This has to be a textbook example of Irony:
Julian Assange's own memoir is being released without his consent.
Discuss...
Friday, September 23, 2011
Friday, September 16, 2011
Television 4, Sept 18 2011
It still remains to be seen what this will look like, but if this is anything to go by I'm quite unsettled by it.
From what it appears, this could be a 24-hour digital infomercial channel as part of the Prime7 TV network for regional Australia. Seriously, do we need a 24-hour advertising channel on TV? Do we need more advertising?
Who would be brainless enough to watch a 24 hour channel full of ads? I'm naive enough to think that this won't be the case; that channel 64 would not be as vacuous as the press release makes it sound. But I'd be really annoyed it is...
From what it appears, this could be a 24-hour digital infomercial channel as part of the Prime7 TV network for regional Australia. Seriously, do we need a 24-hour advertising channel on TV? Do we need more advertising?
Who would be brainless enough to watch a 24 hour channel full of ads? I'm naive enough to think that this won't be the case; that channel 64 would not be as vacuous as the press release makes it sound. But I'd be really annoyed it is...
Monday, September 12, 2011
9/11 Remembered
I shed a small tear yesterday as I heard a small piece on the radio commemorating the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York. The piece was genuinely moving, but, sentimentalist radio programming aside, the event it chronicled was so profoundly tragic and mind-boggling devastating that you couldn't help be moved by it.
A lot of people I knew watched the events almost live as they unfolded on the news. I didn't have the TV on at the time. With the time difference between New York and Sydney being what it is, the first plane hit at 10:46pm Sydney time, and I went to bed about then. I heard nothing until I woke up to go to the beach at 6am - on the radio alarm clock they were talking about some major tragedy involving planes flying into buildings. I launched out of bed and fired up the TV to see it for myself....
...Words failed me. There was just nothing I could do or say. I felt powerless but I felt so profoundly saddened by what I was seeing.
Even now, it's still so hard to put into words what I feel. There's no doubt that this event changed the world and the lives of people living on the other side of the world as well. As Australians, our neighbours in Bali had their own tragedy just over 12 months later when a bomb took out 88 Australian nationals in the Sari club.
As a result of this, the world became a hotbed of paranoia and general fear. More terror attacks happened in the years since, two wars have been fought, Middle eastern dictators have been forcibly removed and more. In the immediate 12 months after the event global finance markets took a hit, consumer confidence plummeted, tourism crawled to a stand-still. Evan as far as people not wanting to eat out anymore caused issues, with heaps of small businesses shutting down. Indeed, our local pizza place closed with months of this tragedy, but that could have been through other issues too...
...either way, things were never the same anymore...
...Lest we forget.
A lot of people I knew watched the events almost live as they unfolded on the news. I didn't have the TV on at the time. With the time difference between New York and Sydney being what it is, the first plane hit at 10:46pm Sydney time, and I went to bed about then. I heard nothing until I woke up to go to the beach at 6am - on the radio alarm clock they were talking about some major tragedy involving planes flying into buildings. I launched out of bed and fired up the TV to see it for myself....
...Words failed me. There was just nothing I could do or say. I felt powerless but I felt so profoundly saddened by what I was seeing.
Even now, it's still so hard to put into words what I feel. There's no doubt that this event changed the world and the lives of people living on the other side of the world as well. As Australians, our neighbours in Bali had their own tragedy just over 12 months later when a bomb took out 88 Australian nationals in the Sari club.
As a result of this, the world became a hotbed of paranoia and general fear. More terror attacks happened in the years since, two wars have been fought, Middle eastern dictators have been forcibly removed and more. In the immediate 12 months after the event global finance markets took a hit, consumer confidence plummeted, tourism crawled to a stand-still. Evan as far as people not wanting to eat out anymore caused issues, with heaps of small businesses shutting down. Indeed, our local pizza place closed with months of this tragedy, but that could have been through other issues too...
...either way, things were never the same anymore...
...Lest we forget.
Monday, September 5, 2011
Murdochs again...
Here is an opinion that makes some good sense (for once) about the level of influence Rupert Murdoch has in the media.
I see it as a real issue for the head of a media organisation to determine which way to slant a story as it appears in his papers. It's well documented how News Ltd's outlets are attack dogs for more small-L liberal type government groups (Labour in the UK, Democrats in the US, Labor and the Greens in Australia) and lap dogs for Conservatives.
The issue is more that this plays into the hands of those who are less engaged with their world and who are apathetic enough to accept at face value what the papers tell them. These types of people (and I refuse to identify demographics here) are the ones who will not get the full and unbiased account of what is happening - they get a dodgy slant on it that may or may not be correct, especially in light of the recent News Ltd scandals.
How they've managed to build themselves up with such power is beyond me, how they manage to keep it and continue to have such influence confounds me. I recently remarked to a colleague who said he holds a small amount of shares in News International that, in light of the phone hacking scandal, "if that was me, I'd be getting off that sinking ship". How wrong I was. News isn't going to go under with any small stroke of a pen. They are too big and have too much money to disappear overnight....
...unfortunately.
I see it as a real issue for the head of a media organisation to determine which way to slant a story as it appears in his papers. It's well documented how News Ltd's outlets are attack dogs for more small-L liberal type government groups (Labour in the UK, Democrats in the US, Labor and the Greens in Australia) and lap dogs for Conservatives.
The issue is more that this plays into the hands of those who are less engaged with their world and who are apathetic enough to accept at face value what the papers tell them. These types of people (and I refuse to identify demographics here) are the ones who will not get the full and unbiased account of what is happening - they get a dodgy slant on it that may or may not be correct, especially in light of the recent News Ltd scandals.
How they've managed to build themselves up with such power is beyond me, how they manage to keep it and continue to have such influence confounds me. I recently remarked to a colleague who said he holds a small amount of shares in News International that, in light of the phone hacking scandal, "if that was me, I'd be getting off that sinking ship". How wrong I was. News isn't going to go under with any small stroke of a pen. They are too big and have too much money to disappear overnight....
...unfortunately.
21st Century Propaganda
Here is an interesting story published recently regarding the release of a colouring book for young children explaining the events of the 9/11 tragedy 10 years ago.
If the idea of memorialising an event such as this in this fashion isn't strange enough, the blurb on the inside takes the cake. According to the story, it is full of factual inaccuracies and falsehoods, but more worryingly, it takes a pro-American, anti-Muslim view of the events.
The fact that Muslims are labelled as "extremist", "terrorist" and "anti-freedom" is of some concern. The target demographic (ages birth to around 8, I'd image) is largely unable to comprehend any sense of reasoning here. Everything they understand is, for want of a better term, black or white; no shades of grey. That comes with the ability to think in abstract terms into the high school years.
For the most part, kids of this age group believe almost blindly what their parents and teachers tell them. This in itself is not a bad thing. What IS a bad thing is when the kids are told something that is inaccurate, and they take to believing that in the same way. Explaining this to kids in this fashion is likely to make it easy to understand, but I do see potential for kids to assume wrongful views based on biased information.
Kids of all ages need to be given information that presents a cohesive view of the world. Most kids under the age of 10 can see both sides without getting confused. It's not hard to say that "a handful of bad people did bad things to innocent Americans. The bad guys identified themselves as "Muslims", but not every Muslim is a bad guy like them. Not everyone agrees with what these bad guys did. Killing people is wrong etc etc etc..."
Where were you when you heard about the 9/11 tragedy??
If the idea of memorialising an event such as this in this fashion isn't strange enough, the blurb on the inside takes the cake. According to the story, it is full of factual inaccuracies and falsehoods, but more worryingly, it takes a pro-American, anti-Muslim view of the events.
The fact that Muslims are labelled as "extremist", "terrorist" and "anti-freedom" is of some concern. The target demographic (ages birth to around 8, I'd image) is largely unable to comprehend any sense of reasoning here. Everything they understand is, for want of a better term, black or white; no shades of grey. That comes with the ability to think in abstract terms into the high school years.
For the most part, kids of this age group believe almost blindly what their parents and teachers tell them. This in itself is not a bad thing. What IS a bad thing is when the kids are told something that is inaccurate, and they take to believing that in the same way. Explaining this to kids in this fashion is likely to make it easy to understand, but I do see potential for kids to assume wrongful views based on biased information.
Kids of all ages need to be given information that presents a cohesive view of the world. Most kids under the age of 10 can see both sides without getting confused. It's not hard to say that "a handful of bad people did bad things to innocent Americans. The bad guys identified themselves as "Muslims", but not every Muslim is a bad guy like them. Not everyone agrees with what these bad guys did. Killing people is wrong etc etc etc..."
Where were you when you heard about the 9/11 tragedy??
Monday, August 29, 2011
Fake news cross?
Now this made me laugh this morning:
Channel 9 Live cross to helicopter was faked
The bigwigs at Channel 9 made a public statement (read: excuse) that they couldn't fly the chopper due to inclement weather. Apparently the journos in the chopper never claimed they were in the air at the crime scene, but they were introduced by the news anchorperson that way.
So who is at fault here? And what was the point of the live cross in the first place? In most cases, a live cross to a chopper adds no value to a news story as it is, and it was no different in this case. A lot of scalps were taken as a result of this though. I'd argue the merits of sacking the young journos - weren't they just doing what they were told?
It's hard enough to decipher the truth from the fiction these days in the news. Making up fake television like this doesn't help matters...
Channel 9 Live cross to helicopter was faked
The bigwigs at Channel 9 made a public statement (read: excuse) that they couldn't fly the chopper due to inclement weather. Apparently the journos in the chopper never claimed they were in the air at the crime scene, but they were introduced by the news anchorperson that way.
So who is at fault here? And what was the point of the live cross in the first place? In most cases, a live cross to a chopper adds no value to a news story as it is, and it was no different in this case. A lot of scalps were taken as a result of this though. I'd argue the merits of sacking the young journos - weren't they just doing what they were told?
It's hard enough to decipher the truth from the fiction these days in the news. Making up fake television like this doesn't help matters...
Monday, August 22, 2011
Asylum Seekers Part 3 - Tampa anniversary
We are approaching the 10th anniversary of the Tampa crisis; a very dark moment in our recent national history. This is a classic example of a number of things:
Firstly, the lines between fact and fiction being blurred by the media - and not just by the shock jocks like Alan Jones, by the mainstream news services as well;.
Secondly, of a government trying on the classic tactic of "conviction without trial" - "we don't know what their story is, and what's more, we don't care. They're not coming here" was John Howard's official stance on the people who were rescued by a Norwegian freighter;
Thirdly, of a government pandering to far-right views on immigration, being overrun by foreigners. There are so many legislative areas that could be improved to alleviate some of these fears, but largely this is just rhetoric and hot air from a bunch of people who should know better.
It is now reported that most Australians want to see Asylum seekers processed here, and I couldn't agree more. If their claims for asylum prove to be fraudulent, by all means send them home. But there is no reason to assume, before being examined, that these people are freeloaders. What are people afraid of immigration?
So the refugee camps are full? Why? Fix it! Other countries take a quota of refugees as part of their annual immigration intake. Would that be a better solution to the current one?
Here is an example of a story that includes some follow up on the people who were caught up in the Tampa crisis, proving how wrong John Howard was to assume these people were "illegal" asylum seekers.
Any other (sensible) ideas would be welcomed!
Firstly, the lines between fact and fiction being blurred by the media - and not just by the shock jocks like Alan Jones, by the mainstream news services as well;.
Secondly, of a government trying on the classic tactic of "conviction without trial" - "we don't know what their story is, and what's more, we don't care. They're not coming here" was John Howard's official stance on the people who were rescued by a Norwegian freighter;
Thirdly, of a government pandering to far-right views on immigration, being overrun by foreigners. There are so many legislative areas that could be improved to alleviate some of these fears, but largely this is just rhetoric and hot air from a bunch of people who should know better.
It is now reported that most Australians want to see Asylum seekers processed here, and I couldn't agree more. If their claims for asylum prove to be fraudulent, by all means send them home. But there is no reason to assume, before being examined, that these people are freeloaders. What are people afraid of immigration?
So the refugee camps are full? Why? Fix it! Other countries take a quota of refugees as part of their annual immigration intake. Would that be a better solution to the current one?
Here is an example of a story that includes some follow up on the people who were caught up in the Tampa crisis, proving how wrong John Howard was to assume these people were "illegal" asylum seekers.
Any other (sensible) ideas would be welcomed!
Asylum Seekers Part 2
Here we go again, banging the drum on the Asylum Seeker issue.
I take umbrage at a few things mentioned in this issue:
"A Lowy Institute poll this year found that 88 per cent of Australians believe they are queue jumpers and 86 per cent believe they "pose a potential security threat to Australia".
Who were these Australians they allegedly surveyed? Did any of those surveyed get the real facts from the people involved in this, for example the ACTUAL asylum seekers? One thing is for sure that NO politician, on either side of political fence, has ever stood up for the people who (I'm assuming) are making their way out of oppression in their home countries. We seem to forget that that is what asylum seeking is all about. I've made the point in these pages that if you have a legitimate claim for asylum from persecution in your home country, it is NOT illegal to ask another country for asylum. Furthermore, if you can't get a plane and a visa, how the hell else are you supposed to get here?
However, if it is found that the people arriving on boats are jumping the immigration queue, by all means deport them. After all, this is an illegal practice and as such, one cannot expect a nation to grant someone clemency or recourse for trying to break that nations laws, right?
Furthermore, is it overly cynical to doubt the integrity of any "studies" done by an independent think tank run by a billionaire shopping centre magnate?
The fact that 88% of respondents claim that these people are a national security threat and are "queue jumpers" proves, if nothing else, the need for a more free and open press, in order to give us the truth. The amount of misinformation on this issue alone proves that we, as a nation of literate media consumers, are not being fed reliable and accurate information.
There is no excuse for Xenophobia, but there is equally no excuse for a nation's media outlets to stoke the fires of xenophobia in the minds of its audience.
Note: I know these links all come from the Sydney Morning Herald, but there is suspiciously little printed about this in the Australian Murdoch press web sites...
I take umbrage at a few things mentioned in this issue:
"A Lowy Institute poll this year found that 88 per cent of Australians believe they are queue jumpers and 86 per cent believe they "pose a potential security threat to Australia".
Who were these Australians they allegedly surveyed? Did any of those surveyed get the real facts from the people involved in this, for example the ACTUAL asylum seekers? One thing is for sure that NO politician, on either side of political fence, has ever stood up for the people who (I'm assuming) are making their way out of oppression in their home countries. We seem to forget that that is what asylum seeking is all about. I've made the point in these pages that if you have a legitimate claim for asylum from persecution in your home country, it is NOT illegal to ask another country for asylum. Furthermore, if you can't get a plane and a visa, how the hell else are you supposed to get here?
However, if it is found that the people arriving on boats are jumping the immigration queue, by all means deport them. After all, this is an illegal practice and as such, one cannot expect a nation to grant someone clemency or recourse for trying to break that nations laws, right?
Furthermore, is it overly cynical to doubt the integrity of any "studies" done by an independent think tank run by a billionaire shopping centre magnate?
The fact that 88% of respondents claim that these people are a national security threat and are "queue jumpers" proves, if nothing else, the need for a more free and open press, in order to give us the truth. The amount of misinformation on this issue alone proves that we, as a nation of literate media consumers, are not being fed reliable and accurate information.
There is no excuse for Xenophobia, but there is equally no excuse for a nation's media outlets to stoke the fires of xenophobia in the minds of its audience.
Note: I know these links all come from the Sydney Morning Herald, but there is suspiciously little printed about this in the Australian Murdoch press web sites...
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Pippa Middleton's Butt
This morning on Sunrise on Channel 7, the top of the hour promos were talking about Pippa Middleton's bridesmaid dress and how she "allegedly" wore "push up undies" to get her butt looking like it did.
My view? Slow news day, obviously.
Get some perspective, Channel 7. This isn't news. No one cares. It's one thing to listen to Kochie go on about how the Dow Jones index lost 20 points - That has some wider ramifications to the world at least. Stories about the shape of Pippa's butt just make the audience's IQ head in the same direction as the Dow - down 3% by the close of breakfast.
My view? Slow news day, obviously.
Get some perspective, Channel 7. This isn't news. No one cares. It's one thing to listen to Kochie go on about how the Dow Jones index lost 20 points - That has some wider ramifications to the world at least. Stories about the shape of Pippa's butt just make the audience's IQ head in the same direction as the Dow - down 3% by the close of breakfast.
Bert and Ernie
The recent articles in the press about Sesame Street caused me more than one instance of rolling eyes again recently. Ros Marsden nailed it with this one:
Bert and Ernie
Sesame Street has been around for 42 years, not just "entertaining", mind you, but educating kids of pre-school age on issues that they can understand, like numbers and letters and how to be friendly to people you meet in your neighbourhood. And yet, for some strange reason, the Gay Rights lobby thinks that Bert and Ernie are poster-boys for their cause.
I choose to pass no judgement on the Gay Marriage issue. What I DO have a problem with, is the pushing of this, or any kind of political agenda onto pre-school aged kids. At that age, all kids should be worried about is getting their single digit numbers in the correct order and learning to do things like tying shoe laces. Issues of sexuality won't even register on the minds of a child that age simply because they lack the cognitive abilty to deal with such a complex issue.
Bert and Ernie and their alleged sexuality have found themselves at the centre of debates for do-gooders and PC-advocates-with-nothing-better-to-do for years. They seem to lack an understanding of a concept where two men could live together in a shared environment and, possibly, just maybe even, NOT be gay? No, really! Haven't they ever heard of the idea of "flat mates?" Sharing a living space, sharing the rent and that's all? Even a 4-year old is smart enough to realise that they're just friends and nothing more! Why try and ascribe a more sinister meaning that a kid is not going to understand anyway?
Call me naive if you must, but the Jim Henson organisation has been making wholesome family entertainment for ages. Sesame Street has been doing a great job at what it does for over 4 decades. Let them keep doing it for many more years to come. And may they continue to do what they do without the interference of politics.
Bert and Ernie
Sesame Street has been around for 42 years, not just "entertaining", mind you, but educating kids of pre-school age on issues that they can understand, like numbers and letters and how to be friendly to people you meet in your neighbourhood. And yet, for some strange reason, the Gay Rights lobby thinks that Bert and Ernie are poster-boys for their cause.
I choose to pass no judgement on the Gay Marriage issue. What I DO have a problem with, is the pushing of this, or any kind of political agenda onto pre-school aged kids. At that age, all kids should be worried about is getting their single digit numbers in the correct order and learning to do things like tying shoe laces. Issues of sexuality won't even register on the minds of a child that age simply because they lack the cognitive abilty to deal with such a complex issue.
Bert and Ernie and their alleged sexuality have found themselves at the centre of debates for do-gooders and PC-advocates-with-nothing-better-to-do for years. They seem to lack an understanding of a concept where two men could live together in a shared environment and, possibly, just maybe even, NOT be gay? No, really! Haven't they ever heard of the idea of "flat mates?" Sharing a living space, sharing the rent and that's all? Even a 4-year old is smart enough to realise that they're just friends and nothing more! Why try and ascribe a more sinister meaning that a kid is not going to understand anyway?
Call me naive if you must, but the Jim Henson organisation has been making wholesome family entertainment for ages. Sesame Street has been doing a great job at what it does for over 4 decades. Let them keep doing it for many more years to come. And may they continue to do what they do without the interference of politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)