Going deep
John Richardson writes: Re. “The year of deep obsessions and the deep state” (December 23). Bravo for saving your absolute best ‘til last. Breathtaking: a true tour de force. Compulsory reading for anyone who might be unaware of just how fragile our liberty really is and how easily we can be beguiled by the perfidy of the most wicked and dangerous in their hunger for high office. And a sobering reminder of just how precarious life has become at the hands of the neo-liberal ideologues from both sides of the power game who would run “Team Australia”.
Right there on my TV
John Kotsopoulos writes: Re. “Is Michelle Guthrie going to sell ads on your ABC?” (December 21). Ads on the ABC? Do the neocons realise in their rush to circumscribe the ABC by introducing commercial imperatives they risk hitting the advertising revenues of the private media? Probably not. But hey, who cares who suffers when you see a chance to put the bovver boots into a perceived political foe? Political numbskullery at its best.
Sadly John Richardson shows no awareness of how faux progressives such as himself are helping cause, to use his words, “just how fragile our liberty really is.”
John Kotsopoulos, with his “chance to put the bovver boots into a perceived political foe?” and “Political numbskullery at its best” helps, when we look at his quaint approach to the English language, explain why he remains unaware that the original ABC Charter didn’t call for the Organisation to compete with the private media for such events as the recent Soccer rights.
If the ABC/SBS duo are being encouraged to participate in such bidding wars in order to win ratings, why wouldn’t Michelle Guthrie have to consider selling ads on your ABC?
It’s not so much John’s “neocons” as it is his own ilk who create the problem in the first place, is it.
Courageous anonymous AR, to open with your words, “Just in case – you missed it”, why not come out of your fantasy Cave and read The latest M.I.T. Technology Newsletter which explains why “Bioenergy Plus Carbon Capture Sounds Promising, Looks Dubious.”
It mentions the elephant (indeed the herds of elephants?) in the room which Faux Progressive lobbies don’t want mentioned, including the fact that, “Climate change agreements rest on negative emissions technologies that may be unachievable.”
This will possibly be a tad too demanding for some but for those hoping to be better informed it’s worth the effort.
Perhaps the Crikey Commissariat will follow M.I.T.’s courageous lead; or perhaps not.