I think it was klaus k who once suggested on this blog that we should completely eschew the word “postmodernism”, so vacuous and meaningless has it become. That seems a proposal worth reviving when you read an astonishing take on the ABC’s decision to reallocate resources away from specialist Radio National programs, particularly the Religion Report.

The questions facing mankind are, essentially, the same as they have always been: the age-old questions about what is good, true and beautiful. How do we identify those characteristics in our own and others’ behaviour? How do we achieve them in our lives?

Inevitably, we will never answer them validly if - confusing the medium with the message, to put it in Marshall McLuhan’s discredited formula - we confuse the garments for the person, the cover for the book.

Apparently, the ABC’s remit is to pose (or answer?) eternal questions, and any management decision about Radio National demonstrates “relativism” and that “they hate religion”.

I’m actually not a huge fan of Stephen Crittenden’s, but there can be no doubt that discussing programming decisions in this fashion is, well, just demented. The ABC’s decision making is driven by twin (and overlapping) logics - the decline in funding for content created inhouse by specialists, and an attempt to be a leader in interactive content. It has nothing much to do with “relativism” and “postmodernism” except in the fevered imaginanings of crazed columnists. There are legitimate questions to ask about all this - but the culture wars frame makes it literally impossible to debate them sensibly. A lot is changing in public broadcasting in this country, and we really haven’t begun to discuss it because the overhang of the culture wars mindset seems to persist. Probably this sort of craziness is best ignored, and its hyperbolic nature itself a sign that its time is past, but it’s worth noting if only to call for a much better informed and contemporary discussion on public broadcasting.