Policy of confrontation or confrontation of policies?

18/02/2004

Last night, ABC (Australia’s public broadcasting system) showed an episode of their investigative journalism program 4 corners, entitled Lords of the forests. This piece attempted, and failed miserably, to present an analysis of the forestry debate in Tasmania. I could go on about the biases or factual mistakes in the program, but the critical problem is that it was a missed opportunity. Rather than exploring the possibilities for understanding and negotiation between the parties it chose to focus on mutual accusations and diatribes. The end result? Nothing changed in the debate. After the program, I participated in the 4 corners web forum where I presented the following view (with minor edits here):

The program was a perfect example of a bipolar view of the world: you are with me or against me. In that view your options are ‘pro forestry jobs and against the environment’ or the other way around. There is no middle ground, no reasoning; times for meditation or elaboration of ideas are not allowed. In my opinion, the program was quite biased against the industry. I am not saying that the forest industry is perfect or has no problems, but it was misrepresented.

Environmentalists’ are failing us; their actions are more tokenism than politics. Climbing a tall tree might be a good stunt for a circus but is of no use for intelligent discussion or decision making. On the other side, the forest industry is failing us too. The industry should aim for maximum transparency. For example, making the export figures for woodchips confidential hurts the possibility for debate. Recognising the mistakes and abuses to the system when they occur would be steps in the right direction.

I think that Tasmanians deserve more a confrontation of policies than the current policy of confrontation.

PS. 2004-12-17. The Independent Complaints Review Panel (ICRP) for the ABC upheld three complaints made by Forestry Tasmania and Timber Communities Australia against the program, including factual inaccuracies and abuse of emotive language.

Filed in environment, forestry, tasmania

No comments yet.

Write a comment: