By Catrin Gardiner, Queensland University of Technology
In the middle of the Pacific, Fiji journalists are transforming their practice, as newsrooms around Suva are requiring journalists to become multimedia creators, shaping stories for the digital age.
A wave of multimedia journalists is surfacing in Fijian journalism culture, fostered during university education, and transitioning seamlessly into the professional field for junior journalists.
University of the South Pacific’s technical editor and digital communication officer Eliki Drugunalevu believes that multimedia journalism is on the rise for two reasons.
“The first is the fact that your phone is pretty much your newsroom on the go.”
With the right guidance and training in using mobile phone apps, “you can pretty much film your story from anywhere”, he says.
The second reason is that reliance on social media platforms gives “rise to mobile journalism and becoming a multimedia journalist”.
Drugunalevu says changes to university journalism curriculum are not “evolving fast enough” with the industry.
Need for ‘parallel learning’ “There needs to be parallel learning between what the industry is going through and what the students are being taught.”
Mobile journalism is growing increasingly around the world. In Fiji this is particularly evident, with large newsrooms entertaining the concept of a single reporter taking on multiple roles.
Fijian Media Association’s vice-president and Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley says one example of the changing landscape is that the Times is now providing all its journalists with mobile phones.
“While there is still a photography department, things are slowly moving towards multimedia journalists.”
Wesley says when no photographers are available to cover a story with a reporter, the journalists create their own images with their mobile phones.
Journalists working in the Fiji Times newsroom, which is among the last few remaining news organisations in Fiji to have a dedicated photography department. Image: Catrin Gardiner, Queensland University of Technology
The Fiji Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) also encourages journalists to take part in all types of media including, online, radio, and television, even advertising for multimedia journalists. This highlights the global shift of replacing two-person teams in newsrooms.
Nevertheless, the transition to multimedia journalists is not as positive as commonly thought. Complaints against multimedia journalism come from journalists who receive additional tasks, leading to an increase in workload.
FBC advertises for multimedia journalists, reflecting the new standard in newsrooms. Image: FBC TV/Facebook/QUT
Preference for print Former print journalist turned multimedia journalist at FBC, Litia Cava says she prefers focusing on just print.
She worked a lot less when she was just working in a newspaper, she says.
“When I worked for the paper, I would start at one,” she says. “But here I start working when I walk in.”
Executives at major Fijian news companies, such as Fiji TV’s director of news, current affairs and sports, Felix Chaudhary, also complain about the lack of equipment in their newsrooms to support this wave of multimedia journalism.
“The biggest challenge is the lack of equipment and training,” Chaudhary says.
Fiji TV is doing everything it can to catch up to world standards and provide journalists with the best equipment and training to prepare them for the transition from traditional to multimedia journalism.
“We receive a lot of assistance from PACMAS and Internews,” Chaudhary says. “However, we are constantly looking for more training opportunities. The world is already moving towards that, and we just have to follow suit or get left behind.”
More confidence Fortunately for young Fijian journalists, Islands Business managing editor Samantha Magick says a lot of younger journalists are more confident to go out and produce and write their own stories.
“It’s the education now,” she says. “All the journalists coming through are multimedia, so not as challenging for them.”
University of South Pacific student journalist Brittany Louise says the practical learning of all the different media in her journalism course will be beneficial for her future.
“I think that’s a major plus,” she says. “You already have some sort of skills so it helps you with whatever different equipment it may be.”
Catrin Gardiner was a student journalist from the Queensland University of Technology who travelled to Fiji with the support of the Australian government’s New Colombo Plan Mobility Programme. This article is published in a partnership of QUT with Asia Pacific Report, Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) and The University of the South Pacific.
As Americans vote in one of the most important presidential elections in generations, the country teeters on a knife edge. In the battleground states that will likely decide the result, the polling margins between Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump are razor thin.
These tiny margins, and the general confusion around American politics today, make it impossible to predict the outcome.
The polls might well be wrong: the electorate may have shifted dramatically since 2020 in ways that will only reveal themselves after the election. The reality is we do not know much of anything for sure, and we may never be able to untangle all of the threads that make up the knot of American politics.
After two assassination attempts on Trump and incumbent President Joe Biden’s dramatic decision to leave the race in August, it is entirely possible this election will throw up more big surprises. But as things stand, there are three broad possibilities for what will happen on Election Day.
All of them throw up their own challenges – for the United States, and for the world.
Possibility 1: the return of Trump
Trump may make history and win back the White House. Only Grover Cleveland has managed to get elected a second time as president (in 1892) after suffering a defeat four years earlier.
If Trump does win, it could be via a similar path to the one he took in 2016 – by once again sundering the “blue wall” and winning the battleground states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.
This feat will likely mean his campaign tactic of mobilising men has worked.
A Trump victory would represent the culmination of a generational project of the American right. A second Trump administration would be very different from the first – the movement behind Trump is more organised, focused and cognisant of the mistakes of the first Trump White House. It would also face considerably weakened democratic guardrails.
The implementation of Trump’s radical agenda, alongside some or all of the broader far-right agenda detailed in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, would radically reshape American life and create political and economic chaos.
The rest of the world would have to reorient itself, once again, around Trump.
Possibility 2: Harris makes history
It is entirely possible Harris makes history – not only by beating Trump, but by becoming the first woman and woman of colour to win the US presidency.
Like Trump, if Harris does win, it will likely be through one or more of the battleground states – in particular, Pennsylvania and Georgia.
For Harris, victory will likely come via high turnout by women and voters of colour, particularly African-Americans, or through a combination of turnout by this core Democratic base and swing voters in key states like Pennsylvania.
How Harris wins – and by how much – will be crucial, both to the immediate aftermath of the election and to the shape of a future Harris administration.
A big question: can she win by enough to head off resistance by Trump and the movement behind him? As Australian writer Don Watson has noted, a Harris victory would likely be taken as an existential defeat by the MAGA movement.
How Trump’s supporters react to such a defeat – and how US institutions react to their reaction – will be a critical test for American democracy.
Possibility 3: too close to call
This brings us to the third possibility: the polls are correct, and it’s such a tight race that the margins in the battleground states are in the thousands of votes, or even less.
If it is that close, counting could take days. And there could be recounts after that.
While conspiracies abound, a delay in the result like this would be an entirely predictable and normal outcome. In the United States, there isn’t one system for counting the votes; elections are run by the states on a county-by-county basis, and each state does it differently.
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, for example, legally can’t start counting mail-in votes until the polls open on Election Day.
Then there is the supposed “blue shift” or “red mirage” that sometimes occurs on election night.
There are now many ways to vote in the US – in person on Election Day, early voting before Election Day or by mail-in ballot. And the time it takes to count these different ballots can vary. So, it may appear as if one candidate is winning early in the night (say, when in-person votes are counted) only for their opponent to slowly turn the tide (when mail-in ballots are counted).
In the 2020 election, this meant early Trump (“red”) leads were gradually lost to the Biden (“blue”) votes. Researchers found that counties won by Biden counted more slowly, on average, than those won by Trump – hence the so-called “blue shift”.
This is an entirely normal – and legal – phenomenon. In Nevada, for instance, state law permits mail-in ballots to be counted four days after Election Day, so long as they were postmarked by Election Day.
Trump and his surrogates like Steve Bannon, however, have exploited the differing times it takes to count votes to peddle baseless conspiracy theories, undermining Americans’ faith in their own democracy, and to incite unrest.
By baselessly declaring victory in 2020 on the early “red mirage” tallies in key states before all the votes were counted, Trump was able to create what Bannon described as a “firestorm” – one that eventually led to the insurrection of January 6 2021.
This could very well happen again. Bannon, in fact, has just been released from prison after serving four months for contempt of Congress, and could once again be a driving force in any post-election challenges by the Trump campaign.
Trump, meanwhile, lied again this week when he said “these elections have to be, they have to be decided by 9 o’clock, 10 o’clock, 11 o’clock on Tuesday night” – laying the groundwork for further election conspiracies.
Delays are normal – but fraught
Trump has made it very clear he will not accept another election loss. If he does lose, he or his surrogates will attempt to weaponise similar conspiracy theories again. They may also use legal challenges to vote counts as they did in 2020 – both to contest the result and to once again mobilise the MAGA movement.
In the event of close margins, it’s also possible some states will go to a recount.
There are different rules for this in different states. To take one example, if the margin is within 0.5% in Georgia, a candidate can request a recount.
In the 2020 presidential election, Biden narrowly defeated Trump in Georgia by 0.25%, which triggered a full hand recount of the votes. The Associated Press declared Biden the winner of the state more than two weeks after Election Day. A second recount was later reconfirmed by Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.
Again, this is a normal part of the process. It ensures all votes are counted accurately and the result reflects the democratic will of the American people as best as the (admittedly, deeply flawed) system allows.
Such a delay, legitimate as it would be, would elevate the already very real risk of further political violence and instability in the United States.
None of these outcomes is inevitable. 2024 is not 2020; nor is it 2016. What happens next in America depends on the movement and interplay of so many tangled threads, it is impossible to see where old ones end and new ones might begin.
In all of this, only one thing is certain. Whatever the result – and however long it takes to come through – the divisions and conspiracy theories that have destabilised American politics for so long will not be easily or quickly resolved. That knot may well prove impossible to untangle.
Emma Shortis is Director of the International and Security Affairs program at The Australia Institute, an independent think tank.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Duckett, Honorary Enterprise Professor, School of Population and Global Health, and Department of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne
Australians today are more likely than previous generations to live with complex and chronic diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease and depression.
This means they’re more likely to need health care from a variety of different providers, such as nurses, podiatrists, psychologists and physiotherapists, as well as GPs. This is known as “multidisciplinary care”. It works best when the skills of all these professions are available to the patient in a co-ordinated way.
But the roles of health professions, and the way they’re funded, have been frozen in legislation and policy for decades. Any change has been incremental and disjointed. It has mostly involved adding more items to the Medicare schedule, with each professional practising separately.
The result has been greater inequity of access. Because fewer than half of allied health fee-for-service visits are bulk-billed, most patients pay almost A$70 for each consultation – and sometimes much more. Those who can’t afford the out-of-pocket costs and can’t find a bulk-billing practitioner miss out.
To assess how the government can remove barriers to team-based care and get health professions working to their full potential, or their full “scope of practice”, last year the government commissioned an independent review.
The final report, released yesterday, sets a new path for the primary care workforce. This could make multidisciplinary care within reach of all Australians.
Using health-care workers’ full potential
The review involved extensive consultation, including on two issues papers. The report itself incorporates feedback from the consultations, including sceptical comments, reflecting a divergence of opinions.
Reflected the report’s title, Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce, its main emphasis is to change the rules and regulations imposed by state and federal governments. These stymie health professionals and limit their ability to use their full skills and knowledge to manage their patients’ care.
Over recent decades, health professionals’ education has improved. So professionals are capable of doing more than previously. Yet the rules and regulations have not advanced and so inhibit professionals from making those skills and knowledge available.
The review argues this contributes to career dissatisfaction, and to people leaving various health professions, exacerbating workforce shortages.
The review proposes a new way of documenting and describing what can be done by a profession through what it calls a National Skills and Capability Framework and Matrix.
As with many other recommendations, the review points to where this is done already internationally and how it can nestle into other policies and frameworks to aid implementation.
To the disappointment of most allied health professions, the review does not recommend more Medicare payments for them to practise independently.
Rather, the review recommends payment to general practices for them to expand multi-disciplinary teams. This would see professionals working together, rather than in competition or isolation.
The review also recommends changing the rules about referrals by health professionals, allowing qualified health professionals to refer directly to non-GP medical specialists in similar areas. This means your psychologist could refer you directly to a psychiatrist if needed, or your physiotherapist could refer you directly to an orthopaedic surgeon rather than needing to go back to your GP.
This will weaken the role of the GP as a “gatekeeper” and also potentially undermine the more holistic care that GPs provide. But from a patient’s point of view, eliminating the intermediate step saves them out-of-pocket costs.
An important recommendation recognises that the health system evolves and rules and regulations need to evolve too. It therefore supplements its recommendations for changes now, with an approach for continuous review through an independent mechanism. This would provide evidence-based advice and recommendations about:
significant workforce innovation
emerging health care roles
workforce models that involve significant change to scope.
When will we see change?
The review sets out a loose timeline for implementation, described as short, medium and long term. And it assigns responsibility for each element of its recommendations to appropriate bodies and governments.
As almost all the recommendations require legislative change, and many require agreement between the Commonwealth and the states, it’s unlikely any of the changes will take effect this financial year.
The review recommends change be implemented in a systematic, evidence-based and safe way. Implementation would start in areas of greatest need such as in rural and remote Australia and also in practices most ready for the change, such as Aboriginal Controlled Community Health Organisations or Victoria’s Community Health Centres.
In releasing what he referred to as a “landmark” report, Health Minister Mark Butler noted the complexity of implementation, which would require collaborative action with states and territories. He noted the need for further consultation, but nevertheless took a supportive tone.
Can this review prompt real health reform?
Overall, the review charts a middle course between letting health professionals roam free and the tight and inappropriate rules and regulations which constrain patient care today. It also sets out the practical steps to achieve its goals.
The one downside of the report is the emphasis on harmonisation of state and territory approaches. This would replace the current approach, where each state and territory decides, for example, on what vaccines can be administered by which professionals and what pharmacists can dispense without a medical practitioner’s prescription.
One of the benefits of a federation is the potential for state- and territory-based innovation and cross-border learning. Harmonisation will limit that experimenting, and may lead to more of the stasis seen in health workforce policy in the past.
Stephen Duckett was consulted by the Independent Reviewer during the course of the Review and commented on the Review’s Issues Papers and Draft Final Report
Like most public figures, Kamala Harris adapts her footwear to different occasions. While her wardrobe includes traditional choices such as formal black heels, it was her appearance in Converse Chuck Taylor All-Stars on the February 2021 cover of Vogue that drew particular notice.
As Democratic nominee for president, these sneakers once again became a focal point of her campaign.
Through her choice of sneakers, Harris signals a new era in female political leadership – and demonstrates how footwear choices can shape a leader’s identity and ability to connect with voters.
Embracing all-American values
We may know we shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but all politicians – especially women – know that we inevitably do. The appearance of others is how we categorise people to make sense of the world and our place in it.
Clothing is a key medium through which we identify ourselves and others. Shoes are particularly layered with meaning: when we observe someone’s footwear we are using them to know whether or not we identify with that person.
This is something that politicians and their teams know and manipulate to win votes.
One famous scene that illustrates this beautifully is Brooklyn Democratic congressman David Norris’s concession speech in the movie The Adjustment Bureau (2011).
Played by Matt Damon, the character reveals the significant work that goes into curating the perfect outfit:
Shiny shoes, we associate with high-priced lawyers and bankers. If you want to get a working man’s vote, you need to scuff up your shoes a little bit, but you can’t scuff them up so much that you alienate the lawyers and the bankers […] So what is the proper scuffing amount? Do you know, we actually paid a consultant $7,300 to tell us that THIS is the perfect amount of scuffing?
While Harris’ Chuck Taylors generally look pristine, she is transparent about her awareness of the style’s significance to potential voters, explaining in a 2020 interview:
Whatever your background or whatever language your grandmother spoke, we all at some point or another had our Chucks, right?
An all-American shoe worn by people of all ages, races, genders and sexualities, the relatively inexpensive and utilitarian Converse All-Star is a social leveller – a smart choice for a politician wishing to identify with a broad electorate.
As others have identified, Harris’ choice of sneakers signals her American values and no-nonsense attitude.
In these shoes, she’s ready for anything.
Shoes change us
Interviewed in 2018, Harris’ relationship with the sneakers goes back several years and certainly appears authentic.
Whether the initial choice to wear them was hers – or, like Norris, that of a team of consultants – is now irrelevant. Through the process of wear, shoes change us.
Not only do they affect how we move through the world physically, but they also shape how we relate to others socially.
Anyone who has selected a particular pair of shoes for an interview or special occasion will be familiar with their transformative effect, one that helps you to feel the part.
Identity can be understood as something that is performed. When a performance is received as convincing, we become the part we are playing and the identity is incorporated into our sense of self.
Harris’ shoes are relatable. In them, she is perceived as – and may therefore feel – approachable and down-to-earth.
On the campaign trail, the social interactions they afford increase her ability to relate to and connect with other people. Through this process, her performance and her identity become one.
One might say she has become her shoes; in doing so, she has come to embody the all-American values they represent. And at only 5 feet 4 ¼ inches, the choice not to compensate for her height with heels exudes a self-assurance more women are discovering.
This woman knows who she is and is reassuringly at ease with herself.
Finding authenticity
Aside from ongoing speculation about Trump’s height and whether he wears elevating insoles, his choice of footwear has attracted comparatively less attention, as is often the case for male politicians.
According to Footwear News, he rarely diverts from black leather dress shoes, signifying his corporate associations. This didn’t stop Trump launching a line of gold sneakers, named “Never Surrender High-Tops” and priced at US$399 in February. A new design, with the words “Fight, fight, fight”, was released after the July assassination attempt.
This represents quite a different use of shoes to connect with voters.
In an era when authenticity in politics is increasingly valued, Harris’ footwear choice represents more than a campaign strategy. It reflects changing expectations around power and leadership.
Her Converse sneakers challenge the notion that women must literally elevate themselves to command authority.
Instead, they suggest a new kind of political performance where power comes not from height or traditional status symbols, but from the ability to connect genuinely with voters.
Alexandra Sherlock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The legendary composer, musical arranger and producer Quincy Jones has died at 91.
Over his long career, Jones arranged and produced for a broad range of genres. His work blended the traditions of jazz, popular, world music and Western classical music.
This was perhaps most present in his 1989 album Back on the Block. It features jazz improvisation, Zulu language, gospel and rapping. The album won seven Grammy Awards, including album of the year.
But even more than his own albums, Jones will be familiar to listeners across decades of popular music, for his work as a producer and arranger with legendary artists such as Ella Fitzgerald, Barry White, Chaka Khan, Frank Sinatra and Michael Jackson.
Finding his feet in jazz
Jones was born in Chicago in 1933, right in the middle of the depression. Around 11 years old, Jones found music.
In high school, Jones sang in a capella groups and played in school bands on the trumpet.
By 13, he was beginning to demonstrate a strong musical ability and musicianship skills, writing arrangements for his bands.
When Jones was a teenager, his family moved from Chicago to Seattle. In these early years, Jones had two pivotal mentors. One was the jazz trumpeter Clark Terry; the other was his contemporary and friend Ray Charles.
By the late 1940s, Jones was working as a trumpeter and as composer and arranger for bandleaders such as Dizzy Gillespie and Lionel Hampton.
A jazz big band bandleader in the 1950s, Jones quickly became a sought-after arranger.
Over his career, he worked on numerous jazz recordings with Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Tony Bennett, Sarah Vaughan (including a great swingin’ arrangement of the song Witchcraft), Frank Sinatra (with popular favourites Fly Me To The Moon and Mack the Knife) and the Dinah Washington recording They Didn’t Believe Me with the Quincy Jones Orchestra.
The move into pop
By the 1960s Jones began transitioning into popular music.
In 1961 Jones became the first African American in the position of vice president at a major label, Mercury Records. In 1963 Jones selected and produced Lesley Gore’s hit song It’s My Party from more than 200 demos.
Elements of the previous decades expertise in jazz arranging are apparent with touches of brass and reharmonising (or modifying the harmonic structure – the chords) of a song. Jones’ production approach here was to double-track the melody (duplicating, and placing the second track with a slight delay), enhancing the richness of Gore’s voice.
In 1968, Jones received his first Oscar nomination for Best Original Score for the soundtrack to In Cold Blood. The following year his composing and arranging versatility was demonstrated when he wrote the music for The Italian Job.
In 1979 Jones began working with Michael Jackson on the album Off The Wall.
By the 1980s, Jones was receiving high acclaim and success immersed in many diverse projects including Jackson’s Thriller (1982) and Bad (1987), in which Jones masterfully fuses pop with rhythm and blues, rock and funk.
His innovation in producing was in his broad understanding of multiple genres of music, adoption of technology and his constant musical invention.
‘A great gift’
In 1985 Jones and Michael Omartian were asked to produce the song We Are The World, written by Lionel Richie and Jackson. It was released to worldwide acclaim.
Jones conducted the recording and left a sign on the studio door: “Check your egos at the door”.
Also in 1985, Jones wrote the original score and produced the music for Steven Spielberg’s The Colour Purple, including the song Miss Celie’s Blues, written collaboratively with Jones, Rod Temperton and Richie. The score and Miss Celie’s Blues each received another Oscar nomination for Jones.
Jones was requested on many large projects as a conductor. A great example is Handel’s Messiah: A Soulful Celebration (1992) conducted by Jones. This album featured some of the music industry’s best arrangers Mervyn Warren and Shelton Kilby as well as a stellar list of vocalists such as Gladys Knight, Take 6, Sounds of Blackness, Pattie Austin, Johnny Mathis, Chaka Khan and Al Jarreau.
In an interview with culture journalist David Marchese in 2018, Jones was asked what he was proudest of in his musical career. He told Marchese:
That anything I can feel, I can notate musically. Not many people can do that. I can make a band play like a singer sings. That’s what arranging is, and it’s a great gift.
Beyond his own work as an artist, Jones undertook humanitarian work, mentored new generations of musicians, and was often a commentator on jazz history or the significance of African Americans in the entertainment and recording industry.
Jones’ artistic innovation and highly effective collaborations, spanning a 70-year career, has made an indelible contribution to music and culture globally.
Leigh Carriage does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Just one day after President Prabowo Subianto’s inauguration, a minister announced plans to resume the transmigration programme in eastern Indonesia, particularly in Papua, saying it was needed for enhancing unity and providing locals with welfare.
Transmigration is the process of moving people from densely populated regions to less densely populated ones in Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s most populous country with 285 million people.
The ministry intends to revitalise 10 zones in Papua, potentially using local relocation rather than bringing in outsiders.
The programme will resume after it was officially paused in Papua 23 years ago.
“We want Papua to be fully united as part of Indonesia in terms of welfare, national unity and beyond,” Muhammad Iftitah Sulaiman Suryanagara, the Minister of Transmigration, said during a handover ceremony on October 21.
Iftitah promised strict evaluations focusing on community welfare rather than on relocation numbers. Despite the minister’s promises, the plan drew an outcry from indigenous Papuans who cited social and economic concerns.
Papua, a remote and resource-rich region, has long been a flashpoint for conflict, with its people enduring decades of military abuse and human rights violations under Indonesian rule.
Human rights abuses Prabowo, a former army general, was accused of human rights abuses in his military career, including in East Timor (Timor-Leste) during a pro-independence insurgency against Jakarta rule.
Simon Balagaize, a young Papuan leader from Merauke, highlighted the negative impacts of transmigration efforts in Papua under dictator Suharto’s New Order during the 1960s.
“Customary land was taken, forests were cut down, and the indigenous Malind people now speak Javanese better than their native language,” he told BenarNews.
The Papuan Church Council stressed that locals desperately needed services, but could do without more transmigration.
“Papuans need education, health services and welfare – not transmigration that only further marginalises landowners,” Reverend Dorman Wandikbo, a member of the council, told BenarNews.
Transmigration into Papua has sparked protests over concerns about reduced job opportunities for indigenous people, along with broader political and economic impacts.
Apei Tarami, who joined a recent demonstration in South Sorong, Southwest Papua province, warned of consequences, stating that “this policy affects both political and economic aspects of Papua.”
We firmly reject Indonesia’s new transmigration policy to relocate Indonesians to West Papua, along with the world’s biggest deforestation project in Merauke, as it threatens the survival of West Papuans.
— Free West Papua Campaign (Nederland) (@FreeWestPapuaNL) November 4, 2024
Human rights ignored Meanwhile, human rights advocate Theo Hasegem criticised the government’s plans, arguing that human rights issues are ignored and non-Papuans could be endangered because pro-independence groups often target newcomers.
“Do the president and vice-president guarantee the safety of those relocated from Java,” Hasegem told BenarNews.
The programme, which dates to 1905, has continued through various administrations under the guise of promoting development and unity.
Indonesia’s policy resumed post-independence on December 12, 1950, under President Sukarno, who sought to foster prosperity and equitable development.
It also aimed to promote social unity by relocating citizens across regions.
Transmigration involving 78,000 families occurred in Papua from 1964 to 1999, according to statistics from the Papua provincial government. That would equal between 312,000 and 390,000 people settling in Papua from other parts of the country, assuming the average Indonesian family has 4 to 5 people.
The programme paused in 2001 after a Special Autonomy Law required regional regulations to be followed.
Students hold a rally at Abepura Circle in Jayapura, the capital of Indonesia’s Papua Province, yesterday to protest against Indonesia’s plan to resume a transmigration programme, Image: Victor Mambor/BenarNews
Legality questioned Papuan legislator John N.R. Gobay questioned the role of Papua’s six new autonomous regional governments in the transmigration process. He cited Article 61 of the law, which mandates that transmigration proceed only with gubernatorial consent and regulatory backing.
Without these clear regional regulations, he warned, transmigration lacks a strong legal foundation and could conflict with special autonomy rules.
He also pointed to a 2008 Papuan regulation stating that transmigration should proceed only after the Indigenous Papuan population reaches 20 million. In 2023, the population across six provinces of Papua was about 6.25 million, according to Indonesia’s Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS).
Gobay suggested prioritising local transmigration to better support indigenous development in their own region.
‘Entrenched inequality’ British MP Alex Sobel, chair of the International Parliamentarians for West Papua, expressed concern over the programme, noting its role in drastic demographic shifts and structural discrimination in education, land rights and employment.
“Transmigration has entrenched inequality rather than promoting prosperity,” Sobel told BenarNews, adding that it had contributed to Papua remaining Indonesia’s poorest regions.
Pramono Suharjono, who transmigrated to Papua, Indonesia, in 1986, harvests oranges on his land in Arso II in Keerom regency last week. Image: Victor Mambor/BenarNews]
Pramono Suharjono, a resident of Arso II in Keerom, Papua, welcomed the idea of restarting the programme, viewing it as positive for the region’s growth.
“This supports national development, not colonisation,” he told BenarNews.
A former transmigrant who has served as a local representative, Pramono said transmigration had increased local knowledge in agriculture, craftsmanship and trade.
However, research has shown that longstanding social issues, including tensions from cultural differences, have marginalised indigenous Papuans and fostered resentment toward non-locals, said La Pona, a lecturer at Cenderawasih University.
Papua also faces a humanitarian crisis because of conflicts between Indonesian forces and pro-independence groups. United Nations data shows between 60,000 and 100,000 Papuans were displaced between and 2022.
As of September 2024, human rights advocates estimate 79,000 Papuans remain displaced even as Indonesia denies UN officials access to the region.
Pizaro Gozali Idrus in Jakarta contributed to this report. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.
Both major parties in Australia see a significant role for gas as the world shifts to clean energy in a bid to avert dangerous climate change.
The Albanese government says new sources of gas are needed to meet demand during the energy transition. And the Coalition, if elected, would expand gas use as it prepares for nuclear power.
Of course, some people argue that the grave threat of climate change means we should not burn any gas. Others say the strong growth in renewable energy generation and storage means Australia won’t need gas into the future.
So who is right? As I explain below, renewable energy is a huge part of the solution but doesn’t solve every problem. So keeping some gas-fired generators in the electricity mix, and using them only when necessary, is a sensible compromise.
Getting to grips with gas
There are almost 40 large natural gas-fired generators in Australia, and they are an important part of the National Electricity Market.
According to Open Electricity — a platform for tracking Australia’s electricity transition – the gas facilities generate around 4% of the electricity we consume and comprise about 17% of overall generation capacity.
The data also shows gas plants in Australia run at just 9% of their overall capacity, meaning they are idle much of the time. Some gas plants get used quite a lot, others only rarely. But when the plants are called on – during times of peak electricity use – their services are vital.
Overnight, our demand for electricity dips. But when we wake in the morning and start toasting bread and boiling kettles and the like, electricity demand picks up.
Demand eases off in the middle of the day as the sun rises high in the sky and Australia’s booming rooftop solar reaches its peak electricity output. But when the sun sets and rooftop solar is no longer producing, electricity use peaks. This early-evening demand creates a big challenge to the system.
That’s why we need technologies that can produce electricity at any time of day or night – and do it quickly. That’s where gas-fired generation – and other “dispatchable” forms of electricity – come in.
How do gas fired generators work?
Gas generators come in two main types.
An “open cycle generator”, also known as a Brayton cycle turbine, is essentially a jet engine. It combusts gas in a chamber to create enormous pressure that spins large fans. This drives a shaft that spins in the generator to produce electricity.
This technology is relatively cheap to build and can start up very quickly – but it’s also quite inefficient to operate. It uses a lot of expensive fuel, and creates a lot of waste heat.
The second type is known as a “combined cycle generator”. It also uses a Brayton cycle gas turbine. But it captures exhaust heat from the turbine and uses it to create steam, which in turn powers a second turbine (known as a Rankine cycle). This significantly increases the amount of electricity produced for the same amount of gas burned.
So while this technology is relatively efficient, it’s also more expensive to build and takes longer to ramp up and down.
Other types of gas generators exist, but they’re a relatively small part of Australia’s fleet.
A video explaining how gas turbines work.
Gas is not the only option
Gas plants are not the only facilities capable of firming up Australia’s electricity grid as the share of renewables increases.
Hydro power can also quickly ramp up to meet the evening peak. However the potential for building new conventional hydro in Australia is very limited due to the lack of large river systems and the significant environmental impact on rivers and surrounding areas.
Coal-fired generators have potential to ramp up production, but are generally not designed to do this every evening. Plus, Australia’s fleet of old coal plants is on a fast path to retirement.
To maintain the delicate balance of supply and demand, more will be required of gas and hydro, to produce electricity, and batteries and pumped hydro, to store it.
Pumped hydro works by using excess renewable energy to pump water up a hill. When electricity demand is high, the water is released and passes through a turbine, producing power.
The potential for pumped hydro energy storage in Australia is large, and some projects are likely to be economically viable. But the projects can face challenges, as demonstrated by delays and cost blowouts facing Snowy 2.0 in New South Wales.
Large-scale lithium-ion batteries are relatively easy to install. Many projects have been built or are in the pipeline. But batteries are not great for long-duration energy storage.
All this means gas-fired power generation is likely to have a future in Australia in coming decades.
The downsides of gas
Methane is the main component of natural gas. It’s also a potent contributor to global warming.
During natural gas production and transport, gas leaks inevitably occur. This is a problem for climate change.
So too is the carbon dioxide produced when the gas is burned to produce electricity.
To tackle climate change, we must dramatically reduce the amount of gas we use in our electricity system. Gas use should also be eliminated for heating and cooking in our homes and, where possible, in industry.
So where does that leave us?
Unfortunately, no perfect solution exists to Australia’s electricity supply-demand conundrum.
The most likely, most economic and most environmentally acceptable approach is to use a “portfolio” of technologies: lots of batteries and pumped hydro but also some gas.
Because to keep the system stable and reliable, we need some capacity that will mostly sit idle, getting used on only a few occasions. For that reason, the technologies should be relatively cheap to build and able to run for extended periods when wind and solar generation are abnormally low.
Gas-fired power – especially open cycle generators – meets that requirement. Pumped hydro and batteries do not.
The gas plants we keep in the grid will not often be used, and so will produce relatively low amounts of carbon dioxide.
Nuanced questions remain. What will it cost to keep a gas network operating to serve a fleet of gas generators that run only for a few days a year? Gas pipelines have to be kept pressurised, and the cost of running a gas extraction network for small demand may also be uneconomical.
Non-fossil options such as biogas, hydrogen or synthetically produced methane are possible longer term options. But they are also expensive. And new technologies – such as flow batteries, thermal energy storage and cryogenic energy storage – are on the horizon.
So, keeping some gas-fired generators on standby, and using them sparingly as needed, is a reasonable approach. It allows us to reduce emissions as much as possible, and keep our electricity system secure and affordable.
Roger Dargaville receives funding from the Woodside-Monash Energy Partnership, RACE for 2030 CRC, and he consults for industry and government bodies.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC L3 Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney
The United States Department of Agriculture last week reported that a pig on a backyard farm in Oregon was infected with bird flu.
As the bird flu situation has evolved, we’ve heard about the A/H5N1 strain of the virus infecting a range of animals, including a variety of birds, wild animals and dairy cattle.
Fortunately, we haven’t seen any sustained spread between humans at this stage. But the detection of the virus in a pig marks a worrying development in the trajectory of this virus.
How did we get here?
The most concerning type of bird flu currently circulating is clade 2.3.4.4b of A/H5N1, a strain of influenza A.
Since 2020, A/H5N1 2.3.4.4b has spread to a vast range of birds, wild animals and farm animals that have never been infected with bird flu before.
While Europe is a hotspot for A/H5N1, attention is currently focused on the US. Dairy cattle were infected for the first time in 2024, with more than 400 herds affected across at least 14 US states.
Bird flu has enormous impacts on farming and commercial food production, because infected poultry flocks have to be culled, and infected cows can result in contaminated diary products. That said, pasteurisation should make milk safe to drink.
While farmers have suffered major losses due to H5N1 bird flu, it also has the potential to mutate to cause a human pandemic.
Birds and humans have different types of receptors in their respiratory tract that flu viruses attach to, like a lock (receptors) and key (virus). The attachment of the virus allows it to invade a cell and the body and cause illness. Avian flu viruses are adapted to birds, and spread easily among birds, but not in humans.
So far, human cases have mainly occurred in people who have been in close contact with infected farm animals or birds. In the US, most have been farm workers.
The concern is that the virus will mutate and adapt to humans. One of the key steps for this to happen would be a shift in the virus’ affinity from the bird receptors to those found in the human respiratory tract. In other words, if the virus’ “key” mutated to better fit with the human “lock”.
A recent study of a sample of A/H5N1 2.3.4.4b from an infected human had worrying findings, identifying mutations in the virus with the potential to increase transmission between human hosts.
Why are pigs a problem?
A human pandemic strain of influenza can arise in several ways. One involves close contact between humans and animals infected with their own specific flu viruses, creating opportunities for genetic mixing between avian and human viruses.
Pigs are the ideal genetic mixing vessel to generate a human pandemic influenza strain, because they have receptors in their respiratory tracts which both avian and human flu viruses can bind to.
This means pigs can be infected with a bird flu virus and a human flu virus at the same time. These viruses can exchange genetic material to mutate and become easily transmissible in humans.
In the recent case in Oregon, A/H5N1 was detected in a pig on a non-commercial farm after an outbreak occurred among the poultry housed on the same farm. This strain of A/H5N1 was from wild birds, not the one that is widespread in US dairy cows.
The infection of a pig is a warning. If the virus enters commercial piggeries, it would create a far greater level of risk of a pandemic, especially as the US goes into winter, when human seasonal flu starts to rise.
How can we mitigate the risk?
Surveillance is key to early detection of a possible pandemic. This includes comprehensive testing and reporting of infections in birds and animals, alongside financial compensation and support measures for farmers to encourage timely reporting.
Strengthening global influenza surveillance is crucial, as unusual spikes in pneumonia and severe respiratory illnesses could signal a human pandemic. Our EPIWATCH system looks for early warnings of such activity, which can speed up vaccine development.
If a cluster of human cases occurs, and influenza A is detected, further testing (called subtyping) is essential to ascertain whether it’s a seasonal strain, an avian strain from a spillover event, or a novel pandemic strain.
Early identification can prevent a pandemic. Any delay in identifying an emerging pandemic strain enables the virus to spread widely across international borders.
Australia’s first human case of A/H5N1 occurred in a child who acquired the infection while travelling in India, and was hospitalised with illness in March 2024. At the time, testing revealed Influenza A (which could be seasonal flu or avian flu), but subtyping to identify A/H5N1 was delayed.
This kind of delay can be costly if a human-transmissible A/H5N1 arises and is assumed to be seasonal flu because the test is positive for influenza A. Only about 5% of tests positive for influenza A are subtyped further in Australia and most countries.
In light of the current situation, there should be a low threshold for subtyping influenza A strains in humans. Rapid tests which can distinguish between seasonal and H5 influenza A are emerging, and should form part of governments’ pandemic preparedness.
A higher risk than ever before
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that the current risk posed by H5N1 to the general public remains low.
But with H5N1 now able to infect pigs, and showing worrying mutations for human adaptation, the level of risk has increased. Given the virus is so widespread in animals and birds, the statistical probability of a pandemic arising is higher than ever before.
The good news is, we are better prepared for an influenza pandemic than other pandemics, because vaccines can be made in the same way as seasonal flu vaccines. As soon as the genome of a pandemic influenza virus is known, the vaccines can be updated to match it.
Partially matched vaccines are already available, and some countries such as Finland are vaccinating high-risk farm workers.
C Raina MacIntyre receives funding from NHMRC (L3 Investigator grant and Centre for Research Excellence) and MRFF (Aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2 experimentally and in an intensive care setting) currently. She currently receives funding from Sanofi for research on influenza and pertussis. She is the director of EPIWATCH®️, which is a UNSW, Kirby Institute initiative. She has been an invited speaker at the 2024 Options for The Control of Influenza at four symposia organised by Moderna, Pfizer, Sanofi and Seqirus respectively.
Haley Stone receives funding from The Balvi Filantropic Fund. Haley Stone would like to acknowledge the support through a University International Postgraduate Award from the University of New South Wales.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Warburton, Honorary Senior Fellow, Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne
These include wiping 20% off debts, increasing the income threshold for compulsory repayments, and changing the amounts people have to repay.
As well as encouraging Australians to study, the changes aim to provide cost-of-living relief – or, as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Monday:
putting more dollars in the pockets of people who feel, justifiably, that they’re getting the rough end of the pineapple.
The changes are certainly an improvement. Unfortunately, they are not as good as they should be – particularly if you have a HELP debt and a family to support.
What is the point of HELP?
My analysis of the most recently released tax statistics indicates more than 70% of those required to make a HELP repayment in 2021–22 earned between A$60,000 and A$120,000. Only 20% earned more than $120,000 and less than 10% earned less than $60,000.
The HECS (now HELP) system was conceived in the 1980s as a way to generate revenue to help the government pay for an expansion of university places.
It doesn’t matter if people do not repay all of their loans. The primary purpose is to have students who have benefited, and can afford to contribute to the cost of their education, give something back.
While fairness has always been a key plank of HECS/HELP, there are some major problems with the system. And the changes announced over the weekend continue to ignore them.
The HECS/HELP system was designed so students would only repay loans if they had the capacity to do so. Enrico Della Pietra/ Shutterstock
What about families?
Student loan arrangements have never taken account of other government payments and obligations such as social security, taxation rates, taxation rebates and Medicare levies.
As I have shown in this analysis, for some family types, HELP repayments combine to produce ridiculous effective tax rates.
Imagine the following scenarios for someone with a HELP debt, earning between $60,000 and $100,000 and who had a pay increase in this income range.
In 2022-23, if you were single with no kids, the average effective tax rate on the extra earnings was 51%.
If you were single with two kids aged four and seven, the average effective tax rate on the extra earnings was 77%. If those children were ten and 13, it was 73%.
The situation is similar in a couple family with two children where only one parent is able to work. The working parent has little incentive to increase their earned income and this won’t change much under the new proposals.
The reason people in these situations keep so little of their extra earnings is because as family incomes increase, they lose family tax benefits, they pay more tax and their Medicare levy increases.
There is not enough attention paid to how all these arrangements interact and how they affect people overall.
We need to know many families are paying HELP
The government’s plan to increase the HELP repayment threshold to those with an annual income of $67,000 is a welcome improvement. The system was never intended to take money off people with virtually no capacity to pay.
The government’s plan to simplify the repayment arrangements is also a positive step. The current system has 18 different repayment rates applied to total income, which means people are repeatedly going backwards when they earn extra money. The new plan to only calculate repayments on dollars over the threshold (the marginal rate approach) stops this from happening.
But the system continues to disregard how people with HELP debts can be in different family circumstances.
In my work on HELP, I often get asked how many HELP debtors have dependent children. The answer is I do not know and neither does the government.
None of the data which the government releases provides any information on family circumstances, despite the fact around $4.6 billion was collected from 1.2 million individuals in 2021-22 (the most recent year we have for this data).
This is vital information to make good policy and fair decisions but we do not have it.
Could these problems be fixed?
We could reduce many of the worst impacts here with a single marginal rate for calculating HELP repayments and thresholds which varied depending on the number of children and partner’s income.
The repayment rate and thresholds could be adjusted to deliver an acceptable repayment level for individuals and sufficient revenue for government to support university funding.
There is no point in pretending the current system is one in which people have an insignificant level of debt that is repaid quickly after university.
It is time we had a system that truly recognised this.
Mark Warburton is a member of the Australian Labor Party and occasional provider of consultancy services to groups such as Universities Australia and the Australian Technology Network.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kylie Message, Professor of Public Humanities and Director of the ANU Humanities Research Centre, Australian National University
Visual images often last in historical and popular memory. This is especially the case in presidential campaigns in the United States, which offer a vast mix of spectacle, surprise and drama.
An historian of political visual culture can no more predict which images are likely to last the test of time than we can know who will win. But we can explain why some historical images from presidential campaigns resonate.
This election season has produced the most media savvy and diverse campaign imagery of all time. Cable news, social media and artificial intelligence have created a whole new universe of image-based narratives.
In this rich visual landscape, here are three images likely to last the test of time.
1. Trump’s ‘fight!’ photo
The uncontroversial front-runner for defining image has to be Evan Vucci’s photograph of Donald Trump being led off the stage in Pennsylvania after surviving an assassination attempt in July.
Both are photographed from below and feature the national flag above Americans working against adversity to reach a common goal. Both fit squarely into the tradition of wartime photojournalism.
Both photographs enjoyed instantaneous popularity: Trump’s image went viral and the Iwo Jima image was featured on a US postage stamp before the war’s end.
But their greatest similarity resides in the cultural symbolism of the images.
Both accurately represent an historical moment; a specific point in time. But the point in time has been actively selected to fit a narrative. The narratives projected are deeply held mythologised symbols of aspirational patriotism.
Visual literacy prompts us to think about which images were discounted in the selection of these historically powerful two. Historical legacies and the national mythologies that fuel these lean toward images of success over pictures of wartime death and suffering.
This image of Trump fits all the criteria we would typically and probably unconsciously apply when assessing if an image is likely to have long-term significance.
The baseline characteristic of iconic images is a general bipartisan understanding of what an image “says”. Regardless of whether you agree with the message being conveyed, you understand its social context, why the image is provocative, dramatic or funny (or not), as well as its historical references.
However, contemporary images are not always so straightforward to read – and in a post-truth AI world, it is harder than ever to decipher the visual culture of politics.
2. Brat summer and coconut memes
Kamala Harris’s youth and vision for the future headlined her campaign’s creation of “Kamala HQ”. The strategy adopted the bright green branding and font of Charli XCX’s smash album Brat after the pop star posted on X: “kamala IS brat”.
Social media has been a critical tool in introducing Harris to voters, especially those of voting age for the first time in 2024. The campaign’s use of social media represented young people as engaged and respected decision makers.
Voters have had more than a century to become accustomed to photojournalism. In contrast, a lot of social media representation has arisen from community activism over the past few years. Reporting from women’s marches this past weekend showed links to the visual culture of the protests that followed Trump’s 2016 election.
You think you just fell out of a coconut tree? You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.
This moment went viral during the 2024 election, and it was not long before people started signalling their support for Harris by adding a coconut emoji to their profile or comments.
The popularity of the coconut meme by Harris supporters indicates a rejection of the derogatory use of the term “coconut” against people of colour “acting white”.
The production and reception of memes by younger voters demonstrates a media literacy and sophistication that also requires continuous fact-checking.
This point was made in Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Harris, which urged her followers to do their own “reliability” checking of information in their feeds after Trump and other conservative figures shared AI-generated images of Swift and her fans allegedly supporting Trump.
3. The televised debate handshake
A key image from the debate between Harris and Trump came in the first few minutes, when Harris crossed the stage to offer her hand. It was the first debate handshake in eight years.
This was a bold action given Trump’s prowling movement on the 2016 debate stage against Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, and his well documented predilection for firm handshakes.
The handshake is representative of the campaign, which has been called “a referendum on gender”. It evoked the image of strong and confident leadership – a central theme as Harris spoke passionately about reproductive rights and abortion.
Televised presidential debates are one of the most keenly watched and analysed moments of the presidential election season. Image is everything.
Their importance is perhaps best indicated by Justin Sullivan’s photograph of President Joe Biden, mouth agape and looking frail beneath the word “presidential” during the June debate this year.
While they rarely lead to an outcome as extreme as a candidate exiting the race, as ended up happening with Biden, the images and soundbites they generate can resonate for decades.
During the first ever nationally televised presidential debate in 1960, Republican candidate Richard Nixon was said to be unwell and refused to wear makeup. Compared to his opponent, Democratic nominee John F. Kennedy, he sweated profusely on stage, creating an image that was disastrous to his eventually unsuccessful campaign.
Between the staged and “gotcha” moments of every presidential campaign, debates provide a unique – and, in 2024, a singular – window into how the candidates relate to each other as humans across an ever-widening ideological divide.
Kylie Message has received funding from the Australian Research Council.
Crossbench independents Allegra Spender, Helen Haines and Kate Chaney have declared they are pulling out of the elite lounges run by Qantas and Virgin, amid the ongoing spotlight on privileges politicians receive from the airlines.
Allegra Spender, the member for the Sydney seat of Wentworth, also said she’d write to ask Qantas and Virgin not to give free upgrades to parliamentarians. It was “time to end the upgrades”.
She said all sides of politics enjoyed the perks, and both major parties had blocked greater competition from Qatar Airways.
Airlines operated under government policy and ministerial decisions, she said. “The public is understandably losing trust in politicians to make those decisions impartially when they’re being given free upgrades from the companies they’re supposed to regulate.”
Spender urged a review of the ministerial code of conduct. Tighter rules were needed about what politicians could accept. The code should also be extended to shadow ministers. There should as well be much more transparency over the diaries of ministers, she said.
“This is the only way to deal with the perception – and potential reality – of decisions being influenced by perks.”
But Labor MP Luke Gosling, from the Darwin seat of Solomon, accused her of grandstanding. “It’s a bit rich from the people with harbour views who either drive or have less than a one-hour flight,” he told the ABC.
Haines, from the Victorian regional seat of Indi, said she was quitting the lounges because she wanted “to remove any possibility of an actual or perceived conflict of interest” in her work as an MP.
“The reality that airlines offer these kinds of perks because ultimately they want to get something in return does not sit well with me and I want to continue to contribute to creating a culture of transparency and accountability through my actions as well as my words.”
Haines said she wanted “to see more rigorous rules around MP disclosures of upgrades and I think a ban on soliciting free flight upgrades is more than reasonable”.
Chaney, who holds the Western Australian seat of Curtin, said with the media attention on the issue “we need to do everything we can to rebuild trust in politicians making decisions in the public interest”.
Another crossbencher, Monique Ryan, from the Melbourne seat of Kooyong, who dropped her Qantas chairman’s lounge membership last year on integrity grounds, said she welcomed the discussion about the impact of corporate largesse on MPs’ decision-making.
“I am deeply concerned about lobbying and its potential to impact government decision making. Free upgrades and airline hospitality are lobbying practices that we have taken for granted for a long time, and it is important that we re-examine them — especially given public concerns about conflicts of interest.”
Meanwhile there is no indication of when opposition transport spokeswoman Bridget McKenzie, who was leading the charge against the prime minister over his upgrades, will produce a list of her own. She has said she has written to three airlines to check what upgrades she has had.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Western publics are being subjected to a campaign of psychological warfare, where genocide is classed as ‘self-defence’ and opposition to it ‘terrorism’. Jonathan Cook reports as the world marked the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists at the weekend.
ANALYSIS: By Jonathan Cook
Israel knew that, if it could stop foreign correspondents from reporting directly from Gaza, those journalists would end up covering events in ways far more to its liking.
They would hedge every report of a new Israeli atrocity – if they covered them at all – with a “Hamas claims” or “Gaza family members allege”. Everything would be presented in terms of conflicting narratives rather than witnessed facts. Audiences would feel uncertain, hesitant, detached.
Israel could shroud its slaughter in a fog of confusion and disputation. The natural revulsion evoked by a genocide would be tempered and attenuated.
For a year, the networks’ most experienced war reporters have stayed put in their hotels in Israel, watching Gaza from afar. Their human-interest stories, always at the heart of war reporting, have focused on the far more limited suffering of Israelis than the vast catastrophe unfolding for Palestinians.
That is why Western audiences have been forced to relive a single day of horror for Israel, on October 7, 2023, as intensely as they have a year of greater horrors in Gaza — in what the World Court has judged to be a “plausible” genocide by Israel.
That is why the media have immersed their audiences in the agonies of the families of some 250 Israelis — civilians taken hostage and soldiers taken captive — as much as they have the agonies of 2.3 million Palestinians bombed and starved to death week after week, month after month.
That is why audiences have been subjected to gaslighting narratives that frame Gaza’s destruction as a “humanitarian crisis” rather than the canvas on which Israel is erasing all the known rules of war.
Western media’s human-interest stories, always at the heart of war reporting, have focused on the far more limited suffering of Israelis than the vast catastrophe unfolding for Palestinians. Image: www.jonathan-cook.net
While foreign correspondents sit obediently in their hotel rooms, Palestinian journalists have been picked off one by one — in the greatest massacre of journalists in history.
Israel is now repeating that process in Lebanon. On the night of October 24, it struck a residence in south Lebanon where three journalists were staying. All were killed.
In an indication of how deliberate and cynical Israel’s actions are, it put its military’s crosshairs on six Al Jazeera reporters last month, smearing them as “terrorists” working for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. They are reportedly the last surviving Palestinian journalists in northern Gaza, which Israel has sealed off while it carries out the so-called “General’s Plan”.
Israel wants no one reporting its final push to ethnically cleanse northern Gaza by starving out the 400,000 Palestinians still there and executing anyone who remains as a “terrorist”.
These six join a long list of professionals defamed by Israel in the interests of advancing its genocide — from doctors and aid workers to UN peacekeepers.
Sympathy for Israel Perhaps the nadir of Israel’s domestication of foreign journalists was reached last month in a report by CNN. Back in February whistleblowing staff there revealed that the network’s executives have been actively obscuring Israeli atrocities to portray Israel in a more sympathetic light.
In a story whose framing should have been unthinkable — but sadly was all too predictable — CNN reported on the psychological trauma some Israeli soldiers are suffering from time spent in Gaza, in some cases leading to suicide.
Committing a genocide can be bad for your mental health, it seems. Or as CNN explained, its interviews “provide a window into the psychological burden that the war is casting on Israeli society”.
In its lengthy piece, titled “He got out of Gaza, but Gaza did not get out of him”, the atrocities the soldiers admit committing are little more than the backdrop as CNN finds yet another angle on Israeli suffering. Israeli soldiers are the real victims — even as they perpetrate a genocide on the Palestinian people.
One bulldozer driver, Guy Zaken, told CNN he could not sleep and had become vegetarian because of the “very, very difficult things” he had seen and had to do in Gaza.
What things? Zaken had earlier told a hearing of the Israeli Parliament that his unit’s job was to drive over many hundreds of Palestinians, some of them alive.
CNN reported: “Zaken says he can no longer eat meat, as it reminds him of the gruesome scenes he witnessed from his bulldozer in Gaza.”
Doubtless some Nazi concentration camp guards committed suicide in the 1940s after witnessing the horrors there — because they were responsible for them. Only in some weird parallel news universe, would their “psychological burden” be the story.
After a huge online backlash, CNN amended an editor’s note at the start of the article that originally read: “This story includes details about suicide that some readers may find upsetting.”
Readers, it was assumed, would find the suicide of Israeli soldiers upsetting, but apparently not the revelation that those soldiers were routinely driving over Palestinians so that, as Zaken explained, “everything squirts out”.
Banned from Gaza Finally, a year into Israel’s genocidal war, now rapidly spreading into Lebanon, some voices are being raised very belatedly to demand the entry of foreign journalists into Gaza.
This week — in a move presumably designed, as November’s elections loom, to ingratiate themselves with voters angry at the party’s complicity in genocide — dozens of Democratic members of the US Congress wrote to President Joe Biden asking him to pressure Israel to give journalists “unimpeded access” to the enclave.
Don’t hold your breath.
Western media have done very little themselves to protest their exclusion from Gaza over the past year — for a number of reasons.
Given the utterly indiscriminate nature of Israel’s bombardment, major outlets have not wanted their journalists getting hit by a 2000lb bomb for being in the wrong place.
That may in part be out of concern for their welfare. But there are likely to be more cynical concerns.
Having foreign journalists in Gaza blown up or executed by snipers would drag media organisations into direct confrontation with Israel and its well-oiled lobby machine.
The response would be entirely predictable, insinuating that the journalists died because they were colluding with “the terrorists” or that they were being used as “human shields” — the excuse Israel has rolled out time and again to justify its targeting of doctors in Gaza and UN peacekeepers in Lebanon.
But there’s a bigger problem. The establishment media have not wanted to be in a position where their journalists are so close to the “action” that they are in danger of providing a clearer picture of Israel’s war crimes and its genocide.
The media’s current distance from the crime scene offers them plausible deniability as they both-sides every Israeli atrocity.
In previous conflicts, western reporters have served as witnesses, assisting in the prosecution of foreign leaders for war crimes. That happened in the wars that attended the break-up of Yugoslavia, and will doubtless happen once again if Russian President Valdimir Putin is ever delivered to The Hague.
But those journalistic testimonies were harnessed to put the West’s enemies behind bars, not its closest ally.
The media do not want their reporters to become chief witnesses for the prosecution in the future trials of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defence Minister, Yoav Gallant, at the International Criminal Court. The ICC’s Prosecutor, Karim Khan, is seeking arrest warrants for them both.
After all, any such testimony from journalists would not stop at Israel’s door. They would implicate Western capitals too, and put establishment media organisations on a collision course with their own governments.
The Western media does not see its job as holding power to account when the West is the one committing the crimes.
Censoring Palestinians Journalist whistleblowers have gradually been coming forward to explain how establishment news organisations — including the BBC and the supposedly liberal Guardian — are sidelining Palestinian voices and minimising the genocide.
An investigation by Novara Media recently revealed mounting unhappiness in parts of The Guardian newsroom at its double standards on Israel and Palestine.
Its editors recently censored a commentary by preeminent Palestinian author Susan Abulhawa after she insisted on being allowed to refer to the slaughter in Gaza as “the holocaust of our times”.
Senior Guardian columnists such as Jonathan Freedland made much during Jeremy Corbyn’s tenure as leader of the Labour party that Jews, and Jews alone, had the right to define and name their own oppression.
That right, however, does not appear to extend to Palestinians.
As staff who spoke to Novara noted, The Guardian’s Sunday sister paper, The Observer, had no problem opening its pages to British Jewish writer Howard Jacobson to smear as a “blood libel” any reporting of the provable fact that Israel has killed many, many thousands of Palestinian children in Gaza.
One veteran journalist there said: “Is The Guardian more worried about the reaction to what is said about Israel than Palestine? Absolutely.”
Another staff member admitted it would be inconceivable for the paper to be seen censoring a Jewish writer. But censoring a Palestinian one is fine, it seems.
Other journalists report being under “suffocating control” from senior editors, and say this pressure exists “only if you’re publishing something critical of Israel”.
According to staff there, the word “genocide” is all but banned in the paper except in coverage of the International Court of Justice, whose judges ruled nine months ago that a “plausible” case had been made that Israel was committing genocide. Things have got far worse since.
Whistleblowing journalists Similarly, “Sara”, a whistleblower who recently resigned from the BBC newsroom and spoke of her experiences to Al Jazeera’s Listening Post, said Palestinians and their supporters were routinely kept off air or subjected to humiliating and insensitive lines of questioning.
Some producers have reportedly grown increasingly reluctant to bring on air vulnerable Palestinians, some of whom have lost family members in Gaza, because of concerns about the effect on their mental health from the aggressive interrogations they were being subjected to from anchors.
According to Sara, BBC vetting of potential guests overwhelmingly targets Palestinians, as well as those sympathetic to their cause and human rights organisations. Background checks are rarely done of Israelis or Jewish guests.
She added that a search showing that a guest had used the word “Zionism” — Israel’s state ideology — in a social media post could be enough to get them disqualified from a programme.
Even officials from one of the biggest rights group in the world, the New York-based Human Rights Watch, became persona non grata at the BBC for their criticisms of Israel, even though the corporation had previously relied on their reports in covering Ukraine and other global conflicts.
Israeli guests, by contrast, “were given free rein to say whatever they wanted with very little pushback”, including lies about Hamas burning or beheading babies and committing mass rape.
An email cited by Al Jazeera from more than 20 BBC journalists sent last February to Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, warned that the corporation’s coverage risked “aiding and abetting genocide through story suppression”.
Upside-down values These biases have been only too evident in the BBC’s coverage, first of Gaza and now, as media interest wanes in the genocide, of Lebanon.
Headlines — the mood music of journalism, and the only part of a story many of the audience read — have been uniformly dire.
For example, Netanyahu’s threats of a Gaza-style genocide against the Lebanese people last month if they did not overthrow their leaders were soft-soaped by the BBC headline: “Netanyahu’s appeal to Lebanese people falls on deaf ears in Beirut.”
Reasonable readers would have wrongly inferred both that Netanyahu was trying to do the Lebanese people a favour (by preparing to murder them), and that they were being ungrateful in not taking up his offer.
It has been the same story everywhere in the establishment media. In another extraordinary, revealing moment, Kay Burley of Sky News announced last month the deaths of four Israeli soldiers from a Hezbollah drone strike on a military base inside Israel.
With a solemnity usually reserved for the passing of a member of the British royal family, she slowly named the four soldiers, with a photo of each shown on screen. She stressed twice that all four were only 19 years old.
Sky News seemed not to understand that these were not British soldiers, and that there was no reason for a British audience to be especially disturbed by their deaths. Soldiers are killed in wars all the time — it is an occupational hazard.
And further, if Israel considered them old enough to fight in Gaza and Lebanon, then they were old enough to die too without their age being treated as particularly noteworthy.
But more significantly still, Israel’s Golani Brigade to which these soldiers belonged has been centrally involved in the slaughter of Palestinians over the past year. Its troops have been responsible for many of the tens of thousands of children killed and maimed in Gaza.
Each of the four soldiers was far, far less deserving of Burley’s sympathy and concern than the thousands of children who have been slaughtered at the hands of their brigade. Those children are almost never named and their pictures are rarely shown, not least because their injuries are usually too horrifying to be seen.
It was yet more evidence of the upside-down world the establishment media has been trying to normalise for its audiences.
It is why statistics from the United States, where the coverage of Gaza and Lebanon may be even more unhinged, show faith in the media is at rock bottom. Fewer than one in three respondents — 31 percent — said they still had a “great deal or fair amount of trust in mass media”.
Crushing dissent Israel is the one dictating the coverage of its genocide. First by murdering the Palestinian journalists reporting it on the ground, and then by making sure house-trained foreign correspondents stay well clear of the slaughter, out of harm’s way in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
And as ever, Israel has been able to rely on the complicity of its Western patrons in crushing dissent at home.
Last week, a British investigative journalist, Asa Winstanley, an outspoken critic of Israel and its lobbyists in the UK, had his home in London raided at dawn by counter-terrorism police.
Though the police have not arrested or charged him — at least not yet — they snatched his electronic devices. He was warned that he is being investigated for “encouragement of terrorism” in his social media posts.
Police told Middle East Eye that his devices had been seized as part of an investigation into suspected terrorism offences of “support for a proscribed organisation” and “dissemination of terrorist documents”.
The police can act only because of Britain’s draconian, anti-speech Terrorism Act.
Section 12, for example, makes the expression of an opinion that could be interpreted as sympathetic to armed Palestinian resistance to Israel’s illegal occupation — a right enshrined in international law but sweepingly dismissed as “terrorism” in the West — itself a terrorism offence.
Those journalists who haven’t been house-trained in the establishment media, as well as solidarity activists, must now chart a treacherous path across intentionally ill-defined legal terrain when talking about Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Winstanley is not the first journalist to be accused of falling foul of the Terrorism Act. In recent weeks, Richard Medhurst, a freelance journalist, was arrested at Heathrow airport on his return from a trip abroad. Another journalist-activist, Sarah Wilkinson, was briefly arrested after her home was ransacked by police.
Their electronic devices were seized too.
Meanwhile, Richard Barnard, co-founder of Palestine Action, which seeks to disrupt the UK’s supply of weapons to Israel’s genocide, has been charged over speeches he has made against the genocide.
It now appears that all these actions are part of a specific police campaign targeting journalists and Palestinian solidarity activists: “Operation Incessantness”.
The message this clumsy title is presumably supposed to convey is that the British state is coming after anyone who speaks out too loudly against the British government’s continuing arming and complicity in Israel’s genocide.
Notably, the establishment media have failed to cover this latest assault on journalism and the role of a free press — supposedly the very things they are there to protect.
The raid on Winstanley’s home and the arrests are intended to intimidate others, including independent journalists, into silence for fear of the consequences of speaking up.
This has nothing to do with terrorism. Rather, it is terrorism by the British state.
Once again the world is being turned upside down.
Echoes from history The West is waging a campaign of psychological warfare on its populations: it is gaslighting and disorientating them, classing genocide as “self-defence” and opposition to it a form of “terrorism”.
This is an expansion of the persecution suffered by Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder who spent years locked up in London’s Belmarsh high-security prison.
His unprecedented journalism — revealing the darkest secrets of Western states — was redefined as espionage. His “offence” was revealing that Britain and the US had committed systematic war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Now, on the back of that precedent, the British state is coming after journalists simply for embarrassing it.
Late last month I attended a meeting in Bristol against the genocide in Gaza at which the main speaker was physically absent after the British state failed to issue him an entry visa.
The missing guest — he had to join us by zoom — was Mandla Mandela, the grandson of Nelson Mandela, who was locked up for decades as a terrorist before becoming the first leader of post-apartheid South Africa and a feted, international statesman.
Mandla Mandela was until recently a member of the South African Parliament.
A Home Office spokesperson told Middle East Eye that the UK only issued visas “to those who we want to welcome to our country”.
Media reports suggest Britain was determined to exclude Mandela because, like his grandfather, he views the Palestinian struggle against Israeli apartheid as intimately linked to the earlier struggle against South Africa’s apartheid.
The echoes from history are apparently entirely lost on officials: the UK is once again associating the Mandela family with terrorism. Before it was to protect South Africa’s apartheid regime. Now it is to protect Israel’s even worse apartheid and genocidal regime.
The world is indeed turned on its head. And the West’s supposedly “free media” is playing a critical role in trying to make our upside-down world seem normal.
That can only be achieved by failing to report the Gaza genocide as a genocide. Instead, Western journalists are serving as little more than stenographers. Their job: to take dictation from Israel.
Jonathan Cook is an award-winning British journalist. He was based in Nazareth, Israel, for 20 years and returned to the UK in 2021. He is the author of three books on the Israel-Palestine conflict, including Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (2008). In 2011, Cook was awarded the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism for his work on Palestine and Israel. This article was first published in Middle East Eye and is republished with the author’s permission.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kerrie Sadiq, Professor of Taxation, QUT Business School, and ARC Future Fellow, Queensland University of Technology
Large companies paid the Australian government a record A$100 billion in tax in the last year, a 17% increase on the previous year. But, over the same period, there were still 31% of large companies, operating here but not paying any tax.
The Australian Taxation Office’s annual corporate tax transparency report released last week includes data on nearly 4,000 of Australia’s largest corporations.
In its tenth year, the report is lauded by the government and ATO as a way to increase corporate accountability and reduce tax avoidance. But there is no detail on the tax practices of multinational entities, including how they interact with their offices around the world.
In particular, there is little information about how 1,200 companies paid no tax.
What the report tells us
The transparency report provides data on corporations with income of $100 million or more and businesses which pay the petroleum resource rent tax (PRRT). This includes Australian public and foreign-owned corporate tax entities, as well as Australian-owned resident private companies.
The report details the total income, taxable income, tax payable, and PRRT payable for all entities that meet the reporting threshold. Taxable income is simply assessable income minus deductions. Tax payable as a percentage of taxable income, can then be used to calculate an effective tax rate. The statutory corporate tax rate is 30%.
A variation between an effective tax rate and the statutory tax rate is not evidence of tax avoidance. However, questions need to be asked about how profitable companies reduce their tax liability to zero.
Zero liability can be achieved by deducting offsets and credits. For example, companies that conduct significant research and development are given tax breaks which reduce the amount of tax payable.
Where a company has accounting losses or a tax loss because it has incurred more expenses than income, tax will be zero. These are legitimate reasons for paying no tax.
But the limited information provided simply tells us how profitable a company is, the amount of tax deductions claimed against that profit, and the tax payable.
What the report doesn’t tell us
The transparency report reveals little about tax practices of multinational entities.
The question remains what deductions are being claimed by corporations and tax entities. The ATO has this information but can only publish what the law allows them, which is limited.
For multinationals, deductions will include dealings with overseas parts of the global entity, such as subsidiaries or the parent entity. These transactions create legitimate tax deductions.
Common transactions include payments to overseas subsidiaries for services, royalty payments for intellectual property, and interest on overseas borrowings.
In the case of petrol company Chevron, money was borrowed in the United States at around 1.2% and on lent to a related Australian entity at 9%.
After a long court battle, about 5% of interest was allowed as a deduction, an amount significantly above the original interest rate. This gave Chevron in Australia a large tax deduction.
It is through these types of transactions profits earned in Australia are shifted overseas. Current tax law allows this but requires the transaction, known as the transfer price, to be at arm’s length – that is, the price is agreed to between independent parties entering the same transaction.
What is transfer pricing?
Multinationals are global by nature and therefore logically maximise worldwide profits. Tax systems do not operate in the same way.
Tax comes under domestic law which means transactions between parts of a global entity are recognised for tax purposes.
If goods or services are sold by one part of the entity to another, an internal transaction occurs. For tax purposes the transaction is recognised as a deduction in one location and income in another. An Australian entity would pay a foreign party for things like marketing, and get a deduction for the expense.
In recent years the ATO has settled marketing disputes with large multinationals including Google, BHP, Apple, Rio Tinto, ResMed and Microsoft.
Where a deduction is allowed in a high tax jurisdiction, such as Australia, and income is included in the profits of a low tax jurisdiction, such as Singapore, the result is larger overall global profits.
The tax system recognises the incentive for multinational entities to shift profits this way and requires transactions to be at a commercial or negotiated price. Determining the price however can be fraught and has led to numerous court cases and tax disputes.
The tax transparency report reveals nothing about these types of transactions.
Taxing multinationals in Australia
In the last decade there have been moves to tax income in the location of the economic activity. The OECD has tried to stop profit shifting by companies, which erodes the tax base of high taxing jurisdictions, through its tax reform agenda.
Further complicating the issue of transfer pricing is the question of whether there is any real activity in the countries where different parts of a multinational are located.
Singapore is recognised for what are known as service hubs. These are places where various services such as sales negotiations are conducted and marketing occurs. Singapore also happens to have a headline corporate tax rate of 17%. This is often reduced to single digits after deals are entered into between taxpayers and the Singapore revenue authority.
These are increasingly valuable assets for multinational entities as they provide a unique edge in the market. We only need to think of Apple, Microsoft and Google to understand how valuable names, logos and designs are.
By its very nature intellectual property has no physical location and can be owned anywhere in the world. Often, intellectual property is held in low or no tax countries.
The transparency report includes no details about how much is transferred to these locations. This is where Australia’s proposed public country-by-country reporting may assist.
Is the ATO’s corporate tax transparency report worthwhile?
Australia should continue to strive to be a leader in corporate tax transparency.
A two-step approach is required to eliminate corporate tax avoidance. Information is valuable and public transparency measures are an important first step.
A second step, however, is to reform substantive tax laws to tax profits where they are genuinely being generated.
Kerrie Sadiq is the recipient of a four year Australian Research Council Future Fellowship Grant.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hafsa Ahmed, Senior lecturer, Department of Global Value Chains and Trade, Lincoln University, New Zealand
The Asian markets have long been seen as a linchpin for New Zealand’s economic success. And the key to future growth could be the cultural similarities between Māori and communities across the Asian region.
These shared values include mana (honour/prestige), manaakitanga (reciprocity/hospitality), karakia (prayer), whakapapa (genealogy) and veneration of kaumatua (elders).
My ongoing research has found embracing the cultural values of tikanga Māori could give New Zealand an edge in these competitive Asian markets.
Seven of New Zealand’s top ten export destinations are in the Asian region. Exports to China alone amounted to NZ$20 billion last year. Exports to India amount to $520 million.
Asia’s projected growth presents a unique opportunity for any country trying to increase its trade in the region. New Zealand holds a unique advantage when engaging with Asia which relates to cultural distance – the extent to which shared values and norms differ from nation to nation.
Research has shown cultural distance is an important factor in international trade and management.
Cultural distance is what sets a country’s culture apart, including differences in language, societal values and family structures. It’s not static, and there could be clusters within countries where diversity exists.
European Australia, for example, is less distant to the European New Zealand than other countries due to shared colonial origins. But these British-based cultures are considered to have a greater distance from their own indigenous populations.
My research has found there are certain shared values between Māori and Asian cultures that mean the cultural distance is less than it is with Anglo-American cultures.
Similar to many Asian cultures, the Māori worldview is deeply rooted in the intricate relationships between humans, ancestors, and the natural world.
This can be seen through whakapapa and mana, both intrinsically linked to one’s connection to the natural environment and human beings.
This has similarities with spiritual practices in Asia, including Hinduism and Buddhism. The concept of bumitama in Balinese culture, for example, translates to “humanity-land-god”, reflecting a holistic view where humans are interconnected with nature and the divine.
The Māori concept of manaakitanga – the principle of reciprocity, where an individual is recognised and respected for not just who they are but as a representative of everyone who has gone before – is an acknowledgement that individuals are all connected through their ancestors.
Manaakitanga has parallels in many Asian cultures. For example, the ancient Sanskrit adage atithi devo bhava is the cornerstone of Indian hospitality.
Kaumātua – an elder in Māori society – holds a position of immense significance. As the custodians of knowledge, tradition and spiritual wisdom, kaumātua is pivotal in guiding the community, particularly the youth.
This approach of transmission of knowledge, values and cultural heritage from elders to younger generations is a core function of many Asian societies.
New Zealand’s advantage
This comparison simplifies complex cultural systems. It’s important to acknowledge that the nuances and complexities of each culture are vast and multifaceted.
But examining shared similarities can help foster a deeper appreciation for the resonance between Māori and Asian cultures.
The government needs to consider the cultural distance between Māori and Asian cultures as it works to promote trade with its Asian partners.
Incorporating tikanga Māori in international policy and engagement can enable authentic relationships with Asia.
In addition, New Zealand could further include Māori representation in diplomacy with specific Māori diplomatic roles for Asia.
Strategies can include adopting Māori values in decision-making – such as focusing on manaakitanga and kaitiakitanga. The government needs to also support Māori businesses to enter Asian markets and encourage training focused on Asian and Māori cross-cultural exchanges that include opportunities to learn Asian languages to bolster communication.
But this would require a thorough alignment of the New Zealand government towards Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles – a move that is unlikely with the current centre-right coalition.
It is clear embracing tikanga Māori could provide an edge to New Zealand when it comes to engagement with Asia to foster stronger economic, trade, investment and tourism relationships.
Hafsa Ahmed does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In recent months, Australian concertgoers have witnessed plenty of unexpected onstage drama.
The latest example came from Coldplay’s sold-out Sunday show in Melbourne. Lead singer Chris Martin took a sudden plunge through a trapdoor, catching fans off guard, before reemerging with a laugh and reassuring wave.
Just weeks prior, also in Melbourne, singer Olivia Rodrigo abruptly fell into an unexpected opening mid-performance.
While such slips may seem like isolated moments of bad luck, they signal at one aspect of live shows that often goes unnoticed: performer safety.
As stages become increasingly elaborate – with intricate set designs and high-tech moving parts – the line between awe-inspiring production and potential hazard grows thin.
A thin line between spectacle and risk
Performer safety mishaps aren’t isolated accidents. They are part of a recurring pattern in live music in both Australia and overseas, with falls and slips being one of the most common setbacks. For instance,
in 2022, Post Malone fell through an open trapdoor mid-performance in St Louis. The fall resulted in a rib injury, a 15-minute interruption to the show and many concerned fans
on a more local level, in 2022 Australian cabaret performer Hans suffered a shattered foot and slight spinal damage after falling four metres while performing on a cruise.
in October, The Weeknd was grabbed by a Melbourne concertgoer who evaded security and rushed onto the stage and towards the artist, stunning him momentarily
last year, Bebe Rexha was struck in the face by a phone thrown from the audience during a concert in New York City. This resulted in a laceration that required stitches
Harry Styles was hit by various objects during his 2023 world tour. In one show in Los Angeles, a skittle struck his eye
during her BST Festival performance in London, P!nk was taken aback when a fan threw a bag containing their mother’s ashes onto the stage. While no one was injured, the unusual act left P!nk visibly shocked.
What’s behind this trend?
From falls, to fans rushing onstage, to objects flying from the crowd, it’s clear artists are facing a unique set of safety challenges. These challenges are driven by two factors: audience behaviour and increasingly complex stage designs.
While audience misbehaviour poses a significant risk, it seemed to have peaked post-pandemic. This may have reflected a collective frustration – or perhaps it was audiences failing to remember proper concert etiquette after spending so much time in lockdowns.
Social media also arguably played a role, by turning disruptive actions into “viral moments” and potentially inspiring copycats. Fortunately, these incidents seem to be declining as live music crowds settle back into pre-pandemic norms.
Stage-related mishaps, however, appear to be on the opposite trajectory. As artists strive to create unforgettable experiences, they’re confronted with stages that are riskier than ever before.
Delivering the “wow factor” has led to stages becoming multi-layered landscapes with high-tech trapdoors, platforms, dazzling lights and immersive visuals that may be difficult for the performer to navigate.
This raises a significant but often overlooked element in safety discussions: the human factors. Even the most seasoned performers can only process so much sensory input at once. As stage productions grow more complex, the cognitive load on artists also intensifies.
Artists already spend much of their mental energy on trying to engage their audience, leaving fewer resources to safely navigate a maze of lighting rigs, trapdoors and moving platforms. In this context, stage mishaps aren’t accidents; they’re byproducts of an environment where human attention is stretched to its limits.
As the demand for spectacle increases, so too does the risk of artists facing disorientation or injury.
Why does it matter? And what should be done?
Major artists are humans, too. Their safety is just as important as that of the audience – and is also an occupational safety matter.
But even beyond artists’ wellbeing, the effects of an onstage mishap can be felt by the entire audience. An accident can pause or even cut a show short, leaving fans frustrated.
While recent incidents have been limited to minor injuries or brief disruptions, these recurring patterns point to a growing issue that shoudn’t be ignored.
It’s time to bring performer safety into the spotlight – and there are a few ways we can do this. For instance:
tour operators and production teams have a responsibility to conduct thorough safety audits to identify every possible risk element an artist may encounter on stage
venues should prioritise security and make sure major events are adequately staffed
fans should be reminded that a stage is a performer’s workplace – and not an interactive free-for-all.
At the end of the day, ensuring a performer’s safety is a responsibility that falls on everyone, from the tour operator, to venue staff – and yes, even to the fans.
Milad Haghani does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In a significant blow to Australia’s defence capabilities, the federal government is cancelling what would have been the nation’s largest-ever space project: a A$7 billion military satellite communications system.
Defence industry sources quoted by The Australian newspaper indicated that insufficient funding was allocated to start the program, despite its strategic importance. According to the ABC, “defence industry figures believe there are cheaper options available”.
The project’s cancellation would mark a dramatic reversal for a program that was meant to make Australia’s military communications safer at a time when the cyber threat landscape has been steadily evolving.
The rise and fall of JP9102
The ambitious satellite program is known as JP9102. It was awarded to US defence contractor Lockheed Martin in April 2023 after a competitive tender process that included major players like Airbus, Northrop Grumman and Optus.
The project aimed to launch several large military-grade satellites. It would also involve several ground stations, new satellite communications operations centres, and a central management system. Taken together, this would create a secure communications network for Australia’s military.
Currently, the Australian Defence Force (ADF) uses a complex network of up to 89 different “capabilities” (military assets) that rely on satellite communications.
This existing system lacks the comprehensive security and coverage that JP9102 promised to deliver. Without it, Australia’s military communications are potentially left vulnerable to cyber and electronic warfare attacks.
In its statement, the Department of Defence claims its “current satellite communications capabilities support the immediate needs of the organisation”.
What can military satellites deliver?
The proposed satellite system was intended to create what experts call an “uncrackable data network” across the ADF.
These military-grade satellites would have provided secure communications for fighter jets, naval vessels and ground forces across the vast Indo-Pacific region.
Unlike commercial satellites, military satellites incorporate advanced encryption and anti-jamming capabilities. This makes them significantly more resistant to cyber attack and electronic warfare.
Military satellites face sophisticated cyber threats from both state and non-state actors.
China and Russia are widely recognised as having advanced capabilities in this domain. They have the ability to jam satellite signals, intercept communications and potentially even take control of satellite systems. North Korea has also demonstrated growing capabilities in cyber warfare, particularly in signal jamming.
In 2014, Russian forces reportedly jammed and disrupted satellite communications during their operations in Crimea. More recently, at the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, hackers disabled thousands of satellite modems that were part of the Viasat satellite network, causing disruptions to both military and civilian communications across Europe.
In the commercial sector, Iran has been accused of jamming satellite broadcasts and GPS signals.
This demonstrates how even nations with less advanced military capabilities can pose significant threats to satellite communications.
JP9102 was considered a “bleeding-edge technology project”. It included plans for machine learning capabilities to increase agility and responsiveness.
The JP9102 satellites may, if they are based on open-architecture design or software-based systems, take advantage of future on-orbit servicing technologies that could extend their operational life and enhance their capabilities over time.
A budget reality
The key takeaway here is the growing gap between Australia’s defence ambitions and its budget reality. As regional tensions continue to increase and cyber threats evolve, the decision to cancel JP9102 highlights the challenging trade-offs between needing to secure Australia’s military communications and the costs of doing so.
It raises the question of how Australia will secure its military communications in an increasingly contested Indo-Pacific region. The cancellation of JP9102 creates a significant capability gap in Australia’s military communications strategy that will need to be addressed.
Defence planners will likely need to explore alternative solutions. These might include partnerships with commercial satellite providers or joining the military satellite networks of allied nations, such as the United States.
David Tuffley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The largest wetland on Australia’s second longest river, the Murrumbidgee in the southern Murray-Darling Basin, is drying up. This is bad news for the plants, animals and people who rely on the vast Lowbidgee Floodplain. So it’s important to understand what is going on, and whether we can do anything about it.
Our new research used computer modelling to study past and future river flows. We examined natural flows in the lower Murrumbidgee River between 1890 and 1927, before humans started changing the river. We compared these flows to what happened after big dams went in and more water was taken out for irrigation. Then, we modelled how climate change is likely to influence flows in future.
We found river regulation such as dams and reservoirs cut flows in half over the past three decades. It means periods between life-giving floods on the wetlands are now more than twice as long. With climate change, drying of these vital freshwater ecosystems is likely to accelerate.
Altogether, we predict the annual duration of flood events sustaining these wetlands will drop by as much as 85% by 2075 compared to natural levels, if nothing is done. But there are plenty of things we can do to turn this around, because our research shows the main reason for the decline is river regulation and overextraction.
A colony of Australian pelicans gathered on the Lowbidgee Floodplain. Annette Ruzicka
Floods are essential for wetlands
The Lowbidgee Floodplain, in southwestern New South Wales, supports expansive river red gum and black box forests as well as one of the state’s largest lignum shrublands. Lignum’s thick mass of stems forms bushes that make great nesting platforms for waterbirds, attracting thousands of glossy ibis, straw-necked ibis and royal spoonbills. The area is also a breeding ground for Australian pelicans.
The endangered Southern bell frog and threatened native fish such as Murray cod also live here.
Floods bring wetlands to life. But human activities have disrupted the natural cycle of flood and drought. In the Murrumbidgee, 26 big dams and reservoirs now store and divert water, mainly for irrigation. These interventions have more than doubled the time between floods, causing large sections of the wetlands to dry up.
The lack of floods has devastated the floodplain, causing black box and river red gum forests to die. Waterbird numbers also plummeted.
A clip from the aerial waterbird survey of Pollen Creek on the Lowbidgee (Centre for Ecosystem Science)
The Lowbidgee’s cultural significance
The Nari Nari people have lived on the Lowbidgee Floodplain for tens of thousands of years. The land and water has deep cultural and spiritual value.
Evidence of Nari Nari connection to this place is seen in the scar trees cut for canoes and other wooden items, middens of discarded shell and bone, earth mounds and burial sites scattered across the landscape.
After 180 years of dispossession, 880 square kilometres of the floodplain was returned to the Nari Nari Tribal Council in 2019. This allows the original peoples of this land to repair it, reinstating cultural burning for example. But there’s a limit to how much they can do without more water.
Nari Nari Elders Kerrie Parker (left) and Mabel Fitzpatrick (right) in the Gayini Wetlands of the Lowbidgee Floodplain. Annette Ruzicka
River regulation and climate change
Few studies have effectively reconstructed such a long history of a river to see where we have come from, and just as importantly, assessed what lies ahead.
We modelled natural flows in the Murrumbidgee River, using data for rainfall and runoff upstream. The rainfall data covers more than a century, from 1890 to 2018, which allowed us to model natural flows back to 1890.
First we established a baseline for natural flows. Then we were able to work out how dams, reservoirs and and water diversions have disrupted these flows over time.
We also considered how climate change might influence river flows in the future under different greenhouse gas emission scenarios.
We found most of the decline (55%) in the Murrumbidgee River’s flows was due to river regulation. But climate change will probably make matters worse, shaving another 7–10% off river flows by 2075, based on average projections.
The average annual duration of floods reaching the floodplain wetlands has dropped from 11.3 days under natural flows to just 4.5 days currently. This could decline further to around 1.7 days as the climate becomes warmer and drier.
An aerial view of the Gayini Wetlands. Annette Ruzicka
Now is the time to act
Australia’s rivers are at risk, but it’s not too late to act. By reducing over-allocation and returning water to the environment we can protect threatened and endangered species, reduce the impacts of climate change, and honour the cultural heritage of First Nations Peoples.
Managing water releases to mimic natural seasonal flows can also help reinstate the natural cues for native plants, animals and other organisms.
Our research underscores the urgent need to understand our past in order to explore future water management options. It’s clear much of the damage has been done by damming the river and taking out so much water. Now it’s important to restore the balance in favour of the environment, to prepare for future climate change.
The Murrumbidgee River and its major floodplain wetlands are also a warning – a canary in the coal mine so to speak – of what could happen to other river systems worldwide as water demand rises along with projected income and population growth. This is especially concerning for many arid and semi-arid regions, where climate change is increasing temperatures while reducing rainfall.
We wish to acknowledge the contribution of Nari Nari Tribal man and General Manager of Gayini wetlands, Jamie Woods, to this article and the research paper it was based on.
Jan Kreibich’s work was supported by the University of New South Wales and the Australian Research Council.
Richard Kingsford receives funding from a range of government and non-government organisations, including the Australian Research Council, the New South Wales, Victorian, South Australian and Queensland Governments and the Australian Government. He is councillor of the Biodiversity Council and a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists.
On election eve in the United States, the presidential race is deadlocked. The polls are exceptionally close across the country and in all the swing states – Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin in the industrial midwest; Nevada and Arizona in the west; and Georgia and North Carolina in the south.
The final New York Times/Siena poll shows Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris leading by a very small margin or tied with Republican former President Donald Trump in all the swing states. The exception is Arizona, where Trump leads by a few percentage points.
While there is no clear favourite to win, there are several critical factors that will driving voters’ decisions on Election Day. This is what to watch.
Trump’s favourability is stuck around 43% in nationwide polling. In the past two presidential elections, he fell short of taking 50% of the national popular vote. As president, he never achieved over 50% favourability. And he has never topped 50% since leaving office.
This means he has hit a ceiling in his support and is highly unlikely to win the national popular vote on Tuesday.
This also reflects what happened to Trump in the Republican primaries to win the nomination. He dominated the field, defeating Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, and several others. But in most of those primaries, 15-20% of Republican voters did not vote for Trump.
Where will these Republican voters ultimately land on Tuesday? Probably half want to vote Republican and will go with Trump. Others will not being able to bring themselves to vote for Harris and will simply not vote for president.
Others will switch their support to Harris. Indeed, there has never been such a swelling of support from members of one party to support the other party’s presidential candidate.
Harris needs those “Republicans for Harris” votes. In addition, she’ll need to replicate the coalition of young voters, voters of colour and women who backed current President Joe Biden against Trump in 2020 in those same swing states and nationally.
Her favourability ratings are higher than Trump, at around 46%. The closer a presidential candidate is to 50% approval ratings, the better their chance of winning the election.
It’s the economy, stupid
At the same time, the country is in a bad mood. There is a classic polling question asked at elections: is the country on the right track, or moving in the wrong direction? Between 60–70% of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track.
That is a signal this election is about change. Historically, that sentiment has not favoured the incumbent in the White House. As Biden’s vice president, Harris is directly facing this headwind.
There are four key issues in this election. The most important is the hip pocket issue: household budgets, cost of living pressures and voters’ concerns about their future economic security.
Since Biden and Harris took office nearly four years ago, the cost of groceries, household items, utilities and services such as insurance have risen between 10–40%. Petrol prices have gone up even more.
Though interest rates have fallen, American households are hurting. When asked who is best to manage the economy, voters in swing states say Trump by a 15-point margin.
The next-biggest issue is immigration. Since Trump first became a presidential candidate in 2015, he has relentlessly pushed the immigration button, declaring the border with Mexico is out of control, with crime and pillage rising in its wake.
The first three years of Biden’s term were also marked by big surges of immigrants crossing the border, though rates have fallen dramatically in 2024.
Voters view Trump as best placed to manage this issue, too, by nearly 15 points.
Abortion rights and reproductive health services are the third major issue. Many women across America are repelled by the Supreme Court’s decision to take away their long-held constitutional right to an abortion. Now, this policy is decided at the state level. And several conservative Republican states – including Ohio and Kansas – have voted to restore abortion rights.
Harris is seen as the champion of these issues. Multiple pollsshow voters trust her more than Trump on reproductive rights, by wide margins.
Abortion rights are also on the ballot in two swing states, Nevada and Arizona, which should help Harris in both.
The future of American democracy is the fourth major issue facing voters. According to a new poll, half the country sees Trump as a profound threat to America’s democracy who will wield authoritarian power to enforce his policies and programs.
Harris has pledged to turn the page, heal divisions and get Republicans and Democrats working together again.
In these closing days, Trump continues to make provocative statements with violent imagery. At a rally in Arizona last week, for instance, he again attacked Liz Cheney, the former Republican congresswoman who advocated for the prosecution of Trump over the January 6 insurrection:
She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face.
This may have provided Harris with a final cut-through moment on Trump’s fitness for office in the final days of the campaign. She said in response:
Anyone who wants to be president of the United States who uses that kind of violent rhetoric is clearly disqualified and unqualified to be president. […] Trump is increasingly, however, someone who considers his political opponents the enemy, is permanently out for revenge and is increasingly unstable and unhinged.
So, who is going to win?
Trump’s team sees victory in all the polls. His chief pollster wrote late last week:
President Trump’s position nationally and in every single battleground state is significantly better than it was four years ago.
The polls may also be undercounting the full measure of Trump’s support, as was the case in 2016 and 2020. And the polls may not be reflecting the extent of antipathy towards Harris as a Black and south Asian woman.
Jen O’Malley Dillon, Harris’ campaign director, and who headed the 2020 Biden campaign that defeated Trump, has told her troops, meanwhile, that undecided voters are “gettable”, adding:
We have multiple pathways to victory […] Our folks are voting at levels we need them to vote in order for us to win.
Harris has built a US$1 billion (A$1.5 billion) machine designed to reach voters in the swing states – through personal contact. This machine made three million phone calls and door knocks on homes in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin alone on Saturday. If this machine delivers, it could be the boost Harris needs on election night.
Harris’ campaign also signalled over the weekend that late-deciding voters, and especially women, are breaking their way by double digits. There is a sense among Democrats that Harris is now peaking as the campaign concludes.
The final analysis
If Harris wins, it will be because she has successfully sealed the deal with those voters and made the election a referendum on Trump – that on balance the country has had enough of him after eight years. It also means her ground game delivered the votes.
If Trump wins, it will mean voters trusted him to manage inflation and the cost-of-living squeeze on households, as well as what they see as out-of-control immigration and crime. These messages would also have been further embellished by unease about Harris, a Black and south Asian woman, as president.
Bruce Wolpe receives funding from the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney. He also worked on the Democratic staff of the US House of Representatives, most recently during President Barack Obama’s first term.
At first glance, Netflix’s Woman of the Hour is yet another true crime fictionalisation that plays to our preoccupation with American serial killers of decades past.
Directed by Anna Kendrick, who also plays the female protagonist Sheryl Bradshaw, the film reconstructs the crimes of serial rapist and murderer Rodney Alcala, aka the “dating game killer”. Alcala famously appeared on (and won) a television matchmaking show in 1978 amid a years-long killing spree.
The film examines historical sexual violence at both the individual and institutional level. It exposes the intense physical and psychological cruelty Alcala inflicted on his victims, as well as the cruelty and misogyny of the patriarchal culture that enabled such behaviour.
Woman of the Hour is a groundbreaking text: it’s the first feminist true crime film to achieve commercial success since the #MeToo movement gained momentum in 2017.
Rodney Alcala reportedly killed up to 130 people, including men, women and children. Netflix
Seeing and being seen
Woman of the Hour inverts the sadistic and voyeuristic “male gaze” of traditional true crime by obliging viewers to identify with the female victim rather than the male perpetrator.
As film theorist and gender studies expert Sarah Projanksy observed in her influential book Watching Rape:
Depictions of sexual violence in most horror and crime thrillers run the risk of extending and reproducing eroticised violence against women, even when victims fight back.
But Kendrick’s directorial debut doesn’t romanticise Alcala or glorify his crimes. There are no cowering or moaning victims shown in various stages of undress.
Instead we see, through careful framing and close-up shots, the panicked discomfort of Alcala’s victims as they navigate the dangers of dating, the damaging effects of casual misogyny and the ever-present threat of male fragility.
As Margaret Atwood once said, men are afraid women will laugh at them, while women are afraid men will kill them.
‘No matter what words they use,’ a make-up artist tells Sheryl, ‘the question beneath the question remains the same […] which one of you will hurt me?’ Netflix
“Did you feel seen?” Alcala asks Sheryl, after the aspiring actress appears with Alcala on The Dating Game in an attempt to be “seen”.
“I felt looked at,” Sheryl responds.
The tense interactions between predator and prey build an almost unbearable suspense for viewers, who have already seen through Alcala’s superficial charisma and charm.
Alcala was an amateur photographer who often exploited his victims’ desire to be understood and “seen”, and would lure them under the pretence of taking their photo.
The film’s unsettling dialogue and intelligent use of visual metaphor frames women as objects to be looked at, but with a twist: the female characters are aware they’re being tracked and entrapped (even if the realisation comes too late).
In subtle but devastating ways, Kendrick presents the horrific rape and torture committed by Alcala from the viewpoint of the victim. The camerawork underscores the victims’ feelings of shock and disorientation, but never in a voyeuristic or gratuitous way.
Rodney Alcala died of natural causes in 2021, aged 77. He was on death row at the time. Netflix
A game of murder and romance
Woman of The Hour implicitly suggests part of Alcala’s perverted pleasure in killing came from his gamification of this process.
In the film, Alcala strangles and then revives his victims, sometimes several times, before resubjecting them to the horror of his violence and the knowledge of their own death. His appearance on The Dating Game is the ultimate power move in his game of murder and romance.
“I always get the girl,” Alcala smirks at a fellow contestant.
His challenge extends not only to Sheryl, the blind date on the other side of the screen, but to the entire studio audience and the viewers at home.
However, the film makes clear that romance was never Alcala’s goal. Instead, he leverages the game of romance to exploit his victims’ vulnerability and trust. In this respect, the game is rigged in his favour.
When a woman in the audience recognises Alcala as the man who raped and killed her friend years prior, she attempts to report her concerns to the show’s producers, only to be fobbed off by a security guard. In another act of cruel male deception, the guard tells her to wait for a “senior executive” who he knows is actually the night janitor.
Women, it seems, are simply pawns in the patriarchal game of 1970s America – an era when women’s testimonies of sexual abuse and harassment were distrusted and their safety routinely overlooked.
Woman of The Hour lays bare the systemic failings that let Alcala get away with his crimes for so long. Netflix
Alcala after #MeToo
The women who survive Alcala’s violence in Woman of The Hour are those who perceive the artifice of his romance script, before inverting that script and presenting it, equally convincingly, back to him.
When teenage runaway Amy wakes in the remote desert after Alcala has brutally raped and assaulted her, she outwits him by coyly asking him to keep what has happened a secret.
By luring Alcala into a false sense of security, Amy convinces him to spare her. When Alcala pulls into a gas station, she flees to a nearby diner and alerts the police, who arrive and arrest him.
Kendrick is careful to not adopt the voyeristic male gaze that is so common in the true crime genre. Netflix
In the end, Kendrick’s message is explicit: “There’s no happy ending with a story like this.”
This post-#MeToo take on Alcala’s violent crimes is a commentary on the systemic misogyny – including the failings of the police and judicial systems – that allowed a serial killer who went on national television to evade detection.
Kendrick, the woman of the hour, refuses to look away.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne
The United States presidential election will be held Tuesday, with results coming in from Wednesday morning AEDT. I have a guide to Wednesday below that includes when polls in the key states close and other information.
In analyst Nate Silver’s aggregate of national polls, Democrat Kamala Harris leads Republican Donald Trump by 48.5–47.8, a gain for Trump since last Thursday, when Harris led by 48.6–47.5. Harris’ national lead peaked on October 2, when she led by 49.4–45.9.
The US president isn’t elected by the national popular vote, but by the Electoral College, in which each state receives electoral votes equal to its federal House seats (population based) and senators (always two). Almost all states award their electoral votes as winner-takes-all, and it takes 270 electoral votes to win (out of 538 total).
Relative to the national popular vote, the Electoral College is biased to Trump, with Harris needing at least a two-point popular vote win to be the narrow Electoral College favourite in Silver’s model.
Trump leads by 0.4 points in both Pennsylvania (19 electoral votes) and Nevada (six). He leads by over one point in North Carolina (16) and Georgia (16), and by 2.6 points in Arizona (11). Harris leads by about one point in Michigan (16) and Wisconsin (ten).
If the current polls are exactly right, Trump wins the Electoral College by 287–251. But either Harris or Trump could outperform their polls and win easily.
In Silver’s model, Trump has a 53% chance to win the Electoral College, slightly down from 54% on Thursday. There’s a 28% chance that Harris wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College. The FiveThirtyEight forecast gives Trump a 53% win probability.
Silver is aggregating state polls to produce a popular vote forecast, and this gives Harris a 50.4–48.4 popular vote margin, better for Harris than her 0.7-point lead in national polls.
Silver said the US pollsters are “herding”, particularly in the key states. This means individual polls are not showing enough variation in their results. If the polls are wrong in these states, herding would be a cause.
The highly rated Selzer poll had a shock result, giving Harris a three-point lead in Iowa (six electoral votes), a state Trump won by eight points in 2020. However, an Emerson Iowa poll gave Trump a nine-point lead. At least Selzer isn’t herding!
If Harris loses, a big cause will be the unpopularity of Joe Biden. If Trump loses, I believe his biggest mistake will be agreeing to the June 27 debate with Biden. Biden’s woeful performance persuaded senior Democrats to pressure him into withdrawing.
Early voting and economic data
As at Friday, over 70 million Americans had voted early (44% of total 2020 turnout). Many states give data on their early vote, such as the gender composition or the party registration of voters in states that have registration by party. But Silver said on Thursday
that analysts shouldn’t use early vote data as an alternative to the polls.
Many people will vote on election day, so the composition of the current early vote may be a skewed representation of the final electorate. Also, we don’t know who early voters voted for. Even in states with party registration, people can register as Other, and Other voters make up a large share of the vote.
In economic data, US GDP increased 2.7% at an annualised rate in the September quarter (0.7% in quarter on quarter terms). GDP has increased modestly in every quarter since September 2022. In September, the personal savings rate dropped 0.2% since August to 4.6%.
Just 12,000 jobs were added in October. While the unemployment rate remained unchanged from September at 4.1%, the employment population ratio (the share of eligible Americans employed) dropped 0.2% to 60.0%. The survey fieldwork may have been affected by Hurricane Milton.
The Silver economic index is at +0.19, indicating an economy just above average. The economy is a key reason why Trump could win.
Election day guide for Wednesday AEDT
All times in this section are Wednesday AEDT. US media will often call uncompetitive states for a candidate once all polls in that state are closed, without any votes being counted. Some states are split across time zones, and in this case the part in the western time zone will close an hour after the eastern zone part.
Early and postal votes are expected to lean to Harris, while election day votes are expected to lean to Trump. So if the early vote is counted first, the state is likely to appear better for Harris than the final result, and the reverse if the election day vote is counted first.
The Green Papers has a complete list of poll closing times and FiveThirtyEight has details on how each state counts its votes. I will concentrate on the seven key states.
At 10am, the first polls close in the eastern time zones of Kentucky and Indiana. These states are both expected to be Trump blowout wins.
At 11am, polls close in Georgia. Early votes will be reported by 12pm, followed by the election day vote. Initial results will probably skew to Harris.
At 11:30am, polls close in North Carolina. The early vote will be counted first, so the initial results are likely to be relatively good for Harris.
At 12pm, polls close in Pennsylvania and the large majority of Michigan. Pennsylvania will count their election day votes first, which should be relatively good for Trump. Michigan will count its postal votes with election day votes.
At 1pm, polls close in Wisconsin, Arizona and the remaining small part of Michigan. In Wisconsin, election day votes will be counted first, with postals not released until late. An hour after polls close, Arizona will release its early vote, which should be relatively good for Harris. Counting of election day votes will continue until the evening AEDT, with more counting in the following days.
At 2pm, polls close in Nevada. The early vote will be counted first. Results can’t be reported until all voters in line have voted, which will probably be hours after the official close of polls. There will also be late postals to count.
At 3pm, polls close in the Pacific states of California (54 electoral votes), Washington (12) and Oregon (eight), all expected to be easy wins for Harris. If Harris is doing unexpectedly well in the key states, these three may put her over the 270 electoral votes needed to win.
At 5pm, the final polls close in Alaska’s western time zone.
We may know who has won the Electoral College and therefore the presidency by Wednesday afternoon, but counting will continue until well into that evening AEDT. If it’s close, it may take a few more days to resolve the Electoral College.
Some states, including the populous Democratic strongholds of California and New York, take weeks to count all their votes. So it won’t be until early December that we know the national popular vote totals.
Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
It’s estimated almost 1.9 million Australians have diabetes, and numbers are growing. Between 2013 and 2023, the total number of people known to be living with diabetes across the country rose by 32%.
As is the case for a range of health conditions, diabetes disproportionately affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Among other factors, physical activity plays an important role in the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes. But our new study, published in the Medical Journal of Australia, shows we don’t know enough about the role of physical activity in preventing and managing type 2 diabetes in First Nations people.
What is diabetes?
Diabetes is a condition where there’s too much glucose (sugar) in the blood. There are different types, but the most common is type 2 diabetes. In people with type 2 diabetes, the body becomes resistant to the effects of insulin, a hormone which regulates blood sugar levels.
Risk factors for type 2 diabetes include having a family history of diabetes, being overweight, and having high blood pressure.
The high rates of diabetes in Indigenous communities are to a large extent influenced by the social determinants of health. For example, we know food insecurity disproportionately affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, especially in rural and remote communities. This can make it difficult to follow a healthy diet, which in turn affects overall health.
People in remote Indigenous communities also often have poorer access to educational and employment opportunities, suitable housing, and high-quality health care. All these factors can contribute to poorer health.
If diabetes is not effectively managed, it can lead to a range of complications, including long-term damage to the heart, kidneys, eyes and feet. Diabetes can affect all aspects of a person’s life, including their mental health.
Physical activity has been associated with lower levels of glycated haemoglobin in the blood (an index of glucose control), reduced blood lipids such as cholesterol, and weight loss. Evidence suggests a combination of aerobic and resistance exercise may be superior to either mode alone.
We reviewed studies that looked at the effects of physical activity interventions and programs in type 2 diabetes prevention and management for First Nations Australians.
We found only nine studies that investigated physical activity interventions for preventing or managing type 2 diabetes in Indigenous adults.
There was some evidence linking physical activity to better outcomes in Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes. However, the value of the findings was affected by shortcomings in study design and a lack of involvement of Indigenous people in designing and carrying out the research.
There are many aspects of diabetes prevention and management that tend to be more difficult for people in First Nations communities, particularly those that are rural or remote.
Also, new technologies that can help with diabetes management, such as continuous glucose monitors, are often very expensive.
It’s crucial Indigenous Australians with diabetes have access to appropriate diabetes support, education and services.
Notably, health, cultural and socioeconomic disparities can impact participation in physical activity. What constitutes realistic opportunities to exercise can differ for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people compared to other Australians.
Previous data has shown Indigenous Australians are less likely to meet physical activity recommendations than non-Indigenous Australians.
Factors that might influence the uptake of physical activity among First Nations people include access to safe, accessible, family-friendly and inexpensive locations to do exercise. These can be limited in regional and remote communities.
Overall, we found a lack of reliable data on whether exercise, and what type of exercise, might benefit Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with type 2 diabetes.
Given physical activity is a cornerstone in the management of type 2 diabetes, we need more rigorous research in this area. These studies must be well designed and culturally appropriate. They must involve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people at all levels of the research process.
Targeted research will help us determine the best approaches to increase physical activity, and understand its benefits, for Indigenous people with type 2 diabetes.
Ray Kelly is a Director at Ray Kelly Fitness Pty Ltd, which provides lifestyle programs in partnership with Aboriginal medical services. He has received funding from Primary Health Networks, the NSW Ministry of Health, and directly from Aboriginal medical services. Ray has also received MRFF funding for his research.
Margaret Morris receives research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Australian Research Council.
As the US election unfolds, American territories such as the Northern Marianas, American Samoa, and Guam, along with the broader Pacific region, will be watching the developments.
As the question hangs in the balance of whether the White House remains blue with Kamala Harris or turns red under Donald Trump, academics, New Zealand’s US ambassador, and Guam’s Congressman have weighed in on what the election means for the Pacific.
Massey University’s Centre for Defence and Security Studies senior lecturer Dr Anna Powles said it would no doubt have an impact on small island nations facing climate change and intensified geopolitics, including the rapid expansion of military presence on its territory Guam, following the launch of an interballistic missile by China.
Pacific leaders lament the very real security threat of climate-induced natural disasters has been overshadowed by the tug-of-war between China and the US in what academics say is “control and influence” for the contested region.
Dr Powles said it came as “no surprise” that countries such as New Zealand and Australia had increasingly aligned with the US, as the Biden administration had been leveraging strategic partnerships with Australia, New Zealand, and Japan since 2018.
Despite China being New Zealand’s largest trading partner, New Zealand is in the US camp and must pay attention, she said.
“We are not seeing enough in the public domain or discussion by government with the New Zealand public about what this means for New Zealand going forward.”
Pacific leaders welcome US engagement but are concerned about geopolitical rivalry.
Earlier this month, Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Baron Waqa attended the South Pacific Defence Ministers meeting in Auckland.
He said it was important that “peace and stability in the region” was “prioritised”.
Referencing the arms race between China and the US, he said, “The geopolitics occurring in our region is not welcomed by any of us in the Pacific Islands Forum.”
While a Pacific Zone of Peace has been a talking point by Fiji and the PIF leadership to reinforce the region’s “nuclear-free stance”, the US is working with Australia on obtaining nuclear-submarines through the AUKUS security pact.
Dr Powles said the potential for increased tensions “could happen under either president in areas such as Taiwan, East China Sea — irrespective of who is in Washington”.
South Pacific defence ministers told RNZ Pacific the best way to respond to threats of conflict and the potential threat of a nuclear attack in the region is to focus on defence and building stronger ties with its allies.
New Zealand’s Defence Minister said NZ was “very good friends with the United States”, with that friendship looking more friendly under the Biden Administration. But will this strengthening of ties and partnerships continue if Trump becomes President?
US President Joe Biden (center) stands for a group photo with Pacific Islands Forum leaders following the Pacific Islands Forum Summit at the South Portico of the White House in Washington on September 25, 2023. Image: Jim Watson/RNZ
US President Joe Biden, center, stands for a group photo with Pacific Islands Forum leaders following the Pacific Islands Forum Summit, at the South Portico of the White House in Washington on September 25, 2023. Photo: Jim Watson
US wants a slice of Pacific Regardless of who is elected, US Ambassador to New Zealand Tom Udall said history showed the past three presidents “have pushed to re-engage with the Pacific”.
While both Trump and Harris may differ on critical issues for the Pacific such as the climate crisis and multilateralism, both see China as the primary external threat to US interests.
The US has made a concerted effort to step up its engagement with the Pacific in light of Chinese interest, including by reopening its embassies in the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and Tonga.
On 12 July 2022, the Biden administration showed just how keen it was to have a seat at the table by US Vice-President Kamala Harris dialing in to the Pacific Islands Forum meeting in Fiji at the invitation of the then chair former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama. The US was the only PIF “dialogue partner” allowed to speak at this Forum.
However, most of the promises made to the Pacific have been “forward-looking” and leaders have told RNZ Pacific they want to see less talk and more real action.
Defence diplomacy has been booming since the 2022 Solomon Islands-China security deal. It tripled the amount of money requested from Congress for economic development and ocean resilience — up to US$60 million a year for 10 years — as well as a return of Peace Corps volunteers to Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and Vanuatu.
Health security was another critical area highlighted in 2024 the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders’ Declaration.
The Democratic Party’s commitment to the World Health Organisation (WHO) bodes well, in contrast to the previous Trump administration’s withdrawal from the WHO during the covid-19 pandemic.
It continued a long-running programme called ‘The Academy for Women Entrepreneurs’ which gives enterprising women from more than 100 countries with the knowledge, networks and access they need to launch and scale successful businesses.
While both Trump and Harris may differ on critical issues for the Pacific such as the climate crisis and multilateralism, both see China as the primary external threat to US interests. Image: 123RF/RNZ
Guam’s take Known as the tip of the spear for the United States, Guam is the first strike community under constant threat of a nuclear missile attack.
It was seen as a signal of China’s missile capabilities which had the US and South Pacific Defence Ministers on edge and deeply “concerned”.
China’s Defence Ministry said in a statement the launch was part of routine training by the People’s Liberation Army’s Rocket Force, which oversees conventional and nuclear missile operations and was not aimed at any country or target.
The US has invested billions to build a 360-degree missile defence system on Guam with plans for missile tests twice a year over the next decade, as it looks to bolster its weaponry in competition with China.
Despite the arms race and increased military presence and weaponry on Guam, China is known to have fewer missiles than the US.
The US considers Guam a key strategic military base to help it stop any potential attacks. Image: RNZ Pacific/Eleisha Foon
However, Guamanians are among the four million disenfranchised Americans living in US territories whose vote does not count due to an anomaly in US law.
“While territorial delegates can introduce bills and advocate for their territory in the US Congress, they have no voice on the floor. While Guam is exempted from paying the US federal income tax, many argue that such a waiver does not make up for what the tiny island brings to the table,” according to a BenarNews report.
US Congressman for Guam James Moylan has spent his time making friends and “educating and informing” other states about Guam’s existence in hopes to get increased funding and support for legislative bills.
Moylan said he would prefer a Trump presidency but noted he has “proved he can also work with Democrats”.
Under Trump, Moylan said Guam would have “stronger security”, raising his concerns over the need to stop Chinese fishing boats from coming onto the island.
Moylan also defended the military expansion: “We are not the aggressor. If we put our guard down, we need to be able to show we can maintain our land.”
Moylan defended the US military expansion, which his predecessor, former US Congressman Robert Underwood, was concerned about, saying the rate of expansion had not been seen since World War II.
“We are the closest there is to the Indo-Pacific threat,” Moylan said.
“We need to make sure our pathways, waterways and economy is growing, and we have a strong defence against our aggressors.”
“All likeminded democracies are concerned about the current leadership of China. We are working together…to work on security issues and prosperity issues,” US Ambassador to New Zealand Tom Udall said.
When asked about the military capabilities of the US and Guam, Moylan said: “We are not going to war; we are prepared to protect the homeland.”
Moylan said that discussions for compensation involving nuclear radiation survivors in Guam would happen regardless of who was elected.
The 23-year battle has been spearheaded by atomic veteran Robert Celestial, who is advocating for recognition for Chamorro and Guamanians under the RECA Act.
Celestial said that the Biden administration had thrown their support behind them, but progress was being stalled in Congress, which is predominantly controlled by the Republican party.
But Moylan insisted that the fight for compensation was not over. He said that discussions would continue after the election irrespective of who was in power.
“It’s been tabled. It’s happening. I had a discussion with Speaker Mike Johnson. We are working to pass this through,” he said.
US Marine Force Base Camp Blaz. Image: RNZ Pacific/Eleisha Foon
If Trump wins Dr Powles said a return to Trump’s leadership could derail ongoing efforts to build security architecture in the Pacific.
There are also views Trump would pull back from the Pacific and focus on internal matters, directly impacting his nation.
For Trump, there is no mention of the climate crisis in his platform or Agenda47.
This is in line with the former president’s past actions, such as withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement in 2019, citing “unfair economic burdens” placed on American workers and businesses.
Trump has maintained his position that the climate crisis is “one of the great scams of all time”.
The America First agenda is clear, with “countering China” at the top of the list. Further, “strengthening alliances,” Trump’s version of multilateralism, reads as what allies can do for the US rather than the other way around.
“There are concerns for Donald Trump’s admiration for more dictatorial leaders in North Korea, Russia, China and what that could mean in a time of crisis,” Dr Powles said.
A Trump administration could mean uncertainty for the Pacific, she added.
While Trump was president in 2017, he warned North Korea “not to mess” with the United States.
“North Korea [is] best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met by fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
North Korea responded deriding his warning as a “load of nonsense”.
Although there is growing concern among academics and some Pacific leaders that Trump would bring “fire and fury” to the Indo-Pacific if re-elected, the former president seemed to turn cold at the thought of conflict.
In 2023, Trump remarked that “Guam isn’t America” in response to warning that the US territory could be vulnerable to a North Korean nuclear strike — a move which seemed to distance the US from conflict.
If Harris wins Dr Powles said that if Harris wins, it was important to move past “announcements” and follow-through on all pledges.
A potential win for Harris could be the fulfilment of the many “promises” made to the Pacific for climate financing, uplifting economies of the Pacific and bolstering defence security, she said.
Pacific leaders want Harris to deliver on the Pacific Partnership Strategy, the outcomes of the two Pacific Islands-US summits in 2022 and 2023, and the many diplomatic visits undertaken during President Biden’s presidency.
The Biden administration recognised Cook Islands and Niue as sovereign and independent states and established diplomatic relationships with them.
Harris has pledged to boost funding to the Green Climate Fund by US$3 billion. She also promised to “tackle the climate crisis with bold action, build a clean energy economy, advance environmental justice, and increase resilience to climate disasters”.
Dr Powles said that delivery needed to be the focus.
“What we need to be focused on is delivery [and that] Pacific Island partners are engaged from the very beginning — from the outset to any programme right through to the final phase of it.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Andrew, Professor, Head of the Discipline of Accounting, Governance and Regulation, University of Sydney Business School, University of Sydney
More of our personal data is now collected and stored online than ever before in history. The rise of data breaches should unsettle us all.
At an individual level, data breaches can compromise our privacy, cause harm to our finances and mental health, and even enable identity theft.
For organisations, the repercussions can be equally severe, often resulting in major financial losses and brand damage.
Despite the increasing importance of protecting our personal information, doing so remains fraught with challenges.
As part of a comprehensive study of data breach notification practices, we interviewed 50 senior personnel working in information security and privacy. Here’s what they told us about the multifaceted challenges they face.
Data breaches occur whenever personal information is accessed or disclosed without authorisation, or even lost altogether. Optus, Medibank and Canva have all experienced high-profile incidents in recent years.
Under Australia’s privacy laws, organisations aren’t allowed to sweep major cyber attacks under the rug.
They have to notify both the regulator – the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) – and any affected individuals of breaches that are likely to result in “serious harm”.
But according to the organisational leaders we interviewed, this poses a tricky question. How do you define serious harm?
Interpretations of what “serious harm” actually means – and how likely it is to occur – vary significantly. This inconsistency can make it impossible to predict the specific impact of a data breach on an individual.
Victims of domestic violence, for example, may be at increased risk when personal information is exposed, creating harms that are difficult to foresee or mitigate.
Enforcing the rules
Interviewees also had concerns about how well the regulator could provide guidance and enforce data protection measures.
Many expressed a belief the OAIC is underfunded and lacks the authority to impose and enforce fines properly. The consensus was that the challenge of protecting our data has now outgrown the power and resources of the regulator.
As one chief information security officer at a publicly listed company put it:
What’s the point of having speeding signs and cameras if you don’t give anyone a ticket?
A lack of enforcement can undermine the incentive for organisations to invest in robust data protection.
Only the tip of the iceberg
Data breaches are also underreported, particularly in the corporate sector.
One senior cybersecurity consultant from a major multinational company told us there is a strong incentive for companies to minimise or cover up breaches, to avoid embarrassment.
This culture means many breaches that should be reported simply aren’t. One senior public servant estimated only about 10% of reportable breaches end up actually being disclosed.
Without this basic transparency, the regulator and affected individuals can’t take necessary steps to protect themselves.
Affected individuals can’t take steps to protect themselves if breaches aren’t reported. Yuri A/Shutterstock
Third-party breaches
Sometimes, when we give our personal information to one organisation, it can end up in the hands of another one we might not expect. This is because key tasks – especially managing databases – are often outsourced to third parties.
Outsourcing tasks might be a more efficient option for an organisation, but it can make protecting personal data even more complicated.
Interviewees told us breaches were more likely when engaging third-party providers, because it limited the control they had over security measures.
Between July and December 2023 in Australia, there was an increase of more than 300% in third-party data breaches compared to the six months prior.
There have been some highly publicised examples.
In May this year, many Clubs NSW customers had their personal information potentially breached through an attack on third-party software provider Outabox.
Bunnings suffered a similar breach in late 2021, via an attack on scheduling software provider FlexBooker.
Getting the basics right
Some organisations are still struggling with the basics. Our research found many data breaches occur because outdated or “legacy” data systems are still in use.
These systems are old or inactive databases, often containing huge amounts of personal information about all the individuals who’ve previously interacted with them.
Organisations tend to hold onto personal data longer than is legally required. This can come down to confusion about data-retention requirements, but also the high cost and complexity of safely decommissioning old systems.
One chief privacy officer of a large financial services institution told us:
In an organisation like ours where we have over 2,000 legacy systems […] the systems don’t speak to each other. They don’t come with big red delete buttons.
Other interviewees flagged that risky data testing practices are widespread.
Software developers and tech teams often use “production data” – real customer data – to test new products. This is often quicker and cheaper than creating test datasets.
However, this practice exposes real customer information to insecure testing environments, making it more vulnerable. A senior cybersecurity specialist told us:
I’ve seen it so much in every industry […] It’s literally live, real information going into systems that are not live and real and have low security.
What needs to be done?
Drawing insights from professionals at the coalface, our study highlights just how complex data protection has become in Australia, and how quickly the landscape is evolving.
Addressing these issues will require a multi-pronged approach, including clearer legislative guidelines, better enforcement, greater transparency and robust security practices for the use of third-party providers.
As the digital world continues to evolve, so too must our strategies for protecting ourselves and our data.
Jane Andrew receives funding from The Australian Research Council – Discovery Project.
Dr Penelope Bowyer-Pont receives funding from the Australian Research Council – Discovery Project.
Max Baker receives funding from The Australian Research Council – Discovery Project.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cathrynne Henshall, Post-doctoral Fellow, School of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University
It’s the time of year when shiny horses and colourful clothing fill our screens – the Spring Racing Carnival, which includes high profile races like The Everest, Melbourne Cup and Cox Plate.
It’s also the time of year when questions are asked about the welfare of racehorses that compete in the so-called “sport of kings”.
But recently, as we’ve come to know more about what makes a good life for a horse, questions are being raised about the daily lives of racehorses.
Industry participants will point to the high level care that racehorses receive – comfortable stables, specially formulated diets, the latest vet treatments and added extras such as massages and swimming sessions.
But does this care translate into good welfare?
The theory of ‘telos’
Firstly, a quick primer on the difference between care and welfare.
Care includes all the things that make sure racehorses get fit, stay fit and stay healthy. This care helps maximise the chance a horse will win races.
Welfare is the animal’s subjective or individual experience of its life – how it feels – and there are a number of ways to assess this.
One way is the concept of “telos”, originally developed by Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle.
Telos helps us to identify what matters to animals – their behavioural, psychological and physiological needs.
So to consider if racehorse care actually translates to good welfare, we can assess how closely it provides the animal with the things that matter to them, based on their telos.
Equine telos involves living in groups, forming long-lived social relationships, grazing fibrous plants and being on the move for up to 18 hours a day, as well as staying safe by sensing danger and then moving away.
It also involves living in variable environments to solve challenges, learn, engage in curiosity and play.
Let’s compare that to the daily life of a racehorse.
Movement and feeding
Firstly, the vast majority of racehorses live in stables – sometimes up to 23 hours a day.
Multiple studies have found continuous stabling harms horse welfare.
Stables significantly restrict opportunities for voluntary movement, and studies show stabled horses spend the majority of the time inactive.
Even though stables house horses communally, most designs limit horses’ opportunities for social interaction.
Thirdly, there’s little for a horse to do in a stable other than eat, stand, drink or lie, and they often develop abnormal behaviours that are associated with stress. These are never seen in free-ranging horses.
When racehorses do get to move, they have little say over how far, how fast and for how long they move.
The kinds of physical exercise racehorses do are both significantly shorter in duration and at much higher speeds than horses voluntarily choose. It’s those speeds that place them at risk of suffering a serious injury.
What about diet?
Although a lot of time and effort is spent ensuring racehorses enjoy high quality diets, they are mostly comprised of concentrated energy sources such as grains, rather the fibre horses evolved to eat.
Horses are trickle feeders (grazers), with small stomachs that continuously secrete digestive juices.
In the wild, grazing keeps those stomachs full, which prevents the stomach lining from being damaged by digestive acids.
In comparison, racehorses often consume their food very quickly – instead of spending up to 75% of their day eating, they spend only 33%.
Social relationships, in the limited form possible in a racing stable, are also frequently disrupted because horse populations are highly transient due to spelling, retirement or even just going to the races.
Then there’s the gear that’s used to control them.
Horses, like most animal species, escape and avoid painful stimuli.
However, in racing (and many other equestrian activties) it is mandatory to use “bits” to control horses’ behaviour during riding and handling. Bits work by causing uncomfortable pressure and pain and may lead to mouth injuries.
So, racehorses may be repeatedly exposed to pain from bits and perform a range of behaviours to try to escape that pain, like bolting, mouth opening or head tossing.
Racehorses frequently show signs of difficulty coping with the stressors of racing life, including “going off their feed”, aggression towards handlers, becoming hard to control when ridden and a range of stress behaviours and health issues, such as bleeding from the lungs.
What about welfare?
Racehorse care is often directed towards managing issues that are the direct result of the demands of the racing environment.
Fancy stables and aqua sessions are not important to horses, and may even cause harm.
What matters to horses are opportunities to make meaningful choices, such as the freedom to move, form friendships and graze for the majority of the day.
Current racing industry practices often deny horses the chance to make these choices.
There’s no doubt people in racing care deeply about their horses. But to experience good welfare during racing, racehorses need more than just good care.
Cathrynne Henshall receives funding from the Hong Kong Jockey Club Welfare Foundation
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lesley Russell, Adjunct Associate Professor, Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, University of Sydney
Stark health disparities exist across the United States. Life expectancy is lower than in other wealthy countries – and declining. The richest American men live 15 years longer than their poorest counterparts. The richest American women live ten years longer.
Political differences are an interesting and provocative way of looking at these disparities.
Differences are frequently analysed by race, a proxy for other factors that influence health, such as housing, environmental pollution, nutrition and affordable access to health care.
But there are other ways to cut the data. This includes by state – whether it is “red” (governed by the Republican party) or “blue” (by the Democrats). We can also look at individual political affiliation.
One new study from the US looks at political polarisation as a risk factor for individual and collective wellbeing. It finds polarisation – where opinions and beliefs become concentrated at opposing extremes – has a major impact on health.
The paper explores the health risks of polarisation using the COVID pandemic as a case study. COVID saw Americans die at far higher rates than people in other wealthy nations.
Australia escaped the high death toll. But there are still significant lessons we can learn – about how increasing polarisation affects our health and wellbeing, and for the effective management of pandemics and other health crises.
Political orientation and health
The relationship between important health measures, political loyalties and voting patterns in US counties and states is significant. At the state level, policy-making has become increasingly linked to political ideology. With this, differences in lifespan and health status across states have grown.
Political division in the United States intensified during the COVID pandemic. Ron Adar/Shutterstock
On average, life expectancy for residents in Democratic-voting states is more than two years longer than in Republican states. Political orientation is also a strong predictor of obesity rates and chronic illnesses linked to obesity, such as heart disease and diabetes.
Much of this is due to differences in social policies, such as Medicaid. All of the ten states yet to take up the Obamacare expansion of Medicaid – which provides health insurance for poor people – are run by Republicans.
The scale of welfare programs and firearm regulations in these states also play a role.
Stress of a polarised political climate
Large numbers of Americans also report that politics takes a significant toll on their health. This is caused by stress, loss of sleep, suicidal thoughts, an inability to stop thinking about politics and engagement with social media, for example, making posts they later regret.
A study from 2021 showed people who are more ideologically extreme than their state’s average voter have worse physical and mental health.
This political partisanship has been greatly aggravated by Donald Trump’s arrival on the American political scene. The former Republican president has stoked social division and undermined trust in government, scientific expertise and public health organisations. Disinformation and misinformation continue to spread.
All of this was on show in how the Trump administration handled the COVID pandemic. Trump and other political leaders made the situation worse by linking health behaviours (such as mask-wearing and vaccination) to partisan identity.
There was a clear impact on the rates of COVID infection and death. Red states implemented fewer political decisions to mitigate COVID than blue states. And after vaccines became available, residents of pro-Trump counties – less likely to be vaccinated – were more than twice as likely to die from COVID as those in areas that supported Biden.
It is also interesting to look at the role of education here. Low education levels were found to be a strong and independent predictor of whether you were more likely to die from COVID in the United States. This might be explained by the relationship between education and both collective culture and individual literacy.
There is also a strong link between education and political affiliation.
College graduates are more likely to vote Democratic, while those without a degree, especially white Americans, are more likely to vote Republican. This was not explored in the new US study about health and polarisation.
Erosion of trust is dangerous for health
Trust in government is another key factor not addressed in that research. But in Australia, this is top of mind following the release of the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Report, which found the federal government must work to rebuild trust after lockdowns and other mandates.
Greater trust in government is linked to increased political participation, social cohesion and collaboration in tackling societal challenges. In both Europe and the United States, social cohesion and public trust in politicians and experts have been linked to lower excess mortality from COVID.
In Australia, the Australian Cohesion Index shows the pandemic and cost-of-living crisis have eroded trust in government and affected health and well-being. At the same time, Australians see the nation as increasingly polarised.
The presidential election this week will decide much about the future of the United States as a polarised and divided nation. In Australia, the lessons and recommendations from the COVID report provide an opportunity to avert the choices facing the United States.
Lesley Russell has worked as a policy advisor for the Democrats in the US House of Representatives, for the Obama Administration and for the Australian Labor Party in the Australian Parliament.
You might have heard about your local Buy Nothing Project group on Facebook. If not, you probably know someone who’s a member. We estimate at least one million Australians are involved as members or live in households with a member (probably their mum).
Buy Nothing groups enable people to ask for and give away unneeded stuff in their neighbourhood. Whether it’s gifting excess garden produce or an outgrown toy, or asking for winter clothes or to borrow a power tool, the groups help people help others.
Australia has more than 500 of these groups, each with 500–3,000 members. While ordinary in operation and humble in commitment to neighbourhood generosity, these groups have extraordinary potential to reduce consumption and waste. Our research also suggests they improve community wellbeing.
Homes and neighbourhoods have a big role to play in the transition to a circular economy. This kind of economy shares, reuses, repairs, repurposes and recycles materials and products for as long as possible. This circularity is crucial, because getting to net zero is a difficult ask without public buy-in on reducing consumption.
However, our research also finds Buy Nothing groups are not immune to older gendered scripts of household labour. Most group members are women, many of them mothers. It is they who are taking, or expected to take, responsibility for finding or disposing of the stuff that fills their family’s homes and lives. This has troubling implications for how we think about action and responsibility for household waste.
How do Buy Nothing groups work?
Since its founding in the United States in 2013, the Buy Nothing Project has grown quickly. There are 128,000 Buy Nothing communities around the world today.
Other online platforms also help people redistribute used goods. But several membership rules make the project unique. The two strictest rules are:
“give where you live” by joining only one hyper-localised Facebook group
Each local group covers just a few suburbs. Volunteer admins run these groups and enforce the project’s rules and values.
Buy Nothing Project co-founder Rebecca Rockefeller talks about its origins.
Why do people join?
In our study, members cited various reasons for joining and continuing to be involved. The “free stuff” was an obvious motivation. Yet they more often mentioned wanting to help others and sustainability and environmental concerns.
The minimal barriers to participation helped to reduce any perceived financial or logistical challenges associated with sustainable consumption.
Interviewees also said their involvement helped them connect with their community. People found much joy and satisfaction in building social networks and helping others.
People are even gifting items with substantial resale value, such as laptops or bikes. This suggests they value the community connection more than the money they might have been able to get from a sale.
The data we gathered show these groups have more “gifts” than “asks”. This indicates we have many unused items in our homes. It also highlights a common hesitancy to rely on others, which the Buy Nothing Project seeks to overcome.
Operating online offers people a high degree of control over when and how they take part. Buy Nothing participation varied based on life circumstances. Parenthood, natural disasters, pandemics, evolving personal values and educational experiences all influenced people’s engagement.
Participants appreciate the platform’s user information, such as names and profile images. This fostered feelings of familiarity, reciprocity and community.
But the online environment also allows some anonymity and a relaxed or blended approach to the “buy nothing” ethos. People still feel free to buy things when they need to.
Many participants engage regularly with the group via a quick daily scroll through Facebook. Using the for-profit platform caused some concerns for the founders, who felt it conflicted with the movement’s values. But attempts to move away from Facebook to an app were largely unsuccessful.
The cost-of-living crisis has spurred on the global growth of Buy Nothing groups.
What are the broader benefits of Buy Nothing?
Buy Nothing membership can be very educational. Via a “drip feed” of materials in their social media feed, members see others like them engage in environmentally conscious behaviours. As one member said:
The more I have been in [the group], the more I am appreciating the concept.
Such exposure normalises circular gifting and asking behaviours, encouraging members to adopt them too.
Within households, group membership fosters discussions and behaviours related to sustainability. Many members talk with their children about product reuse, charity and awareness of others’ needs.
Households can play a crucial role in adopting environmental innovations. This is because they serve as hubs for social interactions and the spread of knowledge.
But conflicts over sustainable practices also arise within households. Members reported “pulling their families along”. One recalled her struggle to convince her husband to reduce household waste. She was “dragging him kicking and screaming along” but now he was “starting to appreciate some value” in her efforts to reduce their waste.
Our participants’ domestic frustrations mirrored broader anxieties about climate change and the environmental impacts of too many belongings and waste. They linked personal anxiety about clutter with global issues such as exporting waste to poor countries and low-quality donations overwhelming charities.
Group admins told us 75-80% of group members are women, as were most admins themselves. This leads us to an uncomfortable tension: a desire to recognise overlooked economic practices while resisting the perpetuation of gender stereotypes. Just as household consumption and its excesses is positioned as women’s responsibility, managing household waste has historically disproportionately consumed women’s time.
Members said they managed both their belongings and those of others, including parents and children. One said:
I feel like I’m the only person who ever takes anything out of our house.
While celebrating this sustainable activity, we should recognise women are doing most of this work.
I am a member of my local Buy Nothing group – both for personal and research purposes.
The Qantas upgrades affair has turned from a missile targeted at Anthony Albanese to a cluster bomb hitting MPs on all sides.
On Sunday, Education Minister Jason Clare took the opportunity provided by an interview on Sky about the government’s proposal to slash 20% off student debt to relate, in detail, why he requested a Qantas upgrade in 2019 for a private trip to Singapore.
He’d had an operation on his leg. He was catching up with his family already overseas. He contacted someone – he’s forgotten who – in Qantas.
On the other side of politics, the Nationals’ Bridget McKenzie, who’s been in hot pursuit of Albanese over his upgrades, is yet to produce full details of her own situation. She’s asked the airlines for the information.
Then there’s the Liberals’ Paul Fletcher, who apparently likes to book economy on flights of under two hours. He’s had 69 upgrades over almost 15 years.
It’s important to remember what the rules are. Parliamentarians in their work are entitled to fly business class on domestic trips. In some cases, they choose to fly economy on short hauls and business on longer ones.
In the wake of the ongoing revelations, surely it is time to fix the rules. One obvious change should be a ban on upgrades for all personal travel, domestic or overseas, by parliamentarians. If MPs do not want the discomfort of economy class on holidays or other excursions, they should pay to avoid it.
Another change should be that the minister for transport, and the shadow minister, should decline upgrades for their official travel. That avoids any suggestion of being influenced by such perks.
This parliamentary week is devoted, in the Senate, to estimates hearings, so there will be some grilling on the first day about upgrades, and also about the fabled Qantas chairman’s lounge, a networking facility which those with power are invited to join.
“The Chairman’s Lounge” is the title of the book by journalist Joe Aston that kicked off the furore a week ago.
The estimates hearings are also likely to see opposition senators probe the entrails of whether Lidia Thorpe, who demonstrated noisily at the parliamentary reception for the King, has or has not been properly sworn in as a senator.
Thorpe substituted the word “hairs” for “heirs” when she read the oath. But she signed the paper, and constitutional expert Anne Twomey thinks she’s met the requirements.
McKenzie has been among those targeting Thorpe. But if, when the full Senate sits later in the month, the opposition tries to have action taken against Thorpe, it will just serve her cause.
Thorpe wants publicity and that would give her plenty more. To be attempting to censure or even have disqualified an Indigenous senator would send a bad signal, at home (where some Indigenous people back her) and abroad.
The House of Representatives this week will have a heap of legislation before it, including the bill on misinformation and disinformation. There will be another to keep the NBN in public hands, as well as the aged care reforms.
But we’re still awaiting an announcement on restricting gambling advertising, and a bill to put an age limit on young people signing up to social media accounts.
We won’t be seeing before the election legislation for the prime minister’s announcement on cutting student debt by 20%, and other changes relating to its repayment, that he unveiled at the weekend.
Unlike the government’s earlier change to the indexation of this debt, now before the Senate, these new measures are promises – conditional on Labor winning next year’s election.
If that happens, Albanese says this will be “the first piece of legislation we bring into the next parliament”. The 20% cut would be from loan accounts that exist on June 1 next year.
The government says this is worth $16 billion, although experts point out the real figure – that is, the cost to taxpayers – is several billion dollars less because a portion of these loans would never be repaid anyway.
We do not have a precise timeline for the cost, which the government says would be borne over the life of the debt. No doubt the estimates hearings will see some delving into this promise, that is squarely directed at millennial voters and those younger and focused on the cost of living.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Over the weekend, the Albanese government announced radical changes to student loans, which would kick in after the next federal election.
Three million Australians with student debt could see their balances cut by 20%. The remaining debt would be repaid under a new system, with no compulsory repayments for people earning less than A$67,000 a year. Both changes require parliamentary approval.
The changes will apply to everyone with a student debt, including all HELP (formerly HECS), vocational education and Australian apprenticeship support loans, as well as other student support loans.
People with student debt would undoubtedly benefit from the proposed changes. But they come with a hefty price tag and some disadvantages.
What are the proposed cuts to student debt?
As of June 30 this year, Australia’s higher education student debt totalled about $75.1 billion – although this is soon set to drop by about $3 billion. Legislation to partially reverse recent indexation to debts will go to the Senate later this month.
However, staying with the $75 billion, a 20% cut would be about $15 billion.
Using the government’s figures, someone with the average HELP debt of $27,600 would see around $5,520 cut from their HELP loans next year.
Vocational education students owed $8.4 billion as of June 30 2024. Their balances would reduce by about $1.7 billion under the changes.
Based on previous student support loan data, this debt is more than $3 billion. The changes would see it drop by about $600 million.
These reductions total $17.3 billion compared to the government’s estimate of $16 billion. But the upcoming indexation changes may explain this difference.
Repayments set to change
These changes have two important elements: the income at which repayments start and how repayments are calculated.
There was a noted outcry earlier this year when the cost of an arts degree hit $50,000 for 2025.
No compulsory repayments if you earn under $67,000
With parliament’s approval, for 2025-26 compulsory repayments on student loans would not start until the debtor was earning $67,000. This is up from about $56,000.
This would help a significant number of Australians. In 2023-24 more than 400,000 debtors had incomes between $50,000 and $70,000.
Changes to how repayments are calculated
Another significant change is to how repayments are calculated. Currently, when a debtor’s income reaches one of 18 income levels they repay a higher percentage, based on all their income.
This can produce strange results. Take a graduate earning $62,850 a year. They are in the 1% of income repayment rate, so they owe the Australian Taxation Office $628.50 in HELP repayments. But if their income goes up by $1 to $62,851 they enter the 2% repayment bracket, and owe the tax office $1,257. So a $1 pay increase would reduce the graduate’s take home pay by more than $600.
Under the government’s proposal, repayments would be calculated on income above a threshold, ignoring all income below the first threshold.
The new system would start with a 15% repayment rate at incomes between $67,000 and $124,999. Income at $125,000 or above would have a 17% repayment rate.
So, take a graduate on $70,000 a year. Under the current system, they will repay 2.5% of all their income, which is $1,750. Under the proposed system their repayments will be calculated only on the $3,000 difference between $67,000 and $70,000. This means they pay 15% of $3,000 or $450.
But those earning $180,000 plus will repay more student debt each year due to the new system. This is not a large group.
Of the 1.16 million people who made a HELP repayment in 2021-22, all but 16,000 earned less than $180,000.
The cost of an arts degree is set to reach $50,000 in 2025, amid growing concerns over study costs. rongyiquan/Shutterstock
There are some disadvantages
The downside of reduced annual repayments is longer repayment periods and more indexation of HELP balances.
People who want to repay more quickly can make voluntary repayments, which have increased significantly in recent years. But most people take the default option of compulsory repayments only.
While people who currently hold debt will see their repayment times reduced after the 20% cut to their balance, future borrowers won’t have this benefit.
Given the pattern of recent announcements, it would not be surprising if the government also announced reduced student contributions for future borrowers.
But it is also surprising the government has been stalling for two years on the high cost of arts degrees, set to hit almost $17,000 a year next year. These high fees should have been reduced long ago.
The cost to government
The 20% reduction in student debt balances will also come at a very significant cost to government and taxpayers.
This will not be the full $16 billion they have announced, since that includes debt that is not expected to be repaid anyway.
For higher education debt, the government actuary estimates 24% of the debt outstanding as of June 30 this year will not be repaid. Even so, a 20% cut to the $57.1 billion “good” debt would still cost $11.4 billion.
Cutting vocational education debt by 20% would add around another $1 billion to the cost, after deducting debt that won’t be repaid. Debts for student income support tend to have high bad debt rates, but the 20% cut for them would also add to the government’s expenditure.
The government will also incur further costs from slowing down future repayments.
Is this the best way?
The last few years have highlighted how stressful and damaging high levels of student debt can be for younger Australians.
And as Labor looks ahead to the next federal poll, reducing individuals’ debts and repayments could be a useful election selling point.
However, the Albanese govenrment’s plan comes with a high price tag and the priorities may not be entirely right. Managing future debt, such as by reversing fee hikes under the Job-ready Graduates program, is as important as reducing old debt.
Andrew Norton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Israel’s deadly siege on northern Gaza has entered a 30th day. Early week, the World Health Organisation managed to deliver some medical supplies to the Kamal Adwan Hospital, but on Thursday, Israeli fighter jets bombed the hospital’s third floor, where the supplies were being stored.
Al Jazeera reports Israeli forces are continuing to shell Beit Lahia, the scene of multiple massacres last week. On Wednesday, an Israeli attack on a market in Beit Lahia killed at least 10 Palestinians. Earlier in the week, Israel struck a five-story residential building, killing at least 93 people, including 25 children.
Meanwhile, at the United Nations, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Francesca Albanese, has released a major report accusing Israel of committing genocide.
Albanese concludes that Israel’s war on Gaza is part of a campaign of, “long-term intentional, systematic, state-organised forced displacement and replacement of the Palestinians” . The report is titled Genocide as Colonial Erasure.
AMY GOODMAN: Francesca Albanese is now facing intensifying personal attacks from Israeli and US officials. She was set to brief Congress earlier last week, but the briefing was cancelled. On Tuesday, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, wrote on social media, “As UN Special Rapporteur Albanese visits New York, I want to reiterate the US belief she is unfit for her role. The United Nations should not tolerate antisemitism from a UN-affiliated official hired to promote human rights.”
On Wednesday, Francesca Albanese spoke at the United Nations and responded to the US attacks.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I have the same shock that you have, looking at how the United States is behaving in this context, in the context of the genocide that is unfolding in Gaza. I’m not — I’m not surprised that they attack anyone who speaks to the facts that are, frankly, on our watch in Gaza. And they do that so brutally because they feel called out, because it’s not that it’s that the United States is simply an observer. The United States is being an enabler in what Israel has been doing.
AMY GOODMAN: That was UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese speaking at the United Nations on Wednesday. She joins us here in our studio.
Welcome back to Democracy Now! Thanks so much for joining us.
Well, before we get you to further respond to what the US and Israel is saying, can you lay out the findings of your report?
Colonial Erasure’: UN expert Francesca Albanese on Israel’s “intent to destroy” Gaza Video: Democracy Now!
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Absolutely. First of all, thank you for having me.
I have to say that this report is the second I write on — and I present to the United Nations on the topic of genocide. And it has been very reluctantly that I’ve taken on the responsibility to be the chronicler of — the chronicler of an unfolding genocide in Gaza.
In March this year, I concluded that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Israel had committed at least three acts of genocide in Gaza, like killing members of the protected group, Palestinians; inflicting severe bodily and mental harm; and creating conditions of life that would lead to the destruction of the group. And the reason why I identified these were not just war crimes and crimes against humanity is because I identified an intent to destroy.
And I understand that even in this country, people are quite confused about what is genocidal intent, because it’s not a motive. One can have many motives to commit a crime. And I understand genocide is a very insidious one, and it’s difficult to identify what’s a motive. But this is not about the motives. The intent to commit genocide is the determination to destroy, which is fully evident in — especially in the Gaza Strip, as I identified in — as argued in March already.
The reason why I continue to write about genocide — and, in fact, this report walks on the heels of the previous one — is in order to better explain the intent, especially state intent, because there is another misunderstanding that there should be a trial of the alleged perpetrators in order to have — to attribute responsibility to a state.
No, because not only you have had acts committed that should have been prevented by the — in a rule of law, in a proclaimed rule of law system like Israel, where there is the government, the Parliament, the judiciary, working as checks and balances, genocide has not only been not prevented, [it] has been enabled through the various organs of the state.
And I explain what has happened as of October 7, which has provided the opportunity to escalate violence, to build on the rage and on the fury of many Israelis, turning the soldiers into willful executioners, is that there was already a plan, hatred.
I mean, the Palestinians, like Ilan Pappé says, are victims not of war, but of a political ideology that has been unleashed. Palestinians have always been an unwanted encumbrance in the Israeli mindset, because they are an obstacle both as an identity and as legal status to the realisation of Greater Israel as a state for Jewish Israelis only.
NERMEEN SHAIKH:So, we’ll go back to — because I do want to ask about the Israeli state institutions that you name and the branches of the Israeli state that have been involved in forming this state’s intent. But if you could elaborate on the point that you make, the difference between intent and motive, and in particular what you say in the report about how it’s critical to determine genocidal intent, “by way of inference”?
You know, that’s a different phrasing than one has heard in all of this conversation about genocide so far. If you explain what you mean by that and what such a determination makes possible? So, rather than just looking at genocidal intent in other forms, what it means to infer genocidal intent?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: So, first of all, what constitutes genocide is established by Article II of the Genocide Convention, which creates a twofold obligation for member states, to prevent genocide so genocide doesn’t have to complete itself. When there is a manifestation of intent, even genocidal intent, there is already an obligation to intervene, because a crime is unfolding.
And then there is an obligation to punish. How the jurisprudence, especially after Rwanda and after former Yugoslavia, there have been cases both for criminal proceedings, where individual perpetrators have been investigated and tried, and [the] responsibility of the state, litigated before the International Court of Justice. This is how the jurisprudence on genocide has developed.
And the intent has been further elaborated upon what the Genocide Convention says. And while it might be difficult to have direct intent, meaning to have — it’s difficult but not impossible, in fact, to have a state official say, “Yes, let’s go and destroy everyone” — although I do believe that there is direct intent in this genocide in Gaza.
But the court also established that genocide can be inferred from the scale of the attack on the people, the nature of the attack, the general conduct. And what it says is that normally there should be a holistic approach in order to identify intent, which is exactly what I’ve done.
And indeed, this is why I proposed in this report what I called the triple lens approach. We need to look at the conduct, like the totality of the conduct, instead of studying with a microscope each and every crime. We need to look at the whole, against the totality of the people, the Palestinians as such, in the totality of the land, that Israel has slated as its own by divine design.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: No, absolutely. And then, if you could — the other precedent you’ve just spoken about — of course, Rwanda and former Yugoslavia — another case that you cite in the International Court of Justice is The Gambia v. Myanmar. So, how is that comparable to what we see happening in Gaza? Why is that a relevant example and different from both Rwanda and former Yugoslavia?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Let me tell you what I see as the major differences in the case of Israel, because it’s a very complex discussion. But in all four cases, there is a toxic combination of hatred, ideological hatred, which has informed political doctrines. And this is true in all the various contexts we are mentioning. The other common element is that there is [a] combination of crimes. Like, forced displacement is not an act of genocide per se, but the jurisprudence says that it can contribute to corroborate the intent.
But, again, mass killing or mass destruction of property, torture and other crimes against a person, which translate into an infliction of physical and mental harm to the group, not individuals as such, but individuals as part of the group, these are common elements to all genocides.
What I find characteristic in this one is, first of all, this is not — I mean, the state of Israel is not Myanmar and is not Rwanda 30 years ago. This is not war-torn former Yugoslavia. This is a state which has a separation of powers, different organs, as I said, checks and balances. And let me give you a specific example, because you asked me to comment on the state functions.
In January this year, the International Court of Justice issued a set of preliminary measures in the context of its identification, before even looking at the merits of the case initiated by South Africa for Israel’s breach, alleged breach, of the Genocide Convention, which identified the plausibility of risk for the rights protected — of the rights of the Palestinians protected under the Genocide Convention, which means plausibility — it’s semantics, but it’s plausibility that genocide might be committed against the Palestinians in Gaza.
And the provisional measures included an obligation to investigate and prosecute the various cases of incitement, genocidal incitement, that the court had already identified. And it mentions leaders, senior leaders, of the Israeli state. Has there been any investigation? Has there been any prosecution?
But I’m telling you more. The genocidal statements didn’t resonate as shocking in the Israeli public, not only because there was rage, an enormous rage and animosity, of course. I mean, this is understandable, that the facts of October 7 were brutal and traumatized the people.
But at the same time, hatred against the Palestinians and hate speech, it’s not something that started on October 7. I do remember, and I do remember the shock I felt because no one was reacting, and years ago, there were Israeli ministers talking of — freely, of killing, justifying the killing of Palestinians’ mothers and children because they would turn into terrorists.
AMY GOODMAN: Francesca Albanese, talk about the title of your report, Genocide as Colonial Erasure.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: This is another element which I think — and, in fact, it’s the most important, where we see the difference between this genocide and others, because there is a settler-colonial component. And again, if you look at what the International Court of Justice in July this year concluded, when it decided that the — when it found that Israel’s 57 years of occupation in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem is unlawful and needs to be withdrawn totally and unconditionally, as rapidly as possibly, which the General Assembly says by September 2025.
The court said that it amounts to — that the colonies amount to — have led to a process of annexation and racial segregation and apartheid. And these are the features of settler colonialism, the taking of the land, the taking of the resources, displacing the local population and replacing it. This has been a feature.
Now, it is in this context that we need to analyse what is happening today. And by the way, don’t believe, don’t listen only to Francesca Albanese. Listen to what these Israeli leaders and ministers are saying — reoccupying Gaza, retaking Gaza, recolonising Gaza, reconquesting Gaza. This is what they are saying.
And there are settlers on expeditions, not only to Gaza but also to Lebanon. So, this is why I say that the main difference, the main feature of this genocide, apart all the horrible aspects of it, is that this is the first settler-colonial genocide to be ever litigated before a court, an international court.
And this is why coming to this country, which is a country birthed from a genocide, when I meet the Native Americans, for example, I feel the pain of these people. And I say if we manage to build on the intersectionality of Indigenous struggle, the cry for justice behind this case for Palestine will resonate even louder, because it will somewhat be an act of atonement from the settler-colonial endeavor, which has sprouted out of Europe, toward Indigenous peoples. So there is a lot of symbolism behind it.
NERMEEN SHAIKH:And, you know, the analogy — first of all, you talked about the case brought by South Africa, so what they share, apart from South Africa and Israel-Palestine, is both the fact that they were colonial-settler states, as well as the fact that apartheid has been established as having occurred in both places.
Now, in the case of South Africa, it was a decision that was taken by the United Nations at the time of apartheid, was unseating South Africa from the General Assembly. There have been calls now to do the same with Israel. So, if you could — if you could comment on that?
And then, I just want to quote another short sentence from your report, in which you say, “As the world watches the first live-streamed settler-colonial genocide, only justice can heal the wounds that political expedience has allowed to fester.” So, if you could talk about the International Court of Justice’s case in that context, what role you think they can play, South Africa’s case, in resolving or addressing — seeing and addressing this wound?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: First of all, let me unpack the question of the unseating Israel, because this is one of the recommendations I made in my report. Under Article 6 of the UN Charter, a member state can be suspended of its credentials or its membership by the General Assembly upon recommendation of the UN Security Council. And the first criticism I got is that we cannot do that, because every states commit international law violations. Absolutely. Absolutely.
But there are two striking features here. First, Israel is quite unique in maintaining an unlawful occupation, which has deemed such by — in at least one full occasion, but again, there was already a case brought before the ICJ in 2004, so there have been two ICJ advisory opinions.
There is a pending case for genocide. There has been the violations of hundreds of resolutions by the — on Israel — over occupied Palestinian territory, by the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, and steady violation of international humanitarian law, human rights law, the Apartheid Convention, the Genocide Convention. So this is quite unique.
But all the more, this year alone, Israel has conducted an attack, an unprecedented attack, against the United Nations. It has attacked physically, through artillery, weapons, bombs, UN premises. Seventy percent of UNRWA offices and UNRWA buildings, clinics, distribution centers have been hit and shelled by the Israeli army.
Two hundred and thirty UN staff members have been killed by Israel in Gaza alone. UN peacekeepers in Lebanon have been attacked. And this doesn’t even take into account the smear, the defamation against senior UN officials, the declaration of the secretary-general as persona non grata, the referring to the General Assembly as a “cloak of antisemites”.
Again, this has mounted to a level — the hubris against the United Nations and international law has been unchecked and unbounded forever, but now, especially after the Knesset passed a law outlawing UNRWA, declaring UNRWA a terrorist organisation, and therefore disabling it from its capacity to deliver aid and assistance especially in Gaza and the West Bank and East Jerusalem, this is the nail in the coffin of the UN Charter.
And it can also contribute to that sense of colonial erasure, because here it’s not just at stake the function of a UN body — and UNRWA is a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, so it’s even more serious. But there is the capacity of UNRWA to deliver humanitarian aid in a desperate situation, and also the fact that UNRWA is seen by Israel as the symbol of Palestinian identity, especially the Palestinian refugees. So there is an attempt to erase Palestinianness, including by hitting UNRWA.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to ask you about your trip here, as we begin to wrap up. The US Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, quoted on — tweeted on Tuesday, “As UN Special Rapporteur Albanese visits New York, I want to reiterate the US belief she is unfit for her role. The United Nations should not tolerate antisemitism from a UN-affiliated official hired to promote human rights.” If you can further address their charge of antisemitism against you?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: And talk about what happened. You were supposed to come to Congress and speak and brief them, but that was cancelled this week.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Yes, it was canceled. But let me — first of all, I’m very embarrassed to read this, because a senior US official who writes this, I mean, it shows a little bit of desperation. I’m sorry, but, you know, I’m very candid.
And let me unpack my antisemitism for the audience. So, what I’ve been accused of — the reason why I’ve been accused of antisemitism — is because I’ve allegedly compared the Jews to the Nazis. Never done. Never done.
What I’ve said, what I’ve done is saying, and I keep on saying, that history is repeating itself. I’ve never done such a comparison where I draw the parallel. It’s on the behaviour of member states who have the legal and moral obligation to prevent atrocities, including an unfolding genocide.
In the past, they have done nothing — nothing — until the end of the Second World War, to prevent the genocide of the Jews and the Roma and Sinti. And they’ve done nothing to prevent the genocide of the Bosnians.
And they’ve done nothing to prevent the genocide of the Rwandans. And they are doing the same today. This is where I insist that now, compared to when there was the Holocaust, now we have a human rights framework that should prevent this. The Genocide Convention to prevent this. So, this is one of the points.
The second point, — which leads to portray me as an antisemite, which is really offensive — is that I’ve said that October 7 was not — I’ve contested, I’ve challenged the argument that October 7 was an antisemitic attack. October 7 was a crime, was heinous. And again, I’ve condemned the acts that were directed against the Israeli civilians, and expressed solidarity with the victims, with the families. I’ve been in contact with the families of the hostages.
But I’ve also said the hatred that led that attack, that prompted that attack, to the extent it hit civilians, not the military, but it was prompted not by the fact that the Israelis are Jews, but the fact that the Israelis — I mean, the Israelis are part of that endeavor that has kept the Palestinians in a cage for 17 years and, before, under martial law for 37 years. And Palestinians have tried — it’s true they have used violence, but before violence, they have tried dialogue. They have tried collaboration. They have tried a number of means to access justice, and they have gone nowhere.
I can — I mean, let me relate just this case, because last year I worked with children. And someone who was 17 years old before October 7 last year had never set foot out of Gaza. This is the reality. And I spoke with children while I was writing my report on “unchilding”, the experience of Palestinians under Israeli occupation. And one of them — I mean, there were these two girls fighting, because one of them had been able to go to Israel and the West Bank because she had cancer and could be treated, and the other was jealous, because, she said, “At least she was sick, and she could go, she could travel. I’ve never seen the mountains.”
And again, this doesn’t justify violence, but, please, please, put things in context. And even Israeli scholars have said claiming that October 7 was prompted by antisemitism is a way to decontextualize history and to deresponsibilise Israel.
I condemn Israel not because it’s a Jewish state. It’s not about that, but because it’s in breach of international law through and through. And were the majority of Israelis Buddhists, Christians, atheists, it would be the same. I would be as vocal as I am now.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Francesca, just one last question, and we only have a minute. Your recent book, J’Accuse, you take the title, of course, from the letter Émile Zola wrote during the Dreyfus Affair to the French president. You came under severe criticism for the choice of that title. Could you explain why you chose it and what it means in this context?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Absolutely. I have the sense that whatever I say comes under scrutiny and criticism. But J’Accuse is — first of all, it’s the title that was proposed by the editor, the publisher. And I was against it until October 7.
When I saw the narrative, the dehumanization of the Palestinians after October 7, and what it was legitimising, I said, “This is the title. We need to use it,” because I draw the parallel between what is happening to the Palestinians and what has happened to other groups, particularly the Jewish people in Europe.
I say the Holocaust was not just about the concentration camps. The Holocaust was a culmination of centuries of discrimination, and the previous decades had led the Jewish people in Europe to be kicked out of jobs, professions, to be treated like subhumans, as animals. And it’s this dehumanisation that we need to look at in the face today, in the eyes today, and recognise as leading to atrocity crimes.
AMY GOODMAN: We want to thank you for being with us, Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The Palau Media Council has condemned a political lawsuit against the publisher of the Island Times as an “assault on press freedom” with the Pacific country facing an election on Tuesday.
In a statement yesterday, the council added that the lawsuit, filed by Surangel and Sons Co. against Times publisher Leilani Reklai over her newspaper’s coverage of tax-related documents that surfaced on social media, was an attempt to undermine the accountability that was vital to democracy.
The statement also said the lawsuit raised “critical concerns about citizens’ access to information and freedom of the press.
“This lawsuit, combined with government’s statements endorsing that Island Times reported mis-information on its coverage of the tax related document and the decision to ban Island Times from Surangel and Sons [distribution] outlets, raises critical concerns about citizens’ access to information and the freedom of the press — both of which are cornerstones of a democratic society,” the statement said.
“The council sees this legal action as an assault on press freedom and an attempt to undermine the accountability that is vital to democracy.”
The statement said that Reklai, one of Palau’s senior journalists, was being targeted simply for reporting on documents that were already in the public domain.
“She did not originate the information but responsibly conveyed what these documents suggested, raising questions about the current administration’s narrative on corporate tax contributions,” the council said.
‘Journalistic duty’ “Reporting on such information is a journalistic duty to ensure transparency in tax policies and government incentives impacting the private sector.
“The Island Times, by publishing these documents, has provided a platform for clarifying public understanding of the new PGST tax law’s impact on major corporations and the actual tax contributions of Surangel and Sons.
“These issues are clearly within the public’s right to know, and the council emphasises that media plays a crucial role in reporting such findings and promoting informed debate.
The council said it stood in solidarity with Reklai and all journalists who strived to find and uphold the truth.
“In a healthy democracy, a free and open press is essential for informed citizens and responsible governance.”
Palau’s largest newspaper is being sued for defamation by the company of President Surangel Whipps Jr’s father, just days ahead of general elections in the Pacific nation.
Surangel and Sons alleges “negligence and defamation” by the Island Times and its editor Leilani Reklai for an article published on Tuesday with “false and unsubstantiated allegations,” owner Surangel Whipps Sr said in a press release on Thursday.
Reklai has rejected the company’s allegations and said the “lawsuit is trying to control how media here in Palau tells a story”, a news article about the case in the Island Times reported on Friday.
“I feel like we are being intimidated, we are being forced to speak a certain narrative rather than present diverse community perspectives,” said Reklai, who is also a stringer for BenarNews.
The Micronesian nation of 17,000 people — 650 km north of Papua New Guinea — goes to the polls on November 5. Whipps Jr’s rival is his brother-in-law Tommy Remengesau Jr, who was president from 2001 to 2009 and 2013 to 2021.
The controversy comes after Palau was top of the inaugural 2023 Pacific Media Freedom Index of 14 island countries that highlighted the region’s media facing significant political and economic pressures, bribes and corruption, as well as self-censorship.
Island Times editor Leilani Reklai . . . fears the lawsuit could have serious consequences for the media in Palau and bankrupt the newspaper. Image: Stefan Armbruster
Island Times reported on Friday the suit is seeking compensation and punitive damages and that the company asserts the “monetary awards should be substantial enough to prevent similar conduct from the newspaper and Reklai in future”.
Surangel and Sons financial details — leaked from the country’s tax office — were posted on social media last weekend, prompting heated online debate over how much it paid.
A new corporate and goods and services tax system introduced by Whipps Jr’s government is currently being rolled out in Palau and its merits have been a focus of election campaigning.
The company in a statement said its “privacy rights had been violated,” the tax details were obtained illegally, posted online without consent, and some of the figures had been altered.
Motivation ‘confusing voters’ “The motivation behind the circulation of this document is clearly for misinformation and disinformation to confuse voters. In the end Surangel and Sons is not running for office. Unfortunately, it has been victimised by this smear campaign,” the company posted on social media.
Island Times in a 225-word, front-page story headlined “Surangel & Sons condemns tax report leak as privacy violation” reported the company’s statement on Tuesday. It also quoted financial details from the leaked documents and accompanying commentary.
Whipps Jr. in a press conference on Wednesday accused the Island Times of publishing disinformation.
“Island Times continues to print political propaganda, it’s not accurate,” Whipps Jr said, calling for a correction to be published.
The lawsuit against the paper and its editor was served the next day.
Whipps Jr’s spokesperson told BenarNews any questions related to the lawsuit should be directed to the parties involved.
Eightieth birthday celebrations for Surangel Whipps Sr (left) with his son Surangel Whipps Jr in February 2020. Image: Diaz Broadcasting Palau screenshot BenarNews
Surangel and Sons was founded in 1980 by Whipps Sr, who also served as Palau’s president briefly in 2005 and for two years from 2007.
Business ‘offers everything’ The privately-owned business “offers everything from housing design and automotive repair to equipment rentals, groceries, and scuba gear” through its import, sales, construction and travel arms, the company’s website says.
Previously as CEO, Whipps Jr transformed the company from a family store to one of Palau’s largest and most diversified businesses, employing more than 700 people.
His LinkedIn profile states he finished as CEO in January 2021, after 28 years in the position and in the month he became president. His spokesperson did not respond to questions from BenarNews about if he still retains any direct financial or other links to the company.
Surangel and Sons said the revelation of sensitive business information threatens their competitive advantage and puts jobs at risk.
Palau’s Minister of Finance Kaleb Udui Jr told the president’s press conference on Wednesday an investigation was underway, a special prosecutor would be appointed and apologized for the leak to the company.
“I would hope the media would make extra effort to help educate the public and discourage misinformation and breaches of privacy of the tax office and any other government office,” Udui said, confirming the tax documents had been altered before being posted on social media.
He said tax office staff have previously been warned about leaks and ensuring data confidentiality, as breaches negatively impact the confidence of foreign investors in Palau.
Explanation rather than leak Whipps Jr added that the newspaper should have explained the tax system instead of reporting the leaked information.
He also accused Island Times of failure to disclose a paid advertisement in this week’s edition of the paper for his political opponent.
“I’m disappointed in the Island Times, because there was an article that was not an article, a paid advertisement,” Whipps Jr said about a colourful blue and yellow election campaign graphic.
Island Times told BenarNews it was not usual practice to put “Paid Advertisement” on advertisements but it would review its policy for political campaign material.
Reklai fears the lawsuit could have serious consequences for the media in Palau and bankrupt Island Times, the paper reported.
“If I don’t stand up to this, it sends a signal to all journalists that they risk facing claims for damages for powerful companies and government officials while carrying out their work,” she said.
Palau has two newspapers and four radio stations and enshrined in its constitution are protections for journalists, including a guarantee they cannot be jailed for refusing to disclose sources.
Surangel and Sons said they would no longer sell Island Times through their outlets.
Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown has returned from New Caledonia saying it is not a simple “black and white situation”.
Brown returned from a three-day Pacific fact-finding mission in the French Pacific territory alongside the Prime Ministers of Solomon Islands, Tonga and Fiji.
New Caledonia has been going through a period of turmoil with violence and arson since May, resulting in 13 deaths and the destruction of many businesses.
“There’s no doubt there is a call and a need for the easing of tensions in the country,” Brown said.
“This would enable more dialogue to take place between the various vested groups to find a pathway forward for New Caledonia.”
Brown said Kanaky New Caledonia’s population was diverse, made up of indigenous Kanak, French, and Pacific diaspora.
Almost all of these groups want greater autonomy from France with some also wanting full independence or to remain a French territory, he said.
“But you have quite a large group between those two extremes that want a way forward that enables New Caledonians, all of them, to be able to determine their own future.”
Pacific policing France ‘may wish to consider’ Brown said Australia’s newly proposed regional policing initiative is “an option that New Caledonians may wish to consider”.
“At the moment that’s being done by the state government through France through its gendarmes and police force.”
The last time regional policing was used was in Solomon Islands after ethnic unrest in the 2000s, he said.
When asked whether France had “militarised” New Caledonia, Brown said France sent a lot of support “to help maintain law and order” but the focus now was on the reduction of tensions and dialogue.
France’s Ambassador to the Pacific Véronique told the ABC she doubted French authorities would see the need for Pacific police to be deployed to New Caledonia.
Brown said the other issue was the need for an urgent financial package.
“Unlike most other Pacific countries in cases of disaster whether they be natural disaster or other sorts, Pacific countries have the likes of the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, development partners that would support and assist.
Relying solely on France “In the case of New Caledonia, it doesn’t have the association with any of those financial institutions and would rely solely on France for its support.”
There needed to first be a reduction of tensions so that any rebuild would not be under threat from more civil unrest, he said.
Brown said Pacific nations had taken different decolonisation paths — with the exception of Tonga which had never been colonised.
Fiji became a republic after a number of coups and Cook Islands is self-governing in free association with New Zealand.
“Each of us took a different path to where we are today to gain our autonomy and our sovereignty and it’s something that we were able to share with New Caledonia.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
“In his message for the day, the secretary-general underscores that a free press is fundamental to human rights, to democracy and to the rule of law,” Dujarric said.
‘Alarming rate of fatalities’ “Recent years have seen an alarming rate of fatalities in conflict zones, particularly in Gaza, which has seen the highest number of killings of journalists and media workers in a war in decades.
“In his message, he warned that journalists in Gaza have been killed at a level unseen by any conflict in modern times.
“The ongoing ban preventing international journalists from Gaza suffocates the truth even further,” he said.
People repaying HELP student debts would get cost-of-living relief under changes to repayment arrangements to be announced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Sunday.
The minimum threshold for repayments to start would be lifted by more than $10,000 a year, from about $54,000 in 2024-25 to $67.000 in 2025-26. This threshold would be indexed so it always remained about 75% of average graduate earnings.
The government would also move to a marginal repayment system for HELP debts. That would in the short term be to the advantage of people on incomes just above the threshold.
This change, which does not alter the overall amount of the person’s debt, was recommended by Bruce Chapman, the academic who was a designer of the original HECS scheme in the 1980s. Chapman undertook work for the universities accord released by Education Minister Jason Clare.
The accord recommended “reducing the financial burden of repayment on low-income earners and limiting disincentives to work additional hours by moving to a system of HELP repayment based on marginal rates”.
In a Sunday speech, Albanese will say the changes will boost take home pay for one million young Australians.
The average HELP debt holder would pay about $680 less annually in their repayments.
A university graduate earning $70,000 would have their minimum repayments reduced by $1,300. A graduate on $80,000 would receive a cut of $850.
The targeted relief would apply to all graduates earning up to $180,000 annually.
The changes extend to student loans for vocational education.
The government plans to bring in legislation for the changes next year, but it is not clear whether this will be before or after the election, which must be held by May.
The cost over the forward estimates would be about $300 million.
Albanese said:“We will make it easier for young Australians to save in the future and we are going to make the system better and fairer as well. This is good for cost of living. Good for intergenerational fairness. Good for building Australia’s future.”
This is the government’s second recent round of changes to the HELP scheme .
In changes to indexation in this year’s budget the government announced it would cut the student debt of more than three million people, wiping more than $3 billion from what people owe.
It capped the HELP indexation rate to be the lower of either the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the Wages Price Index (WPI), backdated from June 1 last year. Indexation had been based on the CPI. Legislation for the budget change is currently before the parliament.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The Philippine Supreme Court has granted temporary protection to an environmental activist abducted in Pangasinan earlier this year.
In its resolution dated September 9 — but only made public this week — the court granted Francisco “Eco” Dangla III’s petition for temporary protection, and prohibited the respondents, including high-ranking soldiers and police officers, to be near the activist’s location.
“Furthermore, you, respondents, and all persons and entities acting and operating under your directions, instructions, and orders are PROHIBITED from entering within a radius of one kilometer of the person, places of residence, work, and present locations of petitioner and his immediate family,” the resolution read.
The respondents are:
Philippine Army chief Lieutenant General Roy Galido
Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Police General Rommel Francisco Marbil
Brigadier General Gulliver Señires (in his capacity as 702nd Brigade commanding general Brigadier)
Ilocos Region police chief Police Brigadier General Lou Evangelista
Police Colonel Jeff Fanged (in his capacity as Pangasinan police chief)
Aside from giving Dangla temporary protection, the court also granted his petition for writs of amparo and habeas data. A writ of amparo is a legal remedy, which is usually a protection order in the form of a restraining order.
The writ of habeas data compels the government to destroy information that could cause harm.
These extraordinary writs are usually invoked by activists and progressives in the Philippines as they face intimidation from the government and its forces.
Dangla’s abduction Dangla and another activist, Joxelle Tiong, were abducted in Pangasinan last March 24.
According to witnesses, they saw two men who were forced to board a vehicle in Barangay Polo, San Carlos City.
The two activists, who who had been red-tagged for their advocacies, were serving as convenors of the Pangasinan People’s Strike for the Environment.
They “vocally defended the people and ecosystems of Pangasinan against the harms of coal-fired power plants, nuclear power plants, incinerator plants, and offshore mining in Lingayen Gulf,” at the time of their abduction.
Three days later, several groups announced that Dangla and Tiong were found safe, but that the two had gone through a “harrowing ordeal.”
“Bruised but alive” . . . the environmental activists abducted in Pangasinan but found safe, Francisco ‘Eco’ Dangla III (left) and Joxelle ‘Jak’ Tiong. Image: Rappler
The reality The protection given to Dangla is only temporary as the Court of Appeals still needs to conduct hearings on the petition. In other words, the Supreme Court only granted the writ, but the power to whether grant or deny Dangla the privilege of the writs of amparo and habeas data lies with the Court of Appeals.
There have been instances where the appellate court granted activists the privilege of writ of amparo, like in the case of labour activists Loi Magbanua and Ador Juat, where the court issued permanent protection orders for them and their immediate families.
Unfortunately, this was not the case for other activists, such as young environmentalists Jhed Tamano and Jonila Castro.
The two were first reported missing by activist groups. Security forces later said they were “safe and sound” and that they had allegedly “voluntarily surrendered” to the military.
However, Tamano and Castro went off-script during a press conference organised by the anti-insurgency task force and revealed that they were actually abducted.
In February, the High Court granted the two temporary protection and their writs of amparo and habeas data petitions. However, the appellate court in August denied the protection order for Tamano and Castro.
Associate Justice Emily San Gaspar-Gito fully dissented in the decision and said: “It would be uncharacteristic for the courts, especially this court, to simply fold their arms and ignore the palpable threats to petitioners’ life, liberty and security and just wait for the irreversible to happen to them.”
Days from the US presidential election, the polls are showing the outcome of the race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump remains a nail biter.
With the United States our closest ally, the result could have potential implications for Australia in areas such as climate change policy, defence and the economy. If there is a Trump victory, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will also have the challenge of building a relationship with an unpredictable character.
To discuss the state of the contest and what comes next, we’re joined by Bruce Wolpe, senior fellow at the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney. Wolpe worked with the Democrats in Congress, and on the staff of Julia Gillard. Last year, he authored the book, Trump’s Australia.
Wolpe regards the election as too close to call.
They’re just deadlocked in two fundamental respects. National head-to-head across the country – the popular vote – they’re 49-48, 47-47, no one cracking 50, and there’s no clear favourite. And then that same pattern exists in all of the seven swing states that will decide the election per the Electoral College.
In terms of key issues:
Just as it is here in Australia, hip pocket is the strongest determinant of how you will vote, and so inflation and the state of the economy, in the lived experience, is the number one issue. Americans and Australians share the same experience over the past post-COVID years where there’s been an outbreak of inflation and high interest rates. And that means that the basket of goods that you buy day in, day out, week in, week out, from the supermarket to your petrol to your insurance prices are up between 10 and 40%.
The second big issue is immigration. As I’m sure you know from looking at the news over the past three years, just following things, the southern border with Mexico has been effectively out of control. It’s back under control but in that time, perhaps millions of people have flowed into the United States.
The third big issue is abortion rights, reproductive health rights and its future. The Supreme Court two years ago repealed Roe v Wade, which established a right found in the Constitution for women to take care of their reproductive health services. That’s the first time that a universal human constitutional right has been repealed since Dred Scott in the Civil War [denying slaves’ rights]. Three generations of women have grown up with the protections for them.
This has become a very powerful issue. And 52% of all voters are women.
On what either a Harris or a Trump administration might look like for Australia:
I think with Harris, we would just see very strong continuity with Biden. I mean, on foreign policy issues, they really have worked together.
The relationship with Australia is fine. Her relationship with the Prime Minister is absolutely fine. They know each other, can work together, a very comfortable working relationship.
[As to] Trump and Australia: first, I really have to say in the first [Trump] term, I think Australia had the most untroubled relationship with Trump than any other country in the world, and that includes Israel, that includes Europe, that includes Canada.
There is a structural trade surplus that the United States has with Australia. So Australia is not number one on the hit list of nations that are, quote, taking advantage of the United States in their trade agreements. […] It will start off in Trump’s head with all the countries that he wants to go after – I don’t think Australia is high on the list.
However, on a personal level, Wolpe says there might be some issues between Trump and Albanese:
I think personally it will be rocky at the start for several reasons. First, Trump will be briefed on everything that the Prime Minister has said on him and his presidency. And he attacked Trump for the January 6th insurrection. He’s for abortion rights and attacked the ruling of the Supreme Court. He’s for gun control, and Australia has a completely different posture on gun control, and Trump is strong on the Second Amendment. If Trump looks at the agenda of the Albanese government, it is a mirror image of Joe Biden’s domestic policy agenda adjusted for realities in both countries. But it’s the same deal.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says that as far as Fiji is concerned, Fijians of Indian descent are Fijian.
While Fiji is part of the Pacific, Indo-Fijians are not classified as Pacific peoples in New Zealand; instead, they are listed under Indian and Asian on the Stats NZ website.
“The ‘Fijian Indian’ ethnic group is currently classified under ‘Asian,’ in the subcategory ‘Indian’, along with other diasporic Indian ethnic groups,” Stats NZ told RNZ Pacific.
“This has been the case since 2005 and is in line with an ethnographic profile that includes people with a common language, customs, and traditions.
“Stats NZ is aware of concerns some have about this classification, and it is an ongoing point of discussion with stakeholders.”
The Fijian Indian community in Aotearoa has long opposed this and raised the issue again at a community event Rabuka attended in Auckland’s Māngere ahead of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Samoa last month.
“As far as Fiji is concerned, [Indo-Fijians] are Fijians,” he said.
‘A matter of sovereignty’ When asked what his message to New Zealand on the issue would be, he said: “I cannot; that is a matter of sovereignty, the sovereign decision by the government of New Zealand. What they call people is their sovereign right.
“As far as we are concerned, we hope that they will be treated as Fijians.”
More than 60,000 people were transferred from all parts of British India to work in Fiji between 1879 and 1916 as indentured labourers.
Today, they make up over 32 percent of the total population, according to Fiji Bureau of Statistics’ 2017 Population Census.
Sangam community NZ leader and former Nadi mayor Salesh Mudaliar . . . “If you do a DNA or do a blood test, we are more of Fijian than anything else. We are not Indian.” Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
Now many, like Sangam community NZ leader and former Nadi Mayor Salesh Mudaliar, say they are more Fijian than Indian.
“If you do a DNA or do a blood test, we are more of Fijian than anything else. We are not Indian,” Mudaliar said.
The indentured labourers, who came to be known as the Girmitiyas, as they were bound by a girmit — a Hindi pronunciation of the English word “agreement”.
RNZ Pacific had approached the Viti Council e Aotearoa for their views on the issue. However, they refused to comment, saying that its chair “has opted out of this interview.”
“Topic itself is misleading bordering on disinformation [and] misinformation from an Indigenous Fijian perspective and overly sensitive plus short notice.”
‘Struggling for identity’ “We are Pacific Islanders. If you come from Tonga or Samoa, you are a Pacific Islander,” Mudaliar said.
“When [Indo-Fijians] come from Fiji, we are not. We are not a migrant to Fiji. We have been there for [over 140] years.”
“The community is still struggling for its identity here in New Zealand . . . we are still not [looked after].
He said they had tried to lobby the New Zealand government for their status but without success.
“Now it is the National government, and no one seems to be listening to us in understanding the situation.
“If we can have an open discussion on this, coming to the same table, and knowing what our problem is, then it would be really appreciated.”
Fijians of Indian descent with Prime Minister Rabuka at the community event in Auckland last month. Image: Facebook/Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka
Lifting quality of data Stats NZ said it was aware of the need to lift the quality of ethnicity data across the government data system.
“Public consultation in 2019 determined a need for an in-depth review of the Ethnicity Standard,” the data agency said.
In 2021, Stats NZ undertook a large scoping exercise with government agencies, researchers, iwi Māori, and community groups to help establish the scope of the review.
Stats NZ subsequently stood up an expert working group to progress the review.
“This review is still underway, and Stats NZ will be conducting further consultation, so we will have more to say in due course,” it said.
“Classifying ethnicity and ethnic identity is extremely complex, and it is important Stats NZ takes the time to consult extensively and ensure we get this right,” the agency added.
This week, Fijians celebrate the Hindu festival of lights, Diwali. The nation observes a public holiday to mark the day, and Fijians of all backgrounds get involved.
Prime Minister Rabuka’s message is for all Fijians to be kind to each other.
“Act in accordance with the spirit of Diwali and show kindness to those who are going through difficulties,” he told local reporters outside Parliament yesterday.
“It is a good time for us to abstain from using bad language against each other on social media.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Water is essential for daily functioning and health, and we can only survive a few days without it. Yet we constantly lose water through sweat, urination and even evaporation when we breathe.
This is why we have evolved a way to regulate and maintain water in our bodies. Like other animals, our survival relies on a strong biological drive that tells us to find and drink water to balance fluid loss.
This is thirst – a sensation of dryness in the mouth signalling we need to have a drink. This basic physiological mechanism is controlled mainly by part of the brain’s “control centre”, called the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus receives signals from various regions of the body and in return, releases hormones that act as a messenger to signal the thirst sensation.
What is dehydration?
Staying hydrated (having enough water in our bodies) is important for several reasons, including:
regulating body temperature through sweat and respiration
lubricating joints and eyes
preventing infections
digesting and absorbing nutrients
flushing out waste (via the kidneys)
preventing constipation
brain function (including memory and concentration)
mood and energy levels
physical performance and recovery from exercise
skin health.
Dehydration occurs when our body doesn’t have enough water. Even slight drops in fluid levels have noticeable consequences, such as headaches, feeling dizzy, lethargy and struggling to concentrate.
Chronic dehydration can pose more serious health risks, including urinary tract infections, constipation and kidney stones.
What does the evidence say?
Despite thirst being one of the most basic biological drivers for good hydration, science suggests our feelings of thirst and subsequent fluid intake don’t always correlate with hydration levels.
For example, a recent study explored the impact of thirst on fluid intake and hydration status. Participants attended a lab in the morning and then later in the afternoon to provide markers of hydration status (such as urine, blood samples and body weight). The relationship between levels of thirst in the morning and afternoon hydration status was negligible.
Further, thirst may be driven by environmental factors, such as access to water. For example, one study looked at whether ample access to water in a lab influenced how much people drank and how hydrated they were. The link between how thirsty they felt and how hydrated they were was weak, suggesting the availability of water influenced their fluid intake more than thirst.
Being thirsty doesn’t necessarily mean we’re dehydrated. puhhha/Shutterstock
Interestingly, research shows women experience thirst more strongly than men, regardless of hydration status. To understand gender differences in thirst, researchers infused men and women with fluids and then measured their thirst and how hydrated they were. They found women generally reported thirst at a lower level of fluid loss. Women have also been found to respond more to feeling thirsty by drinking more water.
Other ways to tell if you need to drink some water
While acknowledging some people will need to drink more or less, for many people, eight cups (or two litres) a day is a good amount of water to aim for.
But beyond thirst, there are many other ways to tell whether you might need to drink more water.
1. urine colour: pale yellow urine typically indicates good hydration, while darker, concentrated urine suggests dehydration
2. frequency of going to the toilet:urinating regularly (around four to six times a day) indicates good hydration. Infrequent urination can signal dehydration
3. skin turgor test: gently pinching the skin (for example, on the back of the hand) and observing how quickly the skin returns to its normal position can help assess hydration. Slow return may indicate dehydration
If skin stays elevated after pinching it may be a sign of dehydration. SusaZoom/Shutterstock
4. mouth and lips: a dry mouth or cracked lips can be early signs of dehydration
5. headaches and fatigue: frequent headaches, dizziness, or unexplained fatigue can be signs of inadequate hydration
6. sweating: in physically active people, monitoring how much they sweat during activity can help estimate fluid loss and hydration needs. Higher levels of sweat may predispose a person to dehydration if they are unable to replace the fluid lost through water intake
These indicators, used together, provide a more comprehensive picture of hydration without solely depending on the sensation of thirst.
Of course, if you do feel thirsty, it’s still a good idea to drink some water.
Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Queensland Health and Mater Misericordia. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, a Director of Food Standards Australia and New Zealand, a Director of the Darling Downs and West Moreton Primary Health Network and an Associate Member of the Australian Academy of Health and Medical Sciences.
Kiara Too is a PhD Candidate at The University Queensland (UQ) Centre for Community Health and Wellbeing. She receives the UQ Tuition Fee Offset and Stipend Scholarship and a King and Amy O’Malley Scholarship. Kiara is also an Accredited Practising Dietitian and a member of Dietitians Australia.
As I write this, people around the country will be recovering from last night’s Halloween shenanigans, perhaps even experiencing a candy-induced comedown.
Luckily, this month’s streaming picks include a serial killer flick that’ll help keep the spooky season around a bit longer. There’s also Chimp Crazy, an audacious docuseries that’s horrific in its own way – as well as some slick new TV shows set against the idyllic scenery of the outback.
Whether you’re after funny, frightening or frivolous, there’s plenty to kick your feet up to.
Territory
Netflix
Territory takes place in the Northern Territory, on the “world’s largest cattle station”. The once-great dynasty of its owners, the Lawson family, is thrown into doubt when their heir apparent dies. The Top End’s most powerful players – billionaire miners, rival cattle barons, desert gangsters and Indigenous elders – immediately start circling.
Filmed in stunning remote locations, the show looks like the most ambitious and sophisticated Tourism Australia ad you’ve ever seen. The wildlife! The panoramic drone shots! The hat budget! The rest of the world could go from thinking we ride kangaroos to work, to assuming we’ve all got our own helicopters. While the male characters are brilliant sources of humour and violence, it’s the ladies in Territory that bring the heart.
Territory does a great job of establishing a simmering tension between the traditional owners of the land and the families and businesses that have taken possession of it – but these plotlines move at a frustratingly slow pace. Perhaps this is to cater to a global audience, which will likely lack the context that local viewers have. And maybe, for Australian viewers, the enduring subordination and struggle of the original landowners is the intended takeaway.
Territory is an ambitious and attractive series. It was wonderful to see so many resources poured into a new concept, filmed and set in a part of Australia that rarely sees the kind of spotlight it deserves.
Anna Kendrick’s directorial debut, Woman of the Hour, offers a glimpse into the horrific crimes of serial killer Rodney Alcala. Branded with the epithet “the Dating Game Killer” after his appearance on a popular 1970s dating game show, Alcala is thought to have been responsible for the rape and murder of up to 130 men, women and children.
Woman of the Hour is especially interested in the way women of the 1970s were pinned under a critical social gaze which expects them to be nurturing and compliant – resulting in their extreme psychological and physical vulnerability.
Alcala’s camera and the cameras of The Dating Game both frame and blind the women subjected to their gaze, highlighting social and gendered conventions and restrictions.
Kendrick is a compelling presence as a woman initially proud of and confident in her intelligence, before realising even she can be caught in Alcala’s web. Daniel Zovatto, as Alcala, is dangerously captivating in the predatory display of his simultaneous charisma and sadism.
Woman of the Hour departs from Kendrick’s past, lighter work; I look forward to seeing what she turns her hand to next.
– Jessica Gildersleeve
Rivals
Disney+
A “bonkbuster” needs three key things. It should be 1) full of sex (the bonking), 2) extremely popular (the -buster) and 3) wildly over-the-top (in other words, bonkers). Rivals, the new Disney+ adaptation of Dame Jilly Cooper’s 1988 novel of the same name, has 1 and 3 in spades. And if earlyreception is anything to go by, it’s well on its way to 2.
The show revels in the excesses and spectacle of its 1980s setting. It begins with Rupert Campbell-Black (Alex Hassell) having sex with a journalist in the bathroom of a Concorde – a scene which, ahem, climaxes when the plane breaks the sound barrier. The show continues much in the same vein for its eight episodes.
On the surface, the plot seems relatively dry. The titular rivals are two production companies competing for a local television franchise. Corinium is headed by villainous Tony Baddingham (David Tennant), while Venturer is run by Rupert and Declan O’Hara (Aidan Turner). Caught between them is the ruthlessly ambitious producer Cameron Cook (Nafessa Williams), who both sides are desperate to get in bed with (figuratively and literally).
However, the plot is surrounded by so much frothy fun, melodrama and naked tennis that there’s plenty of other things to become invested in. Rivals doesn’t take itself too seriously, yet it also has a lot of heart. Keep an eye out for the romance between Freddie Jones (Danny Dyer) and Lizzie Vereker (Katherine Parkinson), which is a real highlight.
– Jodi McAlister
Thou Shalt Not Steal
Stan
Thou Shalt Not Steal follows Aboriginal teen Robyn (the immensely talented Sherry-Lee Watson). She escapes juvenile detention and embarks on a defiant road trip from Alice Springs to Adelaide to uncover a long-held family secret.
Each episode begins with a tongue-in-cheek lesson from Robyn’s past. These range from the eponymous “thou shalt not steal” to “thou shalt never go to Coober Pedy”.
This deadpan humour cleverly introduces significant issues. There are the inordinate rates of incarceration of Indigenous youth, alcoholism, assault, toxic masculinity, bullying and weaponised religion, among others.
Over the first six of its eight short episodes, Thou Shalt Not Steal maintains a balance between acerbic comedy and perilous road trip. Its final episodes revel in a series of over-the-top scenarios that nevertheless tie up narrative loose ends in an enjoyable way. Indeed the shift to outright absurdity reveals the show’s gentler message: about finding a chosen family.
It is a slick, well-made series with terrific attention to detail. The gorgeous landscapes contrast with the dank, grimy spaces occupied by the antagonists and the soundtrack is its own treasure trove. Thou Shalt Not Steal is most definitely a fun ride.
Nothing is certain but death, taxes and Fisk being hilarious – especially in relation to the first two. In season three, things are changing at small wills and probate firm Gruber & Fisk. The signature brown suit remains, but as a freshly named partner our “spiky little lawyer friend” Helen Tudor-Fisk (Kitty Flanagan) must tackle more responsibility, pressure and general idiocy than ever before.
In the office, Roz (Julia Zemiro) is giving her mediation business a red-hot go – to varying degrees of success – and scribbling ideas for an imminent hit album. Ray (Marty Sheargold) is loudly enamoured with his fashion psychologist “lady-love” Melissa (Justine Clarke), to everyone’s vexation. And probate clerk George (Aaron Chen) is in the crossfire from his usual post at the front desk while his role as The Webmaster faces competition.
The quiet hysteria of office life ramps up to a frenzy when threats are made and co-working space politics arise. There are also guffaws a-plenty to be found in Fisk’s handling of useless nepo hires, her ageing ex-judge father’s forthcoming memoir, suspicious will amendments scrawled in biro, and a scheming “grammer” (granny scammer).
Fisk’s star-studded third season doesn’t disappoint. It offers a smorgasbord of Australian comedic talent including Sam Campbell, Claudia Karvan, Tom Ballard and Rhys Nicholson, to name a few. With previous seasons given the approving title of “accurate” by law experts, I might find you in contempt if you don’t give it a watch.
– Marina Deller
Chimp Crazy
BINGE
Chimpanzees terrify me. They’re our closest genetic species; one minute they’re sweet – the next, angry and violent. Similarly, Chimp Crazy gave me the creeps. In this docuseries, hit Tiger King director Eric Goode focuses on another animal obsessive, Tonia Haddix.
Haddix entangles with great apes when she volunteers with a for-profit facility run by Connie Casey. This is where Haddix forms an attachment with a “humanzee” Tonka, who grew up performing in Hollywood films before disappearing from view.
However, Goode can’t get close to Haddix and Tonka: all bridges to the big animal community have been reduced to ashes thanks to how things went down with Joe Exotic. So Goode employs former circus clown Dwayne Cunningham as a proxy director.
While the issue of deforestation doesn’t rate a mention, Chimp Crazy comments subtly on the stratification of society in North America and on a lack of love. All the action occurs in the deep south, with “white trash” under the microscope.
Goode explores an alternative angle with representatives from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), who hound Haddix tooth and manicured nail. Their take is that chimps don’t need us and deserve “humane” conditions.
Ultimately, the docuseries erects another streaming era icon: Haddix is plastic, unapologetic, flawed and reminiscent of a mother who’s about to be separated from her offspring. It just so happens her kid is a 32-year-old chimpanzee.
– Phoebe Hart
The Office
Prime
The new Australian remake of The Office mirrors closely the American version: a romance storyline, tensions between office and warehouse, an old-school boss who loves, craves and needs camaraderie, and a staff for whom work life comes second to what they’d rather be doing.
Hannah Howard (Felicity Ward) is the devoted office manager who loves her job too much and runs an underperforming, dysfunctional workplace of uninterested staff. Like David Brent and Michael Scott before her, Hannah is optimistic, naive, relentless and terrible at staff management. She forces pyjama days and bus trips on her employees, who are clearly unwilling yet never actively rebel. There is plenty of comedy in the awkwardness and small moments.
The first Australian season of The Office might not be anything new, but I kept watching. It felt safe, even comforting. Perhaps in a similar way going to someone else’s family for Christmas lunch can feel familiar: recognisable foods, decorations, known characters – but with the frisson that maybe something different will happen this time.
This remake knows what it is. It’s been made to satisfy an audience wanting to be in a world that reflects their own experiences, but takes it just that bit too far. It’s not setting out to break moulds, but to bring the mould up to date and give it an Australian voice for the world to hear.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
On July 13, shortly after Donald Trump was targeted by an assassination attempt, Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of X (formerly Twitter), tweeted to his more than 200 million followers:
I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery.
Musk’s efforts to influence who wins next week’s US presidential election have continued. For example, over the past three months, he has donated more than US$100 million to a political action committee called America PAC that’s promoting Trump.
But our new research (currently available in preprint form) indicates Musk may be wielding influence in other more subtle ways as well. However, the platform’s increasing opacity to researchers makes this difficult to say for certain.
Shortly after Musk endorsed Trump’s presidential campaign, there was a statistically anomalous boost in engagement with his X account. Suddenly, his posts were getting much higher views, retweets and likes in comparison to other prominent political accounts on the platform.
This raises suspicions as to whether Musk has tweaked the platform’s algorithm to increase the reach of his posts in advance of the US presidential election. It also demonstrates the problems with how social media platforms like X are currently regulated around the world.
Not the first time
Musk has history when it comes to tweaking X’s algorithms so his own content reaches more people.
Last year, he reportedly mobilised a team of around 80 engineers to algorithmically boost his posts. This came after his tweet supporting the Philadelphia Eagles during the Super Bowl was outperformed by a similar one from President Joe Biden. Musk seemed to confirm this happened, posting a picture depicting one woman labelled “Elon’s tweets” forcibly bottle feeding another woman labelled “Twitter”.
To see whether Musk has done this again in the leadup to the US election, we compared Musk’s engagement metrics – such as the number of views, retweets and likes – with a set of other prominent political accounts on the social media platform. The data spans the period from January 1 2024 to October 25 2024.
Other political accounts that served as a basis of comparison include those of right-wing commentators Jack Posobiec, Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump Jr. Our study also examined accounts at the other end of the political spectrum, including those of US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, US Senator Bernie Sanders and Vice-President Kamala Harris.
A sudden and significant increase
Since July, engagement with Musk’s X account has seen a sudden and significant increase.
The view counts for his posts increased by 138%, retweets by 238%, and likes by 186%.
In contrast, other prominent political accounts on X saw more moderate increases: 57% in view counts, 152% in retweets, and 130% in likes.
This suggests that while engagement went up for all accounts after July, Musk’s metrics saw a particularly large boost, particularly in retweets and likes.
The research further found that since July, other conservative and right-wing X accounts have performed better in terms of visibility of posts compared to progressive and left-wing accounts.
The Conversation sought comment from X about the research, but did not receive a reply before deadline.
Without backstage access to the workings of the company, it is impossible to know for sure whether changes to its curation system are boosting its owner’s posts. The platform has limited the access it provides to researchers since Musk took over. This means there are restrictions on the amount of data we were able to collect for this study.
However, the Washington Post recently found that tweets from Republicans are far more likely to go viral, receiving billions more views than those from Democrats. Similarly, an investigation by the Wall Street Journal revealed that new users to the platform “are being blanketed with political content” that disproportionately favours Trump.
Since Musk’s purchase of the platform, it has become more congenial to figures on the right, including people who were previously banned for spreading harmful and false information.
The myth of neutrality
The findings raise the question of the extent to which Musk’s influential social media platform is reinforcing its owner’s political agenda.
Musk, whose businesses have extensive government contracts, has made a public and financial spectacle of his unabashed support of Trump. The billionaire tech tycoon is reportedly Trump’s second-biggest financial donor. He also promoted Trump in a glitchy live interview on X and authored a stream of tweets promoting Trump’s campaign.
Musk is also handing out $1 million a day to selected registered voters. This plan (which has met with questions over its legality) apparently aims to boost voter registration among sympathisers in swing states.
Musk’s actions have torpedoed the fantasy that social media platforms such as X are neutral. Given he has previously tweaked X’s algorithm to amplify the reach of his posts, it would be surprising if he were not tilting the platform in favour of Trump, whom he believes is “the path to prosperity”.
For too long, social media platforms have enjoyed immunity for the information they selectively inject into users’ feeds. It’s time for governments to reconsider their approach to regulating the oligopolistic power over our information environment wielded by a handful of tech billionaires.
Timothy Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) for his Discovery Early Career Researcher Award, ‘Combatting Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour on Social Media’. He also receives ARC funding for the Discovery Project, ‘Understanding and combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘ (2024–2027).
Mark Andrejevic receives funding from the Australian Research Council through the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making and Society and through the ARC Discovery Program for two projects (‘When Your Face is Your ID,’ 2020-2025; and “Mapping Australians’ Media Use and Civic Attitudes,’ 2023-2025).
