So who do you trust in the Australian media landscape in 2018?

On 9 October 2018 Essential Research released the results of survey questions concerning trust in the media.

Once again public broadcasters, ABC and SBS, were the clear winners across all categories in which they were listed.

Q. How much trust do you have in what you read or hear in the following media?

	Total a lot /some trust		A lot of trust	Some trust	Not much trust	No trust at all	Don’t know	Don’t use	% change		Total a lot /some Oct 17
ABC TV news and current affairs	62%		19%	43%	14%	9%	5%	10%	-1		63%
SBS TV news and current affairs	61%		18%	43%	14%	6%	5%	15%	–		61%
ABC radio news and current affairs	57%		17%	40%	17%	8%	4%	14%	-1		58%
Commercial TV news and current affairs	48%		8%	40%	29%	12%	5%	7%	+3		45%
News and opinion in local newspapers	47%		6%	41%	27%	9%	4%	13%	+3		44%
ABC radio talkback programs	44%		8%	36%	22%	10%	5%	20%	–		44%
News and opinion in daily newspapers	44%		6%	38%	28%	10%	5%	12%	+2		42%
Commercial radio news and current affairs	44%		5%	39%	28%	11%	5%	13%	+3		41%
News and opinion websites	39%		4%	35%	32%	11%	5%	13%	-1		40%
Commercial radio talkback programs	35%		4%	31%	29%	14%	5%	18%	–		35%
Internet blogs	17%		2%	15%	34%	22%	6%	20%	-3		20%

Overall, there has been little change in trust in media since this question was asked 12 months ago.

The most trusted media were ABC TV news and current affairs (62% a lot/some trust), SBS TV news and current affairs (61%) and ABC radio news and current affairs (57%).

The least trusted were internet blogs (17%) and commercial radio talkback programs (35%).

Q. How much trust do you have in what you read in the following newspapers and news websites?

	Total a lot /some trust		A lot of trust	Some trust	Not much trust	No trust at all	Don’t know
ABC news websites	69%		21%	48%	16%	9%	6%
The Australian	59%		12%	47%	22%	11%	9%
The Guardian Australia website	55%		10%	45%	23%	11%	12%
News.com.au	55%		10%	45%	27%	12%	7%
Sydney Morning Herald	54%		13%	41%	25%	11%	10%
The Age	53%		9%	44%	24%	13%	11%
Nine.com.au	53%		8%	45%	27%	13%	6%
The Telegraph	49%		10%	39%	26%	14%	11%
Herald Sun	46%		8%	38%	27%	15%	11%
Yahoo 7 News website	45%		6%	39%	29%	16%	9%
Courier Mail	44%		6%	38%	30%	15%	13%
Daily Mail website	39%		6%	33%	31%	21%	10%

* Note : Percentages based only on respondents who had read/used each newspaper/website

Overall, among those who have read or used them, the most trusted news sources were the ABC news websites (69%), The Australian (59%), The Guardian Australia (55%) and news.com.au (55%).

The least trusted were The Daily Mail (39%) and The Courier Mail (44%).

Q. Overall, do you think the news reporting and comment on the ABC is independent and unbiased?

	Total		Vote Labor	Vote Lib/Nat	Vote Greens	Vote other
Yes	40%		50%	40%	52%	28%
No	34%		24%	43%	23%	50%
Don’t know	26%		25%	17%	25%	22%

40% think that the news reporting and comment on the ABC is independent and unbiased and 34% think it isn’t.

Those most likely to think the ABC is not independent and unbiased were LNP voters (43%), other party voters (50%) and aged 55+ (40%).

As for the general public's attitude to the recent attacks on ABC independence - 36% of survey respondents thought that the Government has too much influence over the ABC, 16% think they have not enough influence, 17% think they have about the right level of influence and 31& did not know.

Scott Morrison and climate change policy

On 8 October 2018 the UN International Panel On Climate Change issued this media release:

Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C
approved by governments

Incheon, Republic of Korea, October 8 – Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society, the IPCC said in a new assessment. With clear benefits to people and natural ecosystems, limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C could go hand in hand with ensuring a more sustainable and equitable society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said on Monday.

The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C was approved by the IPCC on Saturday in Incheon, Republic of Korea. It will be a key scientific input into the Katowice Climate Change Conference in Poland in December, when governments review the Paris Agreement to tackle climate change.

"With more than 6,000 scientific references cited and the dedicated contribution of thousands of expert and government reviewers worldwide, this important report testifies to the breadth and policy relevance of the IPCC," said Hoesung Lee, Chair of the IPCC.

Ninety-one authors and review editors from 40 countries prepared the IPCC report in response to an invitation from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) when it adopted the Paris Agreement in 2015.

The report's full name is Global Warming of 1.5°C, an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty.

"One of the key messages that comes out very strongly from this report is that we are already seeing the consequences of 1°C of global warming through more extreme weather, rising sea levels and diminishing Arctic sea ice, among other changes," said Panmao Zhai, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group I.

The report highlights a number of climate change impacts that could be avoided by limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to 2°C, or more. For instance, by 2100, global sea level rise would be 10 cm lower with global warming of 1.5°C compared with 2°C. The likelihood of an Arctic Ocean free of sea ice in summer would be once per century with global warming of 1.5°C, compared with at least once per decade with 2°C. Coral reefs would decline by 70-90 percent with global warming of 1.5°C, whereas virtually all (> 99 percent) would be lost with 2°C.

"Every extra bit of warming matters, especially since warming of 1.5°C or higher increases the risk associated with long-lasting or irreversible changes, such as the loss of some ecosystems," said Hans-Otto Pörtner, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group II.

Limiting global warming would also give people and ecosystems more room to adapt and remain below relevant risk thresholds, added Pörtner. The report also examines pathways available to limit warming to 1.5°C, what it would take to achieve them and what the consequences could be. "The good news is that some of the kinds of actions that would be needed to limit global warming to 1.5°C are already underway around the world, but they would need to accelerate," said Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Co-Chair of Working Group I.

The report finds that limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require "rapid and far-reaching" transitions in land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities. Global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) would need to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching 'net zero' around 2050. This means that any remaining emissions would need to be balanced by removing CO2 from the air.

"Limiting warming to 1.5°C is possible within the laws of chemistry and physics but doing so would require unprecedented changes," said Jim Skea, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group III.

Allowing the global temperature to temporarily exceed or 'overshoot' 1.5°C would mean a greater reliance on techniques that remove CO2 from the air to return global temperature to below 1.5°C by 2100. The effectiveness of such techniques are unproven at large scale and some may carry significant risks for sustainable development, the report notes.

"Limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared with 2°C would reduce challenging impacts on ecosystems, human health and well-being, making it easier to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals," said Priyardarshi Shukla, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group III.

The decisions we make today are critical in ensuring a safe and sustainable world for everyone, both now and in the future, said Debra Roberts, Co-Chair of IPCC Working Group II.

"This report gives policymakers and practitioners the information they need to make decisions that tackle climate change while considering local context and people's needs. The next few years are probably the most important in our history," she said.

The IPCC is the leading world body for assessing the science related to climate change, its impacts and potential future risks, and possible response options.

The report was prepared under the scientific leadership of all three IPCC working groups. Working Group I assesses the physical science basis of climate change; Working Group II addresses impacts, adaptation and vulnerability; and Working Group III deals with the mitigation of climate change.

The Paris Agreement adopted by 195 nations at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in December 2015 included the aim of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change by "holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels."

As part of the decision to adopt the Paris Agreement, the IPCC was invited to produce, in 2018, a Special Report on global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. The IPCC accepted the invitation, adding that the Special Report would look at these issues in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty.

Global Warming of 1.5°C is the first in a series of Special Reports to be produced in the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Cycle. Next year the IPCC will release the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, and Climate Change and Land, which looks at how climate change affects land use.

The Summary for Policymakers (SPM) presents the key findings of the Special Report, based on the assessment of the available scientific, technical and socio-economic literature relevant to global warming of 1.5°C.

The Summary for Policymakers of the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15) is available at https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15 or www.ipcc.ch. 

The aforementioned summary forms part of the scientific findings informing the IPCC 6^th Assessment Report currently being prepared by the working groups.

Australian Prime Minister and Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison sought to downplay its significance because it made no specific recommendations on a country by country basis.

He stated that last year the “same report” said that “Australia was right on the money when it came to the mix of climate change policies.

.@ScottMorrisonMP: on the climate report: This report deals with the global situation, it does not provide recommendations to Australia or Australia’s program.

MORE: https://t.co/Cj9SlGufQm #newsday pic.twitter.com/VXRgEesW5i

— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) October 8, 2018

As far as I can tell last year’s special report did not give Australia a glowing endorsement.

If one wants an IPCC opinion on Australia's climate change policy one has to go documents such as this......

This is an excerpt from the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (Working Group II Report "Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability") on the subject of Australia:

Adaptation is already occurring and adaptation planning is becoming embedded in some planning processes, albeit mostly at the conceptual rather than implementation level (high confidence). Many solutions for reducing energy and water consumption in urban areas with co-benefits for climate change adaptation (e.g., greening cities and recycling water) are already being implemented. Planning for 1375 25 Australasia Chapter 25 reduced water availability in southern Australia and for sea level rise in both countries is becoming adopted widely, although implementation of specific policies remains piecemeal, subject to political changes, and open to legal challenges. {25.4; Boxes 25-1, 25-2, 25-9} Adaptive capacity is generally high in many human systems, but implementation faces major constraints, especially for transformational responses at local and community levels (high confidence). Efforts to understand and enhance adaptive capacity and adaptation processes have increased since the AR4, particularly in Australia. Constraints on implementation arise from: absence of a consistent information base and uncertainty about projected impacts; limited financial and human resources to assess local risks and to develop and implement effective policies and rules; limited integration of different levels of governance; lack of binding guidance on principles and priorities; different attitudes towards the risks associated with climate change; and different values placed on objects and places at risk. {25.4, 25.10.3; Table 25-2; Box a5-1} [my yellow highlighting]

Successive Coalition federal governments (with Scott Morrison as a cabinet minister) typified this half-hearted approach to climate change mitigation. After four years the largely ineffective Emissions Reduction Fund is almost empty, the Renewable Energy Target has been all but abandoned and the National Energy Agreement is defunct, with the government's attention turned towards growing fossil fuel energy.

As prime minister Morrison has recently announced he will not be honouring Australia's $200 million pledge to the UNFCCC sponsored global Green Climate Fund (GCF).

It is no secret that Scott Morrison admires US President Donald Trump and right wing American politics generally.

As Morrison argues an inability for Australian action on climate change to make a real difference to ongoing global warming, given we only produce est. one percent of all annual global greenhouse gas emissions, one suspects that he would also agree with this reasoning behind the latest Trump administration refusal to act on climate change.

The Washington Post,  28 September 2018:

Last month, deep in a 500-page environmental impact statement, the Trump administration made a startling assumption: On its current course, the planet will warm a disastrous seven degrees by the end of this century.

A rise of seven degrees Fahrenheit, or about four degrees Celsius, compared with preindustrial levels would be catastrophic, according to scientists. Many coral reefs would dissolve in increasingly acidic oceans. Parts of Manhattan and Miami would be underwater without costly coastal defenses. Extreme heat waves would routinely smother large parts of the globe.

But the administration did not offer this dire forecast, premised on the idea that the world will fail to cut its greenhouse gas emissions, as part of an argument to combat climate change. Just the opposite: The analysis assumes the planet’s fate is already sealed.

The draft statement, issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), was written to justify President Trump’s decision to freeze federal fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks built after 2020. While the proposal would increase greenhouse gas emissions, the impact statement says, that policy would add just a very small drop to a very big, hot bucket.

“The amazing thing they’re saying is human activities are going to lead to this rise of carbon dioxide that is disastrous for the environment and society. And then they’re saying they’re not going to do anything about it,” said Michael MacCracken, who served as a senior scientist at the U.S. Global Change Research Program from 1993 to 2002.....

Tweet of the Week

PM, seeking a fair go is not politics of envy. IPA bred. IPA fed. IPA led. Your politics like Howard's is one of wedging. We have growth but now none of it goes to the worker. PM, why? #auspol

— Catching up (@fehowarth) October 11, 2018

Quotes of the Week

“I fear that the danger of plastic bags is much exaggerated”  [Former sacked prime minister & Liberal MP for Warringah Tony Abbott quoted in The Guardian on the subject of plastics polluting the environment, 6 October 2018]

 “A key architect of the landmark Paris climate deal has lambasted the Coalition government’s inaction on greenhouse gas emissions, saying it “goes against the science”, squanders economic opportunity and risks Australia’s international standing. Laurence Tubiana, a respected French diplomat and economist, also says Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s claim that Australia will meet its Paris targets “at a canter” is contradicted by international scientific opinion.”  [Journalist Nicole Hasham in The Sydney Morning Herald, 3 October 2018]

“To me this particular event seems to show the Liberal party has been taken over frankly by extremists on the hard right who aren’t particularly motivated to win elections and aren’t particularly motivated to serve the public. They’re just motivated by a crazy agenda.”  [Alexander Turnbull, son of deposed Liberal prime minister Malcolm Turnbull in The Guardian, 11 October 2018]

The past two months have not been great for NSW Police public relations

The Daily Examiner, 8 October 2018, p.3:

Two police officers have been served with future court attendance notices for alleged offences related to the use and access of a NSW Police Force computer system.

Police said the 43-year-old male senior constable and the 40-year-old female leading senior constable, both attached to Northern Region, are alleged to have modified data in October, last year.

The woman has been charged with unauthorised access of restricted data and the man has been charged with unauthorised modification of restricted data.

They are both due to appear at Coffs Harbour Local Court on Tuesday, November 23.

The West Australian, 6 October 2018:

A Sydney police officer has been stood down after allegedly making sickening threats towards a Greens Senator’s young daughter.

Sarah Hanson-Young was targeted by what she calls vile, cowardly and intolerable threats at the height of her public stoush with Senator David Lleyonhjelm.

But Ms Hanson-Young says the threats went further, targeting her 11-year-old daughter in a call made five days after her joust with Mr Lleyonhjelm.

“I have spoken to her about it,” she said.

“Of course it’s a difficult thing to explain.

“I was very shocked to know that it was a police officer.

“It's disgusting and no child deserves this, no young woman deserves this and to do it is not just cowardly, it's vile.”....

Federal police charged the 56-year-old cop with using a carriage service to menace, harass, offend after raiding his south-western Sydney home.

The senior constable has since been stood down and his employment is under review….

The officer will face court next month and faces up to seven years’ in prison if convicted.

NSW Law Enforcement Conduct Commission, Media Release, 20 September 2018:

RELEASE OF REPORT ON LECC OPERATION BALTRA

The Law Enforcement Conduct Commission has found that a Leading Senior Constable engaged in serious misconduct after he punched an intoxicated woman (Ms Z) in police custody on 15 September 2017.*

The Commission’s Operation Baltra held private hearings to determine whether the officer involved (Officer A): 

1. Used excessive force when he punched Ms Z to the head with a closed fist whilst her hands were handcuffed behind her back.

2. [blank]

3. Breached NSWPF policies and guidelines when he recorded the CCTV footage of the incident on his mobile phone and subsequently shared that footage with a Snapchat group, which comprised other police officers from Police Station X.

The Commission has found that the punch with a closed fist by Officer A to the side of Ms Z’s head was an unreasonable use of force and that Officer A engaged in serious  misconduct as defined in section 10 of the LECC Act. 

The Commission is satisfied that Officer A was in breach of the NSWPF policies and guidelines with respect to his filming of the CCTV footage and that the dissemination of it to other police officers via Snapchat was unauthorised.  Notwithstanding this finding, the Commission is satisfied that Officer A genuinely believed that he was not breaching any policies or guidelines by sharing the information with other police officers in his team. 

The Commission’s recommendation, outlined in its Operation Baltra report presented to Parliament today, is that consideration should be given to the taking of action against Officer A with a view to dismissing the officer pursuant to section 181D of the Police Act 1990. 

The Operation Baltra report and associated footage can be found on the Commission website. 

Background

The Law Enforcement Conduct Commission is an independent statutory body. The principal functions of the Commission are to detect, investigate and expose serious misconduct and serious maladministration within the NSW Police Force and the NSW Crime Commission. 

The Commission is separate from and completely independent of the NSW Police Force and NSW Crime Commission. The Commission will treat all information confidentially and has powers to protect persons who provide information to it. 

* Codenames have been used in the report to protect the identities of the involved persons. 

The Northern Star, 21 September 2018, p.1:

The Law Enforcement Conduct Commission has found a police officer who inflicted multiple baton strikes on a naked 16-year-old boy in Byron Bay used excessive force and should be considered for prosecution.

The commission’s Operation Tambora arose out of events involving the arrest of the teenager by four police officers in Lateen Lane on January 11 this year.

On February 6, Channel 9’s A Current Affair aired mobile phone footage showing police apprehending the boy in the early hours of the morning. The footage showed at least one officer using a baton repeatedly to subdue him.

The teenager, referred to as “AO” in the commission’s report, had been holidaying with his family in Byron Bay at the time of the incident.

The investigation was primarily concerned with the conduct of the police officers when attempting to take AO into custody. This involved consideration of whether the decisions by the police officers to use OC spray and a taser were justified in the circumstances. There was also a significant issue as to the need for the use of a baton on AO and, in particular, the number and force of baton strikes that were administered to AO, particularly those administered by “Officer E” at a time when AO appeared to be restrained.....