Structural changes at both Fairfax and it's Murdock competitor signal the possible ending of newspapers as we know them, ushering in a no-print era where we access our need for information by way of the Internet.
This was forecast as inevitable by some pundits when the " Kindle " was invented, but it took the release of the I-Pad to put a virtual Kindle in so many people's hands to make this a possibility.
There is no doubt that the old printed newspaper format is extremely wasteful. On average, most people discard at least half the pages of their daily paper unread, because it contains matter that does not interest them. For instance, would a person who does not bet on horse races be really interested in the racing pages ? If you don't own shares, would you really want to wade through the share market reports and study the daily stock prices ? How many male readers avidly scan the social pages ?
Some years ago, the Illawarra Mercury readers were given the option to decide if they wanted the massive racing supplement covering the weekend race meetings included in their home delivered Friday edition. Those with no interest in racing probably saved a great number of trees from becoming newsprint as this supplement usually ran to twenty-four pages.
The newspaper proprietors seem to be stuck on the horns of a dilemma. There are vast numbers of elderly people who will never purchase an I-Pad because they are not new technology literate, nor will they ever adopt this technology. The real force behind newspapers - the advertisers who use them to reach their customer audience - would suffer a media deficit of reach if the printed papers ceased.
Perhaps there is still a market for print - if it can reinvent itself into a format that meets people's needs.
Perhaps the present "one size fits all " format needs to be discarded into individual sections that are each offered separately on the newsagents counter. The most popular would naturally be that which contains world and local news, the original reason for the development of newspapers. Sport would closely follow as a desired segment, with other sections separately covering finance, social events, gambling interests and of course the listing of births, deaths and marriages.
Customers would have the option of buying the sections that interest them - at a price consistent with the number of pages involved - or of taking the entire paper as it exists in it's present format. It would deliver a benefit of a cheaper price option to the public and a lower production cost to the newspaper company, and it would certainly reduce waste by way of unread newsprint.
Eventually, the electronic age must win, but there is an opportunity to delay the inevitable if this industry meets the challenge by reinventing itself.
Saturday, 30 June 2012
Friday, 29 June 2012
" Intervention " or " Justice " ?
The question seems to be - " Does a government have the right to manage the financial affairs of it's citizens when they are deemed to be out of control ? " Many people argue that we are each responsible for the way we choose to live, but do we have the right to force those dependent upon us to share that same fate ?
Put bluntly, the Federal intervention programme was caused by concern for what was happening in our remote Aboriginal communities. Alcoholism was rife and as a result many Aboriginal children were not getting regular meals or attending school. There seemed to be a danger that we would raise a " lost generation ", lacking the tools with which to sustain themselves and destined to repeat the lifestyle of their elders.
The intervention took the form of isolating a percentage of social security income into a special account which could only be accessed for approved spending. This money could not be used to buy tobacco or alcohol, but was quarantined for the purchase of food, clothing and household essentials. It simply reduced the amount of discretionary spending available to ensure the availability of the basics.
The fact that this scheme was initially used to manage the lifestyle of Aboriginal people caused accusations that it was " racist ". There have been calls for it to be extended nation wide and applied to all citizens - of all colour. That again raises the question of whether any government has the right to manage it's citizens financial affairs, and yet that has been an acceptable fact of life for most of the last century.
If a person suffering Dementia enters an institution, the government watchdog takes control of their affairs, as also happens when a person is certified with a mental illness. Alcoholism is a form of mental illness. Under it's influence the victim loses spending control and brings disaster into the lives of any children depending on that person for survival. It may be impossible to alter the lifestyle of the alcoholic, but it is possible to repair some of the harm done to dependent children - and that seems to be the aim of this legislation.
One of the outcomes of alcoholism is a disregard for the obligation of having children attend school regularly. Education is the key to a better life and withholding money can be a decisive factor in gaining compliance. In some cases, it is the only way to ensure that children of deprived households get at least a basic education.
Both sides of politics seem to be in rare agreement with the principles involved. We can only hope that this question is not mired in accusations of racism and that it is implemented in a sensible manner to help those of any race or creed - who have fallen through the cracks. Justice and need are are twin issues !
Put bluntly, the Federal intervention programme was caused by concern for what was happening in our remote Aboriginal communities. Alcoholism was rife and as a result many Aboriginal children were not getting regular meals or attending school. There seemed to be a danger that we would raise a " lost generation ", lacking the tools with which to sustain themselves and destined to repeat the lifestyle of their elders.
The intervention took the form of isolating a percentage of social security income into a special account which could only be accessed for approved spending. This money could not be used to buy tobacco or alcohol, but was quarantined for the purchase of food, clothing and household essentials. It simply reduced the amount of discretionary spending available to ensure the availability of the basics.
The fact that this scheme was initially used to manage the lifestyle of Aboriginal people caused accusations that it was " racist ". There have been calls for it to be extended nation wide and applied to all citizens - of all colour. That again raises the question of whether any government has the right to manage it's citizens financial affairs, and yet that has been an acceptable fact of life for most of the last century.
If a person suffering Dementia enters an institution, the government watchdog takes control of their affairs, as also happens when a person is certified with a mental illness. Alcoholism is a form of mental illness. Under it's influence the victim loses spending control and brings disaster into the lives of any children depending on that person for survival. It may be impossible to alter the lifestyle of the alcoholic, but it is possible to repair some of the harm done to dependent children - and that seems to be the aim of this legislation.
One of the outcomes of alcoholism is a disregard for the obligation of having children attend school regularly. Education is the key to a better life and withholding money can be a decisive factor in gaining compliance. In some cases, it is the only way to ensure that children of deprived households get at least a basic education.
Both sides of politics seem to be in rare agreement with the principles involved. We can only hope that this question is not mired in accusations of racism and that it is implemented in a sensible manner to help those of any race or creed - who have fallen through the cracks. Justice and need are are twin issues !
Thursday, 28 June 2012
Local knowledge saves lives !
The relentless pressure to reduce the cost of services often squeezes out the contribution local knowledge can play in saving lives. The Wollongong fire emergency centre that used to despatch fire crews to blazes is now shut and calls are handled by despatchers in either Sydney or Newcastle.
When cases are handled by a person far removed from the local scene and lacking geographical knowledge, mistakes can occur. It is reported that fire crews have been ordered to attend fires up to eight hundred miles from where their station is located. Distance might look perfectly reasonable to someone looking at a map, but that is the type of mistake that involves lost time - and lost time can equate into lost lives.
When someone picks up the phone to send for a fire crew or to call an ambulance, they are often in a state of panic. Sometimes it is a small child on the end of that line. Sometimes it is someone who is emotionally distressed and incapable of giving rational directions. It helps if the person trying to unscramble that distorted information has local knowledge and can ask questions that clarify precisely where this help is needed.
When it comes to reducing the cost of services, a theoretical approach is not always in the best interests of safety. Sooner or later the principle of having this state's emergency services controlled from a central point can lead to the type of thinking that has sent data processing overseas. When cost is the only criteria, then moving those services to a call centre in a low wages country makes a lot of sense - even if it delivers life or death decisions to people who lack even a basic knowledge of the local scene.
There is no doubt that this centralised despatch system will work well - most of the time. The present 000 number for police - fire - ambulance removes the need to try and find individual numbers for each of the services, but that still works best if the 000 controller connects the caller with a local call room for each service.
There is no substitute for local knowledge when lives are at stake !
When cases are handled by a person far removed from the local scene and lacking geographical knowledge, mistakes can occur. It is reported that fire crews have been ordered to attend fires up to eight hundred miles from where their station is located. Distance might look perfectly reasonable to someone looking at a map, but that is the type of mistake that involves lost time - and lost time can equate into lost lives.
When someone picks up the phone to send for a fire crew or to call an ambulance, they are often in a state of panic. Sometimes it is a small child on the end of that line. Sometimes it is someone who is emotionally distressed and incapable of giving rational directions. It helps if the person trying to unscramble that distorted information has local knowledge and can ask questions that clarify precisely where this help is needed.
When it comes to reducing the cost of services, a theoretical approach is not always in the best interests of safety. Sooner or later the principle of having this state's emergency services controlled from a central point can lead to the type of thinking that has sent data processing overseas. When cost is the only criteria, then moving those services to a call centre in a low wages country makes a lot of sense - even if it delivers life or death decisions to people who lack even a basic knowledge of the local scene.
There is no doubt that this centralised despatch system will work well - most of the time. The present 000 number for police - fire - ambulance removes the need to try and find individual numbers for each of the services, but that still works best if the 000 controller connects the caller with a local call room for each service.
There is no substitute for local knowledge when lives are at stake !
Wednesday, 27 June 2012
Time to flip a coin !
The fact that a Suspected Illegal Entry Vessel ( SIEV) capsized and drowned nearly a hundred asylum seekers is making ordinary Australians both ashamed and angry. Border protection has become a political football and both sides of politics seems more interested in point scoring and denigrating remedial plans than actually stopping the boats.
Achieving consensus is impossible without a working compromise being reached between the Labor government and the opposition Coalition. Any solution will be blocked by the Greens unless the two main parties deliver the numbers, and the Greens are totally opposed to any solution that involves asylum seekers being assessed in a third country.
The main stumbling block seems to be an agreeable destination. Labor is adamant that it wants the boat people sent to Malaysia. The Coalition is equally firm that they be sent to Nauru. The only thing the two sides seem to actually agree on is that moving asylum seekers offshore will destroy the people smuggler's myth that once asylum seekers reach Australian soil they will be allowed to stay. There will be no incentive to risk their lives on a leaky, overcrowded little boat if they will immediately be deported away from that treasured Australian landfall.
It is not hard to see why a workable plan remains out of reach. This is the classical political clash of ego's.
When Kevin Rudd won office he inherited a working solution devised by John Howard that had virtually stopped the boats. This plan offended Labor principles and so it was scrapped and replaced. The replacement has clearly failed, but to change course would involve Labor admitting it made a mistake - and in politics that is unthinkable !
No solution has been reached because a decision that favours either Malaysia or Nauru delivers a win for one leader and a loss for the other, and human life runs a long way second to the ego's of our political leaders. They would prefer to see people drown at sea than suffer the humiliation of being the one who is seen to back down.
Perhaps the only way out of this mess is to invoke the Australian national character. We are a people known for our love of sport - and our affinity to wager on events. If both sides agree to let fate decide the destination of the asylum seekers, that decision can be made on the flip of a coin. Heads - they go to Malaysia. Tails - they go to Nauru.
At least it removes politics from the decision !
Achieving consensus is impossible without a working compromise being reached between the Labor government and the opposition Coalition. Any solution will be blocked by the Greens unless the two main parties deliver the numbers, and the Greens are totally opposed to any solution that involves asylum seekers being assessed in a third country.
The main stumbling block seems to be an agreeable destination. Labor is adamant that it wants the boat people sent to Malaysia. The Coalition is equally firm that they be sent to Nauru. The only thing the two sides seem to actually agree on is that moving asylum seekers offshore will destroy the people smuggler's myth that once asylum seekers reach Australian soil they will be allowed to stay. There will be no incentive to risk their lives on a leaky, overcrowded little boat if they will immediately be deported away from that treasured Australian landfall.
It is not hard to see why a workable plan remains out of reach. This is the classical political clash of ego's.
When Kevin Rudd won office he inherited a working solution devised by John Howard that had virtually stopped the boats. This plan offended Labor principles and so it was scrapped and replaced. The replacement has clearly failed, but to change course would involve Labor admitting it made a mistake - and in politics that is unthinkable !
No solution has been reached because a decision that favours either Malaysia or Nauru delivers a win for one leader and a loss for the other, and human life runs a long way second to the ego's of our political leaders. They would prefer to see people drown at sea than suffer the humiliation of being the one who is seen to back down.
Perhaps the only way out of this mess is to invoke the Australian national character. We are a people known for our love of sport - and our affinity to wager on events. If both sides agree to let fate decide the destination of the asylum seekers, that decision can be made on the flip of a coin. Heads - they go to Malaysia. Tails - they go to Nauru.
At least it removes politics from the decision !
Tuesday, 26 June 2012
Saving the planet !
If global warming is fast becoming a matter of human survival for the population of planet earth, then surely there is a better way than just imposing a carbon tax. One of the objectives of this coming carbon tax is to convince the electricity generating industry to move from burning coal to renewable energy. The coal fired electricity generators are the biggest source of carbon dioxide release and their elimination would go a long way towards resolving the problem.
It may take a case of " push " moving to " shove " to have that happen in the short term. We already encourage householders to install rooftop solar energy installations and buy back excess power generated at a premium price, but surely the time has come to make solar energy a requirement in the specification of all new homes.
Present laws make it compulsory to connect to water and sewerage. Would it not be reasonable to require every new home to be capable of generating at least it's own energy needs, with any excess returned to the grid for the same credit rate as the price charged to the householder when that home draws from the grid ?
Comparing the price of an average solar energy collector with that of the average new dwelling reveals a minuscule cost to comply, and brings the benefit of at least a highly reduced power bill - or perhaps no power bill at all. It would not be unreasonable to add the requirement of installing solar as part of the approval process for renovations or extensions to existing homes. The aim would be to eventually have every home in this country contributing to the national electricity grid.
This could certainly be achieved by extending the requirement that all existing homes being offered for resale must have solar power fitted before a contract can be exchanged. Once again, in comparison of the sum of money about to change hands, the cost of such installation is trivial.
It is all a matter of urgency of need. If those predicting coming disaster are right, then we are facing a national emergency and we need take drastic steps to save the planet- and ourselves. But if the pundits are wrong - at least we will have solved the power problem - and ensured long term cheap electricity for all !
It may take a case of " push " moving to " shove " to have that happen in the short term. We already encourage householders to install rooftop solar energy installations and buy back excess power generated at a premium price, but surely the time has come to make solar energy a requirement in the specification of all new homes.
Present laws make it compulsory to connect to water and sewerage. Would it not be reasonable to require every new home to be capable of generating at least it's own energy needs, with any excess returned to the grid for the same credit rate as the price charged to the householder when that home draws from the grid ?
Comparing the price of an average solar energy collector with that of the average new dwelling reveals a minuscule cost to comply, and brings the benefit of at least a highly reduced power bill - or perhaps no power bill at all. It would not be unreasonable to add the requirement of installing solar as part of the approval process for renovations or extensions to existing homes. The aim would be to eventually have every home in this country contributing to the national electricity grid.
This could certainly be achieved by extending the requirement that all existing homes being offered for resale must have solar power fitted before a contract can be exchanged. Once again, in comparison of the sum of money about to change hands, the cost of such installation is trivial.
It is all a matter of urgency of need. If those predicting coming disaster are right, then we are facing a national emergency and we need take drastic steps to save the planet- and ourselves. But if the pundits are wrong - at least we will have solved the power problem - and ensured long term cheap electricity for all !
Monday, 25 June 2012
The " Money/Roads/Cars " triangle !
There is something depressingly familiar about the " Money/Roads/Cars " triangle. The more money we spend to built new roads and widen existing ones seems to be instantly negated by the increase in car numbers - which fill the space we have created.
The statistics deliver a litany of bad news. Each survey reveals that Sydney's arterial road traffic runs a bit slower each year, despite toll increases delivering more money to the roads pool. We are urged to leave the car at home and use public transport to commute to work. We urge industry to relocate jobs to smaller cities and towns. We talk of altering start and finish times to spread commute drive times. We once hoped that the computer would eliminate the need for a commute as people worked from their homes - but like the notion of a " paperless office " - this failed to materialise.
Now the road planners are having a re-think on the toll question. The original idea was to charge a toll to pay for each new road and then discontinue the toll when the debt reduced to zero. Now the thinking is along the lines of " Distance rated tolling ", which means reintroducing tolls on those roads now toll free and extending tolling incrementally from the distant suburbs to the city centre.
This concept seems to adopt a two stage plan for car taxation. The money you pay for registration and green slip insurance permits you to legally drive within your home municipal area. That's just fine for getting the groceries or dropping the kids off at school, but if you use the city arterial road system, then a new charge based on distance comes into effect. The more distance you travel - the more toll you pay !
The statisticians predict that we need to spend $ 30 billion over the nest twenty years to give the city of Sydney a decent arterial road system. The only way that sort of money can be found is by installing a distance rated toll that will apply to all road users.
For the people of Wollongong it probably means the re-installation of a toll booth on the F-6 at Waterfall to pay for the eventual extension of the F-6 to St Peters in inner Sydney, but like all such improvements, that could be long term - and many years from now.
Unfortunately, no matter how promising the plans to fix the road system seem, most people know that the " Money/Roads/Cars" triangle will always be with us. The equation that matters is - increased population means more people driving more cars - irrespective of how many new roads we build.
That is an unalterable " fact of life " !
The statistics deliver a litany of bad news. Each survey reveals that Sydney's arterial road traffic runs a bit slower each year, despite toll increases delivering more money to the roads pool. We are urged to leave the car at home and use public transport to commute to work. We urge industry to relocate jobs to smaller cities and towns. We talk of altering start and finish times to spread commute drive times. We once hoped that the computer would eliminate the need for a commute as people worked from their homes - but like the notion of a " paperless office " - this failed to materialise.
Now the road planners are having a re-think on the toll question. The original idea was to charge a toll to pay for each new road and then discontinue the toll when the debt reduced to zero. Now the thinking is along the lines of " Distance rated tolling ", which means reintroducing tolls on those roads now toll free and extending tolling incrementally from the distant suburbs to the city centre.
This concept seems to adopt a two stage plan for car taxation. The money you pay for registration and green slip insurance permits you to legally drive within your home municipal area. That's just fine for getting the groceries or dropping the kids off at school, but if you use the city arterial road system, then a new charge based on distance comes into effect. The more distance you travel - the more toll you pay !
The statisticians predict that we need to spend $ 30 billion over the nest twenty years to give the city of Sydney a decent arterial road system. The only way that sort of money can be found is by installing a distance rated toll that will apply to all road users.
For the people of Wollongong it probably means the re-installation of a toll booth on the F-6 at Waterfall to pay for the eventual extension of the F-6 to St Peters in inner Sydney, but like all such improvements, that could be long term - and many years from now.
Unfortunately, no matter how promising the plans to fix the road system seem, most people know that the " Money/Roads/Cars" triangle will always be with us. The equation that matters is - increased population means more people driving more cars - irrespective of how many new roads we build.
That is an unalterable " fact of life " !
Sunday, 24 June 2012
Demolition man !
Survivors of the Bali bombing and relatives of those killed will have mixed feelings about the twenty year sentence handed down to Umar Patek, the master bomb maker who helped construct the car bomb used in the October 12, 2002 blast.
Known as " Demolition Man", Patek admits that he helped construct the bomb that killed two hundred and two people, eighty eight of them Australian. He expressed regret for his past actions and it was noticeable that he sat quietly throughout the long hearings and there were no outbursts of Islamic tirades against westerners or perceived injustices. This was obviously taken into account by the presiding judges.
Patek is forty-five years old and with good behaviour and parole, he will probably be released after fifteen years of incarceration. If he walks out the prison gate at age sixty he will have served a vastly lesser punishment than the execution carried out on Amrozi, Mukhlas and Iman Sumudra, the three people who actually placed and detonated the bomb.
This October will bring the tenth anniversary of the bombing and much has changed in Indonesia in that time. The Indonesian state has cracked down hard on terrorist cells and on the wider scene al Qaeda has taken some powerful hits with the elimination of Osama bin Laden and many of his key associates. Terrorist cells are still active in Africa and the Middle East, but the former frenetic energy is missing from the Indonesian scene.
If that is the sign of some form of truce it is welcome. Indonesia is one of our closest neighbours and the fact that it is a predominantly Muslim country should be no obstacle to a close trading relationship. We fought a bitter war with Japan within living memory and now that country is one of our biggest trading partners. Hopefully, Indonesian religious activists may be starting to realise that Australia poses no threat to their religion and that the only hope for world peace is a world where many religions live in peace with one another.
The tenth anniversary of the Bali bombing may be the time to draw a line. The guilty have been punished - and now the world has moved on.
Known as " Demolition Man", Patek admits that he helped construct the bomb that killed two hundred and two people, eighty eight of them Australian. He expressed regret for his past actions and it was noticeable that he sat quietly throughout the long hearings and there were no outbursts of Islamic tirades against westerners or perceived injustices. This was obviously taken into account by the presiding judges.
Patek is forty-five years old and with good behaviour and parole, he will probably be released after fifteen years of incarceration. If he walks out the prison gate at age sixty he will have served a vastly lesser punishment than the execution carried out on Amrozi, Mukhlas and Iman Sumudra, the three people who actually placed and detonated the bomb.
This October will bring the tenth anniversary of the bombing and much has changed in Indonesia in that time. The Indonesian state has cracked down hard on terrorist cells and on the wider scene al Qaeda has taken some powerful hits with the elimination of Osama bin Laden and many of his key associates. Terrorist cells are still active in Africa and the Middle East, but the former frenetic energy is missing from the Indonesian scene.
If that is the sign of some form of truce it is welcome. Indonesia is one of our closest neighbours and the fact that it is a predominantly Muslim country should be no obstacle to a close trading relationship. We fought a bitter war with Japan within living memory and now that country is one of our biggest trading partners. Hopefully, Indonesian religious activists may be starting to realise that Australia poses no threat to their religion and that the only hope for world peace is a world where many religions live in peace with one another.
The tenth anniversary of the Bali bombing may be the time to draw a line. The guilty have been punished - and now the world has moved on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)