capacity.Who was it that drove the first Holden car made at the factory at Fisherman’s Bend? Ben Chifley,and the clowns voted him out in 1949.Unfortuneately,if Ben was alive today he wouldn’t be able to be part of the Alternative Liberal Party.
HoldOn (General Motors) and FoulCan (Ford) = “our car manufacturing industry” ?