From the desk of ROLAND ROCCHICCIOLI

THE Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is an essential institution. It belongs to the Nation. It symbolises the collective voice and values of the people. Irrespective, it must broadcast without fear or favour. Sadly, its independence has been contaminated by those imprudent ideologs who would damage its reputation.

Access to the airwaves comes with responsibility. Entrenched beliefs notwithstanding, it does not gift the broadcaster a platform to moralise. No ABC broadcaster should have an on-air opinion. The role is too critical. The announcer/presenter is there to question; to disagree; to seek truth; and to deliver a balanced viewpoint, however challenging.

Radio is powerful. It is a misnomer to posit the corporation is in direct competition with commercial radio; conversely, its programming should not be fusty or banal; nor should it be imitative of other broadcasters. The ABC should be the benchmark for the pursuit of excellence; an exemplar of fine broadcasting. It would be naïve to contend ratings are not important. They are the gauge to measure degrees of interest — the indices of public engagement. Contradictorily, it must not forsake academic and culture standards in the populist pursuit; nor should it be élitist. It is an impossibly difficult row-to-hoe, but one to which the ABC must find a solution. That is its charter!

Linguistic bastardisation is the curse of our day and age. Grammatical application should not be pompous, but standards should not be lowered. The erstwhile commission required announcers to have a working knowledge of three, preferably five, languages. On-air mispronunciations were a source of deep humiliation. The abandonment of basic syntactic principles is alarming. Imperatively, announcers/presenters should know the difference between bought/brought; have/has; is/are; was/were. The subjunctive(the hypothetical) has been forgotten: “If I WERE an announcer”. Police has no singular form, viz: VicPol are investigating. Is it important? Depends; however, one is correct, the other incorrect.

The ABC’s function is unambiguous: to inform; to entertain; and to educate, all Australians; to reflect the diversity of national interests through a breadth of distinctive programmes of both broad and specialist appeal, including some of the more popular niche areas of cultural interest. Lamentably, the ABC has failed to successfully merge both proven and cutting-edge programming. Its content aggregate is imbalanced. One network suffers a risible pretention to intellect, while the other is inane, mind-numbing jabber. Broadcasting devoid of basic scripting, coupled with unrelenting vox populi (talk-back) and personal opinion, makes for tedious, lazy, radio. Too often it is irritating and unlistenable.

The decision to dismantle a raft of successful creative programmes demonstrated a lack of regard and considered creative judgement. Radio is theatre of the mind. It fires, potently, the listener’s imagination. It takes them on a personal journey. The serious absence of balance between the polemic, academic discourse, and specialist diatribe, alongside popular and classical music and the spoken performance, is dire.

The wilful implacability of presenters to position themselves at the epicentre of programming is alarming. In their pursuit of social-media celebrity and hyperbolic click-bait, the listener has an irrelevance. Agitprop is unacceptable. Presenters are motivated to argue personal opinion. Perceived, and real, bias is the consequence of rampant hubris, and unprecedented editorialising.

The ABC is too important! It needs a fundamental overhaul to be rid of a destructive menace at its core.

Roland is heard with Brett Macdonald — radio 3BA Monday at 10.45 a.m. Contact: [email protected]