Channel 7 doesn't deserve public funding

@misinformedmedia

20.1K followers · usually 2.1K views a post

Views

105.8K

Likes

8.3K

Comments

740

Shares

174

Why it worked

The video likely resonated due to its strong, critical stance on public funding for a media network perceived as controversial, tapping into public sentiment about resource allocation and political commentary.

Summary

The speaker argues that Channel 7, a privately owned company, should not receive public funding. They criticize the network for using public money to platform Pauline Hanson and fund her activities, suggesting that if the company has private investors, it should rely on them instead of taxpayer funds.

Free account

Transcript, structure and on-screen text

5 beats, a 142-word transcript and 28 lines of on-screen text — the parts you need to write your own version.

Create a free account to see the full breakdown

Original caption

A network that uses White Australia Policy as a headline does not deserve public funding. The Seven Network is a privately owned, commercially run company that uses its broadcast to platform Pauline Hanson. I don’t agree with taxpayer money being used to subsidise a media company that can afford to pay its own workers and I don’t agree with the public having to fund a network that makes life unsafe for a large segment of the public. Channel 7 has, all on its own, become a megaphone for spreading and amplifying deeply harmful prejudices that put members of the public at risk every day.