|
|
|
|
|
by jassinpain
1974 days ago
|
|
I think it's interesting how they use Fox News in the title, not News Corp. Sadly the makes it clear this is a agenda article not really about the people. The statement is made that the funds raised should goto the Australia citizens and not the news producers who's content is being used by big tech without compensation. While the law maybe bad it's not made clear by the anti "Fox News" agenda of the author, sadly this is what most news has come to not reporting but reporter agenda pieces. Quick update, it's also very clear why ABC was left out from Wikipedia "The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is Australia's national broadcaster, founded in 1929. It is principally funded by the direct grants from the Australian government and is administered by a board appointed by the government of the day" |
|
This is a blog post by one writer. It's not reflective of what "most news" is about any more than any random blog post is, i.e., not representative at all.
Google for Australia google news tax, and click news to see actual news sites, and not one in the first several pages (actually, I can find exactly zero) have a title like the one you complain is "what most news has come to".
Are to cite any real news (as in a major news publication) source as an example of your claimed bias? I can't find any.