MP questions live export footage/ Live export ban lifted?

Sure, but this hardly seems like a justification for letting something else which is much more shocking continue.

I can't even believe this. -_-' Times like these, I hate the government. Okay, so most times I dislike it, but times like these I really hate it.

Yeah, well I charge that if it is possible to put something together from selected footage that would shock every city dwelling Australian, conditions are not good enough. Even if the footage is exaggerating an issue, it is still not lying about the fact that there is an issue.

If there wasn't anything abhorrent going on to be filmed, it would be impossible to present things as being so bad.

I personally know ppl who have been in those  abattoirs  over in Indo and they said they have never ever seen such actions as was displayed on 4 corners. If you look closely at the footage, it seems pretty clear that they were encouraged to do such things - by the way they looked back at the camera smiling. Remember they are a developing nation so many would jump at the chance to make a quick buck. If the producers of the show were really worried about the animals welfare they wouldn't have waited months and months to do something about it. instead they were spending time on putting the footage together for the most dramatic effect. The media will make us believe what they want us to believe.

Why would Animals Australia ENCOURAGE animal abuse?

It is very far-fetched to imply that Lyn White -who works tirelessly for Animals Australia in order to reduce and eliminate the suffering of animals- would put herself through a variety of psychological stress and anguish to present falsified documentation, when animals are being treated cruelly all over the world and obtaining true footage of animal cruelty is just a few towns away.

It is not 'the media' who put this footage together. This was footage of real acts of cruelty simply compiled and presented- there was no fancy editing or special effects, it was pure documentation.

In regards to the article in question, it is in line with the Liberal party's doctrine to downplay concerns of ethics, because acting upon these concerns means a loss of profit for industries- this is highly evident in the case of exporting to Indonesia where the meat industry is losing money.
It is important to be able to read an article and understand the reasoning behind people's outlandish statements and/or accusations. It's usually related to $$$.

It's not worth wasting our time on!

Yeah, because if you work in a burger joint, you're totally going to spit in burgers while there are potential customers being given a tour of the kitchen.
Even children know how to put on a show like that- playing nice when mother walks in.

Why would an animal rights organization pay off workers to abuse animals? I assure you, there is plenty of animal abuse going on in the world, it is not be hard to get genuine footage. It would be a total waste of time and money to fabricate evidence when there is so much real, factual evidence to be found.

The media programmes which released the footage have nothing to do with the organization who collected the footage in the first place. That would be part of the reason for the distance in time between filming and the release of the information.
The media will make us believe what we want, yeah, I get that. Animals Australia, on the other hand, are just doing what they can to help the animals.

Much of the worst footage was never aired on TV, or even put onto Animals Australia's website, because it was far too horrific. Feel free to watch the extended 45minute edit for media to get a clearer picture of the extent of the cruelty: http://www.rspca.org.au/video/live-export-web-media45min.zip

Animals Australia was careful to ensure footage that was presented was indicative of the standards documented in Indonesia. For example, Arthur's story is what the Australian live export industry calls 'standard operating procedures': http://vimeo.com/24323145

Animals Australia provided footage to Minister Ludwig in November last year, after documenting dreadful cruelty to sheep in the Middle East. His response was to write a letter to MLA in January of this year asking them to do better. So there seemed little hope that he would do anything more on this occasion, which is why Animals Australia went to the media.

It is not Four Corners role to be 'worried about the animals welfare'. Their role is to provide balanced, independently verified stories. They are Australia's most respected current affairs show precisely because they always do their own research to verify sources and ensure accuracy, which is what they did on this occasion. But the Four Corners journalist who presented the story will be able to explain their position better than I can, so I'd suggest you read this article by her: http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/state/livestock/cattle/abc-tells-its-side-of-live-trade-story/2203537.aspx?storypage=0

Goodness! Really? That's awful. I didn't think it could GET much worse.