It is obvious that you agree with their agenda. You agree because you only see that side yourself. It is the questions that are asked or not asked and the way they ask the questions. If they are going to get an answer they wouldn't like aired then they don't ask that question.
If there was real balance then why are the panellists out of proportion with the actual population. Women outnumber men. The number of times we have aboriginals or muslims is out of proportion to the population numbers. Would they have Mark Latham or Pauline Hanson on a panel or just get them there at times when it is possible to get them in the "hot seat". They always put Libs in a hot seat but get Labor pollies in when the discussion is likely to go the way of Labor. Just checkout the political affiliations of the presenters. They give Malcolm Turnbull a chance to air his views but I don't see them getting Tony Abbott there to balance the discussion. They give BLM too much oxygen. They give the Victorian premier too much leeway.
I've mentioned this before but in case you missed it. I was once approached by the ABC to talk about the whaling days on the basis that I am one of the few survivors active in the industry (their words). They wanted to hear about the whaling days. I agreed to do the interview and they gave me a time to be available. I then made the comment that I was in favour of the industry restarting now that the whale numbers had returned to the earlier days when modern whaling started. They never rang at the arranged time and the interview the had was with a whale watch operator.
