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.
