Talk:Australian Broadcasting Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	Australian Broadcasting Corporation is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
	This article was the Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight (25 November - 10 December 2006). For details on the improvements made to the article, see the history of past collaborations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	To-do list for Australian Broadcasting Corporation:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Strike out as completed. rewrite in summary style. split off relevant sections to own articles. restructure: History (daughter History of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation) resource links birth [1] 1940's [2] 1950's [3] 1960's and 1970's [4] 1980's [5] 1990's [6] 2000's [7] Logo Structure Funding Services News (daughter ABC News (Australia) Radio (daughter ABC Radio (Australia) Television (daughters ABC TV (Australia) and ABC2; alternatively, ABC Television) Online (daughter ABC Online) International (daughters Radio Australia and Australia Network) Commercial (covering ABC Shops, Symphony Australia; daughter ABC Enterprises)

• Talk:Australian Broadcasting Corporation/Archive 1

Contents 1 History section totally removed? 2 The Alan McGillivray Solution 3 Current members 4 Government and the ABC, and Politicisation 5 'Aunty' 6 Logo speedy delete 7 Removed this for better wording... 8 Board? Commission? 9 The Lab

[edit] History section totally removed?

Who failed to provide a summary of the broadcaster's history when moving the text to a daughter article? The text should be re-inserted until this is done. I'd expect two to three paragraphs here. Tony 00:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I hived off the history section at the same time as I created a separate article for ABC TV. This was done as part of the ongoing process of refactoring this article in the summary style. A summary of the former section will eventually be provided by myself if the blank section doesn't inspire someone else to write it first. I think the main article link is preferable to re-inserting the excessive history to an already long article.--cj | talk 09:51, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a total blank is worse than a long history. Please create a summary SOON. Your action has resulted in damage to the overall article, IMV. Tony 11:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Whereas, I disagree. --cj | talk 12:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

So what. It goes back until you've written a summary. Like your hide to remove it without going through the process of raising the matter here first. Tony 13:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Come on, If I was from Germany, I would not have a clue about the funding history or anything without clicking the link. Simply, a summary needs to be written below the link, describing the major milestones of the ABC ~ Trisreed my talk my contribs 14:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Guys. C'mon I'm sure we find a compromise here. All we need is a couple of paragraphs below the daughter link and that shouldn't be too much of challenge. I can't do it right now but undertake to do that first thing tomorrow if someone doesn't beat me to it. — Moondyne 14:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks to Moondyne for doing what Cyberjunkie undertook to do in the first place. I think it should be at least twice that length, which would still be a fraction of the previous length. But at least it's not an embarrassment now. Tony 03:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The history section seems too short to me. Sorry to butt in, but I thought I'd have a look at the article as it's the current Collaboration. MrsPlum 08:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I quite agree: Cyberjunkie has ended up damaging the article by acting unilaterally and without preparation. The current section is too short and fragmentary. I rather think that he should fix it up, as he undertook to. Tony 01:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Alan McGillivray Solution

This is referred to in the references, but I can't find it on Google or on library catalog searches under Alan McGillivray's books.--Grahamec 13:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current members

I added links to the names of current board members, and found that many had articles already. However, Mark Scott is a disambig page, without any article for him, and this is the link also found in the infobox. It would be better if we redlinked a page for him, and maybe someone during this collab could write about him etc.? Likewise with John Gallagher. SauliH 15:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Government and the ABC, and Politicisation

Found an interesting paper dealing with the history of government appointments to the ABC board at Friends of the ABC submission. I feel that discussing the appointments of the conservative figures to the board, without providing the historical perspactive is leaning towards a political POV. This link provides a large amount of material that could be used to fill this out further. If some has the time or inclination please look at. SauliH 19:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

See also thie lectureSauliH 21:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I am listing a few things here for reference. Feel free to write them up in prose if you like

Controversial Appointments

Chairman appointments

Sir Henry Bland retired public servant and adviser to Malcolm Fraser during the election campaign, 1976

Donald McDonald, arts administrator and close friend of John Howard, 1996.

Richard Downing, professor of economics, 1973, and Ken Myer, department store executive and chairman, 1983, had publicly endorsed Labor at the 1972 election

David Hill, railway executive, 1986,was close to Neville Wran

Also, commissioner/director appointments

view appendix SauliH 07:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that the claim that the ABC has been criticised by Conservative Governments for being left wing is too narrow. When left wing Governments have been in power they have also been very critical of the ABC

[edit] 'Aunty'

I tried to find a source for the origination of the name 'aunty'. This lecture was the best I could find. SauliH 21:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't doubt that the BBC was called Aunty first. It is only in recent years (say 20) that I have noticed the ABC being called Aunty, and I was familiar with it being applied to the BBC long before that.--Grahamec 06:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logo speedy delete

It would be nice to have an explanation on-site. Tony 00:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The tag states "This image is tagged as being allowed under "fair use" with a generic fair use template and was uploaded after May 4, 2006. However, it has no explanation as to why it is permitted under Wikipedia's rules for fair use. It may be deleted seven days after it was uploaded. Please remove this template if a rationale is provided." hmmm... SauliH 01:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Does someone know how to do this? Tony 01:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

There is an explanation of the fair use rationale, if you click on the logo. I question the status of the claim that it will be deleted, coming from a red-linked user.--Grahamec 06:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Being "red-linked" shouldn't make a difference. _JD^talk 08:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

All right I withdraw that, but there is something to be said for creating even a very short user page.--Grahamec 09:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I had a very short user page. I deleted it. _JD^talk 09:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed this for better wording...

I removed this paragraph for the time being, as it has a certain level of uncited opnion. I am not sure how it or if it should go back in.

Due to the ABC's almost total reliance on government funding, as well as government recommendations to the Governor General for board appointments, the broadcaster has had a complex relationship with governments. ^{[citation needed]} Relations between public broadcasters and the governments that provide all or much of their funding, and establish and maintain their legal status, have typically been through periods of turbulence since the rise of current affairs and documentaries in broadcasting.^{[citation needed]} SauliH 16:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

These statements may not be specific enough to require citations, as long as more detailed information does have them. Tony 01:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I am ok with the idea behind this paragraph being entered... I guess my point is more - Do we need it? and if so, can we rewrite it? I am inclined to leave it out. SauliH 07:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Board? Commission?

pre 1984 ABCorp - was the administration correctly called a board or commission or board of commissioners? If you know please edit my section to the correct terminology. SauliH 16:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Lab

A good site, The Lab provides a gateway into the world of science, including the unique self-service science forum and the best science news from Down Under.

This is completely opinionated. I will correct it by saying "The Lab" is an online service reporting science related news. It features in-depth articles and analysis on current scientific issues, and various pages for children, featuring Karl Kruszelnicki, a popular Australian scientist who made his debut on the ABC.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.187.153.252 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 20 December 2006.