Dumbing Down the Trickle Down

We spend less on education across the decades. And create a spiral of social decay with each generation.

Australia watches another generation enter our society ill-equipped to cope with the power of marketing, spin and bullshit media. They grow up thinking "A Current Affair" is a source of news and information. They grow believing "subway" is health food. They grow up fearing foreigners and their wives. That generation is the new vulnerable.

They are easily impacted by the street trade of drugs. They have no idea what home ownership looks like. They have no skills to critically assess honesty in media or politics. They are financially caged, cash-flow poor and unable to make decisions without checking the cash in their wallet first.

The men with money talk about those families below the poverty line as though they are a disease, a self-inflicted wound that needs to be purged for fear it may infect an otherwise healthy body. The men with money rely on these walking wounds to feed their profits, to buy their Coke, to drive their trucks, to vote for the LNP.

The men with money are blind to humanity, to people, they are the biggest sociopaths Australia has ever known. The men with money increase funding for police to fight the war on drugs, and cut the funding for education to deliver an even more vulnerable generation just around the corner. The men with money concoct elaborate justifications for diverting government spending to subsidise the activities of the rich and greedy.

Hi Gina, how are you today and how much diesel fuel did you buy with our money this week Governments are strangely reluctant to fund safe houses for victims of domestic violence.

More women die each year from being bashed to death by their partners than terrorist attacks, but where does the money go? Men with money understand the fear of terrorism, because terrorists can harm their stock portfolio or ruin plans for a holiday in Bali. Men with money do not understand the terror of living with violence, living in a home where nothing is certain for a single day.

Beer and gambling are what fuels domestic violence in Australia. Snorting cocaine never managed to achieve a socially acceptable status, but getting blind drunk is woven into the fabric of our culture. Across every socio-economic level their is glamour in grog. It's the most damaging drug of our times. It shortens lives, kills prematurely, ruins careers and sends families broke. It's a great source of revenue for tax coffers however.

The biggest tax based social cancer we have is gambling however. State revenues are addicted to gambling money, so much so that we watch our suburbs slowly drain their home equity into the casinos, pokies, horses and footy. The men with money realise that "gambling" is a dirty word, so they call it "gaming" instead to make it sound less of a big deal. Play a game, have a flutter, put two-bob each way.

What's the harm? After all the beer drinking under educated have nothing better to do with their lives and it's fun to slowly spiral into bankruptcy and force your family onto the streets.

The only thing more disgusting than watching our politicians shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic is watching media whores like Alan Jones profit from the charade.

The man who made millions off his fake fondness for the families on "struggle street" is the first to slip in the boot when a documentary goes to air revealing a few home truths about those in Western Sydney who cannot afford a chauffeur driven Merc. In true form Alan delivers a tirade of condemnation about the TV series while admitting that he hans't actually watched it.

Alan is of course one of the men with money. He has bags of it. He's not ashamed because he would argue that he worked so hard for it. Did he work 1 million times harder than anyone in Mount Druit? At the heart of this "I worked hard for my bags of money" argument is the idea that somehow others didn't work hard for their low rent housing. The suggestion is that somehow it's their fault for being poor.

Gina is helpful in this regard of course, she loves to remind the working poor that if you want more money just work harder. That advice seems a little hollow from someone who was left millions of dollars by her father.

Education is always the key to poverty. Money is not the key, but it does slow things down. It's hard work starting at the bottom of the pile and working your way up, but the better the education the more likely you are to make progress. Take away that education and you condemn a generation to failure before they had a chance.

No man is poorer than a man without an education. No nation is poorer than a nation divided.

The men with money are blind to the poor, to the humanity of poverty. The gap between "have and have not" widens. The fabric of society wears more thin and frail. It's a slippery slope as we watch the vulnerable become increasingly desperate and the government increasingly lost.

Is this the inevitable decay of democratic society? Wealth attained through social contract, for the benefit of all, leads to super wealth for some and pushed others into poverty until we're back at feudal chaos?

If you let gambling, alcohol and violence destroy lives across the country what kind of future does our society hold? How does the next generation of poorly educated citizens expect to improve the picture? Where did all the money go from the mining boom, because the country is broke and our governments are broken.

Keep Left. Safety Zone.

There are two motivations for people at a refugee rally, those who connect directly with a sense of discrimination and injustice, then those who feel directly the plight of the refugees themselves. 

I didn't know what I hoped to achieve by attending the rally in Melbourne, I just wanted to be counted and blurting outrage on social media wasn't going to cut it. Marching in Bourke St felt like real action, even if it it really isn't.

Governments in Australia have a very poor record of heeding protests, and if 600,000 people marching failed to precipitate an apology to our indigenous or a rethink on the Iraq War, then how would a few hundred gathering in the rain lead to any real action?

What took me by surprise was the emotion of the experience. It caught me off guard because my outrage was rational and ethical, not personal. Standing on the edges I could barely hear the speeches, and didn't really care. My mind had begun to wander with contemplation of the people we're here to support, and what their lives are like. 

And it turned out that for me it is personal, I really can put myself in their shoes. I can feel their sense of homelessness, their sense of isolation, their sense of hopelessness. These are people adrift in the world, in every possible sense. 

Until you've been homeless, stateless and lived without a safety net you cannot begin to imagine the emotional journey that your average refugee has undertaken. That doesn't mean you should't try however. Cast into the ocean in search of a new home is far from the worst thing they have faced in life. The more I contemplated their noble desperation the more meaning I drew from the rally.

These rallies will do absolutely nothing to alter the course of debate in Australia, but they will do everything to help us through a dark night in our own lives. Hundreds of people from Melbourne have gathered because they care, because they are custodians of compassion. It was a gathering of humanity and something we can be proud of. 

Our media is filled with the destruction of sanity. But out on the steps of Victoria's State Library, walking the tram tracks of Bourke St and outside the Immigration Dept a chorus of voices came together to remind ourselves that there is a better way to live our lives. A chorus that speaks in the hope that refugees may have a better life too.

Being part of the rally helped me to feel better about the country I live in, knowing that there really are people with morals above those of our current political leaders. If you only saw Australia through our own media this week you would think it was a country where people care more about protecting tax rorts than asylum seekers.

Well the media can go fuck itself. Collectively they are a mob of shameless dolts who put their pursuit of profitable headlines ahead of the nation that feeds them, ahead of their own decency, and ahead of our most vulnerable. Those few examples of reasoned debate are inevitably drowned out by the stupid. 

That battle was lost a long time ago, and maybe the battle for humane treatment of refugees is also lost for now.

At least I have something positive to walk away with today. On a bleak and miserable winters day in Melbourne a cohort of caring souls came out to embrace kindness, humanity and compassion. That's the part of Australia that I love the most, and that I hope to see more of in the years ahead.

Cheaper. Kinder. Smarter.

The idea of being able to "Stop the boats" is akin to zero tolerance on drugs, prohibition of alcohol, or teenage abstinence. Governments cannot regulate human behaviour, especially when the humans haven't even reached your shores yet.

There has been a massive rise in displaced persons around the world in recent years. This means more people seeking asylum globally. This means more refugees in boats. We call this "push factors".

All of the policy discussion in Australia for the last decade has been around punitive measures to stop one kind of refugee, the boat people. In 1992 the mandatory detention policy was put in place, with bi-partisan support, as a temporary measure. It's proved expensive and currently is not working. The deterrent simply doesn't stack up against the desperation of so many displaced people.

I want a policy debate that focuses on the needs of these people, not one that focuses on the racist paranoia of a few privileged Australians. So what alternative policies might change the current situation?

The money currently spent on detention is in the order of $100,000 a year per person. Instead of locking up people who have already been through hell what if we spent some of those funds on creating a better way to get them to Australia? Here's a simple outline for a cheaper, kinder and smarter response to the international humanitarian emergency.


1. Increase our intake: Australia accepts piss all numbers of refugees compared to the rest of the world. We need to stop whining about the numbers arriving and get real about the benefits of accepting them into our communities. We are a wealthy nation and most of us here are migrants of a sort anyway.

2. Improve Processing Times: Why does it take years to process refugees in Australia and only months to do it in Sweden? We spend all our dollars on detention instead of a solution. A very small percentage of asylum seekers end up failing our criteria for refugee status, so currently we're punishing the many for the sake of the few.

3. Bring them here safely: People wont jump on a boat and risk their lives if they have a better way to get here, or a better way to apply for asylum. Creating legal pathways for refugees removes the economics of boat smuggling, and stops people from drowning at sea. This is not a trivial challenge, it requires cooperation between nations, but it's a more achievable goal than trying to get Indonesia to stop the smugglers.


My simple equation is not a new one, but I haven't seen these ideas talked about in the media recently. Having just penned my thoughts I saw a tweet from Sarah Hanson-Young on a similar thread. Turns out The Greens have a well documented policy along these lines, as was submitted to the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers led by Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston.

It's very detailed and tackled some of the practical issues around creating safer pathways. This is where our debate should currently be focused. Below is a copy of the submission from The Greens. I know our political leaders and media are not in the habit of reading the details as often as they should, but perhaps a few words can stick in the memory somewhere and maybe stir some motivation to dig deeper on alternatives:

Cheaper. Kinder. Smarter.

Australian Greens submission can be found here. (pdf)

Cartoon from Bruce Petty, The Age (link)

730 Pre-Recorded

Dear ABC & 730 Report,

This week the 730 Report aired a pre-recorded interview with Tony Abbott, conducted by Chris Uhlmann.

The absence of any questions regarding the hot topic of the day, the alleged $9400 error in Mr Abbott's expense claims, was quite startling. In fact the entire interview came across as a highly 'managed' process, as though Tony was only answering pre-approved questions.

I am interested to know whether pre-conditions were placed on the ABC before Mr Abbott agreed to appear on the program, and whether there are any restrictions on disclosing the exact conditions agreed to for this interview. The context of any interview is important, and I believe it would be in the public interest for the context of this pre-recorded interview to be made clear to the audience.

Is this possible?

www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/40587

The Ultimate Test of an Airline

I've always said that you should judge an airline by how they handle it when stuff goes wrong. China Southern are now in my good books of airlines I can trust when things get sticky.

These guys made a spectacular effort while flying through Guangzhou, turning what could have been a really really bad day into a happy return home. Myself and a travelling companion were checking-in from the far west of China, the city of Kashgar (Kashi), but a rather sultry girl at the counter refused to check out bags through to our international connection. 

We never found out why this happened and at the time it didn't really matter, we just knew that ahead of us lay a 90 minute transfer across one of the biggest airports in the world, a task made nearly impossible by virtue of having to collect our bags at one terminal and check-in again at another. Guangzhou airport is so big it makes Bangkok Suvarnabhumi look like a tin shed. 

Travelling in the far west of China will test the patience of any person and I was already spent of all joy, so this little hiccup struck me as just plain unfriendly. 

7 hours later we arrive in Guangzhou, a little behind schedule and rather low on hope. A little lady named Rain was waiting for us both holding a sign and wearing high heels, but she ran faster than either of us could keep up with. She headed off down the side exit from the air-bridge and within seconds we were standing beneath our aircraft in search of our luggage. It all happened so fast, I felt like a special guest star on Amazing Race. 

While Rain was zippy and efficient, the baggage blokes were stubborn and determined. We dragged one bag off the carts but two others were still hidden under a pile of other luggage. I watched the cart driven off while pointing at my second bag, and we never found my companions suitcase. Our adventure hit a sudden moment of chaos. 

Rain mumbled into her walky-talky and without breaking stride a van pulled up and we stepped right onto it. Through out the drive she's chatting to an office somewhere inside the mega-complex that is Guangzhou International Airport, sorting out which bags were still "in the system" and which one was in my hand. 

What is usually a thirty minute process getting from Domestic to International was reduced to a five minute drive. We emerged inside the arrivals hall and I struggled to keep pace with Rain as she ran ahead of me in her high heels, like a little gazelle dressed in blue with optical correcting glasses. She ditched the walky-talky and started making calls on her smart phone, and by the time I had my rescued bag checked in at the transfer counter she announced that the other two have been grabbed and retagged.

We got confirmation that all the luggage was now aboard the aircraft, 10 minutes before the flight was effectively closed. The bags had made it and it looked like we would too.

In the minutes ahead we ended up with new boarding passes, new baggage tags and an express jaunt through necessary channels. The slowest part was waiting in line for the security check while business class travellers struggle to get their head around the concept of taking stuff out of their pockets and putting laptops in a separate tray. Apparently money doesn't make you any smarter or any more considerate. 

The final thrill ride was in the electric buggy usually reserved for disabled people, with a very lovely Cantonese man improvising the "beep beep" noises because his cart had no horn. He was one of those chaps who talks with a smile, you can hear it with every word, and was probably enjoying the scoot and scurry as much as we were. 

Gate A3 was about a kilometre from the final passport clearance and we arrived just as the plane was being loaded. Rain had slipped on a bit of lipstick while waiting for us to clear security check and had taken a few selfies with her phone already, in preparation for a group shot. The driver took the photo of us together while we stood with Rain and said "Yi, Er, San, Qiezi!"

We made the flight, the bags made the flight, and all ended happily. Better than that, my journeys in the far west of China had been something of a tough ride for me, so this little reminder of what modern China is capable of was well needed to restore my faith in their country. Rain is both exceptional, and typical. 

I fly on a lot of airlines in the course of a year and very few make an impression on me. Most are banal and rather disappointing, and to be perfectly honest there are very few that come close to the consistency of service I get from Thai Airways. Yes, I'm a Thai fan and probably will be for a long time to come. 

But now I know what I can expect from China Southern. Annoying passengers who smoke mid-flight, an extensive network that covers China like no other, some good in flight service from the attentive staff and dreadful meal parcels that wouldn't pass for food in a Los Angeles high school.

But they will move heaven and earth to get you and your bags home on time, and always with a smile.

www.flychinasouthern.com

How To Succeed In Publishing

For two decades News Ltd has been successful at one thing, being more efficient. Their entire organisation has been lead by Uncle Rupert towards leaner and more profitable business practices that deliver returns to their share holders.

To this day efficiency is the primary focus of the management. The trouble with this model is that eventually something else comes along that is an order of magnitude more efficient and drastically cheaper. It's called the internet.

The publishers that will survive are those with the ability to produce better quality instead of better efficiency.

I've heard various news chiefs tell their shareholders that they can cut budgets without cutting quality. It's a mantra that you hear in any industry where a race to the bottom has taken over the logic of otherwise rational minds. They honestly believe it's true, as they watch markets shrink and revenue slide.

"We wont be cutting content" is hardly the same objective as "We want to create better journalism and set a new standard for publishing." The two are worlds apart.

The manufacturing industry in Australia has learned that it's a folly to compete on price, the contracts will eventually end up in China or Thailand regardless how hard management push for efficiency or employee discounting. We can still manufacture goods in the Australia, they just have to be quality based products that demand high technology or are very unique.

Publishing is the same. By all means take full advantage of more efficient technology to produce a publication, be that delivering to millions of iPads or using digital offices to coordinate content production. But efficiency should never be the end goal, it's merely the instrument to enable better content and higher standards.

Tossing a bunch of opinions onto a website is no longer good enough. Adding a few "left versus right" opinions into that mix doesn't achieve balance, it just looks like the editorial direction is suffering from schizofrenia.

If your publication's primary objective is anything other than "to publish the best possible content and inform our audience to the highest standard" then you're probably wasting your time. The challenge is to recognise how to improve your publication and to never settle for good enough.

Donkey Love

From a Chinese website encouraging the use of Donkey Carts in the city of Turpan. It made me giggle.

"When traveling in Turpan, you can take a donkey car to go around. It will make you feel another world. It will make you feel very romantic if you sit with your lover. Sitting and singing in the donkey car can make you relax yourself to the most. All the busy work and all the boring housework are went off at that moment. Moreover, the price is much lower than the taxi. And you can save your feet and directly feel the people there at the same time."

Save The Ice Berg

Yesterday I was lucky enough to listen to the 2011 CBC Massey Lecture on Winter. With Adam Gopnik. Inspiring and intensely thoughtful. Liberating even. It touched on almost every aspect of life on earth and our future ahead. I loved the reference to Elizabeth Bishop, and her poem "We'd rather have the iceberg than the ship."

It works on so many levels.

http://www.cbc.ca/ideas/episodes/massey-lectures/2011/11/07/the-2011-cbc-massey-lectures-winter/



Elizabeth Bishop:

We'd rather have the iceberg than the ship,
although it meant the end of travel.
Although it stood stock-still like cloudy rock
and all the sea were moving marble.
We'd rather have the iceberg than the ship;
we'd rather own this breathing plain of snow
though the ship's sails were laid upon the sea
as the snow lies undissolved upon the water.
O solemn, floating field,
are you aware an iceberg takes repose
with you, and when it wakes may pasture on your snows?

This is a scene a sailor'd give his eyes for.
The ship's ignored. The iceberg rises
and sinks again; its glassy pinnacles
correct elliptics in the sky.
This is a scene where he who treads the boards
is artlessly rhetorical. The curtain
is light enough to rise on finest ropes
that airy twists of snow provide.
The wits of these white peaks
spar with the sun. Its weight the iceberg dares
upon a shifting stage and stands and stares.

The iceberg cuts its facets from within.
Like jewelry from a grave
it saves itself perpetually and adorns
only itself, perhaps the snows
which so surprise us lying on the sea.
Good-bye, we say, good-bye, the ship steers off
where waves give in to one another's waves
and clouds run in a warmer sky.
Icebergs behoove the soul
(both being self-made from elements least visible)
to see them so: fleshed, fair, erected indivisible.

Why Choice Matters

This personal account of why pro-choice is important, and why it is not trivial, is worth a read for anybody. Killing people to save embryos makes no sense. Abortions will exist regardless of law. The rights of the mother cannot be ignored in the debate. Choice means just that, making your decision instead of being forced to follow someone elses.

Freedom to choose is essential to women's rights. Lives are put in peril without it. Mothers have rights too.

http://www.michigandaily.com//blog/feminine-critique-why-im-pro-choice
"Abortion must remain safe and legal because abortion will never go away regardless of law."

Nobody Tweeted Anything Nice

Injustice makes me depressed. Not just sad, but it stops me from doing normal things and feeling normal feelings. Injustice comes on many forms.

A lovely lady who travelled with me last year emailed me this week to share her grief over losing her 19 year old daughter. How do you deal with that kind of loss, how do you talk about the tragedy of young hope replaced by suicide? I also found out that another colleague lost her best friend to cancer after a long battle and an emotional black hole. She died isolated from her loved ones and regretful of her marriage.

An inspiring journalist also published her deeply personal account of what it feels like to suffer a stroke. She was on a flight to Beirut one day and suddenly her world turned to chaos and confusion. I felt nausea passing in waves through by body as I read it.

I can tolerate confronting tragedy in small doses only.

Even more damaging this week has been the main stream media of Australia. As terrible and overwhelming as the other stories of personal trauma have been, having to watch the shoddy state of journalism in Australia is far more harmful to my state of mind. It's not just depressing, it's a source of anger.

Most of us who work in media related industries have an appreciation for the power of the Fourth Estate. Those who care about more than just themselves would love the opportunity to have a voice in the debates that confront our nation. We see immense responsibility to inform readers. We are humbled by such privilege.

Watching staffers in our daily papers abandon that honour is painful. Guys like Joe Hildebrand, Andrew Bolt and Paul Sheehan get paid good money to abuse a great privilege. News is traded for entertainment, facts are discarded for convenience, opinion replaces journalism.

Two things in this world get me mad. People who waste their power to do good. People who get in the way of others who are trying to do good.

Watching arrogant bullies like Peter Reith lecture decent people about the lives of refugees takes things to a whole new low. This man was caught deceiving the Australian people in order to win an election, and he got away with it. Now he gets the privilege of air time on the ABC to spout his aggression, pontificate about the motives of others and shout down more respectful panel members.

It's disgraceful and it's far from anything that qualifies as journalism. And the people of Australia are the ones who are footing the bill for this thug to enjoy "retirement" in the spotlight. He should be in jail, not on television.

The injustice of people abusing their power really hits my raw nerves. It happens in my career that some people like to simply rip off my editorial, steal my photos or copy my design work. Some people are shameless about it, just like Peter Reith and the other white men in suits who fill the pages of our media with misinformation about refugees heading to Australia.

The media makes me angry, tragedy makes me sad. I'm incredibly lucky myself to have good fortune in my life. Some of it has come at a price. It's taken 42 years to feel like I'm getting somewhere in the world.

Little acts of bastardry make me especially angry. Stealing my pencil is the definition of being a shit head. I saw a posting on Facebook today from an independent clothing maker who buys end of stock material to hand sew dresses. Someone walked into a store and stole one of her dresses, it was on consignment. I was angry. It takes a serious loser to steal from a hard working person who has worked their way from nothing into a position of self-employment.

(And if you're that guy who keeps copying my brochure designs and stealing my editorial for your website, you are an even bigger loser than whoever stole that dress.)

Angry is one thing, depressed is another. As the tragic events of suicide, cancer and strokes have reminded me lately; life is short and I've already seen out 42 years of it. I may have to stay away from the television entirely for fear the streams of tragedy and rage will cross.

There was one silver lining to the disgraceful display of Peter Reith on the ABC tonight. His performance drew a broad and damming collection of tweets. Some were rude, some were funny and most were direct and to the point. Nobody tweeted anything nice about the guy, not a single word. His comments were indefensible apparently.

All of which begs the question, why the fuck do you need to put a nasty piece of work like him on TV in the first place?

I bet he stole my pencil.

My Myanmar Moment

Last night I ate grilled meat on a stick while a street kid begged for scraps. It was just another moment during this journey through Myanmar that has reminded me how lucky I am.

In a crowded laneway of Rangoon myself and some lovely guests feasted on soft shell crab, grilled fish and tasty bits on skewers. When the beer ran out we ordered more beer. When the sticks ran out we ordered more of them too. As usual we ordered a little too much and struggled to manage the 200 metre walk back to our bus. 

#firstworldproblems

Myanmar is not a third world nation, it's just a country that has been hidden from the west and has developed more slowly under a military regime. Myanmar shares first world problems and third world problems. As we gorged on protein and alcohol a team of prostitutes walked up the laneway, heading for night clubs or bars. I wondered if the little street kid belonged to one of those women.

The contrast in fortune was powerful at that moment, the lottery of life that begins with where you were born and what your parents do in order to live. Back at the hotel a bunch of privileged white American males were screaming on CNN about their right to own an room full of automatic weapons. 

Few people ever rise above their upbringing, it's a failing of our education system in western countries.

We like to think that class mobility is the norm, but in reality the idealistic potential for mobility is offered as a smoke screen for grinding socio-economic factors that begin long before we can talk. Our lot in life is heavily loaded by pre-existing conditions. The achievement of the few to migrate to the next class is mistaken as the promise for all. 

Not everybody wants to move up a class, or even recognises they are in one. The majority of Australians are ignorant of their good fortune. Ignorance is bliss but it does little for sensible voting patterns. As a nation we have squandered our wealth and as individuals we are lazy and underachieving. Watch this space when China doesn't need our minerals any more. Ignorance is a ticking time bomb.

My parents were nut jobs, but at least I didn't have to grow up on the streets of Rangoon like a lost puppy. There was a time when I thought I had it tough. My father was deeply depressed and tried to kill himself so many times that I wished he had succeeded the first time and saved everyone else the grief. My mother made a bid for freedom from a violent marriage and ended up with a violent alcoholic.

A little childhood trauma goes a long way. I rarely feel guilty for having good fortune these days, I figure I've done my time and have earned a little good luck. That doesn't always cut it of course. Increasingly I feel my luck outweighs the hardship and anything resembling a "trickle down effect" is just a cop out when it comes to the genuine struggles of the poor majority on this planet. 

The numbers are staggering. So many human lives are intensely difficult while so few in the west enjoy massive wealth. 

Some people see this imbalance and devote their live to changing it. I have not done that, which makes me almost as bad as those gun-loving idiots on cable TV. I have an ethical awareness about my good fortune, and rejecting corporations who put profits before people, but deep down I am resigned to the fact that inequality is the human condition. I have no expectation that across the fullness of human existence on Earth that life will be any different. 

There will always be winner and losers. What matters most is learning to win gracefully and still be able to recognise your own good fortune.

For two weeks I have travelled across Myanmar with the most wonderful group of people. Some are recent "regulars" to my adventures with the camera, some are so regular I forget how many times we've had each others company. All are unique and different, all are exceptional companions on the road. The very fact that we are here means we are the fortunate ones in life. 

One is our guide, a local fellow of immense charm and kind spirit. He will be one of life's winners, he will continue to be successful and will rise above his childhood too. That little street kid was not invisible to him either.

The Punctuated Revolution

Back in the 1980s there were dire predictions of global climate change and warnings that in less than 100 years the planet could be thrown into environmental turmoil. The gist of it has proven true, only it's taking place much faster than expected.

The same is now true for the fate of traditional media.

Change is not linear and consistent, it's punctuated by events of great disruption. One year you're buying CD's from a "record store", and the next you're complaining about download speeds while sucking an entire series of TV onto your iPad.

We're still getting word from the old boys in the Main Stream Media that it's time to look seriously at the threat posed by the internet. Actually that threat was obvious at least 5 years ago and what they're now watching is the tipping of an ice berg. It starts slowly at first, with a few groans and pops, then suddenly the entire mass of ice is rolling forward like an unstoppable boulder the size of Uluru.

More recently the twitter-sphere has erupted with derision over the manifest failure of #MSM (Main Stream Media) to deliver even remotely reasonable journalism to a knowledge thirsty audience. The problem with this model is that we no longer have a Main Stream Media. All that is left of the daily papers and nightly news bulletins are marginalised entertainment units that have to scream increasingly loud to get attention.

Real news apparently doesn't sell enough advertising any more, so extreme news is used to boost the numbers. Trouble is that each time the editors jump the shark they push away a little more of their old audience and set the bar for indifference even higher. It's a spiral of death where advertisers cut their spend accordingly, journalists get the sack to keep the business profitable and the cycle spins ever tighter into itself.

At first the spiral into oblivion for a newspaper is slow and broad, resembling an editorial shift over many years as good journos are sent out to chase bad stories. The tighter the spiral descends the faster the collapse, signalled by ever more dreadful excuses for journos being given ever greater column inches. In some cases even a TV show.

We're in the final phases now, where the future of mastheads can be counted in months instead of years. Don't blink, you just might miss the moment of truth. Only a few titles will survive the wash up, and they won't be the ones that sacked all the proper journos either. Who needs to pay $2 a day to read newsprint filled with rumour and fiction, when you can jump on Twitter and get it for free?

The old boys in print are equally keen to boast that "social media" doesn't have any real journalists so what good is Twitter when you want to find out the truth. Irony is lost on them and so is mathematics. The biggest circulating newspaper in Australia claims 100,000 copies a day, which puts it narrowly in front of Annabel Crabb and her 70,000 (and growing) twitter followers.

Sure that's not 70,000 daily readers, but there's a hundred Annabels out there and each of them are eminently retweetable. The numbers scale quickly and in a targeted fashion. For all the hoo-ha over Alan Jones and his "influence", his greatest gift to the media landscape is to act as a human warning to others.

Annabel has the added advantage of offering 100% informed opinion without the distraction of advertising. A single reader can follow a few hundred news sources and tap into a network of information that is orders of magnitude greater than anything offered by every Australian newspaper put together. Put that information gathering ability behind some nice apps on your iPad, such as FlipBoard or Zyte, and you have a far superior experience in every possible way.

You can even send feedback directly to the source to let them know if they hit the mark or not. The reader is in control, not the editor. That is the revolution. Newspapers don't fear unqualified journos on Twitter, they fear being accountable to their audience.

Recent news events such as the infamous misogyny speech by Prime Minister Gillard and the Ashby conspiracy to depose the Speaker of the House failed to get due attention in the #MSM. Thankfully overseas papers like the Guardian provided newsworthy accounts of both for Twitter followers in Australia.

But the #MSM is not really main stream, it's actually the fringe. They just haven't realised it yet and neither have most of the people who object to their scale of bias. These dying mastheads are like a school yard bully, if you ignore them enough they will simply go away.

Given their rate of rabidity and desperation over the last 12 months they will be going away even sooner than anyone could have predicted.




Newspaper Death Watch
http://newspaperdeathwatch.com/

The Failed Estate / Jim Parker
http://thefailedestate.blogspot.com.au/

Let The Great Unhinging Begin / Scott Steel
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/

Prissy Shrieks of Fear and Loathing / Mike Carlton
http://www.theage.com.au/

The $100 Brand

Every time I get a Dell brochure in the mail I am reminded of how a $100 failure can ruin a brands reputation. Failure to deliver, in this case quite literally, has lost that company tens of thousands of dollars worth of business. It was avoidable.

Three years ago I bought $100 worth of printer and paper online. Dell had a special offer. Only problem was they didn't have any printers. So they took the money and promised to sort out delivery some time later. That never happened. It took several goes to track down the problem, but after many months I had to ask for a refund.

As is often the case, a large company with inflexible systems stumbles on small matters of detail. Soon after the purchase of a phantom printer my credit card experienced fraudulent activity, and was hence cancelled. Unable to refund to my credit card, Dell said they would send me a cheque. Seems simple enough, only they didn't do this. Someone made a mistake and attempted to refund a dead card anyway.

Two years pass and I raise the problem with someone important in branding based in the USA. They make squeaky noises of shame and email important people in Australia to seek action and get it sorted. After 6 more months those important people in Australia have kicked the can down the road until a nit-wit repeats the original error but in more spectacular style.

At no point has anyone simply said,. "Oh yes, we've made an error, lets see if we can fix that."

What does it cost Dell to ignore the problem? In this case quite a bit. Due to my personal experience with failure to deliver goods, similar problems from friends of mine who failed to receive far more expensive items, and the failure to manage a simple mistake I now avoid their products totally.

That means in my office and in my editorial. I never recommend them to anyone because frankly how can I? You judge a brand by how they respond when things go wrong. Airlines that put you up in a nice hotel room and get you on the first plane to Sydney rate very highly with me. Airlines that send you a text message three hours before a flight to say "Please don't turn up to the airport until 3pm tomorrow, good luck getting a room while Bangkok floods." do not rate so well.

Dell failed every single test.

My business, and those I offer direct recommendations to, have hence not purchased any Dell items either. In the three years past that adds up to about $35,000 worth of goods we bought elsewhere. And do you think I'd miss a chance to click on their paid ads when online? I know where that money comes from, and I'm pretty sure we've spent that $100 they robbed from me by now.

I know I'm not the only one who got the short end of Dell Australia's tendency to sell products they don't actually have in stock. Perhaps you'll have more luck than me getting your refund, but if not then just spend your money elsewhere and let your friends know why.

And every month when that brochure arrives in the mail I am reminded of how big companies overlook the little people, and how much it costs them. If only they knew.

There are plenty of brands with better service than Dell. Plenty.

Extra giggles?

 Misleading information from Holland Winfield (Holland_Winfield@dell.com) who was the nit-wit in question who turned a small error into a spectacular one. Sending an unusable printer was icing on the cake and he still seems to be confused about cheques and credit card refunds. That's why the mistake was never rectified.

Farewell to my best friend

It's wrong to have favourites but truth is we always do. Twyzle was a rescue cat from the RSPCA and it was girlfriends idea at the time to adopt. It was me who got custody when we broke up but Twyzle was the kind of cat who would be happy with anybody's company. I loved him dearly, and cried a river when he died 6 weeks ago. But he was not my favourite.




Merv was a few weeks old when he was abandoned by a stray. His mother was discovered in a friends attic and she fled, stealing away most of the litter but leaving behind two runts. I raised Merv by hand, and needles to say he loved me in ways he could never love anyone else. Total trust, he was the kitten who never grew up.

When Twyzle died it felt as though his time had come, like a soul ready to move on to his next life. Twyzle was eager to live beyond the boundaries of our four walls. Merv was the opposite. He had no interest beyond his home because everything he wanted was right here. A happier cat has never lived. His departure was sudden and reluctant, as though his soul was not ready to go. I was not ready for it either. Twyzle was ill for 12 months and had survived cancer, car accidents and a jaw reconstruction. I was ready for his death for the last ten years, and the day we put him to sleep after a fatal blood clot was relief. Sad, but ready. His time had come.

In the weeks since Twyzle died I found the company offered by Merv ever more valuable. He was filling the place of two souls now, and soaking up the love. Last night Merv suffered a debilitating blood clot as well, and I knew instantly what was to come. Both cats had developed hyperactive thyroids in their senior years, and despite reasonably effective drugs the likelihood of heart complications and clotting was always high. I had chosen to ignore the truth and hoped Merv would live forever.



It's hard to explain how losing a pet can create such emotional distress unless you've been there too. For the last 16 years Merv was always there. Every day he sought affection, endeared with his little attempts to communicate and bring a peaceful purr to my spirit. Not once when I found myself emotional or upset did he fail to come to my side and offer his companionship. I'll never know what he understood inside his little cat brain, but he often surprised me.

Merv was my favourite. I saved his life and for every extra day on this earth he thanked me for it. At my lowest points, which have been many, he came to join me and I was reminded that I got at least one thing right. I helped him grow healthy and happy.

Over the years Merv grew into a happier soul. He gained confidence, revelled in the love of new companions and found great peace in his small world. Who knew a creature so small could fill so much of the world with joy and love? I changed over those years too, learning to be a better person through the responsibility of his care, learning to gain confidence just as he did. Now that Merv is gone I feel a little of myself has gone too.

I wish I could have him back, I'm not ready to lose my best friend.


Merv...















Twyzle...








Twyzle Loves Merv...










When Merv Was Really Really Little...

The Atheist's Holiday

Myself and a few other atheists finished 2011 in a small regional town being bombarded by the life's work of people such as Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins. At this point in history it still takes an unusually courageous individual to stand up and carry the argument. These men are not alone, but they have shouldered the burden.

2011 is a tipping point for the debate about reason over faith.

ABC television aired an interview with Richard Dawkins conducted by Andrew Denton, who took the opportunity to converse with one of our great intellectuals by asking him, "What star sign are you?"

Denton thinks he's smart, but it looks more like he's missing a few of the more useful bits of engineering that evolution has bestowed on our gene pool. Evolution should really be the topic here, and even Bill O'Reilly on the FOX network has been able to have that discussion with Richard Dawkins without resorting to idiocy.

O'Reilly will never be convinced that we live on a planet that was not designed by God, but he showed more respect for Dawkins and his message.

At the heart of the religious conviction that rejects the word of Dawkins and his kind is the idea that if we humans cannot explain it, then it must have been the work of God. He works in mysterious ways, so any mystery must be down to his presence. There was a time when science was unaware of why the stars filled the sky or the spherical nature of our planet.

Religion filled the void in those times. In a modern world where science understands ever more of our universe and the laws that govern it Religion holds dominance over an increasingly smaller realm of the mysterious. You have to suspend your belief in science to accept fully the word of most religions. And that is what angers Dawkins the most. All he wants is a fair playing field for the debate.

Intelligent Design is not a science. It belongs in the religious text, not scientific, as it fails every test of science you can imagine. A belief in God relies on 'faith', a conscious choice to accept beliefs in the absence of evidence. We learn faith from our parents and our culture, but the source of that faith comes from religion and politics.

Little wonder there are so many Gods to choose from.

Indeed to uphold a belief in one God you have to reject a multitude of others, and deny a good swathe of history as well. Science is not the only academic pursuit that gets locked in darkened room. History reveals the breath taking depth of religious forms that have come and gone, and the role religions have played when asserting power over people. Division of Church and state is a relatively new phenomenon in our world.

The fact that humans across the history and geography of our planet have been drawn to religion in all it's forms points not to evidence of God, but evidence of why we believe in a higher power. It is innate within us to look up the chain to the man in charge. Deep down we are just another form of pack-animal, and we'd rather pin the responsibility for our problems on someone at the top.

Dawkins hints at a very dark side of organised religion however, where we give our power over to others and in return we deny ourselves the chance to learn and understand. It's one thing to put your faith in God, it's another to let men in funny robes dictate your education. Libraries are filled with ideas and knowledge, and yet religion lets just one book dominate the exploration of understanding above all others.

You could argue that religions have very little to do with God, and that's the problem. In many ways they keep God at a distance from people, because the men who run the Church are the ones who speak on His behalf. History reveals a litany of men who either imagined or lied about the word of God to suit their own needs.

If God did exist wouldn't he be pretty dismayed with how his words are twisted and manipulated to suit the power hungry?

The arguments for why God is an inevitable construct of human imagination could fill a library, but then it too would look like a religion. Ironic. Science is not religion, it is a pursuit of knowledge on the basis that we are ignorant. The internet however is as close to a church as atheists can get.

It was pointed out to me during my Atheist's Holiday that the internet has changed everything for religion.

Go back a few decades and those who questioned whether God exists were a small voice in a big world. If you lived in urban Australia then your contemplation of such speculation was met by a church around every corner. You saw religion on TV and you saw cathedrals in the centre of your town. News readers would invoke reference to God on their sign off. God was everywhere, your heretical notions were insolent and naive.

Behold the internet, and there was much light. Instead of being a lonely figure in a religious world you were suddenly one of many. Literature like that of Dawkins was easy to access, along with some idea of just how many other people were thinking along the same lines. Suddenly that old church is the middle of main street no longer dominates the promenade, instead it just looks out of place and rather lonely.

The internet provided us with a way to share ideas without relying on the Church to guide the conversation. The tipping point draws near.

With the devil whispering sweet nothings into my ear we sat in front of the all mighty internet and rummaged through YouTube for fascinating conversation on the topic. We watched the debate between Hitchens and Shmuley (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnMYL8sF7bQ), we relived a few other moments of Hitchens being interviewed in recent years (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uchPPbJep8g) and got a chance to see O'Reilly head to head with Dawkins even if only for a few minutes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FARDDcdFaQ) and even Stephen Fry gets into the game (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm1l7o-S8P4).

Ahh the internet, a genuine savior of the masses.

In Defence of Sony

Recently had a few rants thrown my way, one about my appreciation of public transport in Melbourne and then a more detailed effort about my articles on Sony cameras. To set the scene, I bagged the Sony Alpha range on the basis their SLT version of SLR is a gimmick looking for a market. Sony make some great gear, but have failed to grab a slice of the SLR market since launching the Alpha range. Recently they introduced the translucent mirror and backed the move with a slew of misleading claims.

In a market full of solid technology and with no genuine quality difference between the imaging systems, the lack of an optical viewfinder in the Alpha range makes is a white elephant. Far more compelling are their E-mount systems, but those compliments went unheeded by the gentleman offering feedback.

You can read my article sony in full here, but far more interesting is to read the rant from a gentleman who I wont name for his own sake...

G'day Greg, just received my 3rd example of Digital Photography under my 12 month subscription and yet again I have to read Ewan Bell ranting on about how much he dislikes Sony's current range of DSLRs and their "translucent" /SLT mirror technology.

Enough already! Ok Mr Bell, perhaps you have sold your soul to Canikon and cannot stand the thought that a company might actually try to innovate with their DSLR's, but if you are the photographer that you want us to think you are, you'll appreciate it's not the brand on the camera but the idiot pressing the shutter button that matters. It's not about the brand, it's about the photograph and your reviews might make better reading if they discussed things like the quality of the images that a camera produces rather than why the technology that produces it is not to your particular taste.

I'll be upfront and admit that I happily own 2 Sony DSLR's - an a700 and an a55. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but both are capable of producing exceptional photographs (as is just about any other DSLR on the market today) - if I come home with a dud it's always my fault, not the cameras. The a33/35/55/77 go about it differently, but can you honestly say that they don't/can't take a decent photograph?

By all means be loyal to your particular favourite brand, but don't shit-can a manufacturer just because it's "new" (would you be so harsh if the camera's had Minolta on the front I wonder?) and is trying to do something different in a crowded market. Stupid questions like "Is the SLT concept really going to change digital photography forever?" do you no justice. Of course it won't "change digital photography forever" any more than Nikon or Canon's way of doing something will stay the same forever. Likewise, the statement that "Translucent mirror technology makes more sense for cinematography than stills photography" shows your complete lack of knowledge about cinematography and how those cameras work (unless you really meant amateur video photography using a digital stills camera).

A camera review should be un-biased, or at the very least the author should establish their particular brand-bias at the beginning. If you're too much of a brand-snob to do an objective review, stick to taking your rather excellent photographs and leave the camera reviews to those that can.

Cheers

Next

"The rank and file appear increasingly rank, yet hardly ever file."

I think you know when it's time to move on, and if you let the Universe guide you a little it always works out for the best. That much desired label seems to be used by all and sundry, like a worn out phrase taken drastically out of context and eventually losing it's original meaning altogether.

It seems like a good time to pick another label, one that fits a little better and gives some room for growth.

Next.

Reality and Travel Photography

The reality of travel journalism, at its best, is not lounging about a spa pool waiting for another cocktail to arrive, but getting up at 6am to trek into the village and chase fisherman about the beach with your camera. You get back to the hotel hot and sweaty and too late for breakfast, but you don't care because the excitement of those photos captured on the camera contain an expression of the experience.

You can tell when a writer is faking the experience and you can tell when a photographer is faking being an artist. Sometimes they're lazy, sometimes they're fooling themselves. If you're not busting your ass to get a better shot then just go home and play on Photoshop.

Realities of being self-employed aside, the challenge of my creative work is something I've tried to share in detail with my website called Photography for Travellers. When I first launched the site I had a vague idea of what I wanted to say, and the content has taken shape on its own since then. The key ingredient to good photography is genuine experience. The more you know the more your images will show.

I hope that comes across in the various features and guides across the website, the idea that you can improve your photography more by changing your way of seeing the world instead of just buying a better lens. In the process of adding to the Photography for Travellers website and expanding my ideas, I've come to redefine my idea of what travel photography is all about. Experience turns into expression. The more you embrace the narrative of your photography, the more you become an artist, the stronger your voice and the deeper the message.

http://photographyfortravellers.com/

Peaceful Places

Peaceful places where people are few but naturally pleasant.

Crowds only happen when Monks gather in the mornings.

Fast food is when sticky rice is ready to leave the steamer.

A land where elephants still wander the forests.

How do such large creatures disappear from sight?

I can get lost inside a Tokyo train too. Anyone can.

Trains flow like rivers but lack their grace.

The river cares for its people like a grandmother.

Mostly gentle and wise, sometimes crazy. Always flowing.

A place of places is where I want to be.

Maybe more than one. Life is too short to watch it all on the internet.

Mountain tops are clean and pure, their people hardy and remarkable.

Tropical islands are rare jewells that shine in the ocean.

Jungles are rich in creatures of kind and carnivorous nature.

Deserts are a temporary wilderness for travellers only.

Time pauses when you fly, the world is truly small.

Time races before you fly, the world is truly narrow.

Time jumps while you sleep, re-emerging where you least expect it.

Time flows when you've arrived, flowing away from you like youth.

Time stays with you when you are present, when you're in that peaceful place.

http://ewenbell.com/editorial/Antarctic+Ice

How I Became a Travel Writer

The Victorian Writers Centre asked me to respond to a short Q&A about freelance writing. True to form my reply was over the word count and a day late! Seriously though, my initial write up was too long at 1100 words, so I'm posting the full length version here in case anyone is interested. The original questions are shown first, and then my reply.

1. You travel write on a freelance basis. How did you get started? Is there anything you'd do differently if you were starting over?

2. How do you come up with fresh angles on places many others might have already written about?

3. How do you personally go about pitching your articles, and what's the balance between articles you pitch, and articles you're commissioned to write?

4. What kind of opportunities are out there for travel writers? Is the industry changing at all with the proliferation of online media?

5. What tips could you give to writers interested in getting into travel writing?

1.

I met a lady while travelling in India who teaches writing, and she gave me some excellent advice, she said that 'writers write.' So I started writing. Initially just a blog that nobody read, just to practise my skills and get into the habit of using words on a regular basis and in longer forms. The possibility that someone might read it was motivation enough to cultivate some craft.

Twice in the same month I crossed paths with people who knew a travel editor somewhere and they gave me a contact to forward on my unsolicited stories. Both editors were kind enough to be brutal about my skills, and generous enough to offer advice to improve. Honesty is rare.

I worked hard and worried about the quality instead of the money. I always believed that if you put your 'client' first then the business will follow. It took a long time to gain confidence in my work and it takes time to build a relationship with any editor. I have to start over again every time my editors shuffle their seats, but I have more experience now and can cope a little better with the constant uncertainty of being a freelancer.

2.

I pretty much ignore what may or may not have been before and go with my own experience. I write what I know and stick to my style, which works for some editors and not others but that's ok. You can go mad trying to second guess your audience, so instead I focus on my inner voice and what it has to say. If you have something to say then I think you're more likely to find an audience to listen anyway. It always easier to write your story rather than someone else's.

My angles come purely from my train of thought, direct from the experience. I keep my smartphone switched on and ready to make notes at all times, you never know when a good idea will coalesce into a story outline. If the words flow then I start making notes. These always turn out to be my best work.

3.

It depends on the ebb and flow of my editor relationships. The best editors get to know their writers and spend a few minutes nutting out a brief over the phone. They realise that a freelancer can help them if you let them. At the moment I mostly send in stories on spec, with a few commissions here and there. Editors are more under staffed and over stretched than ever, so you don't always get a reply and you have to understand it's not personal.

What seems like a great idea can fall on deaf ears, if it's the wrong month or just a hectic day for the editor. Then the same pitch gets picked up a month later by another editor and you feel vindicated about the premise of the story. Hard to say which side of the fence is greener, being and editor or a freelancer. Either way there's a bit of green-wash involved.

4.

The industry has taken a lot of knocks in recent years, and not only are writers squabbling over a smaller slice of pie but it's the readers ultimately who are left out to dry. The lack of diversity in media is resulting in poor travel journalism written by non-travel writers. Media famils for staff writers with no knowledge of travel as a discipline are serving up predictable content without suitable experience to challenge what they're offered on a famil. Those few slots that remain for freelancers are increasingly driven by advertising. A few media outlets do a good job of holding their standards, but only where a good editor with some resources are in place.

Many writers believe they need to re-tool, to add other media to their skill set. I disagree, I think this only adds to the dilution of skill and their value. It's better to diversify your writing than dilute it, and look for other mediums to publish words. Books, lifestyle sections, apps and online. The media world is in flux and we need to push for better quality journalism across the spectrum, give readers a real choice. Blogs are not the answer, they're largely a distraction with a few exceptional cases where the character and talent of the author comes through and champions the medium. For the most part blogs add noise and make it harder to find content.

Good travel content is edited and reviewed and published under editorial guidelines. The internet just needs to grow up a little more and I hope we'll see more outlets for good writing on the web. Just look at Television and how it took decades to learn how to use it properly. We're still waiting for the web to evolve, and media opportunities will evolve with it. In the meantime the internet is a bit chaotic, so writers have to put their eggs into many baskets and see what happens.

5.

Keep your expectations real. There's a lot of hype about the fantasy of travel writing and it's mostly bollocks. You need a passion for journalism and writing to make a go of it, and talent alone may not be enough. Be realistic about the level of rejection and failure ahead, and cultivate a thick skin. There's no shortage of people who want to predict your failure, and no shortage of people wanting to take your place.

I've watched many people sit on the sidelines of travel writing, dip their toes in the water and never make the leap in. It's a tough call to make for anyone, you have to give up what you have before trying to succeed in something new. Most people fail before they start, unwilling to take that risk. As a freelance writer you're running a small business and that comes with a pile of responsibility that can kill every creative impulse in your brain. Having some well grounded expectations can help you through the business stuff and let you enjoy the writing.

It's often hard to recognise if you're making progress with your career or not, and finding a measure of success that balances humility with optimism is essential. There are times when you have to talk yourself up a bit, but it's a trap to start believing the hype and especially your own. A good day for me is getting a story filed on time that fits the brief but filled with my own ideas.

If your aim is to be a famous travel writer you might want to get famous at something else first. If your aim is to be a financially viable travel writer then you have a lot of work ahead of you, but accept all the wishes for good luck you can.