No, it was one of the coalition ministers. The ABC is considered well researched/factual while slightly left by almost everyone - save for Liberals/Nationals and other right wing parties who think reality is embarrassing to them, as I see it and you seem not to. You are entitled to your opinion as am I.
I suspect you will disagree with the methodology and conclusions, but from mediabiasfactcheck.com
The comment was made as in relation to balance, where the ABC takes this as having varying views no matter whether they are factually correct (like the anti-vaccination example). It is driven by amongst other things:
I don’t care for any organisation which rates where a organisation sits on a spectrum. I can make my own views based on reading and listening to/watching a range of difference sources here and world wide.
Each organisation also has pockets/journalists which are on one end or the other of the spectrum. Some have a range of journalists on the same spectrum.
In a ideal world, if opinion was removed from journalism, there would be no need for organisations which rate the media businesses.
A way to help combat fake news has been discussed in a White Paper. Fujitsu in collaboration with Keio University’s ‘Trusted Internet Architecture Lab’ in Japan, released the paper titled
“Trustable Internet
Towards a trustable Internet in which people can use information securely”
The premise is that another layer be inserted called in the paper the “endorsement layer”. From the paper: “Therefore, we propose an architecture called “Trustable Internet” that overlays a layer on the Internet, which has a mechanism to confirm the credibility of the data, so that the existing Internet is not affected, and Internet users can use the Web/applications as before.
The architecture has an endorsement layer that provides an interface for storing and sharing “endorsed” information as additional information, which is the basis for data credibility”.
Quite interesting to see some thinking going into a mechanism to tackle trust on the Internet. Certainly it offers some hope of innovation, discussion, and some hope of a way to improve a Web user’s experience in trusting information on the Web.
Separately from fake news and propagating same, press freedom and so on, there are recurring accusations of overt bias as well as failure to confront both parties/sides equally. I tripped on this gem that some may consider sufficient and all but guaranteeing journalistic integrity and others might consider it laughable in the overall context.
