cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Pepe wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
@Pepe:
Australia’s Sky News seems to parrot almost everything said on America’s Fox News, but in Australian accents. Seriously. When I hear Sky News clips they’re almost word for word the same garbage as Fox News, so, IMO they’re quite a right wing conservative news source - not a balanced one.
So, you aren't aware of how many left-wing advocates/politicians are participants of the Sky News channel?
Is this right?
Never heard any. Also didn't seek any out - the ones I've heard just play in the Facebook watch queue automatically. From what I've heard, it seems they're very Fox News like and my guess is they have left wing political guests just the same as Fox News does.
There are at least 5 leftie regulars on Sky news.
The Australian ABC has zero, zip, nada regular conservatives on their programs on the other hand.
Sky News is conservative overall, but there are good left-wing opinions also.
I wouldn't compare Fox with Sky.

One of the strange things the Right wing always claim here in Oz is how the media is left biased (particularly the ABC)
yet thousands of research studies show that media bias has no significant bearing on voter preference. So why do they keep harping on about something that has much to do about nothing?
Can you verify your claim?
There are two aspects to the "claim"
1. For starters there is a lack of evidence of media bias
https://academic.oup.com/joc/article-ab ... m=fulltextAnd ergo there is lack of evidence that media will change voter preference
https://voxeu.org/article/does-mass-med ... vidence-usThe issue isn't that voters don't read the news (they do) but that there's a scarcity of solid evidence to back up the spurious claims of Scomo and associates (Abbott and others) that government broadcasters are biased and influence voters.
We have already covered the ABC being left-leaning via the recent 'Invasion Day' spin, so much so they had to retract that descriptive.
The ABC needs to be impartial, by Charter, but isn't, as has been established.
We have already covered the internal ABC report, that they wanted to hide from the public until someone brought it up in Parliament, which indicated they needed to be more equitable in terms of discussing both the right and left of politics, so I am not going over old ground beyond this.
The question is, why would they waste their time in their left-wing bias if it makes no difference?
Why are they not simply impartial?
Perhaps they haven't read your articles.