The Function Of The A.B.C.: A Rejoinder

Professor Crocker's critique of broadcasting in Australia and particularly his strictures on the regional programme of the A.B.C. in the last issue of the Quarterly, I regard as a real public service. It is something new for us in the A.B.C. to have an intelligent and discriminating listener taking the trouble to look into our constitution and output in the way the Professor has done, even though he is fairly blistering in some of his conclusions. Indeed, it is a great pity that more citizens who are concerned with the development of our social and cultural values do not take broadcasting generally as their responsibility and express themselves as forthrightly as he has done. His comments accordingly fully deserve a considered and serious reply, not only as a courtesy to his own effort but because of the grave issues involved. If, as Professor Crocker infers, the A.B.C. is not living up to its Charter and is missing great opportunities for service to the community, that is indeed a serious matter and he is quite right in bringing it to public notice. I do not wish in this article to deal at any length with factual inaccuracies in the Professor's article, of which there are a number. It is necessary, however, to get the picture right if a just estimate of the argument is to be achieved. For example, the Commission, which is responsible for the general policy of the A.B.C., is composed not of 6 but of 7 Commissioners, with the 5 non-departmental members drawn from representative sections of the community. Their representation covers not only a cross section of the political and religious life of the community, but some measure of public leadership and idealism. Incidentally, as the Professor makes a not too oblique pass at the personnel of the Commission, it might be of interest to detail who, in fact, they are. In order of appointment my colleagues are: the Vice-Chairman, Mr. E. R. Dawes, formerly Opposition Leader of the South Australian House of Assembly and