The Jaded Prime

What is wrong with playing hardball on the round ball?

2009-12-12T20:59:00.002+08:00

Gather 'round children, for the gospel of the great sphere. I, like other great historical figures and heralds of new dawns, have a dream. I have a dream of watching scores of men who are paid obscene amounts of money run around a field chasing a ball with all the desire jingoism inspires. I dream of uniting this country through the greatest game ever played, the synthesis of artistic endeavour. I dream of the round ball revolution that will grip the hearts of all across this red land.

Okay, enough of that bullshit.

The way advocates of a World Cup in Australia talk about the prospect of the event being held down here, you'd think they were trying to push of the recalling of Jesus...or Johnny Warren. I'm a fan of the world game and will stay up until 2AM to watch games but I'm not going to push that old bull.

Instead, I want to talk from a practical standpoint on a few of the issues surrounding our bid for the World Cup in either 2018 or 2022. For all of our foreign listeners, you may or may not be aware that Australia may actually be in the mix to host one of these events. That's right, the gospel will come to the dark land of egg-ball heathens. That's if we can actually stop our squawking and squabbling and get our codes to play nicely.

You see, if we were to win an event rival codes such as Rugby League and Australian Rules Football may be put out for a whole eight weeks while the World Cup bandwagon comes to a rest. Their stadiums would be co-opted to be football destinations, and FIFA insist that no other rival codes operate during the World Cup as to focus the sporting attention of the country on their event.

That looks to be in danger as the CEO of the AFL Andrew Demetriou has grave reservations and misconceptions about exactly what the event would do to their code and has even gone as far as deny access to the Etihad Stadium (for which the AFL has a contract with during the event) which would be a key stadium for any potential World Cup bid. It holds more than the minimum 40 000 FIFA needs and can be transformed into a rectangular stadium which would improve viewing and atmosphere for fans.

To say the least, it's a pretty dick move. But the guy has a point, and has to look after the best interests of his code and being put out of action for eight weeks in the middle of a season may prove to be an insurmountable. Can you imagine what would happen to the clubs without a full eight weeks of gate takings? The way Demetriou describes it, it could very well spell the death of financially unstable clubs.

Bull.

The fact of the matter is that some of the poorer performing AFL clubs such as North Melbourne and Melbourne have been getting assistance from the AFL for quite some time and here's the dirty little secret. They haven't been getting the numbers to their home games to make a profit from the gate anyhow. That's why you get teams playing home games in Darwin, Perth and Canberra. The AFL tries to put a happy face on it by saying they're spreading the AFL word, but it's largely an exercise in financial survival. The AFL pays the clubs to play in the outposts and the clubs take the gate.

To turn around and say that the AFL would not be able to absorb the costs of being out of action for eight weeks is fooling only the most ardent supporters of the egg-ball game. The fact of the matter is, in the long run, the money coming into the country from the World Cup via increases in tourism may actually help rival codes.

Huh? How is that possible? Well, you see, when people go to a major event such as the Sydney 2000 Olympics, tourists have this crazy little idea that they've enjoyed themselves so much that they want to come back after all the tourists have left. There was a major lift in tourism after the Olympics, and there would be one after a possible World Cup.

Post-2000, tourists visiting for leisure increased from about 1.8 million to 2.9 million in 2005. That's 900 000 people coming to our shores and spending their money, which in turn greases the wheels of business and distributes a lot more wealth across this great land. Let me ask this then - What would happen if we had a lot more people with more money in this country due to increased tourism?

Perhaps the most apt question is the one the AFL clubs ask when conducting ticketing surveys. How is the cost?

That's right folks, for a lot of people the price of match tickets is a great consideration. If a lot more people are going to have a lot more money for years after the event, then hosting a World Cup should be a no-brainer to rival codes.

It's a short term loss for a long-term cumulative gain in crowd numbers. Herein lies the true nature of the opposition from rival codes to a football World Cup in Australia.

What if these cashed-up people decide to take in an A-League game instead?

'Till next time

What is wrong with a violation and a strip search?

2009-11-26T12:22:00.002+08:00

The rags over the past few days have been screaming about the turmoil in the Liberal Party, and why not? It's a damned good yarn, with all the shock revelations of a lame version of the Jerry Springer show. First Turnbull decided to take a decisive party room vote on an amended ETS when the Nationals were out of the room and unilaterally declared victory for himself and the concessionists. Then came the leadership showdown, with Turnbull barely surviving a leadership vote and three of the his front bench up and quitting on him.

Meanwhile, the environment's taking another one for the team.

Not surprisingly, the Greens Party are overwhelmingly against what the Labour Party calls a 'good deal for the environment', which has been watered down to the point that the most polluting industries are being given the largest concessions by the government.

What?

It seems to the sane rational person that the point of an ETS is to try and reduce the environmental impact of heavily polluting industires by forcing a cap-and-trade system, thus giving the whip to said industries to curb their CO2 output. Of course, the fundamental mechanics of the thing become a bit skewed when you substitute the whip for a gentle nudge. The time when industry surrenders to a gentle nudge is the day I eat my own shoes, followed by my shoes and then most humiliatingly, my words.

It's all part of trying to reduce the economic impact of this type of system upon industry and subsequently, on the economy. You see, we happen to rely quite a bit on the export of coal (and not that 'clean' coal the kids have been banging on about either), and with a rising aussie dollar and perhaps even a greener aproach from major trading partners, our exports could take quite a hit if we're forced to pass on the costs of an ETS to customers.

So instead of our trading partners having to pay a bit extra for our coal, the Rudd government has seen fit to use our taxpayer dollars to pay off major polluters toward a bill which has a lessened economic impact, but barely adresses the problem of climate change in our hot and dry country.

It also signals to investor in new sources of energy that we are not ready to be weened off the coal-tit quite yet. Imagine sinking millions into geothermal technology when the government is giving money to heavy polluters. Almost wants to make you change your investment plan, don't it?

Ladies and gentlemen, this move by one of the economically well-off countries in the world in the shadow of Copenhagen should not be taken as a sign that we are indeed taking a green future seriously, but instead are paying token respect for our generation's largest problem and worshiping the almighty dollar.

I love capitalism as much as the next guy who doesn't know how to make his own shoes, but I'd like to take my kid down to the creek one day instead of showing them a nature doco on my ridiculously expensive TV.

Meanwhile closer to the mighty state of WA, police are getting new powers to stop people and frisk them for no particular reason. Good to see my tax going toward molesting both the environment and potentially molesting random people.

To be fair, they're only getting the powers in crime hotspots but giving any arm of society extra power without a counter-balance makes me feel uneasy. Makes a heck of a lot of other people uneasy as well, such as civil libertarians and almost everybody connected with the CCC being concerened they're about to be inundated with complaints. Then there's old chestnut about people being concerened that police officers could just target anyone who looked at 'em funny, like minorities (who are kind of wary around police for some reason).

Personally, I'd like to see the police force become sancrosant. I think when somebody attacks a police officer they should go straight to jail and not collect 200 dollars. Unchecked power though, is a dangerous thing, so what I would put in place are harder punishments for police officers hauled up on corruption and misconduct causes.

Just a thought to mull over in the old brainbox the next time you're frisked in public.

'Till next time

What is wrong with an Indonesian solution?

2009-11-16T13:24:00.004+08:00

Over the last month in the oh-so tolerant land of Australia, talking about asylum seekers has been all the rage. More than that, chins have been furiously wagging about our fearless PM's response to the 'boat people' who have been holed up in the Oceanic Viking off the Indonesian coast.

The Oceanic Viking has been a blight on the PM's seeming cruise to the next election while providing much needed respite for an opposition under the harsh light of the ETS issue (which isn't getting hotter according to certain factions in the Liberal Party). Whereas our previous PM, John Howard, had a consistent line on the dealing of asylum seekers (wrong or otherwise), the issue has made Kevin Rudd look like a man with his pants down.

During the three week stand-off which ensued, his government has tried to broker deals with several pacific nations including New Zealand to try and find a home for those aboard the ship. But, oddly enough, nobody wants to handle the political hot potato which has fallen into Rudd's lap. While 22 asylum seekers accepted an initial offer for what the government calls 'rapid resettlement', 50-odd seekers still remained on the boat, wary of what the government is was peddling (rumour has it with good reason too).

It was a month of high drama off the Indonesian coast and we still have 70-odd people in an Indonesian asylum detention centre uncertain of their future. For all the politics, all the testing of international protocol we're still NO CLOSER to finding a solution to what is already a humanitarian crisis.

The million dollar question is though: what's the solution?

Of course, all of the politicians know the answer to the question but afraid of the time and effort that it would take to implement. It's 'simply' about improving conditions in the countries from which the people are seeking asylum from. This goes for our European friends as well dealing with an influx of immigration from Northern Africa. While governments around the world spend billions 'protecting' our borders from the 'immigrants/boat people' (like they're invading, wtf?) foreign aid has not increased in any significant manner since the mid-90's, and meanwhile Bob Geldoff keeps on yelling at the top of his lungs.

It seems to me, that if you were trying to stop the supply of something you'd try and stop it at the source. That is to say, if asylum seekers had little reason to leave their country and risk a dangerous journey across open water to a country on the other side of the world, they probably wouldn't. If that's a simple matter of logic, then why has their been increased funding for border protection but no significant amount of money going to the UN to help speed up the resettlement of political refugees?

Perhaps it's time we stared ourselves in the mirror and asked that question.

What is wrong with Rupert's plan?

2009-10-19T22:15:00.002+08:00

You know, watching Media Watch tonight and being reminded of the great News Corp free content bitchfight, I started to have some sort of activity in my brain-box. It would seem my mind grapes were filling up with juiciness, and my inner light bulb was starting to resemble somthing that was alight.

I think most observers note that it will be a cold day in hell before people pay online for general news when there are a plethora of alternative news sites and a history of being able to get the news for free. Again, most people concede that consumers will eventually pay for content which is not available now. The question on everybody's lips is though : what form would this never-seen before content take?

That's the question I grappled with for five minutes, and this being the internet, I shall now tell you with a great deal of personal conviction about the idea which I formulated for five minutes.

Already in this country, Crickey have had some success actually selling content which differed from the main news stories of the day, and this content usually takes the form of opinion and in-depth analysis of the day's events. This content is delivered straight to the inboxes to subscribers but at the moment, exactly what is delivered to their inboxes is entirely up the content creators.

With more and more sources for news and opinion cropping up, the power has shifted squarely to the consumer. What is what was delivered to these inboxes was entirely up to the consumer? Now, this already exists in some forms, but what I propose is a much more comprehensive form of consumer control.

What if people were to choose exactly what type of news was delievered? For instance, people could to have political news delivered, but not business news. Let's break that down further. What if a consumer wanted news about state politics, and news about mining business news? What if people wanted news about their sport, with a focus on football and cricket?

Consumers would have control of what they read, but this is no basis for getting money from people. This is just eliminating a certain amount of clickwork, and should in my opinion should be offered for free.

What I propose is that extra content be not the ablility of people to select and choose what they are fed for a main course, but the dessert of opinion from the consumers' favourite authors. Do people like reading Miranda Devine for some reason? They can pay to have her columns exlusively delivered to them on a daily basis. Do people love Philip Adams with their breakfast? They can pay to stream a podcast.

Couple this with the mingling of all mediums that the internet represents and we're starting to have kind of idea here. I think the old moguls really love the Citizen Kane scene where he starts to assemble a crack team of writers from publications around the country to write for his newspapers.

Let's re-cap. People get to select and choose what they want for free as a basic news service. They get the writing of their favourite authors for a small cost, maybe to be deducted monthly from the consumers bank accounts (perhaps the phone companies can get involved somehow?). What happens when this model becomes popular?

All of a sudden, we become present at the creation of a new type of media competition. All the major players will be scrambling to provide the best service to capture the market which is now dictating to the creators. When these conditions are present, a great deal of competition is also present. When the news outlets compete on a somewhat level-playing field, there's going to be a great deal of investment of what's driving their profits.

That extra content, provided by the fantastic writers, video journalists and podcasters out there. Hey, does this healthy competition sound appealing or what? The core principles of journalism will be what will set these individuals apart, and when market forces dictate competition the focus will be on investment rather than cost-cutting.

You know all that doom and gloom about journalists' working conditions? Thanks to this new playing field, they'll actually be in demand. The focus will be on providing the best product, not the same product for less.

There's a bit of brain-food for a Monday night.

'Till Next Time

What is wrong with a mixed media diet? (part two)

2009-09-27T19:06:00.002+08:00

This post contains allusions I made during my previous post, and I'm mostly writing this because I'm feeling guilty about leaving it short. You see, I alluded to two separate consequences of the mixed media diet in today's society.

Doesn't that sentence just feel like it belongs in undergraduate media studies? Anyhow, alongside the consequence that people have less time and inclination to read print media, the increasing number of hours spent per day on broadcast mediums has led somewhat to a decrease in literacy.

I'm not talking a major slump. I'm talking about just little things that lead me to believe the people taking care of us in the nursing homes may not be able to read the prescription on our medicine bottles properly. Don't worry, I'm not about to engage in a teen-bashing blog posting as there's already enough of those around the place. Instead, I'm going to attempt to offer some kind of insight into the media habits of the young'uns.

Oh god, I've become a social commentator.

I'd like to think that I'm not so different from teenagers today, being 22 and all, but I find these new creatures vastly different to myself. I wrote in my last post about the customer who spoke in Internet terms in the real world. Who actually said 'OMG' instead of 'my goodness gracious' or something less wanker-y.

Of course, this is starting to sound like just another blogger trying to comprehend an entire generations using analogies and broad generalisations and I fully accept that. I know there are those who express themselves quite well and are well read, in fact, that's one of the benefits of the mixed media diet.

You see, the new generation are viewing a heck of a lot of broadcast medium, and a heck of a lot of embedded media. These are the kids cooped up on a Saturday watching Skins on DVD and youtube clips of people failing. While those habits don't exactly broaden the horizons as much as reading a book the size of your head might, it is making young people more confident with the spoken word.

Granted, sometimes the words aren't correct but is it my imagination but are the new kids on the block a lot more confident? Of course, many would begrudge these traditionally uneducated kids the right to confidence these kids are a far cry from the stoic gen X'ers. Whereas the media may portray them as shut-ins attached to a screen, while they're out of the house they're not shy about their ambitions and about speaking.

Speaking, is our primary form of communication and taught before the written word. How we learn to speak is largely by listening to those who know how to speak. These kids have been given a DVD as a babysitter and are spending their time predominately listening to other people speak on their screens. They are learning and adapting to the new forms of speech, and they are now more than ever equipped to express their views. Of course the massive downside to this is that their opinions are generally ill-informed.

I wrote in my earlier post about the advantages of print media being able to offer informed and in-depth debate and fact to flesh out said debate. Whereas TV and radio try to do this, they just don't have time to, and online news don't want their readers to get eye-strain from reading too many words and following a stream of logic.

Of course, the question now is: Where are the next generation of decision makers getting their facts from?

They certainly aren't getting their informed opinion from print media. While I'm not here to bash other mediums, I think the best broadcast mediums can do in terms of news delivery is whack on a couple of opposing voices to have a bitchfight (On the topic, did anyone see Caroline Wilson and Roy Masters on Offsiders?) without ever answering the all important 'why' question. Broadcast is caught up in the politics of the day woven into a grand narrative, whereas I see print as the wise-man able to ponder, reflect and analyse before offering an opinion (at its best anyhow).

Our kids are being drawn to these mediums, and policy makers eager to get their mugs where the people can see them will be more than happy to offer up an inflamatory opinion in the hopes of being invited back next week and ultimately being re-elected.

In short, other mediums in comparisson to print media offer a lack of insight which those who want to be seen are all to happy to pander to. Welcome to Spin City.

'Till Next Time

What is wrong with a mixed media diet?

2009-09-26T20:19:00.002+08:00

Today, I may have gained some sort of insight into the state of literacy in our nation today. You see, today I watched the AFL Grand Final on the television, played the FIFA 10 demo on the XBOX360, read the news on my computer as well as reading Girls with Slingshots (Mad Props).

At no point during this day did I have time or the inclination to read a newspaper or try to get back into Ulysses. As such, not only did I figure out why literacy rates are dropping but gained a frightening insight into my chosen career. Those of you who read this blog would know I have ambitions of working for print media, but how are my words going to be read when people are too busy utilising other mediums?

All the talk of people not liking the product that newspapers are putting out in the new millennium is missing the point entirely. People are somewhat digging what print journos are doing, it's just that they have absolutely no time to read it. I...want to go into an industry that's becoming redundant through no fault of its own? Am I insane!? Probably.

Forgive me if I'm musing over an old chestnut, but I find myself scared by the voracious media appetite I've developed and the decreasing amount of time I have to satiate that appetite. When an increased appetite combines with a lack of time people will naturally gravitate toward the medium which can get the message to the recipient at rapid speed.

Does print do this? God no. You need a good half hour to digest the daily rag, but you need about five minutes to hear the daily news bulletin. By the same logic though, online media shouldn't be so popular as it takes as much time to read an online story than a print story.

It's a good argument, but it fails to take into account the modern penchant for multi-tasking. You can't check your emails and see what people have written on your wall while you have your nose buried in newsprint, whereas the online arena allows people to multi-task like some sort of mad German (why are they always German?) timemaster.

Of course, if people are attracted to broadcast and online mediums they're missing out on the most important question journalists can ask: why.

It's my humble opinion that print media answers this question with far more regularity than other mediums. I don't begrudge other mediums or demonise them as the 'enemy', but they're concerned with playing to their strengths. Namely, that it can be consumed quickly. The funny thing is though, the truth is never a simple thing which can be answered with a couple of soundbites and talking heads. Truth isn't simple, and requires analysis to bring out.

So why is it then, that newspapers haven't yet significantly changed? Why aren't they obsessed with answering 'why'? Why are they still merely reporting the facts and engaging in tabloid journalism instead of playing to the medium's strengths?

In some respects, the war between the mediums are the imaginings of journos wanting something to gabble on about (and for bloggers to spew over). If all mediums play to their strengths instead of playing follow the leader, all mediums will achieve their niche. Of course, the news has become a business, and businesses will always compete for a bigger market share. The best way to do that, as they see it, is to follow the leader.

It's going to take guts for someone to innovate when jobs are on the line and outlets are shutting down left right and centre, but an informed democracy is at stake. A literate one too.

You see, as part of my job which I'm working in an effort to fund my job search (huh?), I converse with a lot of teenagers. I listen as they play social pop-media commentator, using garbled English and trite catch-phrases in an efforty to impress their equally vaccous friends. I swear to the various deities I once heard someone used the phrase "OMG, that show is so fail".

The OMG in that sentence isn't abbreviated for the ease of the reader, it's a direct quote.

'Till next time

What is wrong with prerecognition?

2009-09-23T19:30:00.002+08:00

I've been thinking about the role social media is playing in our daily lives (to borrow a tried and true cliche) lately. It's not like I have a job of susbstance to think about...or a relationship...or a social life....Okay, I'll stop now before this becomes a whiny 13 year old's blog.

I've had the astounding thought that social networking is making forming true interpersoanl relationships evcen harder than it was during the days of dial-up and blocky porn. Why is that while we're always on, we're perpetually disconnected?

This is just my crazy theory, but I think it's becuase we've started to know too much about eachother. Do me a favour, go to your Facebook account and click on a few friend's accounts. There, you're more than likely find profile information ranging from favourite books to the minutae of their daily lives on Twitter.

So, if we already have this information before we meet a person, aren't we better equipped to make a lasting connection with someone? In my humble opinion, no.

You see, we've basically given over the process of getting to know someone to the intersplice of our digital lives and that experience is what makes the connection. You can know all you want about a person and what they like, but it's the mutual shared experience of getting to know someone which will build the interpersonal relationship.

It's about sitting down, and talking (le gasp!) face-to-face about eachother's likes and dislikes which will enivitably build that relationship. Or am I completely wrong? Is knowing all this surface information about a person helping forge relationships more quickly?

Thoughts?

What is wrong with playing up close?

2009-09-13T21:12:00.003+08:00

I should preface this post by saying that I have just watched a so-so doco about gamers and their problems named 'Second Skin', but I do recommend checking it out if you're a gamer in search of a doco which doesn't condescend. Watching this construction about gaming and gamers, I started to realise that I wasn't a gamer simply because I have always looked at the subculture of gaming at an arms-length - just as this doco does.

Even though I have written for gaming sites such as The Escapist, I don't consider myself to be a gamer. Having an artsy-fartsy background (I have a 16,000 dollar arts degree) I tend to be engaged with the world of videogames from an arms length intellectual curiosity standpoint rather than being a hardcore WoW grinder.

That being said of course, I certainly don't consider myself to be a casual gamer who only surfaces for air when it comes to a latest release of Bejewelled or Peggle. From this curious distance, I can view the subculture of gaming from a stance which allows me to take in a broader view of said culture. This becomes an ethical consideration from which all journalists can learn.

It is a widely held tenant of journalistic integrity that the best sort of journalism is the 'why'-school of journalism. The type of journalism that tells you not only that there's been a terrorist attack in Mumbai, but the type of journalism which sheds light on the political instability and corruption which gives rise to these acts of terrorism in surrounding regions. It's the type of journalism which doesn't just look at surface facts but goes deeper in search of reasons.

But how does one go deeper in searching for those reasons without becoming so attached to the subject matter that it becomes a risk of becoming unbalanced? More to the point, can you ever produce quality journalism without being totally biased?

The problem is that journalism is a medium wherein truth is filtered through conventions such as narrative and scoop. No news story is simple and unequivocal truth, it's the same principle as documentary suscribes to (you see what I did there?). In short, there's a reason they're called news stories.

I can rant all night about narrative constructions and how we're programmed to see things through binary oppositions and what have you, but I'm not going to bore you with a 10,000 word thesis. Instead, I'm going to attempt to condense my argument in a pleasing and coherent fashion using words and a train of logic (you see what I did there?).

Think about the truth of your life. Your actual reality. You just live your life and try not to think about all this stuff too deeply. Now, how would that reality look if produced for the 10PM news bulletin? How would that reality look if up on the silver screen? Heaven forbid, how would that reality look if the fat guy from Michigan got his hands on it?

All of a sudden, you uniterrupted reality would have been put through a wringer of narrative and convention until it looked like something very, very different. Your overbearing landlord may become the bad guy on your noble quest toward financial freedom, your boss the villain in the piece. Sure, this logic may apply to more artistic mediums such as documentary but how does it apply to journalism?

The example I always use to explain narrative's role in journalism is a week of question time. For those of you who have watched a session of question time in it's entirety, you'd know that it's mostly a dull affair with prepared questions answered for maximum political gain. All the answers are fashioned as such that the speeches being made contain no less than buzzwords, key phrases and policy spin. Why?

Because only 60 seconds of the best jabs of the day make it onto the evening news (if that...god help them if there's a kitty stuck in a drain) wherein an entire day's policy debate is condensed into "oh no he didn't!". So, is it our goal as working journalists to reflect the reality of any given situation?

No.

Think back to my Mumbai example earlier. How does one go about explaining the why of the situation? How does one explain the why of the terrorists' actions? One would assume you ask them questions. Questions after all are our tools of trade (unless you're from News of the World then it's hidden cameras), and at the end of the day it's all we really have to solicit answers from people.

Of course, the flaw in that plan is that terrorists generally don't talk to western journo's all that often, unless to tell them to get into the van. So, what do you have instead? You have talking heads telling the journo how the terrorist's operate (hint: the people talking to the journo's generally aren't associated with the terror groups). So in fact, for all the hard work on the journos part, by the time you've filtered these opinions through the narrative machine and come up with binary oppositions such as 'terrorist BAD, democracy GOOD' and all that jazz, your report to find the why becomes just another story with the tagline 'reporting from Mumbai'.

So, for all my jumled mess of words are we any closer to an answer about objectivity? No, my words are just filling space. There's your moment of journalistic downer-zen for the night.

What is wrong with blogging?

2009-08-31T09:01:00.002+08:00

It's hard to pontificate to an empty room, and by god I've tried over the years.

Like most people, this isn't my first blog. First of all, there was that 'look at me I'm a teenager who's well-informed' blog which never took off and then there was the 'obnoxious ranting which is hardly insightful or revolutionary' blog, and there's this blog.

I don't particularly know why posting to this blog has become so difficult for me. After all, I'm hoping to become a somewhat profesional writer, so I should be chomping at the bit at the sight of this balnk piece of paper in which to exercise my trade and put forward my humble opinions.

Yet here I am, posting sporadically and almost forgetting this blog has an existence. I really don't want to go down the road of blaming the readership for my lack of activity, but it's hard to keep up the rage when nobody's looking. It's like trying to give a dog your dinner order; you can try all you want but at the end of the day you won't get through to the mutt and you're left hungry (Quite possibly the most derogatory similie I've ever used).

This sporadic posting has also coincided with me getting a new job to support my job hunt, which mainly involves pointing in the general direction of Twilight and putting on my nice face (which I'm sure is absolutely horrendous). When I get home after the day, I'm not exactly inclined to sit down and produce my own content. I'm just way too busy catching up on the content that I've missed during the day.

Are these the reasons why amateur blogging is on the decrease while pro bloggers are starting to dominate *cringe* 'the blogosphere'?

To look at the decline of the casual blogger, you must first catagorise the type of blogs they keep. For the sake of my argument, I'm putting forward two types of bloggers. Numero uno, the 'I have a cat and the cat's name is Mitsy'-blogger and the 'I'm a citizen journo, worship me?!'-journo.

If we suppose these types of blogs are responsible for a fair chunk of content produced by private producers, then it's easy to see why over the past year or so less people have been inclined to tell the world about the minutae of their daily lives.

In the first instance, if people really wish to tell people about their cat Mitsy and what she had for breakfast, they have other avenues for doing so now. As people become more savvy, web 2.0 has started to take over and alternate sources for information are getting out there. We now have Facebook, Twitter and other networking sites to share personal updates with the world and we also have free media-sharing sites such as Flickr and Photobucket to share photos of said Mitsy. Of course, there are many other alternate avenues, these are just examples and these have been around for quite a while. They've become entrenched in the mindset of the internet user to the point where blogging has become quite irrelevant.

So for the first type of blogger, the blogger still exists and the yearning for sharing is still there, but they've just moved on to the latest and shiniest thing to share their ideas.

The second kind of blogger which has been providing news content and discussion has be co-opted by old media trying to stay with it. As much as people love the rantings of Bob from Wagga on the subject of an effective ETS strategy, they love the same thing from 'media types' who present their views with better prose.

Professional blogging again, has been around for quite a while and this isn't a 'Who? What? Pro blogging is an emerging news outlet?'-kind of post, but stay with me here. Those sage old men in their ivory towers saw the trend toward a more personal and forthright new service and they got people who were blogging anyhow into the office to blog for them for very little scratch. Now you have the same kind of content, just under a new banner. I'm talking about sites such as the Huffington Post and The Punch for those of you up there and down here respectively.

More and more bloggers are being co-opted by the machine, and the machine is flooding the space with their own journo graduates and publicity-seeking journos woking for scale, so what room is left for the niche blogger?

Why would I want to read about Bob's take on the ETS when I could do the same thing by going to a trusted source?

So one type of content generator has moved away from the sphere and the other is being (if not already) swallowed up by traditional media yelling "The internet!? BY GOD IT'LL KILL US ALL!" Of course, this is old news and I knew this from the start, so why in the hell did I decide to blog in the first place?

I find that answer, and I may start blogging with a fair degree of regularity.

'Till Next Time

What is wrong with me? (An ongoing oddessy)

2009-07-21T16:24:00.002+08:00

I have a blog? Oh yeah! That's right!

Anyhow, sorry for not writing for a while for those of you who summon up the courage and possibly masochism to read this blog. As you may know I've tossed my hat into the ring for The West cadetship while starting a new job so my bank balance doesn't seem so depressing.

Anyhow, some of the people I've told my ambitions to have said things along the lines of 'why do you want to work in print, ain't print dead?', and it's a fair point. Why would I want to work in a medium where journalists are being asked to do more work for less money for a shrinking audience?

Because it's dying.

'Huh? You want to work for a medium that's dying?'. Yes, yes I do. You see, I've never been much of an optimist at the best of times (I used to take bets as to how exactly I'd get out back in junior cricket days) but something about working in a dying medium excites me.

It's because newspapers will not go quietly into the night but instead the newspaper men will try to do anything and everything to save their beloved medium. Media in general is a sector which really rewards innovation while stagnant publications will go into decline and stop existing (a la Bulletin) in a physical format.

To be working in a sector which is trying to innovate, regardless of the inspiration of said innovation, is something which I think has the potential to be professionally rewarding. Already you can see newspapers trying to innovate.

The move from respected publications into the realm of tabloid smacks of desperation from a dying medium and looking long term you can see it not working. While a sensationalist headline may sell you a few more papers than usual you can't base a business model on intermittent sales based on shock value. It's just not a long term plan which I personally see working.

Instead, there's been whispers around that the future of print may be in the past. When newspapers were about intelligent debate, discussion and insight into the issues at hand. The newspapers of tomorrow have had the immediacy of the news stolen from it, and it wont get it back but if you raise the level of journalism in the newspapers then you'll create a product which people may shell out two dollars for.

People will always want to read quality journalism, and while the numbers won't be as grand as they once were newspapers will carve out their own niche in the media landscape. It won't be dead, it will just look different.

To get in on the ground floor of that particular shift is something which exites me, and I can only pray to various deities that the newspaper men (kind of like the mad men, no?) have the foresight and courage to take the step of venturing forth in a bold new direction. To go forward, we must go back.

Till next time

What is wrong with Manchester United?

2009-05-28T12:30:00.003+08:00

Okay, so I'm writing this after finally waking up. It seems that when I woke up at 2AM to watch the Champions League final I was dreaming, because in all honesty I can't understand why Manchester United didn't do more to shut down the Barcelona midfield. Seems something that implausable belongs in the realm of the imaginary.

Okay, so I'm just going to blog about some of the thoughts I had about the game this morning because I forgot to take notes so I won't write a full match report on the thing.

The first ten minutes were when I started to think Barcelona were going to be swamped a la' Chelsea second-leg, when Ronaldo started to rain shots down on Vicotr Valdez's goal and a red bloodbath was in the offing. Then, it all came apart for the Mancurians.

The first goal from Samuel Eto'o, I think, demonstrated why Man United lost the match. They allowed the Barca players just a little too much space and Barca with the likes of Iniesta and Xavi only need a little bit of space to make you pay. A Braca midfielder able to skip through the lines, have the time to thread a ball through, Eto'o turns Vidic inside out and it's 1-0 and effectively game over.

I was absolutely stunned to see Manchester players allowing the Barca boys all that space. Okay, against any other team it would be okay to allow that kid of real estate but Barca, with their smooth passing game, you just need to press them like nobody's business.

The second goal again came down to Manchester players allowing the midfield too much time and space. Xavi, virtually walks through the defence and has time to stop, think about it, order a cup of tea, fill out a tax return before finally hitting a cross to Messi who does superbly to head past Van Der Sar.

Manchester to their credit has their offensive game plan working. It was expected Man United would exploit the wing backslack of pace and they did that with long lofted balls (especially to Rooney) but all too often they lacked the touch of class needed to capitalise on the chances they had and their play was becoming one-dimensional.

Manchester United, simply, were unable to deal with the slick Catalan passing game and they brought the defeat upon themselves. Pure and simple. When you play Barca, you have to take your game to the next level and Manchester just didn't do that which is why Barcelona are worthy champions and played some scintilating football.

'Till next time

What is wrong with my portfolio?

2009-05-26T15:51:00.002+08:00

Okay, so it's almost time to send off my portfolio to The West Australian so what I've been doing is trying to update my portfoilio but also get it up online. Now, I'm hoping this will show the power that be that I'm not neccesarily a techno-wizard but I'm all for exploring ways I can use technology to reach new audiences.

The portfolio is basically a mix of everything I've done so far, which happens to be a pretty broad range. I also included some unpublished stuff I can't include in the actual West Australian application so that they can go to the site and see what I can do with features and business.

Okay, so what I did is scanned copies of articles I had onto my hard drive, and used Nitro PDF to publish stuff up on websites into a PDF file. Once I had the PDF files I wanted I used Scribd to upload the documents. Once I did that, I grabbed the embedding code from the site and put it into the site proper. Now, employers can go to the site and have my PDF examples loaded in-browser instead of downloading the file, finding the directory you downloaded the file to and waiting for the relevant app to open up.

It's a remarkably simple system, and I recommend it to any aspiring journalism as a way to get your portfolio 'out there' and show employers you're ready for "Web 2.0"...whatever that is.

Anyhow, you can find it here but what makes a good portfolio?

Well, the first thing people assume is that you want to show work from a broad range of areas. Well, that's certainly true but you've got to be mindful that you show a range which is broadly crap. By this I mean, don't throw something in there just because it shows you can write in a certain area because it will count against you if you're not fussy about what you choose to show people.

For example, I could have put in a couple of more feature articles into my portfolio but I didn't because I looked at it honestly and I came to the conclusion that it wasn't one of my best. Remember, ideally a portfolio is a sample of your best work, not just a sample of your work.

'Till next time.

What is wrong with Tim Andrews?

2009-05-22T17:04:00.002+08:00

Okay kids, I bring you a tale which will put a smile on your dial. Now, I pride myself on being a mixture of conservative and radical (i.e- I support more social services but I know it's useles without a strong economy to back it up) but there's a site out there created by a guy called Tim Andrews which shows young Liberal (The Australian Conservative Party) gals in bikinis and skimpy outfits.

In a post titled "Why the Right Will Triumph in Australia", Andrews put forward the theory that where hot women are, men are sure to follow. Well gee whiz, such insight. He then posted the pictures saying that he had permission from each of the young ladies, but it didn't matter anyhow because all of the pictures were in the public domain.

Now, of course none of this was officially sanctioned by the Liberal Party of Australia but you've got to laugh and then shake your head. I doubt whether the girls knew what the pictures were going to be in this fashion if they were indeed contacted (one of the girls has said he didn't contact her) but it's awfully exploitative anyhow. A couple of the girls were posing in the photos while reading a copy of Atlus Shrugged which shows that either they have a sense of humour or all of the conspiracy is TRUE!

Probably the consipracy thing....they are young Liberals after all.

It's all a bit of a laugh, but it does show the potential for exploitation of a media-happy gen-Y. Think about it. Every single event or party you go to has become a photo-op for young people eager to splash photos of themselves onto the internet for the sake of vanity or self-promotion. I'm not immune from this obsession by any stretch of the imagination but I try to keep it under wraps. When more and more images of ourselves are appearing online in spaces with convoluted image ownership laws, people are inviting this sort of thing to happen.

Do I think people should stop posting pictures online altogether? No, after all, if used probably it can be a great way to share photo's among friends but this whole episode has gotten me thinking about the way people can invite this sort of thing. It's also got me nervous about the possibility of not being featured on a "Hot young journalists" site, but mostly the former.

I'm not going to provide a link to the cached site, but if you really want to you can probably find it.

What is wrong with my health?

2009-05-19T11:09:00.002+08:00

Sorry for not updating for ages, but I've been quite ill so I've tried to take my mind off strenous mental activities such as writing poorly considered rants and putting my energies into getting better and making snide comments on Facebook.

So, during this period, all not that much has happened in my life. I'm still unemployed, but I have enough money to see me through. I'm still applying for The West Australian cadetship in June, not because I thinkI'l want to be at The West Australian for the entirity of my career, but I hope the selection process will help me see where my weaknesses as a journalist lie.

There's been a federal budget, but commenting now will be really ranting after the fact. I also went to see Der Baader Meinhoff Complex, which was well done but could have been cut by about half an hour.

Anyhow, my health is on the improve and hopefully I'll be back and ranting within the coming days.

What is wrong with today?

2009-05-06T14:13:00.002+08:00

Well, apart from my hayfever, not much I'm happy to report.

So, you know how I was banging on about writing an article for The Escapist? Well it's up right here now, and it's the lead story. Yippie-kay-yay Motherlickers! Apart from being featured on one of the more respected games journalism sites, I'm getting paid in yankee green which these days is worth quite a bit more than the aussie dollar.

Apart from playing "Where's my money?" by Busta Rhymes over and over again to celebrate my windfall, I also had somewhat of a successful interview with JB Hi-Fi to get a part time job there. It's all part of the grand plan for my future, and I was able to pimp out the fact I had written for several games sites to demonstrate my product knowledge in the area which is always a bonus.

What else struck me though, is how my cover letter was recieved. Now, these days every single job has about 60 applicants for it so I always try to make my cover letter stand out a bit by cracking a few jokes (my standard 'James is dashing, witty, intelligent and overwhelmingly humble' line got a chuckle). The interviewer actually took more notice of my application because my writing skills made my application stand out.

Just goes to show you; if you can write, you've always got a shot.

Today was also a great day because my new voice recorder and telephone pickup came in the mail. The quality is a heck of a lot better than my old voice recorder and now I have the ability to record telephone conversations which is an absolutely bonus. How often have you missed something somebody has said because you were busy writing down what they had just said? Yeah, that's why a telephone pickup is really valuable. It just allows you to really concentrate on the interview without having to worry about transcribing the interview. I heartily reccommend getting a telephone pickup mic to any up and coming journalist.

The big bits of news on the home front was the revelation the Krudd ws pushing back the implementation of an ETS by a year, and the subsequent revelation it would take six years for the budget to get back into surplus. Oh, apparently raising the target for reduction to 25 per cent from 20 per cent is supposed to offset the delay of the ETS.

Ha!

Again, it doesn't matter if the government is Labor or Liberal, it seems the environment is going to have to take one for the team once again. I appreciate the Krudd government is facing some unparralelled financial constraints, but this was an opportunity to set an agenda for the next ten years.

If the government pushed ahead with an ETS, it would've shown the people of Australia that the government was actually serious about the environment. Now, it seems money has trumped the needs of the world.

Oh well, at least he's putting a cap on the number of public servants. Now, there will only be 99,000. Meanwhile, the temprature guage keeps on creeping up.

What is wrong with punching an editor in the face?

2009-05-01T13:37:00.002+08:00

Okay, so today I open my email messages to find that article I wrote for The Escapist has been edited. That's a good thing, because you know it's gotten so far along the production line they're giving it polish before they whack it up on the intersplice/tubes.

My reaction to editing, in particular getting marked-up stuff back has always been the same, and I suspect it's the same for most up and coming writers or journalists. First there's the wince, and then you don't want to look at it. There's always that moment when you think "damn, that's a lot of red marker".

That initial experience is a really bad one. You just feel bad about your writing, and start to think you may not make it in this business after all. Okay, so maybe it's not that dramatic, but it's certainly no stroll on the boulevard. What I like to do when confronted with this feeling is to go away for about five minutes, and do something you really enjoy doing.

For example, this morning when I got the feedback I first winced and then went to spy on the comely lass next door with a telephoto lens. Okay, so I watched a bit of Seinfeld. Whatever, it's not important. Anyhow, when I came back five minutes later with an open mind and fresh perspective, I noticed the things they changed were to fit the style of their publication and a few things which were a bit stodgy with my writing.

They changed quite a bit, but often the changes were incidental and didn't mean a thing in the broader scheme of the article. I know that's what a good editor or sub editor does. They change the article without changing the crux or the style of it too much. Often, you'll see something changed and you can't figure out why they did it, but it doesn't make the article any worse and that's the mark of a good sub.

Back to my article. So I get the mark-up back, and everything's pretty standard. My article's not a complete mess, and they're just changing it to fit in with the style of the publication. Now, they removed a couple of my quips and softened it up around the edges (I was writing about a form of political protest), so why didn't I complain?

First of all, I'm not working for a major metropolitan newspaper with a readership nudging the million mark. So I know that the changes are not going to change the perceptions of me as a writer to a lot of people. Secondly, it's their damned publication and they're paying me to write the thing.

This is very important. I've spoken to a number of people about making the transition from student to professional, and the bitter squabbles you get into over incidental crap in uni will get you fired out in the real world. In uni, it'sperfectly fine to bitch and moan about every single little change which is made to your work (I often encouraged the people whose work I edited to contact me if they had any concerns) because it's a learning environment where you can ruffle a few feathers.

In the real world, if you march into an editors office with your incidental problems the standard line will be "Oh, I'm sorry we changed your work. I thought we were paying you...maybe we should stop paying you". Of course, this is second-hand stuff so my sources may be exaggerating but there's a way of dealing with criticism.

You go away, you get rid of any negative feelings and you look at them clearly and rationally.

Of course, if they change your article for the sake of pursuing ideological whims, march into their office and give them a piece of your mind. Stand up for your work and what you're trying to do as a journo, but pick your battles carefully. When newsrooms are downsizing and the economy is in the shitter, you'll do well not to unduly rub anyone the wrong way.

Especially those who sign the cheques.

What is wrong with shameless promotion?

2009-04-28T13:00:00.002+08:00

First off, I've got to apologise for the intermittent blog posts. Real life has gotten in the way more times than I care to count over the last week, but at least something good has come out of it.

I've talked on this blog about the desire for me to get a website up and running so that number one, I can have an online presence potential employers can check out and number two to showcase some of the better citizen journalists and writers out there. I may just be one step closer to realising that dream through Weebly.

This is very preliminary, but so far I've been impressed with the service. What it is essentially, is free server space and a widget-based wepage creation toolkit. Which means that basically anyone can create a webpage using their templates or you can go under the hood and customise the code to suit your needs.

The catch is that you can only create about three websites before they ask you to pony up some dough, but how many websites do you need? It's free for crying out loud! To enjoy the freeness (yes, that's totally a word in the Dictionary of Drunkards) of the experience, you do have to put .weebly in your site's domain name, but it's a small price (actually, none) to pay for your own website.

Because I like working with images though, I'm afraid I may be spamming the Weebly servers if I put up a webcomic or something of that ilk. Not to worry though, as Wired actually got me thinking about Cloudsourcing as a way for small time operators to turn a buck.

The term basically means getting all the grudge work of the servers to another product. For example, what's stopping me from chucking up photos on Flickr and Photobucket and using those as a server for the images, while keeping a copy for myself? That way, you don't have to store the photos (or video) on the same server as your website and you can outsource that hassle to another site.

It'sall very initial at this stage, but things are looking promising on that front.

Anyhow, onto something that caught my eye while I was watching MediaWatch last night. You see, here in Australia we've had a recent spate of 'boat people' who undertake perilous trips across the waves to reach Australia in the hopes of political asylum.

Some sections of the media however, aren't merely content with calling them 'boat people' anymore. They've gone back to that old standard 'illegals', which of course implies these people are coming to our shores illegally (which they're not), and implies that these people may be criminals instead of people fleeing persecution.

Language has the power to make people laugh, give insight into darkened areas and provide hope for those with none. Words in the wrong hands can be dangerous things, as one word, one key phrase can change perceptions.

Once you change the perceptions of the voting public, you're going to have a tough time convincing them otherwise.

What's wrong with a tea party?

2009-04-21T16:47:00.003+08:00

Earlier this week in the great ol' land of the USA, demonstrations were held protesting the high taxing of the Democratic party. Unsurprisingly, many to all of the protestors were Republican, and they objected to the trillions of US taxpayer money to bail out crippled financial companies.

Okay, fair enough, but the strange thing here is that they used the concept of
tea' to rally around in conjunction with tax season in the US. You see, they hoped to draw links back to a revolutionary moment in US history known as the Boston Tea Party, when people in Boston refused to allow tea shipped from the UK onto their lands under the grounds that they didn't want to pay tax to a sovereign nation which was not their own.

So, they threw the tea into the harbour so that they didn't have to be taxed on it. It was seen as one of the great acts of defiance against the ruling UK government and led to a revolution which kicked out the brits.

Now protestors are trying to draw paralells between that event and their current protests, and comparing the Obama government to an opressive regime which they do not support, and therefore should not have to pay tax to.

As any sound mind will realise by now, the whole thing is completely ridiculous. Sure, go ahead and protest but you still have to pay your taxes. The whole thing smacks of Republican sour grapes, as now their arguments centre upon not recognising their own government as legitimate and Obama as not a legitimate President?

They say they should have greater control over where their taxes go, and the over-spending of the Obama administration is grounds for revolution. Yeah, that'll fly.

Republicans weren't complaining when their taxes went toward providing the top end of town with tax cuts and perks under Republican auspices, and now the ineptitude of that system has been shown up and they want to protest about paying tax? Years of lax regulation under the guise of fiscal conservatism plagued the world and then US nation, and they want to complain about the opposite approach?

'Till next time
It's got to make you laugh.

What is wrong with a quick update?

2009-04-16T12:34:00.002+08:00

This is just a quick update on a couple of things in the last blog post. The situation in Thailand got worse, with civilian deaths reported to be around the six mark, but I wouldn't be too surprised to hear that number go up to about 15.

The interesting thing though is the independant media in the country are reporting much of the strife was caused by the anti-government demonstrators , backed by Thaksin Shinawatra. Apparently they were the agressors in the conflict, driving a bus into a crowd of soldiers to inflame the situation and whereas the sound of troop guns rung out, it's understood from vision of the incident that the soldiers were shooting into the air to warn off protestors rather than at them. Some of the conflict has been between anti-government demonstrators and ordinary citizens sick and tired of the demonstrators bringing their country into disrepute.

No loss of life is a good thing, but I thank whoever's in charge of the whole cosmic show that it's only six people. That situation could have gotten very bad very quickly, but for the meantime things have seemed to settle down and anti-government leaders have conceeded they face a PR crisis which will make public support of further demonstrations very dificult.

Onto Fiji now, and foreign journalists have been escorted from the country and the Australian Broadcast Commission radio broadcast tower has been powered down by the 'government' acting under, well, I was going to say unconstitutional grounds but there is no constitution in Fiji at the moment.

I also let you know about the TV station which has refused to broadcast pro-'government' stories and how it may just help the situation. Well, it seems the local rags have gotten into the act too and started running stories about 'a man getting on a bus', and 'what we had for breakfast this morning' rather than pro-'govenment' stories which are the only stories they're allowed to run under emergency rules.

You gotta love it.

Hopefully the stories will make people in Australia and New Zealand take a little more notice rather than trivialising the issue.

What is wrong with an illusion of democracy?

2009-04-14T16:20:00.003+08:00

Don't you just love it when you turn on the television set and see pictures of people fleeing their governments? Makes me kind of wish the news could be about a puppy on a surfboard all the time.

This week protests in Thailand and a military dictatorship in Fiji have been gathering pace, and we're about to see two traditional Australian holiday destinations become violent maelstroms of revolution and meanwhile Stephen Smith sits in Canberra and 'expresses concern over the situation'.

In Fiji, one of our close neighbours we have a military dictatorship which has seen the results of a democratic judicial ruling and thought 'nuh, don't like it'. So they (the military dictator in a Prime Minister's clothing Frank Bainimarama) trot out the President who reads from a piece of paper, seemingly bemused as to the powers he's giving himself. Basically, President Josefa Lliolo tore up the constitution and appointed Bainimarama as Prime Minister.

Oh, and about a year ago they promised to hold elections six months ago. Joyous.

Now, they've kicked out the head of the Reserve Bank of Fiji and the Fijian Human Rights Commission because they 'were formed under the constitution'. If that's not bad enough, they've basically shut down all independant media on the island, making it a crime to report 'negative' stories about the government.

So kids, what do you think the media did?

They did the only thing they could ethically do under the situation and refused to broadcast. They're doing their stories or they're doing none at all. Way to stick it to the man Fijian media, right on! Hopefully, the silence will be deafening.

Meanwhile in Thailand, simmering tensions between anti-government supporters and government officials have just started to flow over and the riot police have been called in. So far there no 'reported' casualties, but if you stand back and have a look at the picture in Thailand it may just make you lose your voice out of sheer bewilderment.

The current government, the one elected a while ago has been accused of corruption amongst other nefarious things, and seizing power illegally.

You see, the anti-government protestors are suporters of Thaksin Shinawatra, the ex-PM who was ousted about a year and a half ago for 'alleged' massive coruption and supresing democracy in the nation. The military kicked him out, and he's now a criminal in the country.

That's right, the people of Thailand have basically moved from one corupt government to the next, and they're calling for the ex-PM to be re-installed to the office. What a crazy situation.

The paralells between Fiji and Thailand are quite evident at the moment, as both states are dealing with a government which was installed after a military coup, and both appear to be failing tremendously in their quest to 'restore democracy' to what they saw as failed states. Now, they're repeating the same mistakes as their predesessors and finding that power is a dark temptation indeed.

The over riding socio-political question at stake here has to be 'is it possible to violently insist upon democracy?'.

Your thoughts?

What is wrong with over thinking things?

2009-04-09T09:38:00.001+08:00

Well, you tend to go insane and write shambolic reviews of The Sims. Like I did about a week ago for a reviewing competition. I don't think I'm going to win with this effort, but it staved off the effects of insanity for about ten minutes anyhow....or perhaps encouraged them. Goo goo ga joob!

=====================================================================

THE SIMS- POLLIACI TAKES THE STAGE

"When I consider this carefully, I find not a single property which with certainty separates the waking state from the dream. How can you be certain that your whole life is not a dream?"- Descartes

I turn on the machine and live another life, I am ghost in the machine, and I am hungry for Baked Alaska.

When people think games, they think computer simulations with a point. Whether it be shoot a whole bunch of people, build a city or unravel a mystery, but has there ever been a game which is so nihilistically compelling?

When people ask me my favourite game, I say it is something along the lines of Fallout or Psychonauts, not because The Sims isn't popular, but because of my own shame. Each time I start up the game, I hear the hollow silence of my own coffin underneath the cheery music which permeates my consciousness.

I know that for an hour or twelve I am certainly not myself, I am not the same man who thinks playing until two in the morning isn't a fruitful exercise, instead I am not only a taskmaster but this game has somehow tricked me into believing I am a master of my own self.

I get a call on the telephone, that sim wants to come over for a while. I have work in an hour; I have no time for this foolishness. I need a goddamned promotion, I don't have any bills piled up on the table or children crying for the newest shiny toy and I feel myself lulled into a path by the promise of a piece of candy in front of my feet.

"And if you go chasing rabbits-
And you know you're going to fall"- Jefferson Airplane

I'm Alice, and I don't particularly care that the Cheshire cat is grinning at me. What do I care for the logical reality which dictates this all ridiculous? What do I care for the arguments that my time would not be served by playing a people simulator?

Paradoxically, The Sims has you obsessed with time management as you go down the rabbit-hole to confront your own shortcomings. I look at my sim, and I see an idealised version of myself. He has a job, several attractive sims a phone call away and a home that I could only dream of...and a hot tub!

For others, digital gender-play is the order of the day as their digital manifestations go and give birth to a whole bunch of more Sims which fulfils some paternal fantasies. Others though desire the game as a mere toy, the denizens of the world to do with what they will, locking them up in a room with no food or toilets for days on end and smile wryly as their sim fights for life.

What is this game where you can't just design cities, take life but instead control every aspect of a digital person's life? More to the point, why do I desire the control? In a game which takes control away from your real life and substitutes it for a program, is the need to dictate the terms of life to these beings the last bastions of our humanity telling us that this is a video game, and nothing to be feared?

Am I over-thinking this?

The reason why The Sims is a guilty pleasure is that I seek control. I demand perfection from my sims in stark contrast to my failed endeavours and this makes me feel more than a little guilty. Am I simply projecting my desires onto these hapless digital creatures? What right do I have to demand perfection from these creatures when I am sitting in my room at two in the morning playing a video game?

Perhaps a story will help illustrate my point.

It's about 7PM sim-time. The sun has just come down rather rapidly, and I'm preparing my sim for another day of promotion-chasing. He lives in a two-story house, has a good looking trophy-wife and two kids who are at the top of their classes. Yet, it's not enough.

I have to get him up four hours early, just to make sure that he's in the best condition he can be so he can chase that promotion. Most people will be happy just stumbling into work, getting through their shift so they can get their pay check and put food on the table. My mum did it after all, she raised two kids while getting a degree and working a full-time job.

I find myself now, faced with this being in my control and I'm making sure his kids have the upbringing I never had. Oh God I'm so ashamed.

Why do I want to push my sim into this path though? For some arbitrary cash bonus? Am I simply playing by the game's rules in the hopes of hearing some stupid little chime and my sim's stats getting a boost? Why am I following the pied piper to my own death? Not the death of my sim, but to the death of myself.

It's about 2AM real-world time and I feel like rebelling. The sun has long gone down and my sim is preparing for another day of work. Little does he know that he's not going to work today. That's right; I'm going to ignore the honking of the carpool.

So the hour is fast approaching, and my sim is seemingly looking toward the door. Is my sim...learning? Has years of routine finally come home to roost? It's a moot question anyway, and the car pulls up and starts honking. My sim indicates that he wants to go to work, to get the moolah, to get the points and to get the special item. No, I say, you will stay home and paint! Still he indicates that he wishes to go...I should have turned free-will off.

My sim hasn't grasped the concept or rebellion, and a look outside will tell you why. It's a sunny day outside, and as far as I can tell, it's never rained in this part of the neighbourhood. I look at the houses in the neighbourhood and notice a distinct lack of dilapidation present. This neighbourhood sickens me, but yet I want to spend every waking moment I have there? I'm so ashamed.

Back to my rebellion.

The honking is unceasing, it drives into your brain like a jackhammer into pavement, all compounded by my sim's desire to walk on the straight and narrow and my determination for him to rebel. Who am I to force my cultural ideologies on this little guy? If he really wants to go to work, I should let him. The car's honking louder now. No, I made him what he was through years of routine implementation, and it's my responsibility to show him that there's another way to live life. He doesn't have to go to work, he doesn't have to be a slave to the corporate dollar.

Back in real life I get my bank statement back, and the 90 dollars I spent on the game and 30 dollars I spent on the expansion pack stick out at me. Here I am trying to affect rebellion when I can't rebel myself.

Like a crack-addled clown I go back for more time and time again. Perhaps the greatest act of rebellion would be to turn the computer off, but there's no time for that now, the car's honking is getting louder.

Finally, the car speeds off and my sim is left in a daze, reflecting his creator's state of mind. Here I am free from the constraints of arbitrary gameplay goals and I have no idea what to do. All I keep on thinking is that he should be doing something constructive as I open another bag of chips.

He should be painting a masterpiece, getting his body in taught shape or cultivating contacts. In the middle of my ruminations, a little sim comes up to her daddy and gives him a hug before going to school.

Suddenly, it's not about rebellion anymore. The reason why my sim should aim to be all he can be is right there in a simple act of affection. Who am I to deny a future for this child because I want to rebel? That's when you realise that you're not the G-Man anymore, but instead this game has been controlling you all this time.

So, why is The Sims a guilty pleasure? Because I know it controls my mind, and yet I go back for more each night. There's an old joke, it goes something like this.

A man walks into a doctor's office and says he's depressed.

The doctor says "Polliaci is in town, he'll cheer you up"

The man says "But doctor, I am Polliaci!"

Playing The Sims is to experience all of the follies of human endeavour, and I'd be laughing at the joke if it weren't 2AM.

What is wrong with a rollout?

2009-04-07T09:33:00.002+08:00

Hey, remember that hilarious National Broadband Network bidding process? The one where Telstra submitted not a bid, but a list of requirements it needed to submit a bid? Yeah, that was pretty funny, what with all the laughing at Telstra and everything. Turns out that this morning the almighty Rudd has announced all of the private bids for the tender weren't up to scratch.

Therefore, the Ruddster decided it was high time a newly-created and Government controlled 43 Billion dollar company was given the tender for the process. The private investment in the company will be capped at 49 per cent with the government retaining control.

Sound familiar kiddies? Should be.

I seem to remember a certain time when Telstra was under government control in a former life, under the trading name of Telcom Australia. That was government-controlled, before the governmanet stake was split up in three parts in 1997,1999 and 2006. While investors took up the offer, the company then screwed the pooch big time.

Make no mistake, this failure to capture the National Broadband Network building tender was a kick in the teeth for the company, so much so that everybody's favourite yank with a moustache, Sol Trujilo, up and left with a golden handshake.

The question is, is history about to repeat itself? In my humble opinion, no.

Telstra moved to a private company in a climate which government regulation was seen as the big, bad wolf and privitization was the groovy thing to do. The market was rolling, the money was flowing and there was competition on the part of Optus tomake things interesting.

These days though, following the Freddie May and Mac crash I somehow think the attitude toward privatisation is a smidge different. The market may say that the way out of a crash is to invest and spend, but I doubt whether governments feel the same way.

Tighter regulation of companies, transparency of reporting and general belt-tightening are so in roght now. Would the government move to sell its stake in this new company? Perhaps not right away(the government will sell its stake within five years), but you can bet one thing about this company; It's going to be regulated to within an inch of its life. You thought the relationship between Telstra and the Government was tetchy, just wait until investors start to smell a whiff of government intervention in free enterprise.

Besides, will these be a market in five years for the government to sell its stake to? What's the value in a company which has a foundation built upon strict regulation, and very few investments or strategies for the future (I somehow don't think the government owned company will employ an agressive investment strategy).

Anyhow, this new company would build the National Boradband Network, which is sorely needed. You see, the broadband speed in Australia is akin to a snail taking it easy. The network would deliver speeds of about 10 Megabits to about 90 per cent of Australian homes and businesses.

That's all well and good, but I feel one question has to be asked.

You deliver high speeds but we can't see the hardcore porn sites? What kind of twisted game are you playing at Conroy?

'Till next time

What is wrong with people accepting your pitches?

2009-04-03T11:09:00.002+08:00

It means that you have to go ahead and actually write an article. Why can't people pay me for just being awesome?

This week I got in my inbox a bit of exciting news. It seems the Escapist accepted my pitch to write a feature article for them, which is a step up for me. I'm used to writing small articles for the US market but this is a step up, and a great opportunity to put something meaningful in my portfolio.

Anyhow, the subject is 'political griefers'. Basically, these people use traditional griefing techniques in online games in order to make a political point. People like Joseph DeLappe who posts the names of dead soldiers in America's Army and the group known as Velvet Strike who are determined to fill testosterone-filled rounds of Counterstrike with peace and love.

Goovy, no?

So far I've managed to get in touch with DeLappe about the article and sent him through some questions, but the leader of Velvet Strike hasn't gotten back to me yet. My 1500 word article will basically go through the history of this sort of activity, as well as raising questions about a play space being politicised, and it's going to be an exercise in staying objective.

Objectivity, as Jaded Prime devotees will know, is something with pluses and minuses but with this article I'm dealing with politics. I agree totally with DeLappe and Velvet Strike and their methods, but plenty of players just think they're exploiting a space which should be left untouched by politics.

So I'm really out to maintain a neutral and calm voice instead of publishing a rallying call, and the way I'm doing that is by trying to stay outside of the subject matter and presenting it as somewhat of a social experiment. I'm really just trying to ask questions from both sides of the coin rather than provide opinions.

So anyhow, I have 15 days to get the article in the can, and I'm being paid 25c US per edited word. So you may see me around the Perth Stock Exchange hoping to see red across to board, well, for a couple of weeks anyhow.

'Till next time

What's wrong with a centralised computer?

2009-03-28T16:23:00.002+09:00

At the Games Developer Conference '09 being held in San Francisco, among all the juicy gossip and teases was a piece of tech which could potentially change the face of gaming. Okay, so that may be a hackneyed piece of conjecture but the announced OnLive service could be a future direction worth investigating.

It works like this. Instead of using your rig to play games which need upgrading every so often in the areas of graphical power and processsor grunt you can play games on a central computer. Wha?

Okay, so you sign up for the service, and instead of your input commands going to your machine they go via an internet connection to another computer which handles all the grunt work like processing, then the information is relayed back to your computer via the same internet connection.

This means all you potentially need to play high-end games is an internet connection, as all of the processing is outsourced to the OnLive service before being relayed back to your computer via a stream.

Sounds pretty neat, no?

While others have said this could basically stop production of high-end machines in its stride, others have expressed their concerns over the service.

For one thing, what happens when the glitches start? With your own rig, you can actually open it up and see if there's any physical damage to any of your parts and run diagnostics, but when your stream goes down you can't waltz up to OnLive headquarters and see what's wrong. At least I don't think that's included in the subscription fee.

Then there's the little matter of the internet connection. What if that goes down? You're basically stranded because you don't have access to the database while offline so there's no singleplayer if you don't have an internet connection.

If this thing really takes off like it can, then most games will be in a digital format, tied to the OnLive service. Digital may be the way of the future, but I'd like to have an analog back-up. I'd actually like to have physical proof that I own the game, and I think everybody likes going into a games store and browsing the boxes.

That being said, for all the potential drawbacks....I can play Crisis on a netbook.

If you have a stable connection, then you can outsource allof the grudge work. That's got to be worth investigating.

What is wrong with flowing prose?

2009-03-24T09:46:00.002+09:00

Normaly, I'm a fan of words that ooze off the page like metlted butter and nestle comfortably within my subconscious but lately I'm finding great satisfaction in reading boks that are fundamentally hard to read.

By that I mean books that only tackle complex and open-ended themes which provoke many points of interest to mull over but also hard to read prose. I'm talking Dostoyevsky doing Kafka doing Cervantes.

As you can probably tell, lately I've been submerged in the worlds of Don Quixote, Crime and Punishment and Metamorphosis. The thread which ties the first two together is they've been translated from very alien languages into English.

Cervantes lived in 16th Century Spain and Dostoyevsky lived in 19th Century Russia. To try and translate an archaic form of Spanish into flowing prose is a challenging undertaking by any stretch of the imagination and to be fair the translators do a pretty good job but in the end it still remains a hard book to read.

The translators have to deal with a whole different verb structure than our own ('Lucy's in the Sky with Diamonds' becomes 'Lucy, she is in the sky with the diamonds') and you can tell the translators have tried to salvage the best out of a bad situatuion, but it still remains a challenging read nonetheless.

Dostoyevsky wrote society novels for the most part, and there is a stiltedness and formality to his writing even when ruminating of the internal thought processes of a killer, and for this reason any Dostoyevsky is hard to read for those not familiar with his style.

Yet with both remains the fact that they are totally engrossing authors with wonderful novels and need to be read by anyone who hopes to call themselves literate. Yet, you won't find the youth of today clambouring for first editions and exciting new translations but instead reaching for the modern stuff.

So, I make a point in reading hard to read novels. Sort of my statement against the intellectual laziness of today. I actively seek out books which are going to be hard to read for the mere fact that I feel there's some sort of jewell in the temple of prose and pot of gold at the end of the rainbow made up by words such as 'betwixt'.

So, I find myself with this fixation for reading ahard to read books out of some sort of intellectual protest. In an age where all meaning and prose is given to us in an eye-pleasing format why not go back to those masterpieces which are hard to penetrate? In an age where literature has become consumer product rather than adding to the lexicon of human existence, am I wrong for seeking out texts which go against this philisophy?

Or am I just mad?

'Till next time

What is wrong with Alcopops?

2009-03-20T10:27:00.002+09:00

Alcopops, to our overseas visitors are basiaclly soft drink with alcohol added and marketing to a youth market. Varieties such as Lemon Ruski have popped up over the years, and it's led to a sharp increase of young people binge drinking. Now, Australia's always been fond of a couple of quiet ones but the level of over-excessive drinking has gotten out of hand.

The theory is that young people are atracted to these alcopops because they can't stand the taste of regular alcohol, so they choose to have alcohol with a whole pile of sugar to cover up the taste (because that's being an adult!). So, the federal government finally caught onto the trend and introduced a propsed tax on the sale of alcopops in Australia.

Not only would it curve binge drinking, the government argued, it would also be a nice little fundraiser. Now, instead of being a country run on the sheep's back we would be run on the pissed teenager's back.

Now, the sale of alcopops have suffered a hit but to make up for it teenagers are getting savvy and mixing their own drinks before they go out. They say that they save money by doing it, and this would combat any price hike the government may or may not introduce. Alcopops though, aren't the only thing driving binge drinking in this country.

The fact is, that Australia has had a drinking culture for as long as anyone could remember, with mainstream alcohol companies able to advertise during sports broadcasts to tie in the culture of sport with the culture of drinking, and this is backed up by seeing their favourite players intoxicated on the streets, groping sponsor's daughters and what have you.

It's been said that if the government outlawed all drugs and alcohol, Australians would spin around on their lawn until they couldn't stand. The question is though, how do you deal with the problem?

Senator Steve Fielding of the Family First Party yesterday had the swing vote when the alcopops tax bill made its way to the senate, and he chose to vote it down, wanting more to be done about binge drinking than taxing alcopops.

He said that any legislation had to be a comprehensive plan to get to the root causes of the problem, and would not vote for revenue-raising band-aid solution legislation. Of course, several people have criticised him for blocking the move, while others have lauded his efforts.

In my own personal opinion, I don't think putting a tax on alcopops would dramatically decrease the level of teenage drunkedness in the country but it's a start. I think the legislation should have gotten through, but Fielding has a point in his opposition to sport-related alcohol advertising.

It's a ridiculous loophole which allows alcohol compaies to advertise their product during the day time, but only in conjunction with a sports broadcast. It comes down to the dollars the companies give sports organisations in the country through sponsorship and spokesman deals. So the uniforms of the players may have alcohol logos on them, and signage at the stadiums will display the logo from time to time, and then the companies strike a deal with the television network carrying the game to advertise with the broadcast.

Then what you have is not just a logo, but an association with professional sport, and with pro athletes. Ridiculous as it may sound, many young people look up to these overpaid beefcakes and think that by drinking the particular product advertised, they can be just like their heroes.

If that's the case, then we're all in trouble.

What is wrong with a golden handshake?

2009-03-18T18:51:00.003+09:00

Outrage this week over the executives who deserve a golden shower rather than a golden handshake. The tizzy started when it emerged that due to pre-existing conditions, the top brass at AIG were going to get a whole bunch of moolah as a bonus for doing......well you got me.

That's right kiddies, the guys running AIG, the company currently being bailed out by the American taxpayer were going to get paid obscene amounts for their incompetence. The socialists were howling at this one. Luckily it lookslike they're not going to get the money, but the reasoning behind the payments was a bit baffling.

They said it was due to a clause in a pre-existing contract and their hands were tied, and I understand that but then they came out and said something baffling. They started to argue that incentives were needed to keep talent at the company.

Hmmm, spot the flaw if you can. It seems to me that the people who ran an insurance giant into the ground aren't actually that talented, just sayin'. Is there something to the argument though?

No, of course not you dolt.

They say that to get ourselves out of this mess, they're going to need the help of the people who got them in the trouble in the first place. I can understand there perhaps are a limited number of people to run a multi-national company, but it's just ridiculous.

In no other profession is this approach taken in the face of extreme incompetence. Just imagine it now, the manager of your club has just lost fifteen games on the trot. What does the club do? They sack the hell out of him.

They sure as hell don't invite him back to try and rebuild the squad and throw a bunch of money at him. It seems though, the men with the suits and ties are somehow granted an exemption. Here in Australia, the story is much the same.

Everybody's favourite moustachioed (is that even a word?) Yank, Sol Trujilo, was given a nice little 30 million dollar handshake for advising over a company which had failed to even get on the shortlist for the new broadband network, and played bizzare power games with Stephen Conroy.

Socks, jocks and offshore-location experts Pacific Brands payed a bonus to a former CEO last year to the tune of 3.4 million dollars, a period where they would have been planning the mass sackings of Australian workers.

So you see, the problems which beset this financial world aren't just American. Everybody assumes that this whole thing was kicked of by the leveraged US companies but the problem goes deeper than that. The problem is greed on a masive scale, and that sadly, is a universal theme.

What is wrong with going stir-crazy: pt II

2009-03-14T12:00:00.002+09:00

Many of you will remember my epic stapler review(here: http://thejadedprime.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html), but I'm not satisfied with that, oh no. Instead, I'm not giving up until I write the most enthralling review about the most inane objects I can think of!

Here's one about a brick

======================================================================

THE HAIGH- RADICAL SIMPLIFICATION
By Corky McGee

If there was one darling to come out of last year's Leipzig Brick Show, it was the new Haigh brick which dazzled audiences and had brick journalists in a tizzy. Well, the day is finally here and today marks its release onto the market, but does the real deal measure up to the dazzling display at Leipzig?

For years builders and political activists alike had shown an alarming disinterest in the current generation of bricks, instead choosing to stay with the old standards such as the King and the Lindesay models, so it's no surprise the Haigh has proven to be one of the most anticipated brick releases in years.

Retaining a sleek finish, the Haigh manages to capture the charm of old-school design philosophies while adapting to emerging demands from China and India for Western building products. The Haigh will amaze many pundits with its compact design which will appeal to both markets.

Before this point, brick manufacturer's had to stake a place in either camp, and no firm has ever successfully managed to crack both markets simultaneously. Makers of the Haigh, BrickCo are hoping the brick will lead to an about face in brick market policies.

There's no doubt that in these harsh economic times, brick manufacturers are aiming to increase their market share, and to do so in multiple markets. By employing veteran project lead Jans Klaussen to head up the Haighproject, BrickCo have ensured a design which pushes forward in terms of adaptability and texture while retaining the classic brick-chic that he's known for.

The Haigh's texture was one of the things that dazzled at Leipzig, and we're pleased to report that this hasn't changed a bit at the point of release. The brick is still silky-smooth, but with a rough edge which makes the brick attractive to potential buyers. There's no doubt that under the gruff exterior of this brick is a soft and gentle side which is just so appealing.

We recently road-tested a preview model of the Haigh, and our political activists found it to be a better brick to work with as now they could throw the bricks through shop windows without having to use gloves, a key advantage when aiming for accuracy. Builders too said that after a day's build using the preview model, they felt as if they hadn't done any work at all owing to the milky texture of the brick not leaving any of the scuff marks long associated with the bricklayer.

In terms of shape, you couldn't ask for much more from the Haigh. Shape was one of the key reasons Klaussen was appointed project-lead for the brick, as his work on the Lindesay model helped forge a new generation of bricks, and BirckCo had suffered bad reviews for its previous releases regarding shape.

The shape is what you'd expect from a designer of Klaussen's experience, as the brick retains classic lines but changes things up with softer edges than we're used to seeing from his releases. It's clear that Klaussen has really tried to reinvigorate brick design from its recent slumber and this effort will force some textbooks to be re-written!

Klaussen with his design

Builders say the new design will be a godsend for those working all day long with bricks, as some of the tough lines of previous releases has left their hands with one too many tell-tale signs in the form of cuts to their hands. Political activists too are raving at the new shape, saying the softer edges actually increase the diameter of holes they can break in windows, rather than being a more concentrated area of destruction they've used in the past.

The Haigh also impresses with the colour scale employed. Rather than sporting a deep red as with most of the current releases, the Haigh uses a lighter touch and is more the better for it.

Whereas the market has been complaining about bricks all being the same colour in the past, the Haigh uses a deft touch to distinguish itself from the pack and by doing so distances itself from the frustrations consumers feel for the current generation of bricks.

The lighter tone lends itself a charm which brings back memories of a bygone era of brick design and reminds us that this brick is really what bricks are meant to be. The juxtaposition between its old world aesthetics and it's sleek new world design is a masterstroke from Klaussen who with the Haigh has reclaimed his rightful place at the summit of brick design.

Political activists, in particular are pleased as punch about getting their hands on the new brick, saying the old-school aesthetics reminds them of the work their pappies did in bringing down the government, and makes the political acts referenced by the brick a lot more poignant.

Indeed, Klaussen has always been a staunch activist and employed this new colour scheme in a majestic fashion in a nod to his predecessors. BrickCo may have been worried by Klaussen's revolutionary intent, smelling a PR disaster in the wake of the Tuscon incident, but their decision to allow Klaussen a free hand is one of the smartest business decisions they'll ever make.

Already, buyers from exotic shore have been lining up to sample the new brick, pleased the new style of brick reminds them of the fond days of colonialism. Now they'll not only be able to enjoy the comfort and sophistication of theHaigh but to appropriate the aesthetic meaning to protest western globalisation by lobbing one of the bricks through the nearest Starbucks franchise.

In closing, the Haigh measures up in every aspect to the promise shown by the Leipzig model employing some pretty cutting edge design philosophies by Klaussen to achieve an old-world charm. This is now the new standard by which new bricks will be measured, and I certainly look forward to how Klaussen and BrickCo plan to top this season's release.

P.S- I'm so lonely

What is wrong with this financial crisis thingamajig?

2009-03-13T08:53:00.002+09:00

I've had friends and family come up to me during the last few months, looking to me for guidance about this whole thing kicked off. They know I have some sort of handle on this whole thing, and it's a very complex and tricky issue with no one person to blame. Heck, itwould be good if we could blame this whole thing on Bernie Madoff, but a number of events and lending practices has lead to the meltdown of the current capitalistic system.

First of all, we had the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Now, this basically stemmed from really bad home loans being given out. You see, at the height of the property boom in the US, there was a lot of money floating around the system, so lenders were able to package loans that they wouldn't have in normal times.

Like, the pay nothing for two years and then pay a fuckload of interest later on. These loans were offered to those who couldn't pay the interest straight up, and usually that's a sign that they're not ready for the financial strains of a home loan, but heck, there was money to be made so agents just gave the okay and collected the comission on the sale.

Now, the banks started to realise they had a lot of dodgy loans on their hands. So, they decided to package them up as securities and offload them onto Wall Street in order to safeguard their money. These securities took the form of bonds which the investor would hold, and eventually they'd get the full amounts of the loans and the interest.

Now, to help sell these securities, they were all put into a giant pool.The securirties were given AAA, BBB, and CCC security ratings by insurance companies. This means that the AAA were likely to be paid back, but with less interest and the CCC securities were less likely to be paid back, but the interest rate was higher.

Now, the people in charge of the securities thought by putting them in a giant pool wouldallow them to colate all the money in the one place, so the AAA security holders could be paid back first, the BBB second and so on. That's not it though, to help sell the securities they added on what's known as a Credit Default Swap onto the security.

This is basically insurance for the security, which means if you pay more you can basically guarantee a return on your investment. Here's the kicker though, these things could be traded as well. That's right, you could hold the insurance on another person's mortgage security.

So, you could basically bet on the mortgage not being paid back. Now, the market has gone nuts with these things, to the tune of an estimated 42 Trillion dollars.

Back to the Wall Street people who packaged up these securities. They thought at the worst, they could sell the houses if people didn't pay the money back and give it to investors. Here's the thing though, the availability of these cheap loans led to a heck of a lot more houses being built. Now kiddies, what happens when there's an oversupply in the market? The value goes down.

So of course there wasn't the money there to pay back investors and holders of CDS contracts and a lot of people lost money. Now the investors weren't just mum and dad investors, multi-billion dollar companies also got onto these securities and they weren't being paid back.

Now, there were a heck of a lot of companies not getting money back for their investment, and coupled with the market's penchant for CDS contracts which weren't subject to normal security scrutiny they found themselves in a highly leveraged position.

That means they were getting loans from a lot of other companies, and they didn't have the wherewithal to pay them back. So they had to sell assets, file chapter 11 (bankruptcy) and eventually the debt position of companies were exposed and the whole thing collapsed like a jenga pile.

Whew, I hope that helps explain the whole thing rather than fuzzy the picture for you, and crystallises why you should stock up on food sraps to throw at Wall Street gurus.

What is wrong with Watchmen?

2009-03-07T10:43:00.002+09:00

Not a great deal, as Snyder actually does a eally admirable job at adapting the book to the big screen. The ending is definitely rushed though, and that's my only real beef with the film though but the critics have been lining up left right and centre to criticise the film.

They call the film bloated and overwrought with characterisation.The thing is though, most of these critics have gone to the film with the brief "it's a movie based on a comic book'. The question is, did they try to view Watchmen as a comic book film rather than more of the philisophical and character piece it is.

After all, it's been said that the best possible film version of Watchmen would be a five hour art-house film, and I'm inclined to agree with that. The film cuts a great deal of the characterisation and introspection from the film, but cleverly references events to devotees.

The question is, as the critics have been swayed by their pre-conceptions that it's a 'comic book film', have I been swayed by the fact that I've read the book and know what they've left out? Have I not seen the bloated nature of the film because I've been focused on what they've cut from the film?

Anyhow, here's a quick review I did yesterday.

====================================================================

Watchmen- Film

It ain't as good as the book, but it's as good as a movie based on the book is going to get. As a movie based on one of the most loved texts of the last 20 years, Zach Snyder was always going to have a tough sell for this one. Entire audiences would be searching every frame for the meaning permeating through their beloved text. The question is though, did they pull it off?

Well, it came damned close. It came as damned close as a movie can get to expressing the themes and depth the book does, but for fans of the novel, the film will fall agonisingly short but it's through no fault of the film itself.

It's a damned fine film, perhaps one of the best of the year and for those unacquainted with the text it will open their eyes to a whole new way of thinking about superheroes. It's a superbly crafted film, with a visual electricity and some great performances elevating this flick from standard comic book film to a whole new beast.

All of the characters of the book are well represented, from the cold and subtle facial expressions of Doctor Manhattan played by Billy Crudp, to the raw intensity of Jackie Haley playing the psychotic Rorschach, and the manic depresion of the Comedian is brought to life admirably. It's clear the actors aren't in it for the pay check, but in it for the opportunity to bring the characters to life. The only disappointment is Mathew Goode as Ozymandias who fails to bring a presence to the screen that his character dictated.

That being said, they all bring the intricacies and nuances of their characters to the fore, and some of the scenes between the Silk Spectre and Nite Owl are great, as they explore their sexuality as tied to their personas.

Visually, the film doesn't employ the secondary colour scheme employed by the comic, but in its place is a beautifully photographed piece. Snyder shows his visual flair here, as screen panels are brought to life with an intensity which makes it an incredible experience for devotees of the novel. The opening credits especially are an absolute delight.

Striking, is an understatement. The screen brings to life the still panels, with all of the intricate details of the panels brought to life. From copies of "Under the Hood" lying around, to news clippings hanging on the wall all of the scenery is lovingly crafted with detail which will have fans of the novel grinning from ear to ear as they fondly remember the panels referenced.

Referencing the detail left out is perhaps the most frustrating part of the film for fans, as it points to detail that in parts the film yearns for. The back story of Ozymandias and Silk Spectre II are largely left unexplored and the tribulations of Rorschach's childhood are teasingly floated in front of our eyes and then snatched away.

It was always going to be difficult to fit everything in, and the film already runs a comparatively long two and a half hours. In truth though, if they didn't cut things, the film would have run for four. The novel uses news excerpts to explore the world and back stories of the characters, and that's just not quite possible in a film format.

The question is though, is the inherent meaning of the film lost in these cuts?

Well, for those who have read the novel the meaning will all be there, background explained with a flash of newsprint in the background but for others it may just get a little confusing and the meaning lost.

That being said, the film does a sterling job of exploring the themes inherent in the novel. One person I saw the film with could appreciate the nuances of the tale, and I now have a request to lend the novel to her so she may explore the world more.

Plot wise, it's all pretty solidly paced but one irksome moment comes when the climax comes. It feels rushed for a momentous moment of meaning, and some of the enormity of the moment is lost by the rush to get to the end of the film. Perhaps it's that as a reader you can hold the book in your hands and let the neding unfold slowly and ponder on philisophical points but having the moment forced on you like the Comedian on the Silk Spectre leaves an unwanted taste in the mouth.

One area the novel couldn't possibly explore though is the aural realms. The music employed in the film is nothing short of stunning. Using Dylan, Hendrix and Cohen to underpin the themes of the scene add another layer of meaning to proceedings. The music is from the quotes present at the end of each chapter, and for fans hearing the quotes of the music played in the theatre is an absolute delight.

The thing is though, for all of the meaning which is referenced visually and aurally it remains something special for fans of the book only, but an extraordinary comic book film for others.

Perhaps the greatest work of this film will be to tease those to seek out the book, to re-read the novel as a whole layer of meaning is hinted at. It's this meaning which would have elevated this film into a masterpiece, but as it stands it's a damned good comic book film.

It's as good as a two and a half film version of Watchmen is going to get. An experience of a lifetime to see the panels in live action for devotees, an intriguing film for those not acquainted.

What is wrong at the cricket?

2009-03-03T15:47:00.002+09:00

Terrorists have today targeted the Sri Lankan cricket team, playing in Lahore as the vehicle they were in came under attack. It's a sad day for all of those concerned, and possibly the death knoll for Pakistani cricket.

Already western nations have registered concerns about playing in the country, with the upcoming Champion's Trophy moved because of security fears and Australia being vocal in its intention not to tour the country. Those concerns had always been raised by western countries, and the Asian bloc had always stuck by Pakistan in these disputes.

Now, it seems, anybody's a target for terrorists in the region. There was always the argument that it was safe to tour the country because it was an unspoken rule that they would never target cricketers or sporting venues. Now, that argument has been shot down as they targeted not just cricketers, but Sri Lankan cricketers.

It now seems certian that no internation cricket will be played inside the country, and the standard of Pakistani cricket will suffer for it. The real question is though, how did things become so bad that terrorists could target cricketers?

The short-sighted will point to the appointment of the current Pakistani administration and cluck their western tongues, professing that this sort of thing would never have happened under Pervez Musharref.

Of course, that's a pile of bul-clod and anyone with half a peanut can tell you that hardline Islam was gathering momentum in Pakitstan during the last administration. In the north of the country, there was an increasing call to allow certain provinces to enfoce Sharia law, in stark contrast to the secular shine the administration was putting on the country.

As Musharef became the centre of Washington's attention as the rise of hardline exteremism reared its ugly head, he was caught in somewhat of a quandry. You see, he really did need the support of these exteremists to get 're-elected'. So to the rest of the world he presented a brave face and said they were doing all they could to wipe out extremism in the region, but those inside the country knew the administration could be doing more.

Now, with the Mumbai bombings and these latest attacks, perhaps we're starting to see the fruits of Musharref's inaction coming home to bear poisoned fruit, and it will take a long time to stabilise the region given the extremists were given room to fortify during his reign.

All we can hope is that this latest attack will galvanise the curent administration's resolve to work on eliminating extremism in the region and we can start to see the potential of a truly secular Pakistan.

What is wrong with a Dutchman with bad hair?

2009-02-24T20:46:00.002+09:00

You've got to love Pim Verbeek. Our fearless international coach who has us playing results-oriented football to the bane and pleasure of Australian football fans. On the one hand, our team is playing possibly the worst football of all time but we're getting the results to travel the road to South Africa.

Better yet, he's always been a straight-talker (which journos love) and some of the comments he's been making about the A-League have been raising some eyebrows.

In the past, he's slammed the competition for being akin to a German second division training run, called our players tactically inept and just generally lambasted the quality of football on show in our premier competition, and he's absolutely right.

Let's look objectively at the A-League for a moment shall we? Now, I've had the unfortunate fortune to be a denizen of Perth during the competition's reign, so perhaps I'm not in the best position to be talking about the league's overall quality.

What I will say however, is that the NSL was the more exciting competition and produced the best players. Those who have seen Con Boutsianis curl one in for fun can attest to that, those who have seen Adnre Gumprecht in his hayday will agree and those who have witnessed the magician in Ergic will back me up on this one.

What we have in the A-League is cookie-cutter monotony for the most part, producing the same types of players and not allowing any sort of prodigious talent to shine through. We had Nicky Carle for a while but when he trapsed off to Crystal Palace (snrk!), and thus ended the line of Australian number 10s.

Now, back to Verbeek. He says there's nothing special about the A-League, and most teams are tactically unaware, unable to play a defensive game. With the exception of Adelaide, this may just be the case.

Most teams in the A-League attack, and whereas it can result in some pretty entertaining football but most of the time it results in error-strewn and turnover ball. If one team chose to play some tight possession play, the opposition would eventually run out of puff like a dog running after its own tail. Yet, in the A-League, both teams seem determined to attack with almost reckless abandon.

So Verbeek is correct in his assertions, but is publicy saying so going to improve things? Are the coaches of the A-League going to take heed and start to become more technically adept?

In all likelihood, no. So bagging the A-League isn't going to help it, but rather create a resentment between Verbeek and A-League players and managers. It's also going to attract bad publicity for a league just getting off the ground and in need of a little TLC.

It all comes but to a fundamental question which can be applied to journalism. Is it worth it being honest when the end result is something completely negative? For example, is it completely worth it in these tough times to take down a massive financial company?

It will mean the collapse of a financial system, the layoff of countless of thousands and super funds in the toilet. Is it still worth it to break the story?

A little journalistic quandry for you to ponder...

Till next time

What is wrong with a Mandarin-speaking Bulldozer?: Pt 2

2009-02-14T09:04:00.002+09:00

Well, pundits were shocked and taken a back a couple of days back when Nick Xenophon decided that a hasitly drafted 42 Billion dollar bill possibly needed a few tweaks before being rolled through both houses.

OMG, WTF?

Okay, so predictably the senators from the greens sided with Labor on this one which left Xenophon with the deciding vote. Since he decided to side with the coalition, the bill was stalled. Why did he stall the bill ladies and gentlemen? Well, to save the Murray-Darling of course.

Now, those of you who aren't from the eastern side of Australia may have a bit of trouble knowing what the Murray-Darling is, so it's basically a huge (well, less huge these days) river that runs from Queensland to South Australia and provides drinking water for a heck of a lot of people, so more investment in saving it was probably a good idea.

To do this, they had to trim 50 dollars off the 950 dollar bonus. Hey, I'll give up 50 dollars I didn't actually have to support the Murray-Darling, no worries. Personally, I like the move and applaud Xenophon for holding out just a little more, but I do have deep reservations about one man having so much power.

It was a demonstration of the power Xenophon could potentially wield in the senate if conditions played out right, and one has to question whether one man having so much power over legislation is beneficial to a constitutional monarchy such as ours, but perhaps that discusion is best held for another time.

The other big talking point out of this is the coalition's tactics in trying to block the initial bill.

It was always going to be an uphill strigle, and they were always going to take a battering in the press because they were coming up against, and this is very important, free money.

Within days of Turnbull registering his reservations, the great unwashed were too quick to cry out "Turnbul's blocking mah money!" and fair enough too. If someone threatened to take away money of mine, I'd fight for it like a hobo for a piece of meat.

Meanwhile, the press were banying about a quote from the IMF regarding the recession basically amounting to 'when in doubt, always spend too much than too little regarding this recesion' which is an absolutely true statement.

Various coalition figureheads went on TV and radio to try and find the flaw in this statement, saying it was irresponsible to land the future generations of Australians with a massive debt. The Rudd plan would accure 200 billion in debt, the Turnbull plan would accure 180 billion in debt, but more on that another time.

Now, in my first post I said the coalition was doing the right thing in trying to hold up the bill, and I stand by this assertion. However, the coalition played this so wrong it's not even funny.

When presented with the IMF quote, they danced around the point so comically it was akin to children dancing around a maypole. Instead, what they should have done is say "Yes, that statement is absolutely true. What we're trying to do is remove the doubt from the equation by putting it under a magnifying glass".

That probably would have worked. Instead, they chose to lambast the Labor government for irresponsible spending (which may or may not be true). So when presented with the oportunity to bash to incumbents, the coalition went for the jugular.

Somebody should tell the Liberal party that the days of old political tricks are over and it's going to take more than bashing your opposition to land a punch these days. It takes logic and bashing to win over constituents.

'Till next time

What is wrong with a Mandarin-speaking bulldozer?

2009-02-04T09:06:00.002+09:00

Well, the proverbial cashed-up cat is out of the bag ladies and gentlemen, and the almighty Rudd has announced intentions to pass a 42 Billion dollar stimulus package to help, dare I say it, "ease the squeeze.....on working families".

So, what's included in the fancy stimulus package? Well, for starters just about everybody and their dog will be getting a 950 dollar one-off cash bonus for doing absolutely nothing. Now, the question of lump sum bonuses to help stimulate spending is not as straight forward as it may seem.

In these times of economic doom and gloom, where the crisis lives where the communists used to reside, will Australians use the unique oppurtunity for splurging that has been afforded by this stimulus package. Well, the jury's still out on that one.

There's been no real indication that the last cash-bonus paid out in December had any positive impact on the economic slump, even though Christmas retail figures were better than expected. Lots of people were keeping that money for a rainy day, and there's little indication from the public at this stage as to whether retailers should be licking their lips.

I personally think the average Australian can see why we're in this position right now, irresponsible spending. Even though going out and blowing the lot on...jellybeans would have no tangible effect on the hip-pocket, people will choose to squirrel their money away in anticipation of the hard times ahead. So will chucking money at people and telling them to spend neccesarily work? I'll leave that one up to you.

Small businesses will also belooking toward Canberra with hungry eyes as they're getting a whole bunch of money to see them through, and rebates if they buy a computer exceeding 2000 dollars.

There's also a heck of a lot of investment in schools, with every school in Australia getting 200,000 dollars for improvements such as sciencelabs and the likes. I don't particularly think that's going to stimulate the economy in the short-term, but I'm all for it anyway. Any investment money the schools can grab is okay in my books, as the education of the next generation of Australians is going to be vitally important.

After all, who would you rather be looking after you in your old age? A well-reasoned young person or Corey Delaney?

The other big area the stimulus package, an 890 million dollar area, is the investment in infrastructure and works. Now, this is an old trick from the guys in Canberra. Invest in infrastructure , and not only do you get a whole bunch of shiny new roads and ports but you're able to create jobs within the sector to build all of these roads.

But here's the thing I'm concerned about. Does anybody recall a time when we had a shortage of skilled workers?

Now, I can't caim to know about the level of expertise needed to build a road or aport but I'm pretty sure it's going to take at least some skilled workers to pull off this program. Where are they going to come from?

Worst case scenario the workers come from overseas, hearing that Australia has opportunities. Now, I'm not against foreign workers in the slightest but when they start to send the money paid to them back home, the money which was meant to stay in the country dissapears and goes toward helping another economy.

By far the most interesting thing about this bill from a political sense is the Government's tactics with it. Now, instead of giving the opposition and independants in the Senate a good long look at the details of the package, the Government is hoping to ship this thing through today.

That's right, screw applying the magnifying glass to the thing, through you go!

Overall, Rudd is beginning to seem like an eager salesman really reaching for that sale. When the opposition inevitably opposes being put over a barrel at short notice, the almighty Rudd will start to profess sentiments of bipartisanship and extol the cirtues of passing this thing quickly.

After all, he should know. On his holiday he was busy writing a 7000-word article for The Monthly on the subject of the economic crisis.

More on this story as it develops.

What is wrong with my plans?

2009-01-31T19:16:00.002+09:00

Well, I don't particularly know what is wrong with my plans as of yet but I can not think of a title to adorn this post.

You see, this post is about outlining my plans for the next six months as far as my career in the big, scary world of 'journalism' goes. Now, why the hell would you care about my plans three google bots and people accidentally here when you typed in 'midget porn' into your search engine?

Chances are that you don't care. Fair enough, I'm just taking this opportunity to think aloud...through my fingers for some reason.

Okay, so here's the plan. At the moment I do not have my license or a car. Now, transportation happens to be one of those things you can't do without in journalism (unless you're a yuppie reporter in a dense metropolis). So what I need now is a part-time job doing anything at all. This involves waiting tables, making coffee, digging ditches and working sales.

This would be the 'stable-income' part of the plan. I need this stable income if I am to support my plans of being a freelancer during this period.

My reasoning behind this is that it allows me to work in a professional environment, without having the kudos and cred to do so. You see, I'm just a recently graduated journalism student, and whereas I can get a job with my portfolio I'm just holding back a little before entering the workforce proper.

When I enter the machine of the daily, weekly or monthly publication (as is my plan) I don't particularly want to go through a learning curve while I'm trying to find my feet in the newsroom. No doubt I will still go through this curve when I enter the newsroom, but it won't be nearly as steep having done part of my traineeship out there in the real world of freelancing where your words are taken at their merits.

Once I have acquired enough money through my part-time job and freelance work, with my portfolio bulging at the scenes I will head out and work at a regional paper.

Now, so many of the journo students I've met down the years baulk at the idea of going out to whoop-whoop and working at a paper out there. Myself, I'd rather be out there than in the concrete jungle and here's why.

My reasoning is simple. Even you won't have the prestige of working at a masthead, you'll actually be doing a lot more work at the regional paper than you would at the masthead. You'll be doing a lot more work in terms of actually designing the layout (or 'dummy') of the paper and be tacking down stories which aren't handed to you on a plate.

If you want to find a story in a regional town, you've really got to fish for it. You've got to draw upon all of your resources and skill in order to track down the scoop because in a small town the slightest thing may make the news but the truth is well-hidden.

After all, in the city everybody has their eyes and ears on everybody else.

Anyhow, that's my plan, If you can spot any glaring inconsistencies in logic (as I'm prone to do), please drop me a line and tell me all about it.

What is wrong with getting too close to your sources?

2009-01-27T16:58:00.003+09:00

This is something they won't teach you in your university course, so pay attention.

Say you've gotten some great stuff from a source for a story, and they want a copy of the article. No biggies there, just send the article they're quoted in to them, it's polite to do so after all. Then they start to come back to you about stories they've heard about and which they could go on the record about. So here you are, with a great source for stories into the future, right? Well, you may just want to tread lightly on this one.

You've got to weigh up the material against the fact that you'd be quoting them on a number of stories if you took their leads. Now, if you were to come across a writer who used exactly the same sources for stories, you'd think they were pretty damned dodgy. Even though your intentions are good and what your source is saying may indeed be the truth, nobody will believe because they think you have been manipulated by your source.

That can happen on a number of occasion, especially to younger journalists when PR-savvy people start to get their hooks into you. I've seen it happen time and time again (even quite recently) to young journos, that because someone's given them the time of day they think they can be a trusted source. PR savvy people know what they're doing, and their aims aren't always so altruistic.

I've written about being Shanghaied into stories, now imagine a PR person having your number on speed dial for any little story that breaks. Sure, you have some great material for stories but you're ethically in the wrong for allowing one particular voice into your head time and time again. Even the most implausible opinions are given weight through repetition, and that's called propaganda.

Once you've given into propaganda, you've betrayed the central tenant of journalism. Now, I realise it may not be as quite dramatic out there in the real world, but it's something that every single young journo should get into their heads quite early. It's all about striking a balance. Funny word that...balance.

It's what every single journo on the planet should strive for; the truth being the balance between extreme opinion.

Anyhow, some non-journalism stuff now.

Lately, I've found myself getting into Sigur Ros quite a bit. It started with a reference in Questionable Content about the band, and then I started to check them out. As soon as I heard Gobblegigook I was in love.

Don't get me wrong, some tracks aren't my cup of tea, but awesome tracks like Hoppipolla, Staralfur and Gong (holy crap! That's the song from Dreamfall!) keep me coming back for some laid-back and yet inspirational Scandinavian beats.

Check them out, 'till next time.

What is wrong with the language centre?

2009-01-22T15:31:00.002+09:00

Okay, here it is.

So me and my merry band of student journos were taken last week to a language centre for a guided tour. The language centre's main aim is to preserve and promote the use of the different dialects amongst aboriginal people.

We're given the guided tour of a new building they're moving into, and I put it in the back of my mind that the fight against fading languages may just be a good story down the track.

So, today I decide that it's down the track and I wander on over to the centre. I ask if it's okay to interview someone about the good fight and I'm taken through to the manager of the centre only for her to say that they didn't wish to cooperate at this time.

Wah? Jah? Bah?

Apparently they're into giving journos guided tours but not into spreading the word. Go figure. So today I'm pretty much left without a story to write and am fuming like a Dickensian chimney.

Oh well, what are you going to do?

Anyhow, it's two days out from the end of my sojourn to Port Hedland and overall I would deem it to be a beneficial experience. I reccomend going out to a remote area for a bit of work experience for any up-and-coming journo.

So rarely do you get the opportunity to work in that sort of environment, and at the end of the day you manage to get a few bylines for your portfolio. Speaking of bylines...

That SMS story I wrote about a month and a half ago finally made it onto the pages of The West Australian. Of course there's been a whole song and dance in my own family about wee Jimmy getting his first byline in a masthead but now that I have one in there, I can't say I'm all that fussed by it.

It's odd, as a green journo I should be proud as punch to get my name in a masthead (with a full page no less) but I'm not jumping up and down.

Perhaps subconciously I see it not as the end goal of student journalism but as the first steps on the path of professional journalism. Despite the enormity of the occasion, I'm not overwhelmed by it and I'm certainly not stopping people in the street and yelling "I'M IN THE WEST" in an attempt to start a broad musical number.

More on this introspection as it comes to light.

'Till next time

What is wrong with writing about good causes?

2009-01-15T09:45:00.002+09:00

You see, the thing about writing about a good cause is that while it makes you feel good and it sure as hell beats writing about rape and torture, the organisations you come into contact with will usually try to Shanghai you into a story.

Not familiar with the art of the Shanghai? Let me explain.

To be Shanghai'd into anything refers to the pushy merchants of Shanghai generally notleaving you alone until they make a sale. This principle applies to charity organisations, which upon hearing that you're writing a story about them will try to get you to write about six more on them.

I'm not saying all organisations will do this, but it's one of the most frustrating things you can run into as a journo when you just want to write a simple 500word story on a worthy cause but they want you to write a 3000 word opus. They just seemto think that we can command column inches from our editors at will for some reason, or that we are in fact the best writers in the world and will get their stories published on the front page of The Australian.

So, how to deal with being Shangai'd?

The way I have dealt with pushy organisations keen to gain more exposure is to play along for a certain extent. Be quite enthusiastic about their idea (after all, it is a worthy cause) and show an interest. This will demonstrate that you're not just another bastard journo trying to exploit their organisation (although you may actually be). Then what you do is explain that you're unsure that you have space in the paper in which to fit their stories.

Now you've shown legitimite concern, and given a reason why their stories won't fly this particular week. Then what you want to do is say something along the lines of "I'll keep it in mind for future stories".

This will show that their organisation is on the forefront of the media's thinking, and they'll be reasonably happy with you for all the help that you've given them. So at the end of the day, you get a story, they get exposure and nobody will end up in tears.

'Till next time

What is wrong with characters?

2009-01-12T10:07:00.002+09:00

It's not so much the characters that are in the wrong, but the city-folk who show a complete and utter lack of it. Call it the heat and humidity, but up here in Port Hedland and the surrounding areas I've met more "characters" than I have in a long while.

I'm met a kiwi nurse who's a budding real estate mogul, a couple of miners who thought nothing of taking a couple of city kids out fishing, a drunken (country drunk, not city drunk) journalist and an earnest roadside motel owner trying to bring up the standards of hospitality in the hottest town in Australia...to name but a few.

You just don't meet those sorts in the hustle and bustle of the city, where spare time is spent on blackberries rather than down at the local draining more than a few.

Some of you will point to your fair share of characters in the city, and I fully understand that there are characters in the city worthy of James Joyce style rambling odysseys, but there genuinely seems to be a higher concentration of them up here. It's almost as if there's a direct correlation between humidity and zaniness, between isolation and genuine character.

Anyhow, onto the story for the week.

One I'm working on right now involves the lack of mental health professionals in the Pilbara region. Apparently it's a story that's been bandied about quite a bit up here but in a region with not much news you're bound to repeat more than a few stories. All you can do is give it a fresh lick of paint and hope the mumbo jumbo flies.

Anyhow, the student nursing group I'm up here with turned me onto the story and gave me a fair few contacts to go on. Well, let's just say the frustrations of a holiday-period started to bite as I found nearly everybody was away on holiday.

I managed to get through to a few people though, and managed to get some good quotes about the lack of infrastructure and ridiculous (like, 1500 a week ridiculous) rents making it hard to attract people to the region.

I also managed to get a good quote from a women's wellness centre talking about the effects of a lack of professionals in the Pilbara, so I managed to write an article that not only aired grievances about things but also examined the effects of those grievances.

I also got in touch with the health department's PR section.

For those of you trying to do student journalism in Perth, you'll know that the Health Department PR section is a Ferris wheel without the fun. That is to say, you'll be taken around in circles so quickly it'll make your head spin.

Luckily, I managed to get in touch with a PR rep who said she'd pass my questions onto the relevant people soon so now I'm waiting for their response s I can give them a right of reply as it were.

Normally, if a source doesn't get back to you within deadline you can but a little tag down the bottom of your story saying "The Health Department failed to get back in touch with us before deadline" which is journalist shorthand for "they were fucking bastards and wouldn't give us the time of day".

I'm going to leave it until Wednesday for my deadline, as I'm due to pitch my article on Friday afternoon at the latest but I'm going to try and knock out my articles for the week by Wednesday evening so I can get working on some radio stuff we're doing up here.

'Till next time

What is wrong with the turtles?!

2009-01-07T17:03:00.002+09:00

Aparrently the dogs have been causing a ruckus among the sandy dunes of Cemetery Beach in Port Hedland, and been digging around the nests of the turtle hatchlings. How in the Sammy Davis Jnr. did I find this out? I'll tell you.

It was early in the morning and our little trio of work experience journos went on a expedition to watch the turtles early morning, mindful that a story could develop about "tourists not paying enough respect to the turtles" and what have you.

Instead we found that before we arrived, the town ranger had been called to remove the stray dog which were causing the ruckus. Well, there's our story right there. So with trusty voice recorder in hand I go and do some digging of my own, and talked to a volunteer about what happened.

I got a nice quite from her before I noticed the ranger walking the sandy beaches along with the tour group which had come out to see the hatchiling turtles. So I tag along with him as he's walking the beach, introduce myself briefly and he gave me some great stuff about what may be causing the dogs to get off the leash of their owners.

Although I've been informed that the ranger services may need to okay the quotes first, the ranger really gave me some dynamite stuff.

So, I've got the story, I've got the quotes but now I need a picture to go with it.

So of course, seeing how Jesus himself has been personally providing for me my entire life (Which would run counter to my assertion that I am Jesus, but I digress), the volunteer starts to pile up all the dead turtles in a pile.

Luckily, it's not too graphic so I have the perfect pic to go with the story.

Now I have the story, the quotes and the pic and I can go back and start to compile my story. It comes out at about 350 words which may be a little on the long side, but after some mucking about with the lead I'm pretty happy with what I've got out of the story.

Normally I'd share the article with you but for ethical and possibly legal reasons I can't do that (see: the ranger quotes) just now, but as soon as it's been given the OK I'll be happy to share it with you all.

'Till next time

What is wrong with taking a psychodelic trip?

2009-01-06T10:05:00.002+09:00

I arrived on Sunday afternoon to the heat and red earth of Port Hedland, and began my oddessy into the land of mines and humidity. After confusion reigned supreme regarding my accommodation, I'm settled into a sharehouse with a couple of journo students and a couple of nursing students.

Luckily, my room has been outfitted with an airconditioner with an engine which would have Boeing engineers in awe and I found my new surrounds frosty in stark contrast with the heat outside. The thing which has surprised me was not only the heat but the humidity which locals say is the real killer punch.

In regards to actual work though, during the past two days we've been given a couple of asignments for radio(radio? bah!) and are about to embark on a print journey oddessy. We'll be writing for a number of local rags while we're here about all sorts of things, but taking a special look at indigenous health issues which are affetcing the North West.

Hopefully, we'll have enough work to keep us busy while avoiding going insane from the pressure of those bastions of insanity, deadlines. I'm taking bets now as to how long it takes for me to completely crack under the pressure and go on a drug-fuelled trip into the desert, Hunter S Thompson-style.

Speaking of the Gonzo-man, the thing I think I'll miss about the relative glitz and glamour of Perth is going down to the Luna on my days off and taking in a film or two. The new Thompson doco is dueout soon, which should be fun and hopefully isn't just some pandering schmaltz about what a rebel he was but rather an examintaion of the style he helped found.

For those of you unfamiliar with Thompson, he basically wrote a number of influential articles for Rolling Stone, the most memorable of which took place during the riots in Chicago. Instead of balance and objective journalism which removes all reference ofthe author from the copy, Gonzo journalism is about presenting a very perosnal, first-person account of the event being covered.

The supposed upshot of it is that instead of the aloof, detached style which gives readers very little insight into the 'situation on the ground' as it were, Gonzo makes the reader feel as if they are there by presenting a first person narrative.

Of course this runs counter to the 'objective journalism' philosophy and is full of writer ambiguities and fallacies. But proponents of the Gonzo style say that while objective journalism is the flavour du jour, it runs counter-productive to the inherent point of journalism.

As Thompson summised 'It may be not strictly objective to call a guy a bum or a crook, but objectivism misses the point of journalism altogether'.

The argument which is key to those which support Gonzois that those who defend objectivism use the veil of aloofness to not say exactly what is needed to be said. If a guy's a bum, say it. Objectivism in its worst state will try to avoid making any judgements about a person for fear of reprisal and loss of the journalistic power which publications hold but the actual truth gets thrown out with the bath water.

Of course both approaches have their pluses and minuses, and at the end of the day it is up to the journos of the future to determine which approach is more valid for the times in which we live. What is essential, for this to happen is to discuss each approach, debate the points instead of just milling along turning around copy without a single thought as to your approach from a philisophical viewpoint.

What is wrong with me!?

2008-12-31T14:06:00.005+09:00

Seriously, I'm heading off to Port Hedland in the middle of summer for 20 days? Cyclones, minimum 40 degree Celsius temperatures? You betcha.

It's all about trying to get some more experience writing, and is part of an ECU initiative (along with some other unis) to get us coiffed urban yuppies out there into the country to see what the real deal with aboriginal health is.

If you're from Australia, you'd know that it's one of our greatest shames that the life expectancy of an aboriginal is less than half of the Caucasian counterpart. So every year a bunch of nursing and journalism students go up there as part of a work experience program where the nursing students help out with the hospital up there and the journalism students write for various rags up there for about 20 days.

While there, the students learn about working with aboriginal communities and get to see first hand the conditions in which they live. It's a fantastic initiative to get the journos of tomorrow to see first hand the most unreported story in our culture. They also figure that one or two journos and nurses are going to 'fall in love with the place' and never want to leave (I don't see myself staying, but anything's possible).

So starting on January 4 I'm heading off for 20 days to do some work experience and avoid sunstroke, I'll try and post from there but I'm not too sure about internet access up there.

Anyhow, the other big journalistic story concerning me is my freelance piece for The West Australian.

About two months back I was contacted by one of the lecturers at ECU, along with four other students (the creme de la creme of the print students...or just the one's the lecturers could remember) about possibly doing some work experience for the health and medicine section of the rag. If my article does end up getting published, it'll be good to put in the portfolio and I get paid a whole $150 for my 900 words (shitty rate, but what the hell do I care?). In fact there's a story in today's edition about the dangers about barbecued meat which I'm pretty sure was done by one of the students selected.

I got a story about mobile phones and how Gen-Y are using them to talk about mental health issues rather than 'traditional' mediums such as face to face communication and such.

Here's the copy I sent off to the West, and the copy which was okayed by the editor I'm working with. Take a look, and maybe see where I went wrong, where I went right and what I need to improve on.

====================================================================

TEXTUAL HEALING

By James McGrath

The internet and mobile phones have been accused of distracting drivers when they’re in traffic, raising the risk of tumours and being responsible of causing a decline of literacy rates amongst an entire generation, but for once mobile phones have received some praise–for having a positive impact on health.

A study published in the Australian Psychiatry journal in October found that young people are using technologies such as SMS–the messaging tools for mobile phones– and the internet to discuss mental health issues with their peers and trained professionals.

Participants in the study, which looked at mental health literacy rates amongst adolescents in rural areas said they preferred SMS and the internet over traditional avenues for seeking help because they felt safe thanks to the relative anonymity the technology offers users.

Authors of the study, Dr Lydia Scott and Associate Professor Anna Chur-Hansen from the University of Adelaide, said while traditional avenues such as face-to-face and using the telephone were important, SMS is encouraging more teenagers to talk about their problems.

“The importance of people being able to share experiences with peers is well-recognised. However this is possibly even more significant during adolescent years when their self-identity is continuing to evolve and change,” Dr Scott said.

“The teenagers involved in the study felt that contacting a friend by SMS may be easier and less confrontational than approaching them face-to-face.

“This is significant as the decision for a young person to seek help may be delayed due to fears of social stigma, which can delay appropriate treatment and affect long term outcomes.”

Health professionals around the world have latched onto this idea, and have started to offer SMS services for those in need.

In South Africa, an SMS helpline was set up in 2006 by the South African Depression and Anxiety Group, to help depressed teenagers in an effort to curb the high rates of suicide in the country, and they received an overwhelming response from participants praising the service.

In India, an SMS information service was launched last year to combat the rising epidemic of HIV/AIDS in the country, where teenagers could SMS their questions about the disease without the stigma of having their peers knowing that they were asking about it. Within a month the service had received 25 000 texts.

Closer to home, mental health groups beyondblue, Headspace and Reach Out! have all launched SMS information campaigns in the past in an attempt to reach at-risk youth, and regularly use the internet to reach a new audience.

Reach Out! launched an online forum service in 2005, in which people can come and talk to each other and health professionals in a safe and anonymous setting.

Interactive manager Marianne Webb says that by using an online service, Reach Out! have been able to allocate its limited resources more effectively given the low-cost nature of the project while reaching teens in a brand new way.

“The advantages of reaching at-risk young people online are that you are engaging young people in an environment where they have a sense of control, they feel comfortable and are able to remain anonymous” she said.

“Young people are often worried about their parents or friends finding out, especially if they are considering going to a school counsellor or live in a small rural community.

“Knowing where and how to access to help is another reason that the internet and services such as the Reach Out! forum is the first step young people take in getting professional help”

===========================================================================

*Please note this is not the version which will appear in The West Australian and should be considered such*

What is wrong with lying?: part deux

2008-12-24T14:25:00.002+09:00

Well, I've submitted my review to the team at the Escapist for them to go through it with a fine tooth-comb, and hopefully my weaknesses in the genre will become evident.

That's right, as a writer about to go into the workforce I'm looking for the most criticism I can get, the harsher the better. Only through thorough examination (internal or external) can you ever get better as a writer, so it's something that all training journos should be looking to do.

The better writer's the better, as they'll see problems with your writing that others will simply ignore.

Anyhow, here's the copy I sent them after a few alterations. Here's a fun game, try to guess where I changed it and why I did it!

======================================================================================

Football Manager 2009

Another year, another itineration of the Football Manager series and another ulcer for my trouble. You see, Football Manager is one of those games which not only requires an intellectual investment on the part of the player but also requires an emotional one. Not bad stuff for a glorified spreadsheet.

It creates that ‘just one more turn’ factor well as you’ll often find yourself trying to finalise a transfer fee for that gun striker at 2AM with bleary eyes. So Football Manager 2009 has had a successful formula to work off, and by all rights should be able to just update the stats each year and sell to their niche market, but instead the team at Sega decided to muddy the waters a bit. Whether this be a bold choice or a stupid design decision depends on your understanding of the phrase ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’.

The things that don’t change in this year’s effort are the things that attract players to the series. Football Manager veterans know what I’m talking about when I say those little circles representing the players on your team become much more than graphical representations of number-crunching; they become your team. You’ll howl every time they concede, and crack open a bottle of bubbly every time they score an injury-time winner.

It’s risky business trying to muck with a formula like that, so why in Maradonna would you do it? The team at Sega decided it was time to mess with the formula in an effort to take the immersion level up to 11.

The big thing they did in this version is introduce a whole new graphical element to the experience; a 3D engine. Now that may not seem to be a big deal, but when your experience of a game series is entirely informed by a 2D interface, adding a new dimension is like…adding a new dimension to the experience. So does it work or is it just a pretty diversion?

Well, I’ve got good news and bad news for you all. The good news is that the engine while nowhere near FIFA eye-melting levels does a solid job of representing the game we love. The movement of the players is just what you’d expect from watching a game of football, and the players move in a realistic way. That may not seem like much, but it’s really well done and is for the most part a welcome addition to the core match day experience.

Now for the bad news.

It seems that Sega really wants this new 3D match engine to succeed, so much so that the revised 2D screens look like the dog’s breakfast. Just a few short years ago the 2D match engine looked clean and was the basis for the game’s popularity, but now its circles have seen better days and are in dire need of a good anti-aliasing. Theoretically you can still choose to play with a 2D match engine, but what’s the point when the 3D version looks halfway decent and the 2D engine makes you eyes bleed? It’s like saying goodbye to a part of my gaming heritage, it’s just sad is all. If that wasn’t bad enough, the graphical needs of the 3D match engine may just push this title out of the ‘runs on the smell of an oily processor’ category.

In previous versions of the Football Manager series, the graphical requirements of running the game was pretty much the ability to render Skifree. With Football Manager 09 though you’ll need to be packing a Radeon 9800 at a minimum which may not seem like you’ll be breaking the bank for a new graphics card, but this game is supposed to be a glorified spreadsheet after all.

But despite the downside to introducing a new match engine, Football Manager 09 doesn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater and remains the authoritative football management sim on the market.

The introduction of a couple of nice touches help smooth out the criticisms. The addition of a press conference that you as manager can attend is a great way to involve you in the game world. Given the whole selling point of the series is “You can be the manager!”, it’s a surprise this option wasn’t included in previous versions of the game.

The press conferences are structured well, and if handled correctly can give your team a morale boost and put the fear of God into your opposition. Responses to questions are limited however, so you can’t exactly go on a Jose Mourinho-esque rant in the middle of a journalist’s question, but it’s still an addition that adds to the core appeal of the game.

The addition of real-time feedback from your assistant coach is a great inclusion as well, and really helps you out in diagnosing where your team may be going wrong or which threats you need to neutralise. For example, if the opposition starts pushing players forward and their defensive line is pushing up too, your assistant manager will tell you about it so you can switch your tactics to sitting deep and counter-attacking to exploit the space behind the defence. It’s an addition that will have you thinking like a real manager, and this is what the series and game is all about.

It’s called Football Manager, and this game lets you be exactly that as you ride the highs of championships, the nerve-wracking lows of a relegation scrap and feel the pride of finding a gem of a player in the youth ranks and nurturing him to superstardom. The stats you love are there, the gameplay which entrances you is there and despite Sega almost dropping the ball with the match engine, Football Manager 09 remains the benchmark by which all other football management sims are measured.

Recommendation: Buy it if you’re a football nut or want a new sim to play with, otherwise it’s probably not for you.

What is wrong with lying?

2008-12-23T22:36:00.002+09:00

Okay, so I lied. This post won't be about an article for The West and my sojourn to Port Hedland, shoot me. Instead I thought you (the google bots that crawl this page) would get a kick out of following a piece of writing from the moment of conception to the publishing stage.

Okay, so here's the premise. After writing journalism for yonks (I believe that's the technical term for it anyhow) my other styles of writing have been suffering and in particular, my review skills. You see, I used to be able to write a mean review, so I've found my skills to be slipping lately, so I thought what better way to get back into the swing of things than trying to get a review published?

My target, the guest review spot on The Escapist. I chose it because they're known for great quality writing and submitting to them would put my writing through some pretty stringent standards.

So I've submitted a couple of reviews so far, and the feedback (excellent feedback from Susan Arendt by the by) I've gotten back is basically 'You're a good writer, but this is a bit self-indulgent', which is fair, but they asked for a 'unique voice' in all guest submissions, and how you're supposed to add voice without becoming self-indulgent is proving to be a tightrope.

So, I went back to the drawing board and came up with a review of Football Manager 2009. I'm aware there's an inherent danger in pitching a 'soccer' game to an American publisher but I'm willing to take that shot.

Hopefully, my draft is less self-indulgent than my previous efforts and I've learned from my mistakes because that is a crucial part of any job, let alone journalism where anybody and everybody can write but few can do it well.

Anyhow here's the draft, and I'll let you all know about what sort of feedback I get from Arendt when I pitch it after the holidays.

====================================================================

Football Manager 2009

James McGrath

Another year, another itineration of the Football (the type in which the ‘foot’ part is emphasised) Manager series and another ulcer for my trouble. You see, Football Manager is one of those games which not only requires an intellectual investment on the part of the player but also requires an emotional one. Not bad stuff for a game which has been dubbed a glorified spreadsheet.

It creates that ‘just one more turn’ factor well as you’ll often find yourself trying to finalise a transfer fee for that gun striker at 2AM with bleary eyes. So Football Manager 2009 has had a successful formula to work off, and by all rights should be able to just update the stats each year and sell to their niche market, but instead the team at Sega decided on a not so quiet revolution. Whether this be a bold choice or a stupid design decision depends on your understanding of the phrase ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’.

Those of you who have played any of the Football Manager games know what I’m talking about when I say those little circles representing the players on your team become much more than graphical representations of number-crunching; they become your team. You’ll howl every time they concede, and crack open a bottle of bubbly every time they score an injury-time winner. So why in Maradonna would you muck with a formula like that? It’s evident the team at Sega decided it was time to muck with the formula in an effort to take the immersion level created by those stats and screens up to 11.

The big thing they did in this version is introduce a whole new graphical element to the experience; a 3D engine. Now that may not seem to be a big deal, but when your experience of a game is entirely informed by a 2D interface, adding a new dimension is like…adding a new dimension to the experience. The question is, does it work or is it just a pretty diversion?

Well, I’ve got good news and bad news for you all. The good news is that the engine while nowhere near FIFA eye-melting levels does a solid job of representing the game we love. The movement of the players is just what you’d expect from watching a game of football, and the players move in a realistic way. That may not seem like much, but it’s really well done and is a welcome addition to the core match day experience.

Now for the bad news.

It seems that Sega really wants this new 3D match engine to succeed, so much so that the revised 2D screens look like the dog’s breakfast. Just a few short years ago the 2D match engine looked clean and was the basis for the game’s popularity, but now its circles have seen better days and are in dire need of a good anti-aliasing. Theoretically you can still choose to play with a 2D match engine, but what’s the point when the 3D version looks halfway decent and the 2D engine makes you eyes bleed? It’s like saying goodbye to a part of my gaming heritage, it’s just sad is all. If that wasn’t bad enough, the graphical needs of the 3D match engine may just push this title out of the ‘runs on the smell of an oily processor’ category.

In previous versions of the Football Manager series, the graphical requirements of running the game was the ability to render Skifree. Okay, so that may be a slight exaggeration but it really didn’t need much at all, with Football Manager 09 though you’ll need to be packing a Radeon 9800 at a minimum. That may not seem like you’ll be breaking the bank for a new graphics card, but this game is supposed to be a glorified spreadsheet.

But despite the downside to introducing a new match engine, Football Manager 09 doesn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater and remains the authoritative football management sim on the market.

The introduction of a couple of nice touches help smooth out the criticisms. The addition of a press conference that you as manager can attend is a great way to involve you in the game world. Given the whole selling point of the series is “You can be the manager!”, it’s a surprise this option wasn’t included in previous versions of the game.

The press conferences are structured well, and if handled correctly can give your team a morale boost and put the fear of God into your opposition. Responses to questions are limited however, so you can’t exactly go on a Jose Mourinho-esque rant in the middle of a journalist’s question, but it’s still an addition that adds to the core appeal of the game.

It’s called Football Manager, and this game lets you be exactly that as you ride the highs of championships, the nerve-wracking lows of a relegation scrap and feel the pride of finding a gem of a player in the youth ranks and nurturing him to superstardom. The stats you love are there, the gameplay which entrances you is there and despite Sega almost dropping the ball with the match engine, Football Manager 09 remains the benchmark by which all other football management sims are measured.

What is wrong with doing work experience at Christmas time?

2008-12-21T12:54:00.003+09:00

There's not actually that much to do. The news has slowed to a trickle and you don't have time to do any sort of meaningful work because everybody's going on holidays soon.

I recently undertook a work placement at Aspermont, the company responsible for a multitude of trade publications including Mining Monthly and Biotechnology News. My role while I was there was to turn around press releases and turn them into something somewhat readable. Basically, I was a shitkicker who didn't have that much to do, yet it still remained an invaluable learning experience (plus I got a few bylines which is always good).

It helped me to see where my weaknesses lie in terms of writing and which areas are my strengths. I'll start with the minuses as these are weaknesses that all up and coming journos can learn from.

In a nutshell, I was lazy with my writing. Because I was basically turning around press releases within 20 minutes or so I didn't put enough effort into checking and re-checking my work, and consequently I made a few tiny mistakes with my punctuation surrounding quotes (another of my weaknesses).

I also on the odd-occasion decided to demote people in various positions in stories I was writing. For example, one day I decided that some guy wasn't deserving of a CEO status, so I decided to demote him to a COO. That's the kind of shite that will get angry phone calls. Luckily I only did that once, and it wasn't a systemic thing.

One piece of advice that Nick Evans (Biotech editor) offered me at the end of my experience is that at this junior level, it always pays to spend an extra ten minutes with your copy unless the editor is yelling at you to finish up. Getting out copy quick is good, getting it out quick and with the odd-mistake will just make you look lazy.

Other (understandable) mistakes I made came from just not knowing the territory. For example, I don't know the people at the companies I was writing about, I didn't know if a company's capital raising was a roaring success or not and I didn't know why one company's better than another one.

One hilarious mistake I made was assuming that an oil reserve being "capped and suspended as a site for further development" was a bad thing. Turns out that the sentence didn't mean the company was giving up on the reserve, but just capping it and coming back to it later. I also made the hilarious mistake of describing a company's falling stock price as part of a horror year for the company (It's the middle of a financial crisis! Everybody's stock has gone down you idiot James!).

I also made the mistake of not being punchy enough with my first pars and slipping into passive and throwing a little too much colour into my stories.

Most of these mistakes though were made on the first day, and I straightened up and flew right after that. In fact the people at the company were impressed by my ability to adapt and change my style at the behest of their advice, and other than the small mistakes I made they said I was one of the better work experience kids they have had.

They said my copy was clean (relatively), tight and that it seemed I knew how to throw a verb or two around, you know, bend an ear with a turn of phrase.

My writing has been described as an 'easy' style, which is one of my greatest strengths. It means that writing seems to come naturally to me, rather than being a forced style, and this is down to a couple of key points.

First, I was diagnosed as borderline autistic when I was a child. I wasn't, they didn't know what the hell was wrong with me, but I did take longer to actually speak with any coherence than other people. In fact, I didn't start to speak properly and with any sort of confidence until I was about eight, so I found that writing things down helped my communicate without the stigma of actually having to speak (probably why I suck at broadcast).

Secondly, I'm online a lot. I chat online a lot but not once do I abbreviate or engage in 'text speak'. I write fully formed sentences which when it comes to doing so for the purposes of a piece of journalism, writing properly come naturally because it's the only style of writing I know.

So if you're an aspiring journo and you need better written English skills, it would probably be a good idea to write properly in all facets of your communicative life so that it comes easily when you start to write professionally.

Anyhow, I hope you were able to gleam something from that hotch-potch of ideas I just threw at you, and it will help you identify your weaknesses and strengths as a writer so that more people go out there into the workforce at ease with the tool of their trade.

Next time on the Jaded Prime, details of a freelance article written for The West and Jimmy's sojourn to Port Hedland next year.

What is wrong with my memory?

2008-12-16T08:37:00.002+09:00

Well, it seems with all the hustle and bustle of completing my degree my memory of this blog has faded like my favourite pair of jeans. So, I'm sorry (to the one or two google bots who actually read this thing) I've been so lax in my writing but I've had other things on my mind.

Well, I've graduated for one thing. I managed to grab an above-distinction average for the third year, a period in which I actually chose journalism as a career choice and started to take it seriously.

I've also been fired for no particular reason, although if you were ask my employer if she fired me she'll say that she just couldn't hold a spot on the roster for me anymore or one of those weasel excuses.

If you put the pieces together though, I was fired to cut costs. I was one of the oldest employees there, so I had a higher paycheck than everybody else. It's the middle of a financial crisis and her husband works at an insurance firm while they try to pay off their mortgage.

You don't have to be a genius to put those things together to paint a bleak picture about the balance of power shifting in the wake of climbing unemployment.

A bleak picture has also been painted for the environment this week too, with the Rudd government releasing the 'white' paper, which may as well have been made out of baby seals as far as environmentalists were concerned.

The paper outline an emissions target for 2020, and for a Prime Minister whose campaign ran on green promises, the outcomes were most disappointing indeed.

It turns out all that modeling done by the CSIRO and scientists around the globe was absolute bubkis, and we need not adhere to any sort of target which will stretch us in any way. Instead of the minimum 20 per cent reduction in greenhouse gases most people have called for the Rudd government outlined a minimum five per cent cut, to rise to 15 per cent if other countries follow suit at Copenhagen.

To the cries of angry environmentalists and an almost speechless Bob Brown, they spruiked their plan as "striking the right balance" between economic concerns and environmental ones. I do concede that the economic downturn would create some pressure to scale down ambitions, but nobody expected this.

Of course business groups cried poor and said the plan would be a burden on business, despite the money promised to polluting industry to offset any losses from the emissions trading scheme, and the government has come out and applied some creative mathematics to make everything seem alright.

The government said that a five per cent target would equate to a 34 per cent per capita reduction and a 15 per cent target would equate to a 41 per cent reduction. True, our low capita base lends itself to the argument the we should do less because we don't pollute that much.

The thing is though, and this is very important; you're only taking five per cent of the pollution out of the air.

It doesn't matter about what we do on a per capita basis, it only matters about what we do in a gross tonnage reduction sense. We could do a 50 per cent reduction per capita and the Great Barrier Reef would still be at risk of dying, what matters is the raw amount you take out of the air.

Of course, this sits pretty with the popularist leanings of the Rudd government, that its trying to rationalise a failing as a win for the Australian people. He's trying to reassure us that we're doing our bit for the environment when his government does effectively nothing, just so he can throw around the sexy figures of a 41 per cent reduction per capita.

It's a shame the environment doesn't care about figures.

What is wrong with going stir-crazy?

2008-09-10T21:39:00.002+08:00

You start to look at staplers in a whole new light. Here's a review. Sorry for the funky formatting, Blogger is being a tad weird tonight.

====================================================================

Since the beginning of time, I have had many staplers. I have had a standard workhorse stapler that got the job done but didn't exactly set the world on fire with its ergonomic design. I have had a pop-culture referential red stapler that was a good for nothing layabout that jammed half the time, very frustrating when you can't find a paperclip, let me tell you! But none, have compared to the stapler I have in my hot little hand right now.

It's a Stanley Bostitch, for those of you in the know, you'd already be aware of it's competition leading efficiency, but this year Stanley have truly blown me away with a mixture of form and function that is hard to beat.

Yea, if God had a stapler, it would verily be a Stanley Bostitch. Yet there is something darker about this device that speaks to a more satanic origin, almost if it were calling to me to do unspeakable acts.

It's just so...sexy.

Let's begin with the essential functions and work our way up to the more elegant design shall we?

First of all, you'll no doubt be relieved to hear that it holds a standard 10mm clip so you'll no longer have to worry about getting to the specialty staples shop before it closes. If I had a stapler for all the times I've been caught outside the staples store at closing time, I would be in some sort of orgasmic nirvana.

It's spring loaded, so it operates quite like the standard stapler, which you would think would be something holding it back from greatness but instead I see it as a plus. Think back on all the great innovations of stapler loading mechanism history, and you'll find that the spring loaded is indeed the mechanism that has stood the test of time. Indeed, it's so simple to operate that a child could do it (ages 5 and up).

Once you have your staples ready to go, you'll want to know if the stapler can go all night long...by which I mean whether it won't fail you on sheet 999 of a massive stapling party.

I'm pleased to report that it can go the distance and more, its stamina was quite a pleasant surprise that it had me wondering why I ever went around that that stupid old paperclip...in my pocket.

You could literally staple all day with the Stanley Bostitch, it's that reliable, and the satisfaction you get from the crisp sound of paper being penetrated kept this reviewer up through many a lonely night.

But now, we come to the real sexiness, its design.

It employs the Strapford-upon-Hertforshire school of stapler design, and the Stanley Bostitch has all the hallmarks of veteran designer Thomas Scrote.

None of this smooth and sleek design that have you in two minds as to whether or not you're looking at a stapler, instead, the Scrote design leaves you in no doubt as to what you're looking at. He manages to capture the aesthetic of stapler deign over the last 50 years and condense it into something so pure, to typical of the beauty of the stapler that, I'm not afraid to admit this, I bawled like it was my first stapler all over again.

By God I'm glad I have my Scrote...umm...Scrote-designed stapler by my side!

In summary, if you appreciate the beauty and raw sexual power of the stapler, you have to buy the [i]Stanley Bostitch for you and everybody you know. Together, we can make the whole world cry with the sounds of a million sheets of paper being penetrated by the [i]Bostitch.

It's quite simply, a masterpiece of stapler deign and this will be the model that they study in classrooms for years to come.

20 BILLION STARS

P.S- I'm so lonely.

What is wrong with freelancing?

2008-09-08T13:12:00.002+08:00

You have to fucking good at it to even get a call back saying that they won't pick up your article.

As you may or may not know, I've been enrolled in a unit called Freelance Journalism. Which is cool because there are no classes and we basically set our own work schedule. Anyhow, the first assignment is to write a profile article.

But who do I write a profile article on? That's basically the starting point for any piece, so I started looking at the webirverse to see if there were any up and coming or established authors or artists coming to town. Perth being the backwater hick town it is, nobody of note was coming here.

So then I started to do a search for stand-up comedians, and I noticed that Claire Hooper was coming to town soon for a show. Bingo.

Here's a person who's originally from Perth, has a good profile (she's the chick from Good News Week) and the more research I did on her, the more interesting her story became.

She started out in Perth doing theatre work, and was a bit of a jack of all trades. She wrote, directed, acted, designed costumes but what struck me about her background is that she did experimental re-working of Shakespeare. You know, stuff like reducing Hamlet to 90 minutes and 3 cast members.

So how does someone go from Hamlet to hamming it up?

I had my angle on a Perth girl and she was coming to town soon. This profile pretty much wrote itself, and I was sure I had a story I could sell.

So I got down to the business of arranging an interview, so I contacted her management via email. I got nothing back for a couple of days, until the woman who was arranging the comedy show that Hooper was in town for got in touch with me.

Now, what she told me was very interesting. She told me that she'd already pitched the story to editors of The West and Sunday Times, and they were nibbling at it. That is to say they were undecided on the story.

Now, being a freelance journo who was ready right then to conduct an interview and write a story, I managed to grab the interview.

So I'm now on the phone to Claire Hooper who's in Melbourne, and it's a pretty easy interview. It's one of those interviews that I can just stay silent for, and she'll answer two or three of my questions with one long-winded answer. She's very chatty, and I managed to get some great anecdotes out of her about her youth and how she got into comedy.

I have my research, I've transcribed the audio and I'm sitting with a blank page ready to write.

The words flow like fine wine, and within two days I have a 2000 word profile article that probably not going to win me a Walkley, but is a good yarn all the same. So now all I have to do it sell it.

I pitch it at two newspapers, two websites and two magazines. Only one got a definite answer back to me. What I did was this; I sent the story along with two hi-res images of Claire and a pitch to each of these places. I left my phone number and email address on the pitch.

Two days have gone, and I decide it's been sitting long enough, and I start to do a ring-around to the places I pitched at. I get the old, 'she's not in her office at the moment...' line, and there's nothing too much you can do about it.

The West though, to their credit actually got back to me when I rung them with a very nicely worded rejection letter that wished me all the best. When I rang PerthNow, the editor informed me that he had been on leave and was just catching up on his emails. Fair enough, he said he'd back to me at the end of the day.

I took him at his word and he didn't get back to me. Okay, so I called him again twice in two days and 'he was in a meeting'. FUCK!

So anyhow, I didn't end up selling the story to anybody, which sucks because I need the money for my new website I'm planning.

The moral of the story here is that you have to be a complete and utter nuisance to editors to even get a rejection letter back. This is doubly true if your relatively new and they have no idea who you are.

Next time on The Jaded Prime, the art of the market wrap.

Jimmy.

What is wrong with my life?!

2008-08-30T16:18:00.001+08:00

Nothing really,I'm just way too busy to update this blog.

I shaved my head today, and I've written a profile on Claire Hooper which I'm trying to sell, and when I get some time I'll update you all on the process behind that.

I'll also begoing through how to write a market report, which is FUCKING fascinating.

From Jimmy.

What is wrong with having a bad sub?

2008-08-19T13:52:00.002+08:00

Hi, sorry about the complete lack of post in a while, but I've been hard at work preparing a post that should give the aspiring journo out there a reason to try their hand at subbing. You see, every so often you write a story you think is good, and then you run it through a set of subs and it actually comes out worse than when it came in.

Sadly, this has happened to me on more than a few occasions. Perhaps the one that is freshest in my mind is a story I wrote a while back on a new type of security camera. I'm not going to say my article was perfect (it never is) , but it was a good piece of writing.

Below, is the copy I submitted to the subs.

===================================================================
My heart was already in San Francisco, but my body was stuck in a security checkpoint. My eyes were staring at the bald patch at the gentleman in front of me, my feet were shuffling forward inch-by-inch and my thumbs were left twiddling.

We've all had to wait in security before, as a multitude of people pass through the scanners, with the line moving like salmon upstream. We've all had to wait as that one particular person didn't quite grasp the concept of not taking metallic objects through the scanner

You start to wonder why this sadistic airport has windows. It's like being told you can only take out that Ferarri in first gear.

Luckily, some clever British company, ThruVision, has come up with a new security imaging system.

Based on some of the technology used in deep space exploration, the T5000 Security Imaging System is able to 'see' under the clothes of people standing 25 metres away. The people can even be moving, reducing bottlenecks at security checkpoints.

But how can this new fangled system do that and still not emit huge pulses of energy? Well, instead of the traditional X-Ray that emits a low level of radiation, the T5000 is a passive system that picks up T-Rays.

T-Rays are small amounts of energy given off naturally by all materials, including animals, people and plants. These emissions can travel through smoke, and more physical objects such as clothing. The T5000 merely picks up these energy signatures and uses them to form an image that can reveal hidden objects. Nifty Huh?

That all means that the line can keep on moving and detect objects under a person's clothes, well before they reach a security checkpoint. You can imagine the relief of not having to be subjected to the X-Ray ritual anymore, but using T-Rays can make security operations a lot more efficient.

As CEO of ThruVision, Clive Beattie explains: "The T5000 dramatically extends the security surveillance envelope for ThruVision's passive body scanning products used at important sites and events. The ability to see both metallic and non-metallic items on people out to 25m is certainly a key capability that will enhance any comprehensive security system deployment."

Some of you may be concerned that the ability to 'see under' clothing from 25 metres away may just be humilating as a long range strip search, but ThruVision is quick to point out that the T5000 doesn't see any 'surface anatmical effects'.

Indeed, news of yet another type of security camera may just have some civil libertarians on edge, and with good reason too.

For example, in the UK (where the T5000 was concieved), contains about 20 per cent of the worlds CCTV Cameras with a total of about 4.2 Million installed. That's about one camera for every fourteen people in the entire UK.

Yet CCTV systems, despite record installation numbers, have not been a total success. You'd think that plonking masses of cameras everywhere would have effectively stopped crime, but in a study publiched by the Home Office in 2002 found that "CCTV had no effect on violent crime"

So is the implementation of another type of camera in the form of the T5000 going to stop all crime? More than likely, no.

Yet as I think back on all the times I've been stuck at security waiting for the line to move even an inch, the T5000 imaging camera seems like an attractive prospect. Indeed, for any traveller, the ability to waltz through security is a welcome change from staring at the bald spot of the gentleman in front of you.
===================================================================

It's hardly going to win a Walkley, but it's a nice little article about a security camera that's somewhat well written and wouldn't look out of place in a general interest mag.

Now see what happened when the subs got their hands on the story.

===================================================================
A camera that can see under people's clothes? Not as seedy as it sounds. James McGrath investigates the T5000 imaging camera.

My heart was already in San Francisco, but my body was stuck at a security checkpoint. My eyes were staring at the bald patch on the gentleman in front of me, my feet were shuffling forward inch by slow inch and I was left twiddling my thumbs.

We’ve all had to wait at security, as a multitude of people pass through the scanners, and the line snakes forward slowly at a snail’s pace. And we’ve all had to wait and watch that one particular person who doesn’t quite grasp the concept of not taking metallic objects through the scanner.

You start to wonder which sadist designed the airport with windows so you could see outside without any hope of getting there anytime soon. It’s like being told you can take that Ferrari out ... but only in first gear.

Luckily, a clever British company, ThruVision, has come up with a new security imaging system. It’s called the T5000 Security Imaging System and is based on technology used in deep space exploration.

In essence the T5000 is a camera that can ‘see’ under people's clothes even if they're standing up to 25 metres away. It even works if the people in question are moving. This means that a line can keep moving while the camera detects objects under people’s clothes well before they reach the security checkpoint. It’s thought this new system will help reduce crowd bottlenecks at security checkpoints.

But how does the newfangled system do all this? And will it emit huge pulses of unhealthy energy in the process? Well, the answer to the second question is 'no' it will not, because unlike traditional X-Rays that emit low levels of radiation, the T5000 is a passive system that picks up terahertz rays, or T-rays.

T-Rays are a small amount of energy given off naturally by all materials, including animals, people and plants. These emissions can travel through smoke, and more physical objects such as clothing. They are, however, blocked by water and metal. The T5000 merely picks up these energy signatures and uses them to form an image that can reveal hidden objects. Nifty huh?

Now some may be concerned that the T5000’s ability to 'see under’ clothing may act as a long range strip search, but ThruVision is quick to point out that the T5000 doesn’t see any ‘surface anatomical effects’.

CEO of ThruVision, Clive Beattie explained how the T5000 could also make security operations more efficient: “The T5000 dramatically extends the security surveillance envelope for ThruVision’s passive body scanning products used at important sites and events. The ability to see both metallic and non-metallic items on people out to 25m is certainly a key capability that will enhance any comprehensive security system deployment.”

So is the implementation of the T5000 going to effectively stop all crime? Most likely not. If we recall, CCTV cameras were supposed to stop crime. The UK (where the T5000 was conceived), contains about 20 percent of the world’s CCTV cameras with a total of 4.2 million installed. That’s about one camera for every 14 people. You’d think plonking masses of cameras everywhere would have effectively stopped crime, but a 2002 study published by the UK Home Office found that “CCTV had no effect on violent crime”.

If the T5000 lives up to expectations the welcome change for all those who’ve ever been stuck at security waiting for the line to move forward by even an inch, will be the prospect of waltzing through without having to spend hours studying the bald spot on the gentleman in front.
===================================================================

The guts of the story are still there, but any writer will be able to spot the glaring changes made, and be horrified by the subbing work on this story.

That is why the future journalists need more subs. We need people either going straight into cadetship or going through uni to not only think in terms of being a good journo, but also in terms of being a good sub. If you can bring both skills to the table, then you have more than a shot at landing a job.

What is wrong with this semester?

2008-08-04T19:16:00.002+08:00

Well, it's not bad actually.

I'm just going to give you a quick run-down of what I'll be doing for my FINAL SEMESTER OF UNIVERSITY EVER. I'm sure that statement won't come back to bite me on the bum, no siree!

Anyhow, first up for the film and video side of my degree I'll be kicking things off with Psychoanalysis and Cinema.

A whole bunch of reading, a whole bunch o' Hitchcock and one freakin' big essay (3000 words). Okay, so maybe it's not that big. Maybe I can treat it like one convoluted feature article, let's see how that goes. Anyhow, it seems like a good ol' fashioned theory unit which I should pass.

Then we move onto Screen Evolution.

Now this is an odd one. It's technically a theory unit, but we get to make about 4 short films in it, but they have to relate to the theoretical aspects of the unit, which is to with exploring the screen.

That means exploring the possibilities and theories behind screen technology, and how they have enhanced our perception of the world around us. It's a theory unit which has heavy production elements, which is odd.

Onto the journalism units which is why you're all here...either that or you googled porn and the result was this blog. Hard to say.

Anyhow, the first unit is Freelance journalism.

This is very much an independent study unit, with students given four articles to write of varying lengths. It is then our task to go out and contact various newsrooms and see if they want to buy the story we're writing. Which is awesome because if your article is any good, you can apply for a staffer position after your degree is finished.

We also get paid for our articles which is totally awesome for a uni student.

The second journalism unit is Business Journalism.

This unit is designed to give students a grounding in economic principles and theory, so they won't feel daunted when their editor tells them to do a market wrap or to write about regulations surrounding a company recently floated on the ASX.

I've done a teensy little bit of this in the past, but I'm still learning quite a bit at this stage which can only make me more employable.

Plus we get to play Monopoly!

Anyhow, this post was for all those of you who were curious about what I'm doing this semester.

Don't worry, normal service will resume soon and youll have some rants about the climate and journalism at large.

What is wrong with an ETS?

2008-07-27T17:54:00.002+08:00

For those of you outside of Australia, the current political hot potato over here is the introduction of an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).

Let's face it, our earth is going to hell one degree at a time and a properly implemented ETS would be a great step toward a sustainable future for our country. That, and investment in Geo-Thermal energy *cough*.

As the government wrangles out the details behind a proposed scheme, the political moves behind the scheme make for some interesting political grandstanding.

You see, the former Liberal government (which is now in opposition with a new leader...Malcom Turnbull I think his name is?) at the last general election was trying to limit the damage from being an 'ungreen' party by stating that its aim was to introduce an ETS from the get-go.

Now, the Liberal Party is opposing any implementation of an ETS until at least 2010. For a piece of legislature that is already 10 years too late, that's a big call.

So why this seemingly anti-green stance?

Well, the shadow government is keen to paint Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong (Environment Minister) as populists keen to inflate their own egos without consideration to well-drafted legislation.

On the Sunday program today, Malcom Turnbull accused the government of rushing out this legislation in order to capitalise on pro-green sentiment.

He has a point.

You see, very little detail has come out regarding the finer points of the ETS, and the government has done a very good job of keeping the Australian public in the dark.

"This new ETS is good for the environment, that's all you need to know"

Yet, the government has stated the ETS would be modeled on the somewhat (from an Aussie POV) successful ETS started in Europe. The fact is, the ETS probably will be good for the environment, after a few learning difficulties.

Mr Turnbull said the government had adopted a 'wait and see' approach to climate change. He said they wanted to wait to see the outcomes of the next US Election and the next environment conference in Copenhagen to gauge whether or not it would be worth the trouble.

The shadow government's reasoning being that without China and India on board, any efforts to change would be fruitless and end up costing Australian taxpayers an arm and a leg.

At this point, Mr Turnbull grew thick eyebrows as they went back to that old stance of 'Those furriners are costing our battlers money'.

So the tactic from the shadow government is to aim squarely at the hip pocket of the Australian voter and to paint the Labor government as pie-in-the sky idealists without a sense of economic reality.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The question remains, would a rushed ETS now be better than an fully thought out ETS further down the track? Can our planet afford to take another one for the team?

Thoughts?

What is wrong with the young'uns?

2008-07-25T15:34:00.003+08:00

I try not to give authors free publicity, but this video I stumbled across makes some good points about the youth of today.

It features Mark Bauerlein taking about his new book The Dumbest Generation,which makes a pretty valid argument regarding the cons of a digital culture.

He argues that although the digital offers unrivaled information access for young people, that the young people are not taking advantage of this. Now,I'm one of those young people, and it makes a heck of a lot of sense.

When teenagers and young adults go online, they don't go to check out Othello from the school library. They go to the entertainment sites to watch stupid films, and to social networking sites to find other people with exactly the same interests.

It is one of modern life's great ironic twists that when a new generation is faced with the oppurtunity to have the greatest level of education that any generation has ever recieved, we are so eager to wallow in familiarity.

Sure, there are exceptions to the rule, but have you talked to a teenager lately?

Ask them to point to Iraq on a map, recite a poem or discuss Fellinni and you'll get a blank stare and an oh so sad 'gah?'.

Once upon a time, young people were intelectually curious. Libraries flourished, art house cinemas were able to operate, but texts were scarce. Perhaps because of this scarcity, that people developed a hunger for knowledge, a desire for understanding.

Now, we have the potential to have anything we want at our fingertips, just waiting for curious young minds to devour. The internet is the biggest library of all, with reams of new information added every day. Indeed,one can spend a whole day on the internet and not scratch the surface.

Instead, young people are using the internet to scracth the event horizon of a blackhole of ignorance.

Instead of seeking out new information to learn and to digest, young people are seeking out ignorant others to talk about asinine topics to feel better about their own vacuous selves.

Of course, they're all very special of course. They're individuals who make a meaningful contribution to society. Why try to become a productive member of society when you're already special?

That seems to be the overriding attitudes being taught in schools. Time was, you could actually get a fail mark at school, now it's harder to fail than pass. What kind of freaky-deaky culture is that?

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is truly the dumbest generation. Dumb not because we don't know our times tables, not dumb because we can't recite Homer (You know...the Greek dude) but dumb because we do not attempt to rectify this situation.

We have convinced ourelves that we are worthy of society despite not contributing, and convinced ourselves that taking the hard road is just dumb.

What is wrong with Melville vs Westside?

2008-07-20T21:52:00.002+08:00

Couldn't really come up with a good title there. Anyhow, thought it might be cool to give y'all a look at one of this round's draft reports before it's edited, just to show you what I was on about a couple of posts ago. This should hit the Hockey WA site tomorrow provided I haven't been sued for defamation or anything pleasant like that.

Enjoy hockey fans!

=====================================================================

MELVILLE FIGHT BACK TO WIN

Melville recorded a come from behind 2-1 over Westside Wolves at Melville Turf on Sunday afternoon, in the Wizard Home Loans Cup.

Westside was looking to push into the top four, and Melville was hoping to keep its faint finals chances alive.

Westside grabbed the early initiative though, and looked to play the ball down the right hand side, whereas Melville was content to play on the counter attack. This approach worked well for Melville, who created the better chances early despite the Wolves pressure.

Ten minutes in, Westside’s Russell Ford was able to get a shot in using the reverse stick, to create the first meaningful opportunity of the half.

As Melville made the most of their possession, Westside was unable to capitalise on their possession, despite some promising lead-up play.

Westside almost went ahead with 22 minutes played, with a shot from Justin McDougall going just wide following a short corner.

Melville held on to ensure the status quo at half time, despite a Westside short corner in the last minute of the half making the home fans nervous.

The second half began much as the first finished, with Westside controlling possession, and Melville happy to play on the counter attack. This time though, the Wolves were finally able to capitalise, converting a short corner eight minutes in. The goal was scored by McDougall, who hit the ball low and hard, forcing a deflection off the keeper’s glove into the back of his own net.

The goal spurned Melville into life, which had a goal back just four minutes later after Ben Meacock whacked the ball home after the Westside defence failed to clear the ball from a short corner.

Melville had another goal in no time, with a short corner converted by Dan White, who flicked the ball between the Westside custodian’s legs.

The Wolves went in search of an equaliser, as Melville was forced to play the rest of the half on the back foot.

Westside had a number of opportunities from short corners, but were let down by some poor execution on the trap.

The Wolves task got harder when a yellow card was shown to Adam Bache with five minutes left to go. Despite the setback, the Wolves made the Melville faithful sweat by forming a number of attacks in the final minutes.

Melville’s resolute defence however, was typified by keeper Tristan Clemons, who rushed off his line in the last minute to smother another Wolves attack as they held on for the win.

Westside host UWA next week while Melville face a tough ask against YMCC at home.

===========================================================================

That should give you a good example of how to do a pretty detailed match report, and I'm sure it's not perfect either, so you should have some fun poking holes in it.

Till next time.

(Damn I'm getting conceited)

What is wrong with the classifications board?

2008-07-18T09:08:00.002+08:00

I'm back after my tussle with the flu, and I'm mad as all hell.

Last week I was browsing Kotaku when I saw a story on Fallout 3 being refused an MA15+ classification in this country, effectively banning the full version from this country. Why?

Apparently because your avatar could shoot morphine, with positive in-game effects. Now, I'm not advocating drug use, it's been a huge issue in our country regarding the indigenous population (especially morphine in the NT), but this whole thing smacks of hypocrisy and ignorance from the rating board.

For example, I just have to browse my DVD collection to see that 21 Grams has been given a MA15+ rating. Something tells me that 21 Grams may just be a teeny little harmful and shocking to young minds than Fallout 3 would ever be. Even SAW IV, yes, SAW IV has been given a MA15+ rating according to classification office's press page!

So what? It's not being given a MA15+ rating in this country, can't you just make it an adults-only game? Well, as it turns out, no.

You see, there's no R18+ classification in this country regarding games.

Wha? But...don't they know adults actually play games? Well, one look at the board may give you some clues.

Do me a favour, go to the classification board's website www.classification.gov.au and look at the board listing.

Notice the hilariously named Donald McDonald, the director of the board doesn't look a day under 60 (his bio said he got a BAComm in 1961, so you make a guesstimate). Do you think he's ever...actually played a video game in his life?

Or is it simply that his only experience with video games stems from watching his grandchildren play?

No wonder there's no R18+ classification for games in this country! The prevailing attitude seems to be that ADULTS DON'T PLAY GAMES! Of course they don't! The rest of the board doesn't exactly paint a youthful picture either.

Coming from a theoretical perspective (as these board members must be), video games do seem more harmful than film or books.

The logic is there, video gaming is a highly interactive medium which can be easily imitated. As gamers though, I bet you you've never learned to load a gun by playing GTAIV or Call of Duty. However, anybody who knows a thing or two about film can tell you that it's a highly interactive medium too.

Through the practice of semiotics and verisimilitude, a film involves the viewer. Viewers are not passive in making meaning, but are active in it.

It's easy to see why the classification board may have this view of video games, but that's not the biggest outrage in all this. There's another player in all this that could put pressure on the board, but idly sits by while gamers are treated like children.

WHERE ARE THE CIVIL LIBERTARIAN GROUPS ON THIS ONE!?

You see the peak bodies on the news all the time, and yet they don't seem to be sticking up for our rights to play the same game the rest of the world will be playing. Could it be that censorship is just not a civil liberty issue anymore?

Unlikely. More likely however, is that they're ignorant of the whole thing.

They're kind of busy fighting lock-out laws and debating the alco-pops tax, so getting the full Fallout 3 here, and creating a R18+ classification is pretty low on their list of priorities. Who could blame them, even the most ardent gamer will tell you that these issues are more important than gaming.

There is something you can do to spur them into action though.

Instead on writing your angry diatribes to the classification board, write them to the civil liberatrian groups, lambasting their lack of action on this. Start with one, and if they don't do anything, move onto the next one.

Gamers writing angry letters to the classifications board will do nothing, however, if the civil liberatrian groups start getting tons of letters, the whole thing may just start to look like a juicy issue for them to pounce on.

So gamers, I implore you, don't post your letters to the classification board, post them to civil libertarian groups instead. There's bitching from gamers, and then there's bitching from peak bodies. Guess which one the classification board will listen to?

What is wrong with match reporting?

2008-07-09T18:01:00.002+08:00

As some of you may know, I've been doing a bit of match reporting on the side. It's good experience in a sports-mad Australian market and I'm getting a cool grand for doing it too.

I thought it would be cool if I took y'all through the process behind writing a good match report (because I'm just that conceited).

Let's start with the match itself, and how to take notes on it.

There's no set rules on how you take notes during the game, but there's one thing that's a must. Legibility. If I had a dollar for every time I've gotten home from a game, looked at my notes and just thought 'wah....gah....zah?' I'd be cruising in the Carribean with a model on each arm...good looking ones.

Anyhow, you can't write a report from memory, so make sure your notes are legible. Secondly, work out a system early.

If you start with a page and try to write down everything you see, you will end up with 20 pages of notes and a headache. You need to clearly label things like shots, goals, injuries, and the time they occurred.

If you do what I've described above, you'll have the bones of your report. To make it sparkle however, you've got to give the reader theoppurtunity to 'be there'.

By this I mean, including things like 'They controlled the ball well, creating space to work into' or 'they upped the tempo after half time'. These seem like small things, but they'll lend you report a great deal of credibility, and set you apart from the next guy.

Once you have your report done, you've got to keep in mind that you need to be flexible.

For example, at the moment I write for an actual sporting body. I write a main report for their site which usually comes in at around 300-400 words and gives a throrough overview of the game. Then, I have to send off a report to various community newspapers.

This brings up two things.

Number one, they're only after about 150 words, so you have to take the scapel to your article, to give the papers the bare bones. It's a challenge to say the least. The second complication is thinking about your audience. For example, if you send off your article to a paper whoch covers the area team B is based on, they probably don't want to see the headline "Team A post stirring win", it's probably best to go with "Team B narrolwly lose".

Anyhow, I hope I gave any aspiring student journos a little insight into match reporting. It's definitely something that'll help increase your skill set and you get to take in a game too.

What is wrong with Top Spin 3?

2008-07-08T20:21:00.001+08:00

It's got a learning curve like a motherfucker. Here's the review.

======================================================

As sporting video games start to look more and more like their real-life counterparts, the battle between Top Spin and Virtua Tennis rages on like an epic Nadal vs Federer five-setter.

With each itineration, they seek to smack the competition into next week, but with contrasting approaches. Whereas both series are absolutely gorgeous and graphically realistic, it can only be said that Top Spin offers hard core tennis fans a true 'simulation'.

Whereas Virtua Tennis offers players the chance to smack the ball anywhere, regardless of position, timing or execution of a shot, Top Spin takes these things into account before finally you hit the ball into the net. It's phenomenal what exactly is going on under the hood in each match of Top Spin. The attention to detail of player mechanics and physics is truly a sight to behold for the true tennis fan.

For example, if you release the shot button too early, you'll find that your player will reach for the ball, and end up looking like a complete prat. Push it too late and you'll be on the back foot for the next shot, which is absolutely crucial. You see, whereas in Virtua Tennis you can pretty much get away with anything, in Top Spin, there's a flow to each point.

When you hit the ball over the net, you immediately have to be nimble of feet and mind. You have to be thinking about where the opposition is going next, and if you take your eye off the ball, you'll be on a one-way ticket to loser-ville.

So Top Spin offers great simulation and the ultimate tennis experience, but does this necessarily equal fun?

Well, for all of its inaccuracies, Virtua Tennis was awful fun. In between matches, you could play fun mini-games that boosted your skill and kicked ass. What can be more fun than trying to ten-pin bowl with a giant tennis ball?

Then there was the music in each match, that J-Pop annoyance that grew on you until you found yourself humming it at work while practising your backhand. Online play was great, with a good mix of people just looking to have a good time while hitting a few balls around, but with Top Spin, fun is a dirty word.

Nope, it's all about the business for Top Spin. It markets itself as a sports-simulator, no more, no less. This latest version is no exception to the rule, with sparse fun things to do. There's matches, more matches, and then 'top spin school' (which doesn't offer spanking from Anna Kournikova for being naughty, killjoys).

Then again, Top Spin offers tennis fans what Virtua Tennis can't in officially licensed grand slams. With the notable exception of Wimbledon, they're all there. Roland Garros, New York and Melbourne to make the player feel as if they're really playing in front of massive crowds for the most coveted prizes in tennis. It's an experience made all the richer by the crap you had to go through to get there.

I speak of course of the career mode. Whereas the career mode of Virtua Tennis could be conquered in two days, Top Spin has the learning curve of a wall comprised of Roger Federer on a personal vendetta against you.

I spoke of the sheer complication of the match mechanics before, and you'll have to learn all of these if you have any hope of progressing past the junior tournaments. I warn you now, if you're not a fan of tennis, this WILL put you off tennis for life.

The underlying question in all this is, as with all sports games, does realism equate with fun? What's the use of having the most realistic game if it's no fun? What's the use of have a fun game if it's not realistic? That perhaps is a question to be left in the wind, to be decided by the consumers with the almighty dollars.

As for any sort of recommendation, I can only say that if you want the most realistic experience of tennis you can get from your couch, go with Top Spin. If you just want a hit up with mates, go with Virtua Tennis.

Don't even get me started on Wii tennis.

What is wrong with sickness?

2008-07-04T11:48:00.002+08:00

Gleeeaaarrrggggh! Having the flu sucks, to state the overwhelmingly obvious.

I've already had to get somebody to cover a shift at work for me this week, meanwhile my boss is pissed off at me for another reason. Staying home instead of working doesn't exactly rectify that situation.

Anyhow, this will be a short post about how the new site is progressing, and what sort of freelance work I've managed to conjure up.

Well, I'm now doing match reports for Hockey WA, which involves going to two games a week, and typing up a brief 200 word report on the matches. So far so good, and despite my limited knowledge on the game of hockey, my employer seems to be happy with them, describing them as great.

During our initial meeting, she mentioned that she'd probably send back the first few week's reports to highlight where I was going wrong, but so far she hasn't. I must be doing okay then.

I've decided to hold back on getting any other work during the break, as the new site will keep my occupied enough.

So far, the biggest hurdle is just getting a site up and running. I have very limited expertise in online publishing, so it's all a bit over my head. I've got a production cycle all set up, and a clear focus on our content. Registering a domain name and buying some hosting space is next. I'll probably end up getting ripped off big time, but it's worth it.

Imagine if I could put 'editor-in-chief, the anti-cookie' on my resume! That'll look absolutely fantastic on any resume, and show that I do have the ambition to one day run a publication.

Anyhow, I just wanted to write a few words on Yahtzee's latest rant.

It seems that the Escapist legal department is out of town....or drunk the past few weeks, as Yahtzee has been given an extremely long leash.

First he blatantly does a bit of 'conflict of interest' by professing his love of Cornetto's during his review of Haze. You know...the brand of ice-cream who advertised with the site in the .au region.

Then he unloads on Control-Alt-Del in a very thinly veiled attack.

If I were at the escapist, I'd be telling Yahtzee to cool his jets a bit. I know that he brings in enormous numbers to the site, but they have to draw the line somewhere.

Anyhow, I'm going to go and lie down now, and hope I don't die at work tomorrow. It'll look bad for the customers.

Update re: stud muffin

2008-06-30T18:38:00.001+08:00

I think she may be onto me...either that or I'm extremely paranoid.

She referred to me mockingly as a 'stud muffin' today....

more as it develops...

Oh, and I've decided to make a new site, and the process will be chronicled on here hopefully.

What is wrong now?

2008-06-27T10:36:00.002+08:00

3scapsim has been taken off the air by its editor Melaisis due to a whole bunch of bat-shit craziness happening. I don't blame the guy. Anyhow, somebody has to fill the void....

=====================================================================

Dear Escapist readers,

You may or may not be aware of the demise of Melasis’s site 3scapism. This was a site which was dedicated to showcasing the work of aspiring game journalists and reviewers in a place where it could be seen in one convenient location.

I’m not going into the reasons why 3scapsim is no more, because I simply don’t know enough about it. What I will say however is that it was a fantastic innovation that I’m sure every current games journalist would have been grateful to have access to when they were starting out.

I’m here to announce that the void left by 3scapism will be filled.

I’m starting my own games site, I say ‘my own’, I really mean ‘your’ gaming site. I’m not sure of the name yet, but no doubt it will rock your world.

This simply won’t be a mirror of 3scapsim though, it will [i]improve[/i] on it.

First off, instead of limiting content to video games, I will also be accepting games op-ed pieces. These ideally would be well-written and thought provoking articles written by journalists looking to make their mark in the industry. It would also go above the level of ‘GTAIV IZ DA BEST AND HEREZ WHY’ fan-boy style of writing.

These articles will be the opportunity for writers to take a look at the industry as a whole. Where we were, where we are and where we’re going.

Secondly, we will be accepting film reviews and op-ed pieces at this point too. I know some of you hold a great passion for cinema, and some of you are even film students. What better way to demonstrate your love for cinema by than writing about it?

Apart from new content, we will also be beholden to a real-world production cycle.

That means that each week, prospective article will run the ringer of subbing. This includes checking articles for fact and legal breaches and checking for spelling and grammar. I’m sorry to say that each article will be subject to a word limit too.

This is the way it’s done in the real world, and I’m thinking at this stage the word limit will be 1250 words. This is to ensure that copy on the site isn’t too cluttered, and also gives prospective journalists practice and discipline.

We will also be beholden to UK English. That means ‘colour’, not ‘color’. Don’t fear though, because of the process we will have in place, if you do slip into Americanisms, we will fix it for you.

We don’t wish to discourage anybody at all from writing, but I had to pick a spelling style that is maintained on the whole site, and I’m from Australia, so UK British it is.

At this point in time, there are no style specifics, and this is to encourage creativity from our writers. There’s nothing worse than writing a whiz-bang fantastic article and then having to go through it with a fine tooth comb.

I should point out, that these are all preliminary thoughts, and over the next three weeks these will be developed more fully, and a mission statement will be drafted.

What I’m looking for now is people who want to write. People that love writing so much that it borders on the legal in Missouri. In other words, contributors.

These people would have their own style, their own flair and their own words to preach. If this sounds appealing to you, please contact me using the details below. At this stage, all applicants will be considered, please do not be afraid to give it a crack. It’s your future, grab it.

As I alluded to, I am also looking for subs. These will be the people who have noticed the grammatical mistakes in this letter. Yes, pedants, I’m looking for you. The plan is to check about 5-10 articles per week and this will give you great experience at subbing, and will look FANTASTIC on your resume.

I’m hoping that we can send feedback to journalists each week detailing where they went wrong, where they went right, and where they went gonzo. That way, not only will the site be a functioning media outlet, it will be a great learning and training ground.

I’m also looking for web-wizards who will not only help maintain the site, but help innovate and bring new things to the table. Video content at this stage is off the table, but it’s something I’ll be looking into.

Lastly, I’m looking for enthusiastic researchers. These will be the people who bug the hell out of game developers and their PR departments looking for that juicy exclusive that will take our site from amateur to professional.

The hope is someday, when we call a game company, we get someone who isn’t in a meeting.

In summary, the groundwork has been laid my Melaisis, it’s up to us not only to replicate, but improve. Not to be happy with the status quo, but to innovate.

Please submit all ideas, job applications and articles to james.r.mcgrathATgmail.com or contact me on the forums.

With all things running smoothly, we should have our first update live on the 27^th July.

From

James McGrath (AKA Hey Joe)

P.S- All name suggestions welcome

What is wrong with porn these days?

2008-06-23T18:09:00.002+08:00

I've never been able to get into porn myself. It's something about the masochistic crap involved in every money shot that turns me off.

Once upon a time, the pron industry had the guile to align itself with the sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s, but now it remains a shadow of its former self as models are trotted out on camera and dissected through a consumerist eye.

Let me elaborate and let you in on what the hell I'm talking about.

You search the web for porn these days, and besides the gazillion hits you're going to get, you're also going to have a wide selection available. Porn for those whom feet are their fetish of choice, porn for those for whom redheads are their poison (moi) along with every conceivable combination of body part fetish, sexual fetish and other oddities to take your fancy.

It's a virtual meat market where anything goes, and it's harder not to find porn than it is.

You want a midget riding a black dude? Google it. You want an orgy involving 16 men and one woman? Google it. You want two giraffes giving a reach around to an old man who is licking the feet of a mute nun? Google it.

Any of you who have been on the internet for more than five minutes will recognize the vast fetishistic pool you have to choose from these days. Remember when it was gay/straight/soft/hard?

Now, I'm not against choice, I'm for it. If you have a particular fetish you want to explore, go nuts. What I'm against however, is the affect of this on society today.

Back to my woman in front of the camera example.

A woman is trotted out in front of the camera, usually naive or just acting that way. They're told to pose for the men behind the camera who make comments like 'whoah those are great tits...great nipples....nice arse'.

It's sickening to see these women subjected to this sort of appraisal. It can't be good for women if this is what is informing them of the female ideal according to the heterosexual male. Much like male porn stars create unrealistic expectations of penis size, these women who are engineered to be fetishistic objects can't be doing good.

What I'm driving at, is the standards of physical beauty in a woman is now informed by how perfect their nipples are, how sumptuous their feet are and how firm their bum is. In many ways, we have gone backwards in society when this happens.

Then, you actually get into the porn and its always the woman being subjected to the male presence. There's no passion there, she's being told what to do in every frame. "Bend over, take it on the face!"

Now, I don't know about you, but I've never known a woman who actually likes to have their man shoot his love juice onto her face. Not one.

But of course, men see these films and see the behavior of the ideal woman. So he gets to thinking this is what women should be doing, and they get disappointed when their woman says no (and disappointed when they look down at their manhood).

The only sort of porn I'll ever get into these days is amateur porn where the couple actually R-E-S-P-E-C-T each other and love each other.

Sorry for the rambling people, but I overheard some guys talking about a porno and the things the woman was doing. They laughed and joked about getting their women to do that, and I could only hang my head in mourning and walk on by.

What is wrong with bening a total stud-muffin?

2008-06-19T18:56:00.002+08:00

I joke of course, but last night I had a somewhat alarming encounter at work.

As some of you know, I work as a barista when I'm not whining about people not giving me freelance work. It's a relatively new job, and I've been in it for about five months now. I get along with most of the people there and I feel quite at home.

I also work as the only male on staff. This is an interesting position to be in, but one I'm comfortable with because I've been the only maleon staff before, and I was raised in a family of women.

Here's the thing though, some of them find me attractive. I've lovingly been given the name of 'spunky' and I've overheard conversation saying that I'm quite alright looking. That's fine, it's just looking, that's not going to harm anyone.

But what happens when that escalates?

Last night I was closing with one of my coworkers when the banter between us somehow turned to what I find attractive in a woman and some of my pick-up lines. She instigated the questions such as 'what do you find attractive?'.

My inner alarm bells started to go off at this point, but they weren't blaring. I answered her questions saying that I'm looking for intelligence etc., but then she started to ask about how I picked up women. So I started to joke around saying things like "Nice shoes, wanna root?" and "I sincerely want to listen to you talk about your problems...really".

Then, I'm not sure if this was out of exasperation about my answers, but she asked "What would you say to me?"

ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!

Again, I kept it on the surface saying things like "Uhh....you're tall" and such things. She kept on pushing the point though, and luckily I was able to divert her attention with something that needed cleaning.

Don't look at me like that.

This could just be me being paranoid though, as the girl in question is 18 and Christian. I'm sure Christians go out on dates and such, but she knows I'm not into religion. I don't hate it, but I don't believe in it.

She's pretty cute though, and this episode has me scanning everything she says for hidden intention.

So, the question I pose to readers is this. How do you work with a workplace infatuation? Do you try to bury it,or do you try and bring things to a head?

What is wrong with Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08?

2008-06-17T20:46:00.001+08:00

Not much. Here's my review

==================================================================

I stood on the edge of immortality. It was a 32 yard putt, downhill breaking viciously to the right. On the other side of the hole lay doom, the ripple of the water serving as a counterpoint to my greedy eyes. Make no mistake, this was a toughie.

If I sunk it I would win my first tour championship, if I missed I would be sunk.

I looked around at the crowd, expectant of history on the 18th and the flag waving in the breeze. I refocused and drew my putter back. I paused for a slight moment, I drew the putter forward and the ball was on its way. It seemed the moment was almost cinematic.

The ball rolled its way down the slope. Damn...it had a chance! My hands gripped the controller as it rolled. Is it going to make it?

"Ooh...lipped out"...plop.

This ladies and gentlemen, is the story of how I broke my TV.

It all started one stormy day during a break at work, the local game store was just down the way and I had ten minutes before I had to get back to work. I decided to peruse the bargain section of the store; it was probably the giant red signs that did it.

I trawled my way through the titles I had no interest in, until I laid eyes on Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08. It was half price, making it $AU40. I would make that amount in the next two hours.

'Golf? I know nothing about golf! But still...$40 is pretty good.' I thought as I pawed at the case with my grubby hands, to the delight of the grubby sales clerk who took my money with glee.

I got home that evening, and almost forgot I had bought the game. I was halfway through Sports Tonight when a golf story came on and I realised I could actually be playing golf right now.

I loaded up the disc and waited for the monolithic EA-Sports logo to mock me for making an impulse buy and filling its coffers, therefore funding its attempt at world domination.

I got into the game and was pleasantly surprised by the catchy menu music provided by Gym Class Heroes. I guess I was expecting music from the twenties when golfers wore pants the size of their egos. The presentation was really quite nice, which is almost par for the course as far as EA Sports titles are concerned.

I browsed through the menu items and found a section called Golf 101. Yep, this is what I needed. As I made my way though the challenges presented by learning a new sport and constantly shanking my shots to the left, I couldn't help but notice that this game was gorgeous.

The trees swayed, the grass was realistic, the people were real and the water effects were stunning. Birds tweeted in the background and the crowd groaned as I missed the green yet again. I really felt as if I was out on a sunny afternoon rather than inside during a miserable evening.

There's a reason EA Sports rules the roost, it's because it gives the player great presentation to suck you into the game world.

Once I had completed the training, I felt that it was time to take off the training wheels and just learn by doing, so I decided on a career mode.

When I was asked to create a player, I presented with the option of using my Xbox camera to put myself in the game. Usually, I think this sort of thing is for sad, sad pandas but then again, I'm a sad, sad infant.

It asked me to pose front on, and then profile. It was surprisingly easy. The result was pretty good, it actually looked like me. As my friend commented: "Oh god! It's hideous!".

Once I had my golfer kitted out with the most ostentatious clothing I could manage, I decided to dive straight into the PGA tour. That...was a mistake.

You see, my stats at this stage were pathetic. An old man could out drive me (and did on several occasions), and Wayne Rooney could hit the target better than I could. The best I could ever manage was 6 over for the round.

I was about to give up on the game, egged on by the in-game commentators who mocked me like only the gentle observers of the manly game of golf can.

I went back, and realised there were two options I hadn't considered. Training and the Tiger challenge.

Training involves a bunch of mini-games like 'nearest to the pin' and driving contests. I was pitted with AI around my own ability, but just ahead of me to keep the greyhound interested in the bunny.

I soon found out that these challenges were quite fun, and at the end of them I had earned more potential for my golfer. This meant that my skills would grow as I played more golf, and I found it an effective way to keep the player interested in repetitive training.

Tiger challenge, was like training, but with a few twists to keep things interesting.

What it effectively amounted to was challenges to unlock golfers, courses, money, skills and ultimately a showdown with the great man himself. Rather than a linear structure though, you are free to take whatever path you want, and pursue challenges in any direction.

These ranged from skins challenges against AI, approach challenges that honed your game from the rough and devious putting challenges that placed you on Satan's own putting green.

As with the training portion of the career mode, these challenges were all quite fun, with distinct rewards for beating them.

As the hours passed and my golfer grew ever stronger, I felt it was time to get back on the tour, and see if I could do any better.

As it turns out, I could. My next round was only 2 over par, an improvement of four shots. All that training and all those challenges had paid off in a handsome way.

As I learned the intricacies of the game, I learned to appreciate the simple beauty of the controls.

The left analogue stick controls the swing, you keep it straight and the ball flies straight. Simple enough, but I found it quite hard to control it with my left thumb as is natural, and instead resorted to using my right thumb.

Normally, this would get a game ridiculed, but there's a whole stack of things you have to do before swinging the club, and once you've done those, it's all gravy.

A new feature this year is the ability to draw and fade. This is basically the ability to change the flight of the ball to go left or right. This is the key to unlocking those tough dog leg holes as you can start the ball out right, and fade it left.

The red button brings up your target zone. This is basically the area in which the ball is predicted to land if you give it 100% power. The beauty is, the you can move this to estimate how much power you need to hit a certain point.

For example, your target zone is off the green but you want to pitch your shot right next to the pin. You bring your target next to the pin and it'll tell you that you need around 50 5 power to pitch it there. Then, you just simply draw back your club less than you normally would and hey presto! You're on the green and the crowd is goin' nuts.

Once you're on the green, you're treated to all the bells and whistles.

A grid shows you the slope and the direction of the breaks, and once you've lined up your putt you can press the left bumper to bring up a putt preview. This shows you the line the ball will travel across the green and is invaluable for amateurs.

Of course, all of this can be turned off for the purists among you who want a real man's challenge.

It's taken me half a page to describe the mechanics involved, but once you learn these, it's deceptively simple to master.

I thought I'd finish this game within a week, boy was I wrong.

The thing about this game is that it demands your concentration for all 18 holes. You can't afford to let your concentration slip for even one hole, or you'll end up over even. The game gives you all the tools to succeed, but it can be a bitch sometimes.

There's no doubt this game is more than a challenge than your average sports sim (I'm looking at you Virtua Tennis 3), and is less forgiving. All of which makes sinking that perfect putt or pulling that great fading pitch shot from the rough to grab birdie all the more satisfying.

The true test of any sports sim is if will appease the fans and draw new people into the sport, and in this Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08 succeeds. It's got lots of things to unlock, lots of game play and a ton of trouble if you slice from the tee.

The fact that I'm considering heading off for a round of real golf this weekend is testament to the game. It has superb presentation, superb visuals, great mechanics and is a challenge to all (even to my golf-familiar friend).

Multi player is an absolute hoot, with plenty of mini games and game modes to keep the sledging in the lounge room going long after you've controlled your controller in a fit of rage.

Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08 has all the bells and whistles, but rather but feel overwhelmed by them, the player is invited into the world of golf through intuitive game play and easy to pick-up mechanics.

Now if you excuse me, I'm off to buy a new TV...and maybe a three wood for my friend. We'll see who's hideous.

Recommendation: Buy it for something different

What is smoggin' wrong!?

2008-06-17T16:54:00.002+08:00

The case of Aussie athletes sitting out the Olympic opening ceremony is a curious one. Well, I say athletes when I mean a bunch of officials forcing them to sit at Hong Kong and fly in for their events instead of marching in the ceremony.

It's long been tradition to miss the opening ceremony if you have an event early the next morning, and that makes sense. Who wants to be standing on their feet for ten hours when you have to be gunning for gold the next day?

But this marks the first time that Australian athletes will sit out the ceremony for health concerns. They're (again, I mean the officials) are concerned smog levels in the city will affect their performance, so much so that they'd rather have athletes fly in for their events.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the pinnacle of sporting achievement supposed to be participating in the Olympic games?

Of course, Beijing officials are furious, and I'm sure carefully worded letters will be sent to Canberra over the next weeks. The question is, do officials from the AOC have the right to determine the Olympic experience for athletes?

It's a pretty tough call to make, and one that will be justified if the athletes give good performances, but this points to a darker side of Australian sport, and Australian culture at large.

Ever since the Australia II sailed into Fremantle and Bob declared "any boss who gives a worker the sack because they don't come in tomorrow is a bum", we've relished in sporting success and the underdog tag.

We've always been the colonials trying to mix it up with big boys on the stage, and when we've won, well, it's been a product of Aussie ingenuity and guts.

Even when Steven Bradbury....somehow (by 'somehow', I mean everybody else fell over) won at Nagano, we rationalised the win by saying things like 'good on him, it took guts to make it that far'.

Look at the Australian Cricket team. Is the more no more poignant social baramoter of our culture than the colonials beating the masters at their own game again, and again, and again, and again?

We love it when our teams and athletes win, we see it as a vindication of our national character and our willingness to 'give it a go', but much like our cricket team, we really revel in dominance and the dark edge that can bring.

There is an ingrained culture in Australian sport to win at all costs, heck, bowl underarm if need be! AIS funding is tied into the results various sports achieve, so while Rugby Union may receive big ol' chunks of development money, Volleyball can only navel gaze from way up in the air.

It seems that winning on the world stage at games has become the way of proving our worth as a nation, and our individual character. So the latest move from the AOC should come as no great shock.

You see, the AOC have been looking over their shoulder as teams like Germany France and England eye the fourth spot on the Olympic medals table. They've expressed concern that the tradition of doing better at every Olympics, may be under threat in Beijing.

We can't go backwards! It's unheard of! Our coat of arms doesn't go backward!

So the move to base in Hong Kong instead of attending the opening ceremony isn't just for protecting our athletes, it's for protecting our medal position, and protecting the great Aussie dream.

What is wrong with carbon trading?

2008-06-13T21:24:00.003+08:00

Well, I don't have enough time to write.

I had all these grand plans about how I was going to spend my free time this semester break, but as it turns out, my employers had other ideas. In short, I'm working about 35 hours a week which means I'll be getting some serious cheddar but after a long day, the last thing I want to do is write.

I'll have to scale back some of the freelance projects I was going to undertake, but I should be able to submit one or two pieces around the place which is nice.

The plans I have at the moment is to write a piece about gaming from the most isolated city in the world (Perth) and submit it to the escapist to see if they want to give it a run (or at least read it).

The other piece I'm thinking of developing is an article about the practice of offsetting carbon. My plan would be to hit up an editor of a bio-publication I had a bit of contact with over the semester.

My piece would question the whole practice of planting trees in a vain attempt from companies such as QANTAS and other to offset their footprint. Planting a whole bunch of trees is nice, but how long does it take for those trees to grow?

All the while they keep on polluting, but can say 'hey!We're eco-friendly, look at all the trees we've planted!'. Then what happens if the trees are cut down and made into furniture, what happens to the carbon in the plant then? Does it get released back into the atmosphere?

Perhaps a better way of showing you're eco-friendly would be to invest in renewable energies?

It's even worse since we've ratified the Kyoto protocol. Now companies have the power to engage in carbon trading, and specialist carbon traders are popping up around the place (including here in Perth).

It goes like this. A company can set them selves up so they buy property, plant a bunch of trees to develop a carbon sink. Then, because as a full business they've been allocated a heck of a lot of carbon credits, they can on sell them to the highest bidder (usually from a heavily polluting company). The thing is, they can claim the credits straight away, without waiting for the trees to grow to their full size.

So the polluting industry can keep on polluting because they have the carbon credits to do so, the dedicated carbon trader has a lot of dough and CO2 emissions continue to pollute.

A better system, in my opinion, would be a straight up tax on polluting companies. That way would you not only discourage polluting, you could take the money from the taxes and invest it in renewable energy such as wind, solar or hot rocks/geothermal (a personal fave of mine).

So anyhow, that's what I'd be going with the piece, and I'd be contacting some companies who are setting themselves up as carbon traders to see what sort of protocols are in place regarding the trading scheme.

I'll also be doing my usual round of reviews at the escapist forums, and my next two will be a comparative review between Deus Ex and Deus Ex: Invisible War, and Tiger Woods '08. I actually have some time to work on these, so I'm hoping these turn out to be really high quality reviews instead of the five minute reviews I usually submit, and hopefully these will hit around the same time I'm submitting to the Escapist.

Anyhow, I'm sorry for the longish post.

James

P.S- A shout out to all the Perth Escapists, at the moment Saskwatch and I are planning on goin' bowling in about 2 weeks time. We're hoping this could turn into a Perth Escapists forum/micro-convention, so if you want to meet up with me and the Yankee Culthulu, either contact me on the forums or send me an email.

What is wrong?

2008-06-08T17:45:00.004+08:00

This is just a quick update to assure the two or three of you that read this blog that I am alive and well. I've got an exam in two days time (Which I've only just started studying for), but after that I will be flooding this blog with all sorts of things.

I'm going to be submitting a lot more freelance stuff around the place, and I will be chronicling my struggle to be published right here. At the moment, I'm thinking of submitting a a few gaming sites, because it's what I enjoy writing about.

That being said, I will be trying to get some work with a bio-tech mag here in Perth, and I'll let you all know how that goes. If you guys out there in the webiverse know anywhere that's taking copy for peanuts, fill me in.

I'll also be launching a few creative projects of my own (one of which involves video reviews) which will not be in the style of Yahtzee, so this blog may get some multimedia content soon.

Other than that, I'll be working my arse off at the coffee shop trying to get some money together. I'm not sure for what yet, but it'll be good to have some savings in the bank in case China slips into recession and we're left screwed.

Anyhow, I'm alive, I'm writing and you're going to be hearing a lot more from me soon...ish.

What is wrong with boredom? (spoilers)

2008-06-01T08:56:00.002+08:00

I was supposed to be writing a 2500 word essay due on Monday about the construction of the 'other' as relating to 'terrorist' yesterday, but by the time I got up to 1000 I decided to stop.

Instead, I wrote this. Enjoy

====================================================================

I should be writing an essay about the construction of the 'other' in action film right now, but I just can't be arsed.

Instead, I feel it prudent to collate a few thoughts about how our little medium is starting to grow up. In this discussion, I will be referencing two recent monolithic game releases in Bioshock and GTAIV.

We all remember the hype surrounding the release of the two titles. We all remember perfecting our Serbian accents before GTAIV was released and scribbling 'Rapture Rise!' on our notepads in lectures before Bioshock hit.

When these games came out, we found that not only were they excellent titles (not perfect), but they were attempting a serious discourse on gaming, and its direction.

I'll start with Bioshock.

Rapture. The only place it could be built was the bottom of the ocean. The dark depths were the setting for a game that examined the human condition, morality and most importantly for the gaming industry, the conventions of gaming until that point.

I think us all here who have played the game remember the phrase 'would you kindly?' and the reverberations it had.

Until that point, we had been guided by another's motivations, the other's desire for his family, and ultimately for revenge. Flashing lights gave us the objective we had to fulfil in order to advance the plot, and take us the next step on our linear progression.

'Would you kindly?' changed all that. Before that, we were passengers in a deeper struggle between two men, observing the twisted world around us, slack jawed and wide eyed.

After that, the true horrors of Rapture revealed themselves. Instead of a freakshow, we confronted the very real spectre of corruption and the degradation of society into cannibalistic orgy, where the flesh was the keeper of Adam. All for one man's vision, and a hoodlum's greed.

Bioshock took us on a ride and suddenly, oh so suddenly, with one phrase changed the experience for the player. It took us from the passive observer, to critical witness and participant in creating meaning.

GTAIV involved the player in the narrative like no other game has before.

We all remember GTA right? Violence, hookers and blowing shit up? Fun as hell, but kinda shallow.

The parents cried out. They're going to release a game like that!? In hi-def!? When will these game developers realise the consequences of violence?

Those who have completed the main story of GTAIV will realise that they did.

Here we had Niko Belic, coming to America to find the American dream. Now, it would be pretty easy for the game developers to have us digest a story about how petty violence was in this context. Simple as can be, just put in a huge fuck-you bittersweet ending.

Well, they did that. They fully explored the thematic concerns surrounding a gangster lifestyle as portrayed in popular culture. You know, the one where twelve scantily-clad women dance around a guy wearing baggy clothes telling the world about his penis size and how he was gonna cap all the bitches that stood in his way.

GTAIV captured the futility of this lifestyle perfectly in its storyline, but again, if this game were like ones before it, the player's involvement would be passive.

You know what this game did that no other has yet?

Relationships. You were given a phone, and given the chance to engage with the characters outside of the escort mission/ cut scene parameter. What better way to engage the player in the narrative but give the chance for the player to know the characters involved?

Imagine the emotional impact of a certain character's death if you have gotten to know them. Dug deeper than the superficial appearance of AI, and gotten to the real emotional core of the character.

For those of you who had to endure Kate's death. What did that feel like?

Did you shudder?

Did you weep?

...

Have you ever felt like that before? The heightened sense of tragedy knowing about Kate's family, the McReary clan. Knowing about her relationship with their father, and about her reluctance to trust anyone in her family's gangster life.

On the way to funeral, she finally accepts Niko. Niko accepts and embraces his new, clean life. Away from the killing.

Even after Kate's death, characters call you to offer their condolences.

Without the character interaction, we would just have another predictable tragedy on our hands, but because of it, the player's involvement becomes that much deeper, and we engage with the narrative that much more.

Engage.

That should be the buzz-word for the next phase of gaming.

You can keep your next-gen graphics, you can keep your audio bells and whistles, you can keep your gun with a chainsaw, I want engagement.

I want a game to engage me.

I want a game to drag me into the world so deep that I forget I'm playing a game. You won't do it with graphics, verisimilitude has to go to the core of what gaming means as an interactive experience.

This thing, this gaming medium. It's the only medium where you can actively participate. It's time for developers to realise this.

Would you kindly?

What is wrong with wanting to be a journalism student?

2008-05-21T15:33:00.002+08:00

I was walking around town today after doing an interview with YACWA (Youth Affairs Council of WA) and I decided to go into work to get one of my shifts changed (it's the end of semester and EVERYTHING is due).

(brackets are fun)

The girls at work commented on my dapper looks, I was wearing a shirt and tie at the time, and then one of the younger girls asked me a question I hadn't considered.

"I'm thinking of doing journalism next year, what sort of things do you need to be good at?".

Far be it from me to give my 'expertise' on the subject, for I'm not in the industry (I write some freelance but that's about it), but I started to consider the aptitudes needed for journalism.

First and foremost, you have to be a good writer.

You need to learn the difference between a colon and a semi-colon. You need an extensive vocabulary and the ability to write punchy copy without mistakes is invaluable. Getting the spelling and grammar right will get you a pass no matter what, but what will really put you up there in the echelons of journalistic potential is to learn the power of words.

You see, words are very emotive things. They can express multiple meanings, and using the right ones in any given situation gives you the ability to stand out from the pack who will be writing straight from press releases for the rest of their careers.

We all like to read the news, but news presented in a form that is a pleasure read is an absolute joy.

Then, you need to be across the news.

It's vital that you know what's going on not just in a vague sense, but in particular. For example, journalism students tend today to talk about the cut and parry between Malcom Turnbull and Dr. Nelson after the budget, but not to many people can give you details about what was actually in it.

I'm the first to admit that particulars are not my forte. For example, each week we have something called a 'news quiz' comprising of ten questions from the weeks news. Now, I like to think that I'm across the news and I'm widely read, but as soon as the lecturer wants me to recall a particular figure, I'm stumped. On average, I do about 5/10 a week (and this guy wants to be a journo!?).

It's good if you know what's going on. It's better if you know what's going on and you can give particulars.

People skills are important too.

It's about knowing when to press a source, and when to back off. For a while when I started journalism, I thought the notion of calling somebody up for a quote was daunting. I, as a piddly little student wanted to call a professional to I could get a quote for an assignment.

As I developed though, I realised that most people want to help student journalists out. This is for two reasons; one, because people in this country are generally nice, and two, because they know we'll be the journalists of tomorrow.

Also, they have an opinion they want to get across, they have an agenda they want to drive, so anybody who can put forward that agenda is helpful to them.

That being said, you still need to be polite when calling for an interview. You also need to turn on the charm to get a source on your good side, don't take it as a given that they want to talk to you.

Also, the ability to go deep is paramount.

It's pretty easy to write from a couple of press releases regarding a certain piece of legislation, but few student go and read the legislation.

I appreciate that it can be a bit daunting delving into the world of legislation (It's like they don't want us to read it! *gasp!*), but the good journos will, and this will add extra depth to every story you do.

As I said, I'm a student journalist, and this shouldn't be taken as the be-all and end-all, these are just my thoughts.

What is wrong with passing the buck?

2008-05-18T13:31:00.002+08:00

Let me start this off by saying that I live in the Liberal stronghold of Curtin. I am also damned glad that John Howard didn't get in at the last general election, but during the course of about three months I've become skeptical of the Rudd government.

Some of you may know that I've been writing for the Third Degree, the ECU journalism student run publication. During the course of my experience, I've written on a wide range of subjects that I know nothing about.

I've written on security cameras, obscure pub bands, AFMA regulations and Net Neutrality.

During the research period, I've been offered a glimpse into how government departments are operating under the new government. During my story on Net Neutrality, I searched high and low for regulation concerning the matter from the Communications ministry.

Of course, we're about to get a spanking-new network, so this was an important issue. I found no regulation, but what I did find irked me a bit. I found that the ministry was putting out an invitation for all concerned parties to submit their ideas about regulation of the new network, to be judged by a panel of experts.

Now, I'm not so naive that I don't expect government to consult with outside groups, but you can bet your bottom dollar that if the shit hits the fan, the government will be telling us that it's not their fault, it was the fault of the panel. Then of course, they'll launch an inquiry into it to be headed up by a panel of experts.

I'm currently researching for a piece on the regulation surrounding carbon trading. Since we've signed Kyoto, this is a brand new industry. The ACCC, at the moment, has no regulation surrounding the practice, apart from the loose guidelines set out in the Trade Practices Act concerning false advertising.

Guess what the ACCC has done then?

You guessed it, they've put out a request for all people to give their two cents about how the practice should be monitored and regulated.

Now I realise the ACCC isn't technically under the government's jurisdiction, but does this sort of practice reflect a changing practice in Australia?

I know bodies like to consult with outside bodies on pieces of legislation, but before KRudd, this was an internal process. I commend the government for making this process transparent to the public, but what sort of message does this send out to the community?

Take the 2020 summit for example. The government lauded it as a bold, new move in the direction of policy, but the skeptical took it as a statement 'Well, we're out of ideas already. We've apologised, signed Kyoto, what else can we do?'

In other words, the buck stops with the committee.

The Rudd Government does seem to take ideas from outside it's own party (Howard's Battlers= Rudd's Working Families), but has the time for generating ideas come to an end. Is there a desire to see the government take action instead of consult with special interest groups?

At the moment, there seems to be a focus on symbolism rather than legislation, and sooner or later, the buck will stop with KRudd.

What is wrong with 500 words?

2008-05-14T13:23:00.002+08:00

When you're given the task of reviewing a monolith of a game like GTA IV in under 500 words, you cringe.

I'm all for brevity and look to cut unnecessary words out of any review I do, but the Escapist's challenge had me in a spin. The challenge was to review GTA IV in under 500 words, but it proved to be a bitch of a piece to write.

First of all, GTA IV is one of those games with so many aspects to them, that spending 50 words on each does not do the game or its many facets justice. There was the Euphora engine, the story (the most impressive aspect of the game for mine), the graphics, the police, the networking, the multiplayer to name just a few.

So what did I do when faced with this task?

One of the guidelines said that they were looking for originality and creativity, so I decided on something I've been toying around with for a while now.

I decided to write it in first person.

For this particular piece, I decided to write the review in the guise of a letter from the protagonist, Niko Bellic, back to the homeland, chronicling his experiences in Liberty City. The first person review I think, is a huge area for exploration in games reviewing, and it's a style I'll be doing more of depending on the reception it gets.

Anyhow, let me know what you think of it.

GTA IV REVIEW

Zdravo.

It's been a long time, I'm sorry.

Roman is well, although not as well as I hoped. Liberty City is...a contradiction. I hope I spelt that right. Some of the most beautiful things I have seen in my life I owe to this city.

Sometimes I look up at all the lights, the way they reflect off the pavement and I am in awe. I have learned to appreciate the little things, the way the rain falls and even the beaten buildings of the city make me stand in wonder. I guess these small things are important in an ugly place. This place has a beauty that is all its own, sometimes I feel as if I am in a movie it is that beautiful, but Liberty City is a dangerous place.

I am unsure whether I was safer back home or not.

Ever since I got here, people have wanted me to do things. They seemed to be fun at first, but as I worked my way up the food chain, choices had to be made. I have never had to make choices like these before, except maybe during the war. I guess Liberty City is a war zone all of its own, but you do not want to hear such things.

The police here are a lot more....zealous here than back home. The other day I got a speeding ticket, I do not have my papers yet, so I had to flee. Luckily, I was able to get far away enough from them in the end, but it was a wild ride while I did so.

You'll be pleased to know that I have made some new friends while I am here. Liberty City is a big place, so it is nice that I can call them on the cellular phone anytime I want some company (I love Roman dearly but he can be grating). It makes my stay here bearable knowing that I can go bowling with one of my buddies.

The city is full of places to take my mind off ugly things. I can go shoot pool, darts, or even just get drunk to name a few. The other day I even took a ride in a helicopter!

Your letter asked me if I had met that special someone, but I have not. I will try until the end of my days to find someone, but what I do when I meet them, I still don't know.

There is this one girl though, Kate. She's not like all the other girls in the city, you would like her. She's nice. It's early, but someday I hope to hold her in my arms at a church.

I'll finish now, as I'm sure I'm boring you. Liberty City is a place that is full of interesting people, beautiful sites and full of things to do, but it is also dark. It is a beautiful world, but under the surface, you find that life is complicated.

What is wrong with some journalism students?

2008-05-09T16:02:00.002+08:00

I'm not about to go naming and shaming, nor will I condemn the many over the attitudes of the few, but a worrying trend has emerged.

This all came about when I was explaining a story idea to a fellow student. The idea in question was covering the Republic debate that has been going on for quite a while now. I explained the idea of getting interviews from a monarchist and republican, but the student didn't like the idea.

It wasn't that they didn't think we could get enough shots for it (It was a TV story) or that it was hard to find compelling interviews, but that they just didn't give a damn about it. They didn't know enough about the debate, they didn't care about it, and then they said something that really alarmed me.

"I don't care about all that politics stuff, I just trust whoever is in charge to make decisions on stuff like that"

Then I informed them there would probably be a referendum about the issue.

"I don't care, I mean, in the last election I just left my paper blank"

This was a future member of the fourth estate telling me that they didn't vote...at all. I was flabbergasted, all I could manage was "Well...I worked for the electoral commission during the election".

They did come up with a great alternate story, but the political apathy really worried me. There does seem to be a great ennui with the political machine from a youth perspective, but this person was considering being a journalist.

You'd think that with a room full of future journalists, the air would be rich with debate regarding points of legislation but no, the air was dampened with talk of how pissed they were going to get on the weekend.

These are the people who are going to be setting the agenda in newsrooms in the future, and some of them don't vote, and don't plan to. Not out of any disestablishment sentiment (My big words indulgence for the day), but out of sheer apathy.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

What is wrong with The West Australian?

2008-05-02T20:51:00.002+08:00

Well, for starters, they won't give me a job (and if the higher-ups read this, I probably won't be getting one).

Recently though, Kerry Stokes (think of him as a mini-Rupert) blasted the publication as 'living off their reputation'. He then followed this up by asking for more power on the board of directors, this was roundly rejected at a board meeting (Stokes already holds a chair), and really, who could blame The West?

The guy has slammed the paper, and then asked for more power. Good luck buddy! It's like telling your girlfriend you've been rooting her sister and then suggesting you two should get engaged. It can only end badly.

However tactless Stokes' grab for power has been, does he have a point?

Both The West Australian and The Sunday Times have been criticized for moving to a more sensationalist and populist approach to its journalism.

In the past, it has been labeled as "the nation's most inaccurate and dishonest newspaper" from Jim McGinty, and as I glimpsed at todays front page, I couldn't help but smile.

The headline? One in Two believes Buswell should go. That's not the funny part though, as I got to the first paragraph, I couldn't help but notice the massive claims that "a snap Westpoll has found that half of all West-Australians believe he should resign". Of course, the third paragraph cleared things up.

"The Westpoll, which interviewed 413 people on Wednesday".

Now, I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't called to be part of this poll, and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Western Australia is made up of about oh...I don't know, about a million people? Maybe more?

Half of 413 people, doesn't quite sound like earth shattering news on the front page does it? But HALF OF ALL WEST AUSTRALIANS sounds a heap better!

This, ladies and Gentlemen, was on the front page. Right next to the big ol' picture of Troy Buswell looking like he wants to escape into a dark pit and die.

This sort of misleading is pure sensationalism, designed to get people reading the story. Sure, the copy does say exactly how many people were polled, but only after the reader is hooked.

Anyhow, the old argument of The West Australian being little more than populist sensationalism is perhaps overstating things, but little things like this aren't exactly providing contradictory evidence against Kerry Stokes' assertions.

What is wrong with Demon China?

2008-04-28T12:46:00.002+08:00

Those of you that have read my blog or writing in the past, know about my stance on China's treatment of Tibet, and while we do have to fight to make sure that Tibet gains independence, I think it's time to examine how this problem pans out from the Chinese perspective.

One of the key complaints of the coverage of the Olympic Relay from the Chinese end is that western media is often quick to cast China as the villain in the piece, and for once, I agree with them.

It's very easy for western media to think of themselves as the fourth estate in civilized liberal democracies while casting China as an oppressive force, totally opposed to lofty ideals such as 'independence', 'free-will and 'capitalism'.

China sees western media coverage of the Olympic relay as bordering on the racist, and it's not hard to see why.

Take the Paris leg of the relay for instance. While new agencies reported violence from pro-Tibetan supporters, the full extent was not reported. For example, the story of Paralympian Jin Jing highlights the disgusting conduct of the pro-Tibetan crowd.

To put it bluntly, she was abused from all sides from pro-Tibetan supporters, who didn't seem to care that she was disabled. These scenes of violence had been reported, but the extent of it wasn't. The irony being that the while the Chinese had been accused of shocking violence and the absolution of human rights, it was the pro-Tibetan supporters beating down on a disabled woman.

The problem is, that this type of biased reporting validates the notion that 'the west are against us' in China's eyes.

When the call goes out for China to take a more active role in the international community, it's easy to see why they would decline. They have western democracies telling them what to do, how to act, where to invest and capitalist companies greedily eying up its citizens as a market.

All of a sudden, you have western democracies trying to overturn centuries of tradition and thinking to get China on 'their side'. No wonder the Chinese are wary.

Respect, is paramount in Chinese culture (I know this from talking to international students), and when governments at first chastise them heavily, then western media casts them in a negative light, it points to a lack of respect for China and their policies.

Now, I am pro-Tibetan, but some of the conduct from protesters go against the teachings of the Dalai Lama. Indeed, he's threatened to step down if violence in the region does not stop. This puts pressure on China, and Tibetans to force a diplomatic solution to this crisis.

It seems that while pro-Tibetan supporters have lost their way and resorted to violence, the leader of the exiled government is one to see reason in this quandary. I wouldn't expect anything less.

Listen, China does do a lot wrong, and I'm the first one to point that out. China is fueling conflict in Darfur, silencing media outlets in China and oppressing the Tibetan people, but violence is not the answer.

China is a proud nation, and it is not through violent acts that it will heal itself. It is not through casting China as the villain that will make steps toward peace in Tibet. It is not through directives that China will change.

It is through accepting China as an equal and through dialogue on equal terms that will effect change.

Yet, heavy handed pro-Tibetan supporters seem to think that the negative attention directed toward China will change the country. It may, but for the Olympics only. Once all the tourists go home, it will be business as usual in China.

What we need is a long lasting peace, not an angry band aid.

What is wrong with time?

2008-04-26T15:52:00.002+08:00

I just don't seem to have enough of it these days.

One of the things that irks me when I tell people about how I have no time is their response. "But you're just a uni student aren't you?".

'Just a uni student' seems to be a pretty common comment these days, and it points to a lack of understanding about the rigors of the uni student. Consider if you will, my schedule. I have to put in 16 contact hours a week, which involves an hour commute each way on public transport. No biggie?

Now consider that I, like many other students have a part time job to meet the demands of increasing inflation rates, rental prices and exorbitant petrol prices across the country. At the moment, this takes up 15 hours of my time.

So all together, I'm working solidly 31 hours a week, but that still lags behind the minimum hours needed to classify a full-time job, which stands at 38 hours a week. So it would seem on the surface that being a uni student is easier than having a full time job, but as we head deeper you can begin to see this isn't the case.

You see, the full-time worker gets to go home after a long day, and do nothing. I do concede this is become less frequent with the popularization of the internet leading to working at the office and home, but for the vast majority, home time is their own time.

Not for uni students. We have on average 7-8 hours of reading, homework and assignment work per week on average that takes place off-campus. It's even worse for journalism students because you have to fit in around other people's schedules for interviews and such.

Another key area is the competing attentions of five different disciplines. Uni student in this country usually have four units per semester, and a part time job, which makes focusing on any one thing detrimental to the others.

Full time workers on the other hand, have one area to focus on, their jobs.

All these competing demands and rigorous wok loads for uni students is probably why you see the pulling bucket bongs in their precious spare time.

Now, you may be asking if I've worked a full-time job from up here on my high horse, and I'm here to say yes, yes I have.

Whenever there's a semester break, I work a full time rotation. I need to if I want any cash to do things like buy a car, move out or buy the services of high class prostitutes. 'Dem ho's don't come cheap you know.

It's hard work, to be sure, but at the end of the day I'm able to go home, and do whatever I want, not constrained by the deadlines of academic pursuits.

So before you call somebody a 'lazy ass student', just consider the points above.

What is wrong with subbing?

2008-04-21T19:18:00.002+08:00

Mainly, the abuse I get on a weekly basis.

Recently, I've been subbing some articles for the uni journalism paper, and while it has been a great learning experience, it's one that has left me drained.

My role exactly, is to check the spelling and grammar of articles before they are uploaded onto the website/bulletin. This mainly involves correcting a few grammar gremlins, and there's no harm in that. However, some of the stuff that I get to sub is absolute drivel.

It makes me weep for the future of journalism in the state (That's not entirely fair, there's Curtin to consider) if this is what's going to be served up. I admit that my articles haven't exactly been mind-blowing Walkley Award winning journalism either, but they've made three out of four section heads so far. If my drivel is getting section heads, our little thing is in trouble.

This is third year journalism, and I'm getting people who on one end of the scale use language befitting art mags in a general news story, and on the other end I'm getting people making rudimentary mistakes that a fifth grader wouldn't make.

I understand a few typos here and there and lord knows I'm guilty of that, but sometimes it beggars belief that these people were allowed into third year journalism at all.

Now, I could send feedback along the lines of "you suck, don't EVER become a journalist", but I bite my tongue. I tell them what is wrong, but I suggest ways they could improve their writing. Most people really appreciate the high level of feedback I give and have said so, but every week, without fail I'll get an email saying that "ur really unfair nd mean!".

I usually reply to these emails by clarifying further some of the criticism I leveled at them, and sometimes this works, but most of the time I just get abuse.

Forgive me if I go into ranting territory, but I sure as hell hope this isn't the treatment subs get out there in the real world. I really hope that professionals are able to get over the sting of criticism and analyse the feedback, take it on board and not do it the next time.

I should qualify this post by saying I'm getting less now then when I started, so maybe word is getting out about my subbing style and people are getting less offended, I don't know.

Again, I apologise for the messy structure of this post, but I felt the need to get this stuff of my chest in a somewhat constructive manner.

I've tried to walk on eggshells, but some people just need to be told that their work in unacceptable, after all, my name is going on this publication, and any bad journalism or writing is going to associated with myself when prospective employers look at the bulletin.

Anyhow, my rant is over, and to end it, I'm going to list the top five mistakes I've seen while sub editing.

1. its/it's - Seems like they would've sorted this out in primary school, but no.

2. plurals- I'm not immune from this, and it comes up time and time again when people write about a band/group. For example, 'RATM are touring' is technically incorrect. You'd write this as 'RATM is touring'.

3. too much colour- I suspect this is from people thinking they're the next Oscar Wilde and cluttering their copy with metaphors, similies, personification and all sorts of bells and whistles, while the crux of the article suffers.

4. flowery language- People don't seem to think that writing journalism is any different from writing an academic essay sometimes.

5. judgments- When people write about a subject and seem to think they need to be an expert on the subject, so the make snap judgments. For example 'this technology is the best type ever!' indicates that the journalist is an expert has the necessary qualifications to make a judgment like that. They fucking don't. Just present the facts and let the reader make up their own minds.

What is wrong with Lord Kevin?

2008-04-12T19:43:00.004+08:00

Only a year ago, Australia's approach to the Prime Minister was 'Bugger Off', Kevin Rudd's recent overseas trip has highlighted somewhat of a policy shift.

He began by earnestly promising that 'Australia would be a strong voice in the international community', and that made us all feel important. It harks back to the days where politicians would promise to 'put Australia on the map'.

But the 'Ruddster', the 'Ruddinator', or the 'Kevin07 express' (I don't think the media has settled on a nickname yet), has been flaunting his new government to anybody who would listen to him.

During his trip to the US, he 'jokingly' saluted George W Bush (I'm sure they enjoyed a 'short and jocular conversation' too) and the next day spoke at a progressive politics summit with Bill Clinton in attendance. I'm sure that I don't need to explain the irony.

Next, he was on his way to London, talking the weather with the Queen, where the fleet street press treated him as a shiny new toy to rave about, and he was reported to receive a 'rockstar' reception at an economics school. The fact that the majority of the audience were ex-pats went somewhat unreported by the media.

Next, he was off to China to face up to the Goliath of the 'Tibet issue', all while speaking Mandarin (OMG! He speaks Mandarin!). He was portrayed as the only world leader able to stand up to the Chinese on the Tibet issue. The fact that the Chinese were unmoved by his expert diplomacy was kinda...glossed over. The point was that he tried dammit! The Mighty Queenslander stood up to the Colossal Hu Jintao!

It seems that the honeymoon period for Kevin Rudd is far from being over. The media seem to want to worship him as their personal messiah, and the opposition hardly rate a mention in the daily news (You know, apart from Dr Nelson being Mr Popularity).

My question is this, when does the honeymoon period end? When does the current government stop blaming the actions of the Howard government for the current financial position Australia is in? It's an old trick in transitional government, but the media haven't picked up the Rudd governement for exploiting it yet.

I'm by no means a Howard fan, and I'd love to tell him where to shove that crystal bowl he got from the Evil Conservatives Club that Eat Babies. But, the ride that Kevin Rudd has gotten so far remains a joke.

So how long does the media plan on extending his honeymoon period? One year, two years, until he dies from too much arse-kissing?

Only time will tell.

What is wrong with being a third wheel?

2008-04-08T08:48:00.002+08:00

Okay, hear me out. This isn't going to be one of those mushy "OMG I met a girl!" type of posts, but some background is needed to tell the story.

I was finished up shooting some footage for TV Journalism when I came back to the campus to wait for my next appointment which was two hours away. In my wanderings about campus, I met somebody I knew and we got chatting. She had to meet some friends in the tavern so I decided to tag along.

So she didn't find the friends she was talking about, but found a friend, drawing. She wandered off, but I decided to stay and ask him about what he was drawing. We got to shooting the breeze, killing time when a friend of his came up and sat by us.

Then, another friend of the friend sat by us. The first two left, leaving me and an extremely cute girl to talk. As I said, this isn't going to be one of those "OMG I'm in lurv!" kind of posts.

She had strawberry blonde hair, was an english/journalism major, was into Harry Potter and Vodka Cruisers. We talked Shakespeare and feminist authors in Australian literature. As far as first conversations went, I thought it went pretty damn well, and I was so close to asking her out on the spot, but something stopped me.

Now, I'm not one of those guys who can ask a girl out cold. I've got to work myself into a state of zen and then pump myself up for days to get the nerve to ask a girl out (Yes ladies, I'm one of those cute guys who you hate because they won't make the first move).

But what ultimately made the decision not to ask her out for me was the fact that I was a random. I wasn't looking the best either, but I was just some guy she was meeting for the first time, and her friends were all about.

I guess my question is, can you ask a girl out if you're a random to her? Do you need at least a two conversation minimum to take the relationship to the next level? Is it perfectly acceptable in today's society, within an hour of meeting a girl, to say "Hey, I think you're cute and I'd love to take you out some time"?

I'm of the school that you do, but then again, I'm a pretty shy individual, despite my bravado. But what do you think? Is it polite to ask a girl out within an hour of meeting them?

P.S- I'm hoping to 'bump' into her again

P.P.S- If by any billion to one long shot you're the girl I'm talking about, come and find me. I think you're cute and would love to take you out some time.

What is wrong with birthdays?

2008-04-06T13:51:00.003+08:00

Well, they don't make sense.

I recently turned 21, and the hoopla surrounding my 'coming of age' was quite confusing. Everywhere I went I got comments of '21 eh? That's the big one!' and 'going hard eh?', when they knew that I do not celebrate birthdays.

I haven't celebrated my birthday since I was 16. I just don't see the point of assigning a specific day to celebrate...uhh...what exactly are we celebrating when we celebrate birthdays?

Are we celebrating a certain person's existence and what they mean to us, or are we just celebrating the fact that a certain person has avoided death for a year? If we are, can't we just celebrate these achievements in our own way every day of the year?

Why do we feel the need to put all adulation aside to a specific day? I'd much more rather loved ones said "You're special to me and don't forget it" every day of the year than an overblown party on my birthday.We all need to feel special once in a while, and I don't exclude myself from this.

I've posed a lot of questions so far, but I feel I don't have the sociological background to begin to answer these questions.

For example, we all know that the birthday party is an important social ritual, but why is it? How exactly am I participating in the social order by attending or hosting a birthday party? It's just all so confusing for me, and this is why I can't bring myself to celebrate a birthday.

Don't get me wrong, I'll still wish people a happy birthday, because it's polite, but on my 'special' day, I don't want anything. No presents, no cake (the cake is a lie rofl etc.) and no parties.

Aside from the celebratory aspect of the birthday, the birthday is seen as a cursor in life.

Think about it. In the Jewish faith, once a boy hits 13, he is a man. In Australia, once we hit 18 we are an adult. Once a woman hits 40 they're over the hill.

Why do we feel the need to structure the achievements of our life around the framework of the birthday?

I for one think it's a social yearning for structure that leads us to celebrating and reflecting on certain milestone birthdays, as if we need guidance as to what to do next with our lives.

I've met plenty of 18 year olds that can not be classified as adults, and plenty of 40 year olds that can not be classified as 'over the hill', and I'm betting that you have too.

If this is the case, then does the milestone collapse on it's own flimsy structure?

In my opinion, yes dammit!

I tend to think that age can not be defined by numbers or the passing of the moon, but rather what you feel. This whole age thing is a construction of social invention, and the birthday is society's way of reinforcing this idea.

So before celebrating your next birthday, think about what you're doing, and what you're playing into by acknowledging it.

P.S- Thanks to Mel for promoting the blog, and keep on reading!

What is wrong with the Beijing Olympics?

2008-03-24T10:28:00.000+09:00

Well, let's start out with the restrictive media service and then move on up to the human rights abuses.

According to the charter of the Olympic movement, "the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practiced without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play."

Ironic then, that the Olympics come to a country where the youth are educated in discrimination, there is no spirit of friendship between China and Tibet and there is no fair play for the media.

Consider what will happen when the media roll into town, and find out that their internet access has been severely restricted by a government wanting to present a sanitized version of itself to the world.

Even the biggest of internet corporations Google has found itself regulated to within an inch of its life for wanting to move into the expanding Chinese market. So is any journalist that covers the Beijing games truly free to send their thoughts home? Or will they be thoroughly 'fact checked' before being allowed to be broadcast?

Certainly the western fear is that the Chinese government will be doing its very best to ensure that only positive articles reach the eyes and ears of a western audience. It seems that the truth will only have one flavour once 8.08.08 rolls around.

Much has been written since Beijing was first awarded the game about this being a chance for China to join the wider international community, but is it truly making efforts to join or to remain a isolationist state?

China's recent conflict with Tibetan protesters in border towns, and it's funding of the Darfur atrocity is a clear indication of the aims of the Chinese government in acquiring these games.

Instead of making an effort of 'restore' ties with Tibet and open negotiations about tentative independence, the Chinese government persists with a clearly unpopular crackdown on the protesters.

So it clear that Beijing does not want to join the international community, but rather show off the country in all of it's self righteous glory to an international audience. It is using the games to reinforce it's own position on human rights, rather than using the games as a starting point for a healing process.

One has to feel sorry for those caught in the middle of this ideological struggle, the athletes.

Instead of being asked questions about their performance and how they think they'll fare at the Olympics, increasingly they're being trust into the political limelight. They struggle to field questions about their stance on human rights abuses, and who could blame them?

Their life is about the pursuit of excellence and competition, so musing on human rights and media rights violations doesn't often enter the minds of the athletes. Those with political leaning you feel, are being gagged by the various sports bodies wanting to avoid controversy.

The standard line "I'm looking forward to competing against the best in the world, and right now am focusing on that" is being offered through clenched teeth by athletes when grilled on human rights.

So does the Olympics serve the ideological agenda of the Chinese government or highlight the human rights abuses evident in the country?

Well, the fact that I'm writing this post has to be a positive thing. Any raising of awareness in regards to a violation of human rights must be a positive thing. But will the asking of all these questions actually solve anything, or just highlight the hypocrisy evident in the policies of western governments toward China? The western governments that eye China with greedy eyes are the ones that could actually put pressure on China, if they wanted to.

I'll leave you with one final question to ponder about this complicated issue.

Can you put a price tag on human rights abuses?

What is wrong with Yahtzee Croshaw?

2008-03-23T20:17:00.003+09:00

Well, nothing.

Many of you may have stumbled upon the unique reviewing style of Ben 'Yahtzee' Croshaw with his Zero Punctuation reviews. Those of you who haven't stumbled upon his humour yet are advised to do so immediately. I'm not going to provide a link, I'm going to let you google the term and come across the link yourself, in addition to the raving fan boys that praise his every word.

Why not? His humour is more often than not pitch perfect, and cuts a swathe trough the games industry at large. The problem is however, the slew of imitators that have cropped up.

Take a look at the Review Forum on the Escapist Forums and you'll probably find one or two people imitating his style...badly. Heck, I've even done it for kicks, but there is something very simple that these people can not seem to understand. That without the use of visual aides, Yahtzee's humour would fall flat.

You see, Yahtzee's style so relies on the visual effect of his illustrations that if you were to transcribe the audio from one of his reviews, the effect would be none too effective. It is because of this new style that Yahtzee has enjoyed great success.

The fan boys would have you believe that Yahtzee is a brand new revelation in the gaming journalism world, but he's been around for more than a year or two. So why haven't we heard of him before this point?

More than likely, his reviews for print media (He wrote for Hyper I think, and now writes for PC Gamer, but don't quote me on that) just haven't struck a chord with the audience the way his Zero Punctuation reviews have.

So what happens when unskilled citizen journalists get wind of his popularity and start writing text reviews in his style? Well, they usually fall flat and get savaged by the unkind world of anonymous feedback.

That's why I personally have steered clear of trying to imitate his style (save for effect), and heavily criticize those who do choose to imitate Yahtzee. Instead of writing balanced, well thought out reviews that may be of some use to the community, the imitators decide to get lazy and copy and paste the formula for their own ends.

What really is confusing about all this business, is repeat offenders.

They commit the same crime again and again, and yet maintain that writing in this style 'expresses their own voice'. Bullshit. They see something popular and jump on the bandwagon.

In closing (I fear I've gone on a bit too long), copying a style that is effective in entirely another medium is folly upon madness. So what's wrong with Yahtzee Croshaw? Nothing. It's his 'fans' we need to watch out for.

What is wrong with Online Journalism?

2008-03-21T21:24:00.000+09:00

In short, it's that journalists treat it as print. They're getting better, but there's still a heck of a lot of crimes against the series of tubes going on.

For a start, they write in long paragraphs. Journalists and citizen journalists alike don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that four or five sentences for an online paragraph is too damn long. People don't want to be staring at the same area of screen for too long.

You see, staring at a screen for too long will make your eyes sore, so that's why our natural reaction is to look away. Eye strain is something that a lot of journalists just don't take into account when writing an article.

Think about it. Have you ever read an article or forum post only to close the browser a minute or two later? Have you ever just looked at an article and gone to another page? A quick look at Google analytics will tell you that people spend only a minute and a half on any given blog post.

People are picky about their online writing. If they are going to spend too long reading it, they're just not going to read it. If they are going to read it however, they won't be wanting to spend all their time rereading that particular sentence over and over again.

The difference, in my opinion, between citizen journalists and established journalists is vocabulary. Citizen journalists seem to be hell bent on telling the world 'I have a vocabulary, tell me how smart I am', whereas established journalists take their audience into account.

They want to make their article accessible for as many people as possible. They will avoid jargon (unless writing for a specialist publication) and keep their language as simple. This becomes even more important when writing online, because rereading a sentence online is something that is just not done.

It's okay to admit that you pick up the Sunday paper, and have to reread sentences in certain articles. That's okay, everybody does it. A good journalist will try and make sure that you never have to reread a sentence, but in print it is forgivable.

Online, that's another story. Because people don't like to spend too long reading on-screen text, making the reader reread a line wastes valuable time and leads to eye strain. The same principle goes for structure and grammar.

Ideally, you want an article to flow. You want to be able to jump from one subject to the next with great bridges between paragraphs. Like I did just there, you want to let the reader know what to expect before they get there.

That's what a great article should be, a scenic drive. It should feel like nice Sunday drive into the countryside where the roads are smooth, and the banter between driver and passengers is just so.

Online journalism, at it's ideal, should be about simplicity. Yet, many people seem to think that because they're writing for the World Wide Web that they have to show how clever they are. If you want to show me that you're clever, create witty and insightful comment using simple language.

Just as the best meals are simple feasts using hearty ingredients, so should online journalism be about creating masterpieces out of the bare essentials.