Interesting summary, good job. Not a lot of surprises there. Interesting to note The Daiky Telegraph has twice backed the ALP, bucking a trend…
The Age, regarded as left leaning on balance has backed Labor slightly more than it has gone with the Coalition. Although I’d argue if anything, The Age has possibly moved slightly towards the centre these days and is reasonably well balanced politically with editorial and comment covering both sides quite freely.
Sell all you have and follow me. I guess the easy interpretation kink there for profit gospellers such as Scomo is the lack of detail on where the dollars go after the firesale. I’m assuming JC would direct it all to helping the needy, Scomo would go to Hawaii and brush up on leprosy avoidance.
It’s an easy book to use for purposes.
I think it’s a virtuous verse. And a perspective worth sharing …
The Age has never been left leaning.
It isn’t right leaning either, at least the last 20 years as far as I can remember. If you ask 20 people of all ages, outside of this forum, you’d probably get a split View on that question of its leaning.
Once upon a time it was right leaning if memory serves me correctly.
That said, left leaning people often argue it’s centrist or further right politically. Conservatives believe it’s left leaning and don’t buy it. It’s a subjective perspective.
An outrageous suggestion!!!
I find it bemusing that an argument is being put forward that it’s great that people can find news outlets that (paraphrased) “suit their leanings and beliefs” . The cognitive dissonance of that position is actually staggering. Essentially, it reduces news journalism to entertainment. Though in fairness, that was Fox News open defence in the Carlson defamation case 
That’s always been my personal interpretation too. I mean, it’s not like this is the only verse on riches in the new testament either. The old ‘it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven’ line is still there. There’s a bit of context to be working with, the verse doesn’t sit there in isolation.
OF course, I’m a cybical and embittered atheist, but my personal best guess is that a lot of the theologians etc who’ve analysed and interpreted this and related verses over the last couple of thousand years have found it … a bit too hard, when taken literally and applied to the world you’re living in. I mean, it’s a pretty extreme viewpoint, and that’s NOT a criticism. And this and related verses were of course some of the inspiration for the vows of poverty, the poor monastoc orders etc etc that developed in the historic church. So SOME people obviously took them literally. But as a medieval monk or clergyman, who is very aware that your pope lives a life of insanely gaudy opulence and will likely excommunicate you or banish you minister to a leper colony or something if you criticise him even implicitly - there’d be a lot of political pressure to come up with a theology around the churh’s attitude to riches that was more … lenient … than a literal reading might suggest. But also, from an economic point of view alone, if everyone sold all they owned (land? farming tools? seed corn? livestock?) to become a disciple, economy and society would fall in a heap and everyone would starve. So it’s not entirely a matter of venal churchmen finding an interpretation that suits them out of self-interest, it’s also about well-intentioned people trying tio find a way to live within the gospels that actually works for everyday people.
If you consider it subjective, best not to make generalisations.
Thanks for the tip Big A. Just providing a perspective. Wasn’t too offensive I didn’t think.
Really?
Is that all they have as a policy? Dropping reporting on climate change and build nuclear plants?
What about:
These are policies that would benefit the great unwashed here in Australia.
Any of those things would require too much effort on their part.
None of those enrich their benefactors like Gina, Rupert & Kerry, so there’s no chance that they will do anything like that.
The LNP bastadry on this alone still boils my blood and should keep them out of office for a century. Prior to Israel reducing Gaza to dust they had faster internet than us there.
What does it tell you about the intellect of Australians (and the education system), that people can’t just be given news…… they also need to be told how they think about the news.
It’s hard to believe there was a time when people could think for themselves.
One thing I’d like to see to reform media is a clearer distinction between reporting facts/events and comments/opinions.
You’d never get it, the LNP will never introduce media reforms and the ALP is too scared to
When did this period exist?
Was there really, though?
Things like propoganda have worked through every era of humanity. Propoganda really only works if enough people aren’t critically evaluating everything.
When was that time ? Do you think the response to young blokes signing up for wars was an example of this ?
Are you old enough to remember Federal budget night, when the most important thing in life was the price of beer ?
Actually pretty sure that since the first fleet the only ones who thought for themselves were Indigenous Australians and look where that got them.
I think it would help. In addition to media literacy.
Sigh.