About

Debbie - Sport

During the first set of the US Open final between Roger Federer and Juan Martin del Potro this morning, I said on air that Federer was putting on a clinic … well del Potro is a very fast learner.

He absorbed what Federer showed him in that first set and powered back to beat the master in five sets. His forehand was brutal and Federer’s started to misfire.

Tennis always seems to have some new star on the horizon. The one that arrived today is a 198cm 20 year old from Argentina with a massive serve. At the presentation he towered over Federer - and that’s how it was on the court in that final set.

As Rafael Nadal said after losing to del Potro the other day “he moves well for a man of such altitude”.

….

The howls of disappointment in the NewsRadio office were blood curdling when the FoxSports coverage of the US Open dropped out as set point came up in the second set of this morning’s men’s final.

When the visual returned, the scoreboard showed Juan Martin del Potro had taken the set from Roger Federer. The technical difficulties at FoxSports continued, with regular apologies being posted about transmission problems. I’m sure the howls were even more blood-curdling at their headquarters

In the end, I think FoxSports had more breaks of service than either Federer or del Potro.

….

Also, a forgettable season for Hawthorn in the AFL continued, with the defending premiers not getting even one player in the 2009 All-Australian squad last night. A football coach once told me that the one thing harder to handle than failure is success.

The Hawks are a classic example of what he meant.

—

Marius - Politics

The Westminster system of Parliamentary democracy is one of the great achievements of human endeavour.

Australia’s standing as one of the world’s oldest democracies may be our proudest national boast.

But some of the practices of Parliament are laughable - and many of them are on display in Question Time each sitting day.

Question Time is meant to be the sharp end of open government, the chance for the legislature to scrutinise the executive, the time when ministers must answer questions.

In fact, it is a time for the Government to say what it likes, virtually unhindered by an Opposition which can ask a question but can’t force an answer.

It was ever thus.

Liberal frontbencher Tony Abbott was so frustrated by the impotence of Opposition yesterday, he decided to take direct action to disrupt a government answer by standing in the TV camera shot as Julia Gillard spoke.

For his troubles, he was thrown out for 24-hours and outside he fumed about the complete corruption of Question Time.

He’s right. It is a contest where one side, the Government, controls the rules and appoints the referee.

Oppositions always develop an enthusiasm for reforming the rules to make it more equal, but that enthusiasm fades within days of winning power.

Tony Abbott concedes the Coalition was bad itself when in power; he only claims they weren’t as bad as Labor.

That’s arguable. What is not arguable is the need to reform Question Time. And why not start by scrapping “Dorothy Dixers”? Governments asking themself questions sounds like something out of the puppet parliaments of the old Eastern Bloc rather than a central part of one of the world’s oldest and healthiest democracies.

Other parliaments, including Westminster itself, have healthier question time practices - and it’s time for Australia to have a question time that actually produces answers.

—

Mark - Breakfast EP

I wanted to talk a little bit about what we are trying to do here at NewsRadio. Our aim is to bring you news and information as soon as is possible. And when there’s a breaking news story of major interest to our listeners we try to give you as much information as possible, as quickly as we can — often from primary sources. We also strive to be accurate…. .but if we get things wrong, we correct the record as soon as we are able to.

This sounds a bit like the bleeding obvious, but I think it’s important to state.

We received a listener’s complaint on Friday about our coverage that morning of a crash in Sydney’s south, involving a bus carrying 37 students from Sutherland Shire Christian School. Two people, who were travelling in a car which hit the bus, died in the accident.

The listener said it was a “disgrace” we resorted to what he called “unconfirmed and speculative reporting” in the way we reported this unfolding story.

While we appreciate listeners’ feedback here at ABC NewsRadio, I dispute this one.

I think NewsRadio listeners want to know what we know, as soon as we know it; that’s the essence of ‘rolling news’. When we know there’s doubt about facts, we stress that reports are unconfirmed.

At about 8:25am Glen said on air that there were “media reports of a bus crash in the Heathcote area in Sydney with 40 children believed to have been hurt.” He stressed that NewsRadio would bring listeners more information as soon as it came to hand.

Two and a half minutes later, Glen asked Dave Lane from the Australian Traffic Network what he knew about the incident during the scheduled traffic cross. The Australian Traffic Network are a private company, and while their reports are heard on NewsRadio and other ABC outlets, we can’t vouch for their accuracy.

Lane said the ATN believed the bus to be “on its side with two children critically injured”. This information was later proved to be wrong, but was presented in good faith.

Meanwhile, two ABC NewsRadio journalists were attempting to contact the emergency services to try to get any information they could.

Two minutes later, in our news bulletin at 8:30am, we said ” Police say they have NO information on injuries to schoolchildren, but the Nine network says 40 children have been injured, two critically.”

The reference to the Nine Network was intentional, not gratuitous— as they were the news outlet which had first reported the story and they currently had a helicopter hovering over the scene broadcasting live pictures.

The ABC didn’t have a reporter — let alone a helicopter — in the vicinity of the crash for forty-five more minutes.

Moments later, we updated the story saying “The fire brigade says 30 students have been taken off the bus. Police say some of the students have suffered MINOR injuries, but they understand there have been no SERIOUS injuries to the students. Police say the driver of the car involved in the crash has been killed and a passenger was trapped in the vehicle after the accident.”

About ten minutes later again, we were able to get Kerryn Ryan — the business manager from the school on air. She confirmed the number of students on the bus (37) and that while some students had been hurt, there were no SERIOUS injuries.

Shortly afterwards, Morris Caputi, CEO of Veolia Transport, who operated the bus spoke to us live on air.

He suggested - unprompted - that the accident was the result of a head-on crash when the car had run out of room while attempting to over-take.

Now, our complainant has suggested we should have handled this incident on air by saying:

“1. There are reports of a crash involving a bus and a car on Heathcote Road.
2. Emergency services are responding.
3. Once emergency services are able to advise the extent of any injuries, we will bring the information to you.”

I disagree. This was a serious accident, with direct relevance to a large number of our listeners. We have a mandate to provide them with as much information as quickly as possible….

If you take our complaintant’s theory to its logical extent, on September the 11th 2001 we would have reported:

“1. There is a major incident in New York City in the vicinty of the World Trade Centre.
2. Police and Emergency Services are attending.
3. Once emergency services are able to advise the extent of any injuries, we will bring the information to you.”

Sorry, but that’s not how we do it!.