Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Vaughan, PhD Researcher Sport Integrity, University of Canberra

Warren Buffet once famously said: “you only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.”

In this context, the US government’s decision this month to withhold its annual funding to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), has exposed WADA’s reliance on the nations with the highest numbers of elite athletes as it aims to lead “a collaborative worldwide movement for doping-free sport”.

The US has taken issue with WADA’s decision not to appeal the China Anti-Doping Agency’s finding of “no-fault” following the contamination of 23 Chinese swimmers in 2021.

Read more:
Chinese swimming scandal: a strong defence by world anti-doping body, but narrative of ‘cover-up’ remains

The international community promotes “clean” sport for fairness between competitors and to protect the integrity of the competition, and athlete health. Yet ironically, the very body tasked with safeguarding these values is itself under scrutiny.

The problem: who pays to police doping?

This month’s announcement that the US Office of National Drug Control Policy has withheld its 2024 payment from WADA highlights the fundamental conflict for WADA.

The US contribution of $US3.6m ($A5.8m) amounts to 13.6% of the budgeted $US26.5m ($A42.7m) from global governments.

WADA’s hybrid public-private structure reflects the balancing act between the national governments on one side and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), representing the sports movement, on the other.

Catherine Ordway, one of the authors here, has long argued the 50-50 funding model between the IOC and the national governments creates “a fox guarding the henhouse” scenario.

This is because WADA relies heavily on funding from stakeholders, some of which have had the highest number of doping cases to investigate, such as Russia, China and the US. This in turn creates serious challenges for WADA in maintaining its own independence and impartiality.

The danger is that WADA could be strong-armed into making decisions to suit major funders: if you are being paid by the organisations that have a vested interest in the outcomes, it could create a fundamental conflict of interest.

The annual contribution due from each national government is proportionate to the size of their elite athlete pool. The IOC pays for the other half of the WADA budget, on behalf of all the international sport federations.

The deficiency in the WADA funding model was exposed during the long and expensive investigation into the “institutionalised manipulation of the doping control process in Russia” following the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic Games.

Although in financial distress, WADA could hardly beg one of its biggest funders, Russia, for more money to help it unearth the breadth of the fraud.

Instead, it led to WADA seeking private funding for the first time in its history.

A system open to manipulation

The US funding withdrawal is just one example of how WADA’s reliance on national contributions creates vulnerabilities.

This precarious system limits WADA’s ability to enforce anti-doping measures equitably. For example, smaller nations without robust anti-doping infrastructure are more reliant on WADA. Yet reduced funding hampers the organisation’s ability to investigate violations, test athletes, research new ideas, implement education programs effectively, and expand the function of new initiatives, such as athlete Ombuds.

The risks go beyond under-funding. If a government does not pay its contribution, this has a double impact as the withheld amount will not be matched by the IOC.

If other nations follow the US example, WADA’s financial model could collapse entirely. The United Kingdom and EU countries are reportedly being asked to reconsider their financial contributions.

The question is clear: how can we build a funding model that protects WADA’s independence and maintains trust in the system?

Read more:
Tennis is facing an existential crisis over doping. How will it respond?

Innovative solutions for clean sport

There is widespread agreement that WADA’s current funding model is flawed. The real challenge lies in designing an a system that guarantees independence while fostering accountability and transparency.

Beyond current WADA efforts to secure private sponsorships, and support from philanthropic foundations, here are our proposals:

1. An independent global trust fund

A neutral, independently managed trust fund could be financed by a small percentage of global sporting revenues, such as broadcasting rights, sponsorship deals, or ticket sales. This would create a more impartial funding base.

2. Expand WADA’s social science research grant program

WADA recognises that social scientists play a crucial role in designing solutions for “wicked” problems, including doping, and has established a social science research grant program to support the science research program.

Rather than limiting research to “athlete behaviours (and) the social and environment factors that influence athlete behaviors”, the grant program could be expanded to look at WADA’s governance, accountability and funding from perspectives including behavioural economics, governance and public policy.

Additionally, social scientists can analyse WADA’s internal structure to identify inefficiencies beyond funding, ensuring anti-doping efforts are as effective as possible.

Since January 2024, Ordway has been a volunteer member of WADA’s social science research expert advisory group, which reviews the grant applications on behalf of WADA. Ordway does not have any research projects that would be eligible for funding under the proposed reforms.

3. Progressive athlete contribution model

Professional athletes could contribute a small levy from their earnings to fund anti-doping efforts. This model would promote athlete “ownership” of clean sport and increase investment in fair play.

However, many player associations argue that until there is revenue sharing (from event broadcasting, ticketing and sponsorship), especially in the Olympic context, and a greater voice for athletes, that this option is a non-starter.

With the WADA code consultation process well underway, for stakeholder approval at the sixth World Conference on Doping in Sport in November 2025, this is the perfect moment to act.

The urgency for change

Without bold reforms, WADA’s credibility and the integrity of sport itself, will remain at risk.

The stakes could not be higher: fair play, athlete safety, and the future of global competition all hang in the balance.

It’s time to take decisive action to remove the fox from the henhouse.

By building a funding model for the future, WADA can be properly resourced to fulfil its mandate as the organisation established to support clean and fair competition.

The future of sport may depend on it.

Richard Vaughan is an Olympian. He receives funding from Sport Integrity Australia towards his PhD research. He is the Vice-President of the Badminton World Federation (BWF).

Catherine Ordway has advised in anti-doping policy since 1997 and previously worked for Anti-Doping Norway (2001-2005) and the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (2006-2008). Catherine currently serves as a voluntary member of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Social Science Research Expert Advisory Group. She was a member of the WADA Education Outreach team for the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games, and the WADA Independent Observer team for the Rio 2007 Pan American Games. The University of Canberra has a Memorandum of Understanding with Sport Integrity Australia, which includes the anti-doping PhD research being conducted by Richard Vaughan. Catherine is Richard’s primary PhD supervisor.

– ref. The US has exposed the World Anti-Doping Agency’s precarious funding model – https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-exposed-the-world-anti-doping-agencys-precarious-funding-model-247442

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanne Orlando, Researcher, Digital Literacy and Digital Wellbeing, Western Sydney University

According to the latest reports, TikTok has restored services in the United States after “going dark” on Saturday evening US time. The company turned off its services ahead of a nationwide ban that was set to take effect on Sunday.

However, on Sunday, President-elect Donald Trump announced he would issue an executive order after he is inaugurated into office on Monday, to “extend the period of time before the law’s prohibitions take effect”.

TikTok has thanked Trump, saying it’s a strong stand “against arbitrary censorship”.

What does it mean for TikTok to ‘go dark’?

To make the app unavailable in the US, TikTok went with two strategies. First, TikTok was made unavailable to download from the US version of Apple’s App Store, Google Play, and any other app providers where one could download the app.

Second, to turn off services only for users in the US, TikTok employed the user’s IP address – this indicates where in the world the user is located. If necessary, the same technical process could be done in any part of the world, including Australia.

However, the service should only be affected for people in the US. There have been reports on websites like Reddit that some users outside the US, including those who originally opened a TikTok account in the US, have been affected – but this is likely to be temporary.

If TikTok stayed dark, people who would still want to access TikTok in the US would have to use a virtual private network or VPN. This can make it appear that the user’s IP address is coming from somewhere else in the world.

So, is TikTok banned in the US or not?

Officially, TikTok is currently banned from operation in the US. The law was passed by Congress in April last year and came into effect on January 19 after it survived a Supreme Court challenge launched by TikTok.

The law was designed to force the Chinese company ByteDance to either sell TikTok in the US, or face a ban enforced by steep penalties.

However, Trump’s statement on Sunday made it clear that no penalties would be enacted on the service providers keeping TikTok available while it’s ostensibly banned.

Can Trump ‘save’ TikTok?

Trump’s promise to resurrect TikTok in some way was part of his election campaign, so this statement comes as no surprise.

While Trump cannot overturn the law, his goal is to extend the deadline TikTok has been given to try and sell the app in the United States. The law does not specify details about potential buyers or ownership structures, apart from that they “must not be controlled by a foreign adversary” (specifically China, in this case).

Overriding a law passed by Congress and approved by the Supreme Court is unlikely to stick, though Trump could work around the law by reassuring app stores and cloud-service providers they won’t face prosecution in the event of a violation.

Overall, the situation is slippery and unclear. Among some users, there’s a feeling nobody knows what’s going to happen, but all will be OK in the end. The fact an app can go dark and then be restored in light of an announcement from a politician in less than a day shows there’s an immense lack of stability in the social media sphere.

It also shows that big tech and social media, in particular, has entered the political agendas of governments in an unprecedented way. The situation with ByteDance demonstrates governments can use tech companies as political tools against other governments.

What does the US TikTok ban mean for Australia?

Australians should be able to continue to use TikTok without problems. However, if TikTok does eventually go dark in the US, they won’t see new content from US-based creators.

But there are larger implications. Last year, Australia banned children under 16 from all social media, although the details of how exactly this will work are yet to be determined.

Australia’s reasons for the ban are fundamentally different from why TikTok was banned in the US. In the US, it’s about foreign ownership, while in Australia the government has expressed concerns about young people’s wellbeing. (This issue has been widely debated by experts.)

But the fact that social media bans of different kinds have been on the agenda at all shows we’re going to see a lot more political game-playing involving social media and big tech in general.

Social media companies and governments are now locked in a global power struggle, playing out in multiple countries: from the US and Australia to others like Brazil.

This is a new kind of conflict in which governments are trying to control or regulate big tech companies, and tech companies are fighting to maintain their independence and power.

The outcome of these struggles will likely shape how online spaces are governed and who ultimately controls the digital world we all use. Stay tuned.

Joanne Orlando received funding from eSafety Commissioner.

– ref. What’s going on with TikTok in the US, and what will this mean for Australia? – https://theconversation.com/whats-going-on-with-tiktok-in-the-us-and-what-will-this-mean-for-australia-247791

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Bellanta, Professor of Modern History (Australian Catholic University), Visiting Professor of Australian Studies (Seoul National University), Australian Catholic University

With almost all menswear bought off the rack or online today, the “shoddy dropper” has long passed into obscurity.

This 1920s slang term, used only in Australia and New Zealand, referred to roving sellers of cloth. Most shoddy droppers sold men’s suiting such as serges and tweeds. They walked city streets or went door-to-door in suburbs and towns.

Driven by a cost-of-living crisis that followed the first world war, shoddy dropping was eventually killed off by rising wages by the 1950s.

The practice underscores how readily fashion markets respond to economic factors such as supply, demand, inflation and wages.

‘Suit-length swindlers’

The most successful shoddy droppers were smooth talkers attractively dressed in made-to-measure three-piece suits.

They often went door-to-door, trying to convince would-be customers they could afford to dress like them. All a customer had to do was buy the shoddy dropper’s “high-quality” suit-lengths at a price they would be unable to find elsewhere.

Some shoddy droppers also claimed to have a special deal with a tailor that allowed buyers to have their suit tailor-made at a steal.

The term “shoddy dropping” played on the dual meaning of the word “shoddy”. The first was a noun referring to a cheap fabric made from a mix of new and recycled wool. The second was an adjective meaning “inferior or badly-made”.

Both meanings of shoddy were implicit in an article published in a rural New South Wales paper in 1913.

Though the writer did not use the term “shoddy dropping”, they warned readers against travelling “suit-length swindlers”, saying that

shoddy articles are frequently palmed off as good quality cloths by irresponsible men.

The number of shoddy droppers at any one time was probably tiny, but since they were off the books they are impossible to quantify.

Having said this, crime and news reports suggest the practice began around the start of the first world war.

Supply, demand, inflation and wages

Shoddy dropping surged in the the 1920s and 1940s, as prices soared due to war.

Working-class men’s desire for well-fitting suits was another factor. When Melbourne carters and factory workers gave evidence to the Australian Royal Commission on the Basic Wage in 1920, for example, they said most men they knew wore tailor-made suits to and from work.

This created financial stress; spiralling costs meant made-to-measure suits were hard to afford.

Fashion was another likely reason for the surges in shoddy dropping in the 1920s and 1940s.

The slimline jazz suit, which came into vogue in the early twenties, was just one example.

The jacket of this suit was single-breasted and slightly flared from the waist, while the trousers were narrow and short enough to expose silk-knit “jazz socks”.

The impish charisma of the jazz-suited Louis Stirling below makes it is easy to imagine how a stylish shoddy dropper persuaded fashion-conscious young men to buy their wares.

Stirling was a suit-length seller photographed by Sydney police in 1920 after he was caught stealing cloth. He later produced evidence that he was a shoddy dropper to escape a vagrancy charge in Melbourne in 1922.

The high number of restless first world war veterans looking for work was a further reason for a surge in shoddy dropping in the 1920s.

Consider returned serviceman Reginald Sharples (also known as Walter Johnson). In 1920, police charged him and an accomplice with stealing more than £1,000 of men’s suiting from a tailor in Sydney’s Hunter Street. This was somewhere in the vicinity of A$83,000 today.

Sharples was caught after transporting the stolen cloth to Melbourne. Like Stirling, he later produced convincing evidence to show that he was a shoddy dropper to escape a vagrancy charge.

In his 1920 mugshot, Sharples is dressed in an early interwar version of smart-casual street style. He had combined a light pinstripe suit with a cream turtleneck sweater, black fedora and returned-serviceman’s badge.

Sharples was also an example of links between shoddy dropping and organised crime in and after the 1920s.

Apart from the suits-stealing charge, Sharples was also convicted of stealing morphine and cocaine from a wholesale druggist in Melbourne in 1922. He was also unsuccessfully prosecuted for vagrancy along with Louis Stirling in 1924.

Rumours that both men were associates of underworld figure Squizzy Taylor swirled in court during the trial.

A cost-of-living story

Shoddy dropping had disappeared by the mid-1950s, thanks to rising wages and increasing sophistication in the manufacture of ready-made suits.

These factors meant there were fewer low-income men who felt the only way they could afford a decent suit was to first buy cloth “off the back of a truck”, then face the uncertainty of arranging for it to be tailor-made.

Though shoddy dropping flew under the radar even in the 1920s, it is worth remembering today as a reminder of the unscrupulous selling practices that bloom in cost-of-living crises.

Along with the evidence in the extraordinary informal mugshots taken by Sydney police across the interwar era, shoddy dropping offers further insights into Australia’s history of male fashion consumers’ desire.

It has often been said Australian men were a cause lost to fashion. Shoddy dropping suggests that, in fact, many longed to dress in tailor-made suits and quality textiles. For many, however, those commodities were frustratingly out of reach.

Melissa Bellanta has received funding from the ARC for a research projects titled ‘Men’s Dress in Twentieth-Century Australia: Masculinity, Fashion, Social Change’ and ‘Sentimental Blokes: A Cultural History of Working-Class Masculinities in Australia, 1850-1929’.

– ref. ‘Shoddy dropping’: how the 1920s cost-of-living crisis fuelled a black market in menswear – https://theconversation.com/shoddy-dropping-how-the-1920s-cost-of-living-crisis-fuelled-a-black-market-in-menswear-244918

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Blazevich, Professor of Biomechanics, Edith Cowan University

Watch any match at this year’s Australian Open and you’ll see balls curving in the air or bouncing higher or lower than expected. Players such as Novak Djokovic, Iga Swiatek and Coco Gauff are particularly masterful at the art.

The secret? It’s all about spin.

The ability to control a tennis ball’s spin has transformed the modern game, making it faster and more spectacular than ever. But how exactly do players make the ball move through the air or bounce off the court like that?

The complex physics of spin

The physics underlying the effect is complex. But the easiest way to explain it is to consider the Magnus effect.

When a spinning ball moves through the air, it creates a force that makes it curve away from its straight-line path. Scientists call this the Magnus force, named after German physicist Heinrich Gustav Magnus who first described it in 1852.

The force is generated by the spinning ball dragging air around it in an unusual way. When a tennis player puts topspin on the ball (for example, by brushing the racquet upwards over the back of the ball during the shot), the ball spins forwards end-over-end after contact. As it spins, the friction between the ball and the air starts the air moving in the direction of spin.

Because air spins around the ball, oncoming air hitting the top of the ball collides with oncoming air due to the spin, and slows down. But air hitting the underside meets air moving in the same direction and travels relatively faster.

According to a law first introduced by the Swiss mathematician, Daniel Bernoulli, pressure is greater on top of the ball, where air flows slowly, than under the ball where the air moves quickly. This pressure difference pushes the ball downwards.

It’s the same principle that helps aeroplanes fly – except in reverse so the ball drops rather than flies.

Topspin: a lethal weapon

Topspin is one of the modern tennis player’s most powerful weapons. When top exponents such as recently retired star Rafael Nadal deploy it, the ball can spin at more than 50 rotations per second!

But why is topspin so lethal?

If a player hits the ball at a high speed, it should normally sail over the baseline because there’s insufficient time for gravity to drag it down into the court.

When hit with topspin, the ball will dip down quickly into the court. This allows players to hit the ball with a lot of horizontal velocity without the ball sailing over the baseline.

And because the top-spinning ball spins in the same direction as the ball travels, the ball continues quickly even after bouncing. So, the ball travels quickly both before and after its collision with the court, allowing less time for the opponent to get to it.

A final benefit is that the ball also tends to bounce higher than normal, which can make it harder to hit for an opposing player.

This is partly because the ball strikes the ground at a steeper angle as it curves downward toward the ground and partly because a ball spinning in the same direction as its travel will skid less as it bounces, saving energy and allowing the ball to bounce higher.

Backspin: the gentle winner

Alternatively, a player might “slice” the ball to put backspin on it by brushing under the ball with their racquet.

This creates an upward Magnus force, making the ball float and stay in the air longer than expected. The ball can then be kept low over the net and yet still travel far into the opponent’s side of the court.

When it lands, it stays low and can even skid slightly. So the ball slows down and stays low, making it hard to hit. In response, opponents often have to hit a slower return shot because the ball doesn’t bounce high enough to hit it with a lot of topspin.

The most dramatic use of backspin comes in the form of the “drop shot”, where players disguise a gentle, heavily underspun shot that barely clears the net, then “dies” on the bounce. This leaves little time for the opponent to rush to the net to make the shot before the ball bounces for its second time and the point is lost.

The Spanish star, Carlos Alcaraz, is a master of this type of shot, as you can see in the below video.

Harnessing the physics of spin

This year when you watch the Australian Open, pay attention to how players use spin to control the court: that “heavy” forehand that pushes an opponent back, the slice serve that draws them wide, the delicate drop shot that brings them forward.

And you might watch for players who put sidespin on the ball, the effects of which I’m sure you can now guess.

They’re all examples of players harnessing the physics of spin to their advantage.

Anthony Blazevich 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.

– ref. Spin has transformed modern-day tennis. Here’s the physics behind it – https://theconversation.com/spin-has-transformed-modern-day-tennis-heres-the-physics-behind-it-247462

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Ogden, Associate Professor in Global Studies, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

On the eve of Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration, the world is braced for more of what has been described as his instinct for “weaponised chaos”.

During his previous presidency, Trump upended political convention and created a sense of “permacrisis” – “the dizzying sense of lurching from one unprecedented event to another”.

In the past, crises have traditionally been seen as occasions that will make or break governments. Some leaders, such as Britain’s Harold Macmillan in the 1960s, saw them as negatives, famously saying “events, dear boy, events” were any leader’s greatest challenge.

Other perspectives say crises offer the chance to turn challenges into opportunities. These can offer positive outcomes, “bury” bad news or precipitate wars.

But there is now a sense of crisis being an everyday feature of our lives. According to European observers, this means “volatility, uncertainty, and a prolonged sense of emergency have become the new normal”.

This view sees crises as being uncontrollable, to which leaders and populations can only react. For many now in power, however, creating crisis has become a form of politics in itself.

Manufacturing crisis

Over the past 25 years, Russia’s Vladimir Putin has been adept at using crises to his advantage. He used the 1999 Moscow apartment bombings to crack down on Chechen separatists, the 2002 Dubrovka Theater siege to clamp down on the media, and the 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis to remove the direct election of all state governors.

At the same time, Putin’s Russia has been at the forefront of manufacturing crisis. Vladislav Surkov, a former avant-garde theatre director and later main Kremlin insider, was a key protagonist of such ideas who “directed Russian society like one great reality show”, according to one profile.

Rather than governments trying to control the narrative and reality, scholars Catherine Happer, Andrew Hoskins and William Merrin argue, Surkov “promoted multiple realities and an instability of the real, where anything could mean something else and where nothing was certain”.

These tactics were first used in Ukraine and Crimea in 2014 to blur the lines between truth and falsity, creating a climate of complete uncertainty.

According to the Rand Corporation think tank, this involved
deploying a “firehose of falsehood” to “overwhelm audiences with a relentless flood of disinformation, partial truths, random facts and social media speculation”.

Anything becomes possible

The firehose was imported into the US by Steve Bannon, Trump’s former chief strategist. Specifically targeting the mainstream media, he said “the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit”.

This approach was then used against all parts of the established order, to invoke widespread polarisation, discontent and havoc. Once normalised, such upheavals are used to create a kind of “power in chaos”.

With nothing being certain, and long-held traditions broken, anything becomes possible. Author Peter Pomerantsev describes it as

a strategy of power based on keeping any opposition there may be constantly confused, a ceaseless shape-shifting that is unstoppable because it’s indefinable.

Trump’s nominations for key roles in his upcoming administration are characteristic of such strategies. They seem designed to provoke bewilderment and distraction before they are even appointed.

Each nominee also has the capacity to cause serial, rolling crises once in power. Republican voters, according to the BBC, are “hailing them as much-needed disruptors to what they see as a corrupt establishment”.

A political shock doctrine

The author Naomi Klein famously described the dynamics of “disaster capitalism” in her book The Shock Doctrine. But Trump’s second term looks to be defined by a widespread political shock doctrine of what could be called “disaster politics”.

The potential is for fragmented social cohesion, attacks on minorities and the spread of misinformation to the detriment of democratic values. It would be a blueprint for current and aspiring autocrats across the world.

At its heart, Trump is the crisis, personifying instability, uncertainty and fear. For him and his followers, permanent crisis is the means and the ends to achieving particular aims and normalising such a political ecosystem.

It is also a conduit for autocratic power, as a dazed population searches for meaning in the “omnishambles” that typifies a “kakistocracy” (rule by the worst).

Disaster politics has the potential to pull other countries – democratic or authoritarian – into its orbit, with others trying to emulate Trump’s approach.

It also means being affected by the wider fallout of Trump’s plans to deport millions of immigrants or impose high trade tariffs. Both are seen to be potential triggers for an American and global recession, which will have a clear impact on other countries.

But Trump’s intended approach also offers some cause of optimism. In his previous presidency, when he sought to impose tariffs or pull out of major treaties, it provoked new groupings of countries seeking to preserve free trade and globalisation.

Paradoxically, democratic countries that promote tolerance, inclusion, compassion and acceptance could flourish as a positive antidote to a Trumpian model of prejudice, isolation, fear and anger.

Chris Ogden is a Senior Research Fellow with The Foreign Policy Centre, London.

– ref. Manufacturing crisis: the challenge of Trump 2.0’s ‘power in chaos’ for other democracies – https://theconversation.com/manufacturing-crisis-the-challenge-of-trump-2-0s-power-in-chaos-for-other-democracies-246403

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

A national Freshwater poll for The Financial Review, conducted January 17–19 from a sample of 1,063, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead, unchanged since December. Primary votes were 40% Coalition (steady), 32% Labor (up two), 13% Greens (down one) and 15% for all Others (down one).

As is the case with YouGov below, Freshwater uses 2022 preference flows for its two-party estimates, and applying 2022 preference flows to the primary votes would give about a 50–50 tie, so rounding probably contributed to the Coalition’s lead in both Freshwater and YouGov polls.

Anthony Albanese’s net approval was down one point to -18, with 50% unfavourable and 32% favourable. Peter Dutton’s net approval was also down one to -4. Albanese and Dutton were tied 43–43 as preferred PM after Albanese led by 46–43 in December, the first time Albanese has not led in this poll.

When voters were asked to rate their top three issues, the cost of living was easily highest with 73% rating it a top three issue, followed by housing at 42%, health at 28%, economic management at 27% and crime at 26%. Crime was up three since December, while the environment was down six to 18%.

YouGov poll and economic data

A YouGov national poll, conducted January 9–15 from a sample of 1,504, gave the Coalition a 51–49 lead, a one-point gain for the Coalition since the November YouGov poll. Primary votes were 39% Coalition (up one), 32% Labor (up two), 12% Greens (down one), 7% One Nation (down two) and 10% for all Others (steady).

Albanese’s net approval was up five points to -15, with 55% dissatisfied and 40% satisfied. Dutton’s net approval was up two to -6. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 44–40 (42–39 in November).

The Australian Bureau of Statistics released December jobs data last Thursday. The unemployment rate rose 0.1% from November to 4.0%, but this was due to a higher participation rate. The employment population ratio (the percentage of eligible Australians employed) rose 0.2% to 64.5%, a record high.

The ABC’s report said economists thought a February rate cut was less likely as a result of the jobs data, but market traders disagreed with this assessment.

Morgan poll: Coalition ahead

A national Morgan poll, conducted January 6–12 from a sample of 1,721, gave the Coalition a 51.5–48.5 lead using respondent preferences, a 1.5-point gain for Labor since the previous poll.

Primary votes were 40.5% Coalition (steady), 30% Labor (down one), 12.5% Greens (up 0.5), 4.5% One Nation (up one), 9% independents (down 0.5) and 3.5% others (steady). By 2022 election preferences, this poll gave the Coalition a 50.5–49.5 lead, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition.

The previous Morgan poll, conducted December 30 to January 5 from a sample of 1,446, gave the Coalition a 53–47 lead using respondent preferences, a one-point gain for the Coalition since mid-December.

Primary votes were 40.5% Coalition (down 0.5), 31% Labor (up 3.5), 12% Greens (down 0.5), 3.5% One Nation (down 1.5), 9.5% independents (down one) and 3.5% others (steady).

Despite Labor’s improved primary vote, its two-party share slid owing to a highly unlikely shift with Greens preferences (from 85% to Labor in mid-December to 55% in this poll). An estimate based on the primary votes would have a 50–50 tie by 2022 election preference flows, a 1.5-point gain for Labor.

A new graph to follow the polls ahead of the 2025 election

I will be using the graph below to follow the polls in the lead-up to the federal election that will be held by May. The graph will chart polls from seven pollsters: Newspoll, Resolve, Freshwater, YouGov, Redbridge, Morgan and Essential. The graph starts with the last 2024 poll from each pollster.

This graph uses the 2022 election preference flows from each pollster to obtain its two-party estimates. If this was not given by the pollster, it was estimated from the primary votes.

So far this year, Morgan, YouGov and Freshwater have released new polls. These are marked by a line connecting the new polls with the previous ones. Overall, the Coalition still holds a narrow lead, with the picture unchanged from December. However, Labor was probably unlucky not to get a 50–50 tie from either YouGov or Freshwater.

Respondent preference flows from Morgan and Essential have usually been worse for Labor than the last election method, and One Nation preferences were stronger for the Liberal National Party at the October Queensland election than in 2020, so it’s reasonable to expect Labor to under-perform the 2022 election flows.

Most pollsters don’t give a respondent preference figure, and these figures are more volatile from poll to poll, and do not necessarily reflect changes in primary votes. Therefore, I will use the 2022 preference method in the graph.

The fieldwork midpoint date gives a better indication of how recent a poll is than the final fieldwork date. A poll that was conducted over a long period may have a more recent final date than a poll with shorter fieldwork, but the majority of the poll with shorter fieldwork may have been conducted before the poll with longer fieldwork.

Newspoll aggregate data for October to December

On December 26, The Australian released aggregate data for the three national Newspolls taken between October 7 and December 6, which had a total sample of 3,775. Comparisons are with the July to September Newspoll aggregate.

The Poll Bludger said that in New South Wales, there was a 50–50 tie, a one-point gain for Labor. In Victoria, there was a 50–50 tie, a two-point gain for the Coalition. In Queensland, the Coalition had a 53–47 lead, a one-point gain for Labor. In Western Australia, Labor led by 54–46, a two-point gain for Labor. In South Australia, Labor led by 53–47, a one-point gain for the Coalition.

The Poll Bludger’s BludgerTrack data says that among university-educated people, Labor led by 51–49, a two-point gain for the Coalition. Labor led by 51–49 with those with a TAFE or technical education, a one-point gain for Labor. The Coalition led by 53–47 with those without any tertiary education, a two-point gain for the Coalition.

Resolve likeability ratings

Nine newspapers on December 29 released likeability ratings from Resolve’s early December national poll that had the worst position for Labor this term. Jacqui Lambie was the most liked federal politician at +14 net likeability, with Jacinta Price second at +8. Penny Wong was the only Labor politician at net positive, scoring +2.

Other prominent Labor ministers were negative, with Tanya Plibersek at -5, Jim Chalmers at -7 and Chris Bowen at -11. Pauline Hanson and Greens leader Adam Bandt were both at -13, Barnaby Joyce at -22 and Lidia Thorpe at -41.

Albanese’s net likeability of =17 is better than his -26 net approval from this poll, while Dutton’s net zero likeability is also marginally higher than his -2 net approval.

Left-wing parties face dismal result at German election

In early November the German federal coalition of centre-left SPD, Greens and pro-business FDP collapsed, and an election will be held on February 23, seven months early. Polls suggest a dismal result for the coalition parties. I covered this election for The Poll Bludger on December 28.

The impeachment of South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, the new French PM and a wrap of recent international elections were also included.

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.

– ref. Coalition still ahead in latest polls, but some promising news for Labor – https://theconversation.com/coalition-still-ahead-in-latest-polls-but-some-promising-news-for-labor-246544

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Diana Piantedosi, Sociology PhD Candidate, School of Humanities and Social Sciences (La Trobe University); Honorary Fellow, School of Health and Social Development (Deakin University), La Trobe University

Laura (Radha Mitchell) is an ambitious investment banker living in London with her husband and three children, at the peak of her career.

When she is diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) and, in quick succession, her husband suddenly dies, she upends her children to return to her hometown in rural New South Wales.

There, after 20 years abroad, Laura rekindles a past romance with Michael (Adam Demos), who is undeterred by her MS.

Directed by John Raftopoulos, the 2024 Australian film Take My Hand, now streaming on various platforms, is inspired by the lives of Raftopoulos and his wife Claire Jensz, who lives with MS.

I too have MS. Ultimately, I found Take My Hand misses the mark in representing the complexity of living with MS. But its depictions of care are worth talking about.

A variable diagnosis

Take My Hand portrays Laura’s MS as steadily progressing. This diverges from the experience of Jensz, who describes a period of “feeling better” after having children.

Like 85% of people diagnosed, my MS is “relapsing-remitting”. This form of MS is marked by fluctuating symptoms that vary from day to day, often drastically during flares.

In not looking directly at this diagnosis, the film bypasses an opportunity to depict a frequently misunderstood aspect of living with episodic disability: waking up unsure of what your body can or cannot do.

By focusing solely on steady progression, the film sidesteps the unpredictability, confusion, frustration and resilience required to navigate a body that feels different from one moment to the next.

Hit-and-miss messages of ‘hope’

Take My Hand struggles to balance its romantic narrative with its ambition to raise awareness about MS. Laura and Michael’s chemistry is earnest, but often clumsy.

The film makes a commendable attempt to profile male carers. Care work is often invisible and assumed to be a “natural” quality of women, who account for 72% of primary carers in Australia.

While a minority, male carers face specific barriers, including isolation and stigma from rigid gender roles positioning care as “feminine”.

At times, Michael depicts a form of masculine strength grounded in care. In one striking scene, Laura doesn’t make it to the bathroom in time at a café. As Michael helps her clean up, reassurance is mutually conveyed. Powerfully, this makes visible the usually hidden dynamic of care and its shared emotional toll.

In another scene, Michael is undressing Laura. Laura asks, “What if I end up in a wheelchair?” Michael replies, “Well, as long as we can still do this, it’ll be okay”.

The vulnerability of this moment is undermined by the implication that Laura’s value – and Michael’s care – depends on her attractiveness and sexual availability. Moments like these equate “hope” for people with MS to finding a partner willing to “overlook” potential physical decline.

Relational dynamics left under-explored

The film sidesteps exploration of Laura’s own role as a carer.

In one scene, Laura mentions caring for her parents, particularly her mother, who has advanced MS.

Michael’s dismissal, insisting she needs to be taken care of herself, overlooks the reality that a significant proportion of primary carers – particularly women – identify as disabled.

By failing to explore this intersection, the script reinforces stereotypes that equate disability with “dependence”.

In a fleeting moment, Laura’s sister Rachel (Natalie Bassingthwaighte) glances at Laura’s walking stick. Bassingthwaighte conveys the pain of witnessing the deteriorating health of someone you love.

Likewise, Laura’s experience of being witnessed throughout the film hints toward the emotional labour people with degenerative conditions manage: fielding our loved ones’ oscillations between pity, hope and grief for us, in among our own.

This involves reassuring others (as much as ourselves) that we are “okay” – despite unpredictable bodies and uncertain disease trajectories.

Unfortunately, these layered experiences and relationships are largely unexplored in favour of the central romance.

A flawed but earnest attempt

For viewers familiar with the nuanced realities of living with chronic illness, the film may feel like a missed opportunity to delve deeper into the complexities of love, care and interdependence.

But it could support conversations about forms of masculinity and its expression through care and respect.

I recognise the importance of profiling positive examples of male carers. My mum has advanced stage MS, and my dad is her primary carer. Following the Disability Royal Commission, and in an era where calling out abuse and toxic masculinity is more critical than ever, so is the need to depict positive male role models. People like my dad.

The film doesn’t get this entirely right, but its attempt is worth acknowledging.

Ultimately, Take My Hand is a sweet, if flawed, story of returning to a place you once outgrew and reconnecting with an old love. But it is not a meaningful window into the realities of living, loving and being loved with MS.

Its tendency to oversimplify and sentimentalise the experience of chronic illness diminishes its potential impact. While the film’s heart is in the right place, it leaves audiences wanting a richer, more authentic exploration of its themes.

Diana Piantedosi is the Senior Manager of Policy and Advocacy at Women with Disabilities Australia (WWDA). Diana also volunteers with MS Plus and is a member of the Victorian Disability Advisory Council (VDAC), Victorian NDIS Community Advisory Council (VCAC) and Department of Families, Fairness and Housing’s (DFFH) LGBTIQA+ Disability Inclusion Expert Advisory Group.

– ref. Aussie film Take My Hand is a sweet love story – but it misses the mark in depicting chronic illness – https://theconversation.com/aussie-film-take-my-hand-is-a-sweet-love-story-but-it-misses-the-mark-in-depicting-chronic-illness-246982

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christian Moro, Associate Professor of Science & Medicine, Bond University

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently released new estimates suggesting around 846 million people aged between 15 and 49 live with a genital herpes infection.

That’s equivalent to one in every five people from that age group.

At least one person each second (42 million people annually) contracts a new genital herpes infection.

So what is genital herpes, and are cases on the rise? Here’s what to know about this common infection.

First, what causes genital herpes?

Genital herpes is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) caused by the herpes simplex virus, which also causes cold sores.

There are two types of herpes simplex virus, HSV-1 and HSV-2 (and it’s possible to be infected by both at the same time).

HSV-1 most commonly spreads through oral contact such as kissing or sharing infected objects such as lip balm, cups or utensils, and presents as cold sores (or oral herpes) around the mouth. But it can also be sexually transmitted to cause a genital herpes infection.

An estimated 3.8 billion people under the age of 50 (64%) globally have HSV-1.

HSV-2 is less prevalent, but almost always causes a genital herpes infection. Some 520 million people aged 15–49 (13%) worldwide are believed to have HSV-2.

The initial episode of genital herpes can be quite painful, with blisters, ulcers and peeling skin around the genitals over 7–10 days.

Not all people have severe (or any) initial symptoms. This means a person might not know they have been infected with a herpes virus.

Herpes is a lifelong infection, which means once you contract the virus, you have it forever. After an initial episode, subsequent episodes can occur, but are usually less painful or even symptom free.

Both oral and genital herpes are particularly easy to spread when you have active lesions (cold sores or genital ulcers). But even with no symptoms, herpes can still be spread to a partner.

And although relatively rare, oral herpes can be transmitted to the genital area, and genital herpes can be transmitted to the mouth through oral sex.

Read more:
Crusty, blistering and peeling: where do cold sores come from and what can you do about them?

If an expectant mother exhibits a genital herpes infection close to childbirth, there are risks to the baby. A herpes infection can be very serious in a baby, and the younger the infant, the more vulnerable they are. This is also one reason why you should avoid kissing a baby on the mouth.

Changing trends

WHO’s recent figures brought together data from around the world to estimate the prevalence of genital herpes in 2020, compared with previous estimates in 2012 and 2016.

This data shows no significant difference in the prevalence of genital herpes caused by HSV-2 since 2016, but does highlight increases in genital herpes infections caused by HSV-1.

The estimated number of genital HSV-1 infections globally was nearly twice as high in 2020 compared with 2016 (376 million compared with 192 million).

A 2022 study looking at Australia, New Zealand and Canada found more than 60% of genital herpes infections are still caused by HSV-2. But this is declining by about 2% each year while new genital infections that result from HSV-1 are rising.

There’s no simple fix, but safe sex is important

Genital herpes causes a substantial disease burden and economic cost to health-care services.

With such a large proportion of the world’s population infected with HSV-1, evidence this virus is increasingly causing genital herpes is concerning.

There’s no cure for genital herpes, but some medications, such as antivirals, can help reduce the amount of virus present in the system. While this won’t kill it completely, it helps to prevent symptomatic genital herpes recurrences, improve quality of life, and minimise the risk of transmission.

To prevent the spread of genital herpes and other STIs, practise safe sex, particularly if you’re not sure of your partner’s sexual health. You need to use a barrier method such as condoms to protect against STIs (a contraceptive such as the pill won’t work). This includes during oral sex.

As herpes is now so common, testing is not usually included as part of a regular sexual health check-up, except for in specific circumstances such as during pregnancy or severe episodes.

So it’s wise not to let your guard down, even if your partner insists they have received the all-clear from a recent check-up.

If there are herpes lesions present around the genitals, avoid sex entirely. Even condoms are not fully effective at these times, as exposed areas can still transmit the infection.

Immune health

If you are infected with HSV-1 or HSV-2 it’s more likely symptoms will appear when you’re stressed, tired or overwhelmed. During these times, our immune system may not be as functional, and dormant viruses such as herpes can start to develop quickly in our bodies.

To reduce the risk of recurrent herpes infections, try to eat healthily, get at least seven hours of sleep each night if possible, and look out for when your body may be telling you to take a step back and relax. This self-care can go a long way towards keeping latent viruses at bay.

While the prevalence has increased significantly in recent years, we have not lost the war on genital herpes just yet. Safe sexual practices, education and awareness can help reduce its spread, and the stigma around it.

If you have personal concerns, you should discuss them with a medical professional.

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.

– ref. Genital herpes is on the rise. Here’s what to know about this common infection – https://theconversation.com/genital-herpes-is-on-the-rise-heres-what-to-know-about-this-common-infection-246230

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rochelle Steven, Lecturer in Environmental Management, Murdoch University

Home gardens can provide vital habitat for Australian birds. But there’s more to it than just planting certain types of shrubs and flowering trees.

After decades of encouragement to include native plants in home gardens, urban environments have come to favour certain species and neglect others including some of our most loved birds, such as fairy-wrens.

Birds that thrive on nectar such as honeyeaters, and bossy birds with bold personalities such as noisy miners, some parrots and magpies, tend to dominate the scene. But it doesn’t have to be this way.

We wanted to explore how urban gardens can best support a wider range of Australian birds. Our new review of research on this topic revealed seven key considerations. These fall into two themes: reducing threats and improving habitat.

We found there’s no point doing just the good things (such as plantings) if we don’t stop doing the bad things (such as killing insects, poisoning owls and letting cats hunt). It’s like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it.

So let’s acknowledge the complexity of nature and take a broader approach to attracting birds to our gardens, by ticking off the items on this shopping list.

1. Secure pets

Domestic cats kill millions of Australian birds every year. So no matter how innocent your cat looks, it remains a highly evolved predator.

The only guaranteed way to protect birds and other wildlife from cats is to keep them contained inside or in purpose-built enclosures, 24 hours a day. You can find out about building your own cat enclosure from government and retail experts online.

Dogs can also stop birds taking up residence in your garden. The mere presence of a dog can deter some birds. Keeping dogs contained at night can reduce the level of disturbance to nocturnal birds. But if you really want to attract birds to your garden, you may choose to keep your dog inside more.

2. Avoid using insecticides and outside lights

Many flying and ground-dwelling insects are in decline. This is bad news for many birds including fairy-wrens, willie wagtails, fantails and robins who rely almost entirely on insects for food. But we can avoid using insecticides or any other form of lethal control such as bug zappers in our own gardens.

Ideally, accept insects as a natural part of your garden. Don’t try to deter them, unless they pose a risk to public safety, such as swarming European honeybees or hordes of European wasps. You can also consider favouring native plants that naturally are resisitant to unwanted insect attack.

Excess artificial light is also taking a toll on insects. Consider whether you really need to leave that outdoor light on all night. Review your existing outdoor lighting using the five principles for responsible outdoor lighting, ensuring all artificial light is useful, targeted, low-level, controlled and warm-coloured.

3. Stop poisoning raptors

The use of rat poison, especially those labelled as “fast action”, is killing native owls and other birds of prey at an alarming rate due to secondary poisoning. In other words, raptors are dying after eating rats and mice that have taken the bait.

Many countries have regulated the sale and use of these products for this reason, but Australia is lagging behind. So if you “give a hoot” about our owls, switch to snap traps. There are also various other effective, humane and efficient options available, including removing unwanted fruit from the ground, keeping sheds tidy, and securing compost bins to keep rodents under control.

4. Prevent window strikes

Birds can fly into windows when they’re unable to differentiate between the glass and the surrounding environment. Strikes may be lethal upon impact or result in injury. A stunned bird is also more vulnerable to predators.

In Australia, bird lovers can reduce the risk by using decals which are decorative stickers intended for windows. Screens, hanging plants or mobiles can also be placed in front of windows to help the birds avoid collisions.

5. Create an inclusive garden

The diversity in Australian birds extends to their diets. Beyond honeyeaters, the nation is home to huge numbers of insectivores, carnivores, seed-eaters and fruit peckers.

Australian gardens typically have plenty of bottlebrush and grevilleas, which stacks the deck in the bold honeyeaters’ favour. So when buying new garden plants, try catering for a wider variety of bird species.

Choose dense shrubs with small white, yellow or blue flowers to attract insects. These bushy plants also make excellent habitat for small birds. Retaining trees ensures our larger birds have nesting sites too.

If you get the garden design right, with a variety of plants to suit all tastes, there is no need to feed the birds.

6. Encourage insects

Native bees and flies play a crucial role in ecosystems, both as pollinators and food for birds.

You can provide insects with nesting habitat in the form of insect “hotels”, food (namely flowers and other insects) and safety from pesticides. These small gestures can make a huge difference.

7. Water the birds too

With the urban heat island effect and growing frequency of extreme heat waves, birds are in need of reliable sources of fresh water. Offer this crucial resource in a water feature such as a bird bath or pond.

Whole neighbourhoods for birds

Your garden has never been more important for birds. Doing your bit in your own backyard can make a visible difference – you will see the birds for yourself. But true conservation gains can only be made when people work together at a larger scale.

Why not start a conversation with your neighbour about attracting birds to your garden? Creating one garden for birds is great, but when we start talking about whole neighbourhoods for birds, that’s magic!

Rochelle Steven is affiliated with BirdLife Australia.

David Newsome 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.

– ref. From securing pets to building ‘insect hotels’ – here are 7 ways to attract birds to your garden – https://theconversation.com/from-securing-pets-to-building-insect-hotels-here-are-7-ways-to-attract-birds-to-your-garden-247561

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eldrede Kahiya, Associate Professor – Strategy and International Business, University of Canterbury

With the goal of doubling exports over the next ten years, the National Party’s Boosting Growth Through Trade policy is now central to the coalition government.

The government hopes to achieve this through trade agreements, trade missions and by making India a strategic priority for trade and development.

The benefits of exporting – increased foreign currency earnings, higher paying jobs and better standards of living – explain the coalition’s export goal.

But the reality is that doubling exports is easier said than done. Recent history is not on the government’s side.

A common goal

Ten years ago, then Prime Minister John Key’s government launched the Business Growth agenda.

Within the agenda sat a specific initiative – Building Export Markets. The goal of the initiative was to grow exports to 40% of the gross domestic product (GDP) by 2025 – from NZ$65 billion to $130 billion. But 2025 is here and this target has not been achieved.

Subsequent governments have outlined similar goals. Former Prime Minister Bill English introduced the Trade Agenda 2030 in 2017 and Labour had the 2021 Trade for All agenda.

New Zealand is not the only country to focus on significantly increasing their exports as a pathway to improving the economy.

Under President Barack Obama, the National Export Initiative was tasked with doubling United States’ exports from US$1.5 trillion to $3 trillion over the period 2010–14. The US fell well short of this goal, with exports increasing by less than 50%.

Closer to home, Australia set the goal of doubling the number of exporters between 2001 and 2006.

That didn’t happen either. Austrade – the equivalent of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise across the ditch – has since tried to suggest the goal was only ever aspirational.

Slow growth

In 2023, New Zealand’s exports to GDP ratio was 24%, trailing the OECD average of 29%. The under-performance is not new.

Setting aside the nearly 20% reduction in exports in 2021, following the pandemic, average annual growth has hovered around 2%. This is well below the 5–6% growth required to attain the export goal.

Several historical factors – such as low participation rates of businesses in exporting, low productivity and distance to market – and emergent challenges – such as supply chain disruptions, compliance-related costs and non-tariff barriers – have made it difficult for New Zealand to achieve the goal of doubling exports.

A feasible goal?

Considering the failure of New Zealand to achieve the goal of doubling exports, it would be easy to dismiss subsequent governments’ efforts as overly ambitious. It would also be easy to criticise policy makers for ignoring the country’s unique challenges or for disregarding the role of anti-global sentiments, the residual effect of the pandemic and persistent supply chain disruptions.

But there are key considerations the government can make to build and strengthen the export sector.

First, clarity is needed. The government needs to establish growth expectations for individual sectors, industries and regions. While most of our merchandise exports simply cannot double over the next decade, knowledge-intensive, technology, or service exports can.

These expectations need to be aligned with the relevant sectors to enable each sector to develop targets and initiatives which contribute to the overall export goal.

Equally, it is important to establish priorities.

For example, should we grow exports by motivating more businesses to commence exporting? Or should we focus on encouraging current exporters to expand their international operations?

Roughly 12,000 businesses export, a third of which have ongoing export involvement. That means there are 8,000 intermittent, occasional or “uncommitted” exporters that can be nudged to adopt ongoing export status.

Nudging these businesses towards permanent export status requires a good grasp of their unique needs and international pathways.

The task of export promotion should not fall solely on the trade promotion organisation, New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE).

With trade promotion organisations such as NZTE required to demonstrate impact, there is a preference for supporting a small, carefully curated list of high-growth, high-potential exporters.

But for businesses that miss out on the chance to work directly with NZTE, engaging with the wider network of trade support organisations can be useful. Business councils, chambers of commerce, industry bodies, regional development agencies and shipping ports represent a large untapped resource which can be used for the benefit of exporters.

For exporters, joining chambers of commerce, business councils and other industry bodies remains a valuable way of keeping up with important developments.

Aspirational but not without merit

Maybe doubling exports is aspirational. But there is room for improvement with clarity and buy-in at the sector level, if priorities are spelled out and if we involve the wider network of trade support organisations.

Working on these factors might not lead to a doubling in exports, but they can help build a stronger sector that weathers global economic winds and benefits all New Zealanders.

Eldrede Kahiya 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.

– ref. NZ government has promised to double exports (again) – but as history shows, this is easier said than done – https://theconversation.com/nz-government-has-promised-to-double-exports-again-but-as-history-shows-this-is-easier-said-than-done-244907

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Coates, Program Director, Housing and Economic Security, Grattan Institute

Having compulsory super should help create a comfortable and stress-free retirement. But Australia’s super system is too complex for retirees to navigate.

This can leave them stressed and lacking the confidence to spend their super savings.

Our latest report, Simpler super: taking the stress out of retirement, recommends the federal government offer all Australians a lifetime annuity – a financial product that pays a guaranteed income for the rest of their lives.

This would help retirees stress less, spend more, and enjoy their retirement years.

Stress prompts many to underspend super

For the first time, many Australians are entering retirement with significant super balances: Australians are retiring with an average super balance of more than A$200,000, and couples with about $300,000.

Despite having saved enough to be comfortable, four in five people say planning for retirement is complicated, and 60% don’t think their retirements will be financially stress-free.

Few retirees draw down on their retirement savings as intended. In fact, many are actually net savers – their savings continue to grow for decades after they retire.

Our analysis of the ABS Survey of Income and Housing shows for those aged 60-64 in 2003-04, average super balances had grown by 37% in real terms by the time they were aged 76-80 in 2019-20.

And their average net wealth, which excludes the equity in their home, grew by 14% over the same period.

Australia’s $4 trillion compulsory superannuation system is turning into a massive inheritance scheme. That’s not how super was supposed to work.

Retirees are given too little guidance

The super system makes most big decisions for working Australians, such as how much to contribute or how it’s invested. But once we retire there is little guidance about how to use our funds.

More than four in five retirees are steered into account-based pensions. But partly because they’re anxious not to outlive their savings, this group manages their spending very cautiously.

While on average, an Australian woman aged 65 today can expect to live until 88, they also have a one-in-five chance of either dying before age 81 or of making it to 94.

Half of those retirees who use an account-based pension draw their super at legislated minimum rates, which if followed, leave 65% of super balances unspent by average life expectancy.

This widespread use of account-based pensions makes Australia a global outlier. Retirees in most rich countries are automatically given – or otherwise strongly encouraged to choose – an income guaranteed to last their entire lives.

Research suggests having an income that is guaranteed to last until death can reduce stress and boost retirees’ spending.

Government could steer retirees into annuities

Our report argues retirees should be encouraged to use 80% of their super balance above $250,000 to purchase an annuity.

The government could embed this pre-set guidance throughout the retirement income system. It could be included in all relevant communications with retirees from super funds, and especially at the point of retirement.

Research shows that retirees tend to choose the option put in front of them.

The remaining super balance – $250,000, plus the remaining 20% of any savings above that level – would continue to be drawn down via an account-based pension. Retirees would still have to access their super for large purchases if needed.

Using some super to buy an annuity could boost expected retirement incomes by up to 25%, compared to solely drawing on an account-based pension at legislated minimum rates.

And it would ensure that the bulk of retirees’ incomes, irrespective of their super balances, would be guaranteed to last the rest of their lives.

Annuities should be provided by government, not super funds

But steering retirees into annuities offered via super funds is unlikely to work.

Super funds have resisted previous attempts by government to require them to offer annuities to retirees.

Many people also struggle to understand and compare annuities. They often find it difficult to switch to a better deal later even if they can spot one.

Recent experience in the UK showed when required to purchase an annuity, most people simply took what their fund was offering and often got a poor deal.

Designing a regulatory regime that overcomes these issues is a huge challenge.
The best option, therefore, is for the government to directly offer annuities.
It should offer all retirees a simple lifetime annuity as the baseline option.

The government could also offer alternatives including investment-linked annuities, where payments are guaranteed for life, but payments could vary based on investment returns.

Priced fairly, and managed by an independent agency, a government annuity would encourage there take-up. Retirees would be more confident that they’re getting a good deal.

Annuity payments would be made from the pool of capital created by annuity purchases, with these investments managed by the Future Fund.

Under reasonable assumptions we project the government annuity provider could be managing assets totalling 2.5% of GDP by 2040.

Superannuation offers Australians the promise of a more comfortable and stress-free retirement. Government-offered annuities can help turn that dream into reality.

Esther Suckling made substantial contributions to the research underpinning this article.

Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the federal and Victorian governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute’s activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities, as disclosed on its website.

Joey Moloney 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.

– ref. Superannuation is complicated. A guaranteed government income in retirement would be simpler – https://theconversation.com/superannuation-is-complicated-a-guaranteed-government-income-in-retirement-would-be-simpler-247383

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liam Byrne, Honorary Fellow, School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne

Should a US president by judged by what they achieved, or by what they failed to do?

Joe Biden’s administration is over. Though we have an extensive record, it is difficult to assess his presidency. At its outset, Biden promised hope, a return to normalcy, to be a bridge between generations, to restore democracy.

Four years on, what remains?

The Democratic Party is in disarray, its next generation of leaders unclear. Donald Trump is returning to the White House, his myrmidons clutching an extensive plan for radically recasting the United States in their image. A staunchly conservative Supreme Court has reinterpreted the powers of the presidency to expand their scope. Plutocrats are lining up to pay obeisance to the new administration, some openly speculating how to best slash the regulatory regime in their favour.

Already, Biden’s legacy seems tenuous, under threat.

Biden has been a president conscious of US presidential history, almost to the point of obsession. He did not just honour that history, but sought to stake a claim to his own place within it.

But now all that is at risk of being lost. Biden’s threatens to be a disappearing presidency, reduced to an ellipsis between the two Trump administrations, judged solely by its tragic end.

Biden himself has been reduced to an isolated and embittered old man, desperate still to serve even though the times have passed him by. His vision of America is one that no longer exists, if it ever did.

Biden’s contribution – early successes

The popular consensus is that Biden’s presidency is one of two halves.

From the period of his inauguration to the 2022 midterms, Biden accrued a substantial governing record. If his domestic accomplishments fell short of proclaimed ambitions, there was still significant progress.

Even where Biden was stymied, he could point to the normal resumption of the legislative process, the negotiation between the separate arms of government – a return to business as usual. But such confidence in the state of American democracy proved misplaced, and Biden’s reluctance to use the full power of the presidency to sway members of his own party attracted derision.

In its first half, the Biden administration successfully navigated an effective response to the COVID pandemic. It oversaw the passing of the most significant climate legislation in US history. The US$1.2 trillion (A$1.94 trillion) Infrastructure, Investment and Jobs Act delivered, and continues to deliver, significant material improvements to Americans’ lives.

It was not all plain sailing, of course. The chaos and confusion of the withdrawal from Afghanistan rightly drew criticism – especially the deaths of 13 US service members. While the withdrawal itself was the right decision, Biden is linked to the end of a war that dragged on for two decades, costing hundreds of thousands of lives and more than $2 trillion. It was a war that resulted, in the end, with the Taliban replacing the Taliban.

As the mid-terms approached in 2022, Biden’s presidency already seemed tenuous. Russia had invaded Ukraine in February of that year. The administration’s support for Ukraine was denied bipartisanship by MAGA radicals in Congress. The economic reverberations were significant, boosting the inflationary pressures that had already built up in the global financial system.

Predictions of a Republican “red wave” at the mid-terms were widespread. Many within the president’s party urged him to shift the messaging to core issues of inflation and economic management, in place of the less tangible emphasis on protecting democracy that Biden insisted on.

Then, in June of that year, the conservative Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. This was a national repudiation of established abortion rights, necessitating a national response. Democrats sought to place abortion on the ballot, and though Biden was an awkward proponent of the pro-choice cause (at best), his emphasis on not repudiating established norms allowed him to present his administration as a protector of the Roe v. Wade consensus.

Once mid-term voting was complete, despite Republican gains, it was clear the anticipated red wave had not eventuated. This was read as a political victory for Biden, not just against the Republicans, but also against detractors in his own party. The President’s confidence grew, as did his own conviction in his insoluble bond with the American people.

It was the pride before the fall.

Overwhelmed by circumstance

The period from 2022–24 has proved to be one of the most difficult in history for incumbent governments across the world. The reasons for this global turmoil are not hard to identify.

The cost-of-living crisis of the past two years has stripped governments of support and authority. Economic analyses of the scale and scope of this experience have often neglected to note that the inflationary surge and rising prices have bitten so deep because they come on top of established economic hardship for wide swathes of the population.

To give him credit, Biden had long identified this trend. He was deeply concerned with the erosion of the middle class, and the need to rebuild economic security for this social layer was long at the core of his economic plans. Biden conceived this as a moral imperative for his presidency.

There is debate over whether Biden’s economic program, awkwardly dubbed “Bidenomics”, was ever suited to this task.

Despite the administration’s attempts to point out that economic figures were improving, large swathes of Americans repeatedly reported to pollsters that their lives were not better than they were when Biden took office. Considering that the US, like the rest of the world, was then gripped by a pandemic, this was a remarkable statement.

Large increases in migration numbers created an opening for the MAGA right to blame economic woes on those seeking a better life in the US. Biden and the Democrats sought to show toughness with legal restraint, alienating both left-wing supporters and right-wing detractors for whom no effort by a Democratic administration would ever be enough.

The same dynamics played out in Biden’s foreign policy. His administration provided just enough support to Ukraine to resist the Russian invasion, but with constant concern about “escalation”, criticism came that it was not enough to seriously dent Russia’s military capability. Over time aid increased, but the lingering sense remained that the administration’s response was too little, too late. Biden was accused from different quarters of doing both too little and too much to aid Ukraine’s defence.

In the Middle East, after Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7 2023, the administration declared full support for Israel, its historic ally. In this, Biden articulated the long-held position of the US foreign policy establishment.

As time progressed, accusations that the Netanyahu government was inflicting collective punishment on Gaza and its civilian population intensified. Biden sought to restrain Netanyahu’s actions, but within the bounds of ongoing and longstanding US support for Israel (including military support). On the Republican right, Biden was accused of failing to provide the support Israel required. On swathes of the left, Biden was accused of abetting Netanyahu’s administration in perpetuating war crimes.

Biden’s foreign policy increasingly looked out of step with the times, and dramatically alienated some of the core base of the Democratic Party. The world was growing more polarised; the liberal international order was fraying, if not snapped entirely. Biden’s pleas for others to respect the US’s moral leadership and to return to historic ties of fraternity did not match new and more aggressive geopolitical realities, nor the changed character of the US’s role in the world.

Trump has been quick to claim credit for the tenuous ceasefire agreement thrashed out in the final days of the Biden administration. It remains to be seen whether it will hold. And like much of Biden’s presidency, it is already being cast as too little, too late.

The state of the leaving

Biden’s decision to debate Trump early in 2024 to cement his position as the Democratic nominee for that year’s election will be derided for decades to come as one of the worst campaign decisions in US presidential history.

Biden’s languid showing spooked supporters and emboldened those who already believed the president was simply too old to defeat Trump at the polls and serve a further four years.

The president, though, sought to defy time and age, further entrenching the notion he was disconnected from reality. His 2020 promise to be a “bridge” between generations was hazy at best, but has rightly come back to be used against him.

Did his refusal to earlier confirm that his presidency would be one term affect the 2024 election result? It is impossible to tell. But Biden’s intransigence and refusal to confront the realities of time and age will be cast deep into his legacy.

Depending on how the next few years pan out, it may well be seen as his most significant contribution to US history.

What’s left behind?

Biden’s greatest ambition was to return to a state of “normalcy” that no longer existed – if it ever did.

His ambition was, in many respects, admirable – a desire to rebuild the economic base of the previous democratic order. A time when the US economy led the world (not just its tech sector) and the country built things that could be used. When secure and long-term jobs were easy to find and paid enough for people to live on in some comfort and security.

While this misty nostalgia often obscured the complicated realities of the past (and its exclusions), it was a clear and progressive aim to provide economic security to rebuild US social and democratic life.

The simple fact is that achieving this goal would require overturning long-held orthodoxies on the relative role of the market and the state in US economic and political life. In a time of economic and geopolitical stability, this would be an historic and difficult task. In our current moment, perhaps impossible.

It is easy to personalise the failings of the past four years in the person of the president. For many Americans, that is what the presidency is for. And Biden’s legacy will always be inflected with these failings.

But the state of the union is not due to the president alone.

It is the result of the cynical cultivation of racist and reactionary mobilisation by the Republican party, a process that has culminated in the person of Trump but that had proceeded for many decades prior.

It is the result of the Democratic Party’s allegiance to the established order and its processes, even when it was no longer delivering for those who most need its protection.

And it is also the failings of a president of great ambition, determined to mark his own place in history, who was too late to realise his own time had passed.

Emma Shortis is Director of International and Security Affairs at The Australia Institute, an independent think tank.

Liam Byrne 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.

– ref. Joe Biden’s presidency will be remembered as one that did not match the times, and a leader who failed to realise it – https://theconversation.com/joe-bidens-presidency-will-be-remembered-as-one-that-did-not-match-the-times-and-a-leader-who-failed-to-realise-it-246320

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Howard, Senior Lecturer, Discipline of English and Writing, University of Sydney

The acclaimed American filmmaker David Lynch has died at the age of 78. While a cause of death has yet to be publicly announced, Lynch, a lifelong tobacco enthusiast, revealed in 2024 he was suffering from emphysema.

Best known for films such as Eraserhead (1977), Blue Velvet (1986) and Mulholland Drive (2001), as well as the hugely influential television series Twin Peaks (1990–91), Lynch – a committed transcendental meditator who worked across multiple mediums including painting, photography and music – was a true creative visionary.

Achieving mainstream commercial success while continually pushing artistic boundaries, Lynch’s impact on popular culture has been profound. The fact that the term “Lynchian”, shorthand for a dreamlike quality of mystery or menace, has passed into our shared cultural lexicon attests to this.

‘The beautiful and the damned’

In the introduction to Lynch’s memoir Room to Dream: A Life (2018), his coauthor Kristine McKenna writes:

We live in a realm of opposites, a place where good and evil, spirit and matter, faith and reason, and carnal lust, exist side by side in an uneasy truce; Lynch’s work resides in the complicated zone where the beautiful and the damned collide.

Drawing on the energies of surrealism, Lynch’s work delves into the darkest recesses of human behaviour while celebrating the haunting beauty and strangeness associated with everyday existence.

We see this in Blue Velvet. Now regarded as a true cinematic classic, Lynch’s violent and sexually explicit film caused widespread shock and consternation on initial release. It is an unflinching exploration of the darkness and depravity that lurks beneath the polished facade of suburbia.

The film’s iconic opening sequence sets the scene. A cloudless blue sky, red roses and a dazzlingly bright, white picket fence. A fire truck is moving at a glacial pace, a man hanging off the side, smiling and waving. Schoolchildren are ushered across the road, while a middle-aged white man tends to his lawn. Suddenly, he collapses, clutching his neck and writhing in agony.

Lynch’s camera zooms in on the grass until we are confronted with a writhing mass of insects hiding beneath the surface. The serene soundtrack has been replaced with an ominous, throbbing bass track.

Lynch signals the film’s descent into the realms of the unsettling and the grotesque. By the end, the shell-shocked viewer is left wondering: “Why is there so much trouble in this world?”

Lynch, whose body of work eschews easy and conformable answers, leaves it up to us to decide.

Becoming an artist

Lynch was born in Missoula, Montana on January 20 1946, spending his childhood moving between various states. For college, he set his sights on becoming a painter, and again moved around various art schools in different states – including a trip to Europe.

It was at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts in Philadelphia when Lynch started to experiment with film as a medium. Despite dropping out two years later, he stayed in Philadelphia and continued to paint. He also made his first short film, the self-explanatory Six Men Getting Sick (1967).

In 1970, having been awarded a grant by the American Film Institute, Lynch moved to Los Angeles, where he studied filmmaking at the AFI Conservatory and commenced work on the film that eventually turned into Eraserhead.

Eraserhead, Lynch’s debut feature-length film, is a hallucinatory, nightmarish treatment of domestic life set in an industrial wasteland: a bizarre world where a cooked chicken squirms on a plate, a hideous mutant baby torments its despairing parents and a lady who lives inside a radiator sings mournful songs.

A celebrated career

Eraserhead was a hit with art house audiences and brought Lynch to the attention of Hollywood.

His first major commission was a film based on the life of Joseph Merrick, a severely disfigured Englishmen who became a celebrity in 19th century London. Featuring a memorable leading turn from John Hurt, The Elephant Man (1980) was a major critical and commercial success. It received eight Oscar nominations, including for Lynch as best director.

Having turned down the opportunity to direct Return of the Jedi (1983), Lynch signed up to make Dune (1984), an ambitious adaptation of Frank Herbert’s epic science fiction novel of the same name. The film was savaged by critics and did not play well with audiences.

Blue Velvet came next, along with Lynch’s second best director Oscar nomination.

The equally provocative Wild at Heart (1990), Lynch’s hyperviolent black comedy which doffs its cap in the direction of The Wizard of Oz, won the Palme d’Or at the 1990 Cannes Film Festival.

Twin Peaks was again interested in the more sinister side of small-town American life. Revolving around the murder of teenager Laura Palmer, the series combines elements of mystery, soap opera and absurdism. It was a worldwide phenomenon.

His other projects included the aggressively avant-gardist Lost Highway (1997), the unabashedly sentimental and idiosyncratic The Straight Story (1999), and the surrealist noir Mulholland Drive (2001).

Widely regarded as Lynch’s masterpiece, this elliptical fever-dream of a movie landed Lynch the best director award at Cannes in 2001. In 2022, it ranked eighth in Sight & Sound’s critics’ poll of the best films of all time.

A fitting end

Lynch continued to experiment with narrative and the possibilities of cinematic form. In what turned out to be his last feature film, the long and challenging Inland Empire (2006), Lynch embraced low-resoluton digital video and pretty much dispensed with conventional narrative storytelling.

The sprawling complexity of Inland Empire paved the way for Lynch’s triumphant return to television. Lynch’s final substantive work, Twin Peaks: The Return (2017) picks up 25 years after the original series left off.

This 18-episode series, which I believe stands as the equal – if not the superior of – of Mulholland Drive, serves as a fitting culmination of Lynch’s career.

In classic Lynchian fashion, it concludes on a genuinely shocking, hair-raising and ambiguous note, one that lingers with you long after the screen fades to black.

Alexander Howard 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.

– ref. ‘The complicated zone where the beautiful and the damned collide’: remembering David Lynch – https://theconversation.com/the-complicated-zone-where-the-beautiful-and-the-damned-collide-remembering-david-lynch-242904

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Blazevich, Professor of Biomechanics, Edith Cowan University

We’re nearing the halfway point of this year’s Australian Open and players like the United States’ Reilly Opelka (ranked 170th in the world ) and France’s Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard (ranked 30th) captured plenty of attention despite early-round exits.

These two players caught the eye of the tennis world for not only their towering height (standing 2.11 metres and 2m respectively) but their thunderous serves.

Players of this height don’t just stand out in the players’ lounge – they enjoy a significant advantage on court.

But why exactly does being tall help create those blistering serves? The answer lies in some fascinating physics and biomechanics.

The numbers don’t lie

The connection between height and serving power isn’t just something we imagine – analyses of Grand Slam tennis players show our eyes aren’t deceiving us.

The fastest server of all time might be considered relatively short – Australia’s Sam Groth stands “only” 1.93m – but served an ace at a blazing 263.4 kilometres per hour during an ATP Challenger event in Busan in 2012.

The rest of the top five fastest servers in men’s tennis history, and eight of the top ten, all stood at more than 2m tall.

In women’s tennis, the findings also hold true, with Spain’s Georgina Garcia Perez (1.88m) holding the record at 220km/h. And four of the top five fastest were at least 1.82cm – Sabine Lisicki (Germany) is the shortest at a still above average height of 1.78cm.

The physics behind the power

So what makes height such an advantage for serving?

Among many factors, three are critical.

First, taller players generally have longer arms, which act like speed amplifiers.

In physics terms, the speed of your hand (and therefore the racquet) is approximately equal to the length of your arm multiplied by how fast you rotate it, as shown in the figure below. Longer arms equal faster racquet speeds.

Of course, you might imagine that longer arms would be heavier and therefore harder to move quickly. While that’s true for legs (which is why most of the world’s fastest sprinters aren’t super tall), arms are relatively light.

The speed advantage of length wins out over any minor weight penalty.

A better angle of attack

The second advantage is all about geometry.

Taller players can hit the ball at point higher off the ground, so it’s easier to clear the net and yet still get the ball to land in the service square on the opposite side of the court.

Picture trying to throw a scrunched-up piece of paper into a bin from above it versus from the side.

When you’re above the basket, you can throw it down at a steeper angle and still hit your target, but from the side, the paper is as likely to hit the front of the bin or sail over it.

The same principle applies in tennis – taller players can hit powerful serves on a downward angle that clears the net but still lands inside the opponent’s service line.

This height advantage also means a taller athlete can serve powerfully to any part of the service box, not just over the lowest part of the net down the centre of the court. A shorter player has to be much more precise with their angle to achieve the same effect and usually has to hit their fastest serves down the court’s centre.

In tennis serving, angles matter.

Technique: the freedom to swing free

The third advantage might be the most interesting: taller players can actually use more aggressive serving techniques because they have more room for error.

Tennis serves use what’s called a “throw-like pattern”. This is a complex sequence starting from the legs, rotating through the body, and ending with a whip-like motion of the arm and racquet.

This movement pattern can generate enormous power but it’s also harder to control.

As an example, we use this throw-like pattern to throw a ball as far or fast as we possibly can, but we use a different pattern when we’re trying to hit a bullseye on a darts board.

That is, the technique we use for speed is different from the technique for accuracy.

Taller players, with their better angles and higher contact point, can afford to use more of the explosive, throw-like technique and still land the ball within the service square of their opponent.

Shorter players often need to use a more controlled motion to ensure their serves stay in play – they have less room for error so they need to use a more conservative, but accurate, serving technique.

Hope for the not-so-tall

But before shorter players despair, we should remember that some of tennis’s greatest players have dominated without towering height.

Modern legends Serena Williams (1.78m), Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal (both 1.85m) are hardly giants, yet they’ve got impressive serving records and even more legendary win-loss records.

These players demonstrate that serving isn’t just about raw power: balance, accuracy, ball spin, serve placement and the ability to disguise your serve direction are crucial skills that take thousands of hours to perfect.

A well-placed serve at 180km/h can be more effective than a 220km/h bullet that your opponent knows is coming.

So, while height definitely provides some natural advantages for serving, it’s just one piece of the puzzle.

Tennis remains a sport where technique, strategy and dedication to practice can help players of any size rise to the top.

Anthony Blazevich 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.

– ref. Taller tennis players have a natural advantage – but shorter athletes shouldn’t despair – https://theconversation.com/taller-tennis-players-have-a-natural-advantage-but-shorter-athletes-shouldnt-despair-247460

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin T. Jones, Senior Lecturer in History, CQUniversity Australia

In his farewell address, outgoing US President Joe Biden warned “an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy”.

The comment suggests that, under Donald Trump’s second term as president, it will be billionaires rather than the people who shape public policy.

There is certainly some evidence Biden’s ominous caution should be taken seriously. The world’s richest man and the owner of X, Elon Musk, has been a vocal supporter of the Republican candidate. Other billionaire tech moguls to visit Trump at his Mar-a-Lago mansion after his 2024 election victory include Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Apple’s Tim Cook and Google chief executive Sundar Pichai.

There is nothing unusual about business leaders wanting the ear of an incoming president. What has concerned Biden and others is that so many of Trump’s influential backers also own media platforms and have the ability to sway public opinion.

Should these new tech titans be thought of as oligarchs?

What is an oligarchy?

Like many of the academic and scientific categories we still use today, oligarchy was originally defined by the Greek philosopher Aristotle.

In The Politics, he argued people are “political animals”, social by nature, and instinctively want to live in a community. He studied different governments of the ancient world and concluded there were six essential types.

A state could be ruled by a single leader, a small group of elites, or through mass participation of the people. If the leadership acted in the common advantage (koinê sumpheron), he termed these constitutions to be monarchy, aristocracy or polity, respectively.

If the constitutions became corrupt and the leadership acted only to advance their own self-interest, he labelled them tyranny, oligarchy and democracy.

So for Aristotle, an oligarchy is a corrupt form of government. It is when power is in the hands of a small group of elites who advance their own interests rather than the common good.

In Aristotelian terms, democracy is also a corrupt form of government in which the majority uses its power to abuse minorities. While the term democracy has been rehabilitated and is usually seen as a positive, the word oligarchy has retained its negative connotations.

When the United States was created, the founding fathers looked back to Aristotle, Polybius, Cicero and other ancient thinkers to try and create the best kind of constitution.

Following the Aristotelian tradition, they tried to design a mixed constitution where neither the one, the few nor the many could dominate the others. The president has great power. But their power is kept in check by Congress and the judiciary, which is in turn kept in check by the media and, ultimately, the people through regular elections.

Modern oligarchies

In modern politics, the term oligarch is most often used in a Russian context. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, opportunistic tycoons made enormous fortunes from buying up state assets such as energy companies and financial institutions, which also brought them significant political influence as a result.

Since Vladimir Putin became president in 2000, however, Russia has become increasingly authoritarian. While there is still an oligarchic class, their power has been reined in. They must not challenge Putin’s power or vision for the state.

Although China is ostensibly a communist state, the Gini index (the measure of social inequality) has blown out in recent years as a small group of elites become increasingly wealthy.

Despite the state’s official commitment to socialist principles, political scientist Ming Xia has argued China is now transitioning into a modern oligarchy.

What about the United States and Australia?

Despite Biden’s warning of a potential oligarchy, political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page argued back in 2014 the US already was one.

The US has the essential features of a liberal democracy (fair and regular elections, freedom of speech, and an independent press). But Gilens and Page worried large businesses and a small group of affluent citizens had a disproportionate influence on policy.

In Australia also, it could be argued an oligarchy is either emerging or has already taken hold.

Australia has a similar-sized economy to Russia and a growing list of billionaires who appear to have significant influence over government policy.

The power of the Murdoch family and their media empire is well-documented. We have also seen increased political activity from other billionaires including Gina Rinehart, Andrew Forrest and Clive Palmer – who went as far as to start his own political party.

There is no question billionaires in the US and Australia have enormous power and influence. But that in itself does not make an oligarchy.

In Aristotelian terms, the defining feature of an oligarchy is the ruling elite blatantly use their status for their own personal gain rather than the public good.

This is a moral judgement, and one that is increasingly hard to make when so many of the ultra-wealthy own traditional news media and social media platforms that can shape public opinion.

Nevertheless, any shift towards oligarchy should be a cause of alarm to all who value the long democratic tradition in both the US and Australia.

Whether it is a symptom of Trumpism, as Biden suggests, or part of a longer trend, strengthening our democratic institutions and curtailing the disinformation and misinformation that are all too prevalent on social media, is part of the solution.

Benjamin T. Jones 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.

– ref. What is an oligarchy, and is the United States poised to become one? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-an-oligarchy-and-is-the-united-states-poised-to-become-one-247566

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Madelaine Gamble Rosevear, Postdoctoral Fellow in Physical Oceanography, University of Tasmania

The size of the Antarctic ice sheet can be hard to comprehend. Two kilometres thick on average and covering nearly twice the area of Australia, the ice sheet holds enough freshwater to raise global sea levels by 58 metres.

Ice loss from this sheet is projected to be the leading driver of sea level rise by 2100, yet its contribution remains highly uncertain. While sea levels are certain to rise this century, projections of the contribution from Antarctic ice vary from a 44 cm rise to a 22 cm fall.

Much of this uncertainty is because the ocean processes that control the fate of the sheet occur on an incredibly small scale and are very difficult to measure and model.

But recently scientists have made significant progress in understanding this “ice-ocean boundary layer”. This progress is the subject of our new review paper, published today in Annual Reviews.

Shrinking, thinning and retreating

At the margins of the Antarctic ice sheet, glaciers flow into the Southern Ocean, forming floating ice shelves. These ice shelves act as keystones, stabilising the ice sheet. They’re also shrinking.

The ocean melts ice shelves from below – a process known as “basal melting”. Increased basal melting has led to the thinning and retreat of the ice sheet in some regions, raising global sea levels.

It has also slowed the deepest current in the global overturning circulation, a system of ocean currents that circulates water around the globe.

Like the glaciers that feed them, ice shelves are immense. Yet the ocean processes that control basal melting, and the fate of the entire Antarctic ice sheet, occur on the scale of millimetres. They happen in a thin layer of ocean, just beneath the ice.

The boundary layer between the ice shelf and the ocean is cold, miles from anywhere, and beneath very thick ice, so it’s no wonder it has hardly been measured at all.

Studying this layer with other techniques such as computer simulations is also a huge challenge. Until recently, the tiny motions within the ice-ocean boundary layer put accurate modelling of ice melt out of reach.

These twin challenges have long stymied efforts to answer the deceptively simple question: “How does the ocean melt Antarctic ice shelves?”

Modelling the micro-scale

Computer simulations of ocean processes aren’t new.

But only recently have simulations of the ice-ocean boundary layer become feasible, as computing resources grow and the cost of using them shrinks.

Several research groups around the world have taken on this problem, modelling the micro-scale ocean flow that supplies heat to the ice for melting.

Researchers are looking for a relationship between what the ocean is doing, and how quickly the ice melts. So far, they’ve uncovered not just one relationship but several, each indicating a different melt “regime”. Ocean conditions (temperature, salt content and the speed of ocean currents) and the shape of the ice determine which melting regime applies.

Ice sheet shape is key because meltwater is fresh and lighter than the surrounding ocean. Like hot air collecting at the top of a room, fresh, cold meltwater collects in hollows in the lower surface of the ice sheet, insulating the ice from the ocean water below and slowing melting.

For steeply sloping ice, the insulating effect is much less. The energetic flow of meltwater as it rises under steep ice leads to mixing with the warmer ocean waters. This increases melting.

Fast ocean currents have a similar effect, as they transfer heat to the ice.

Sonar-fitted robots

Recently, ocean robots, including autonomous underwater vehicles and tethered probes deployed by drilling through the ice, have provided unprecedented amounts of data on the environment beneath ice shelves.

Using sonar and cameras, these robots have revealed a weird and wonderful “icescape” on the underside of ice shelves.

This icescape is made of many different ice features, ranging from centimetres to kilometres in size. Some, like steep-sided crevasses, are formed by ice fracturing. Others, like dimpled depressions in the ice (often called “scallops”), stair-like “terraces”, mussel-shaped “scoops”, and larger basal channels, are thought to be formed by melt processes.

Our new knowledge of melting from computer simulations and robots sheds light on these features and how they form. The existence of melt regimes helps explain the evolution of steep-sided terraces, or why different features appear in distinct parts of an ice shelf.

For instance, in the warm, calm eastern part of the Dotson ice shelf in west Antarctica, an autonomous robot observed basal terraces. In the west of Dotson – which experiences cold, fast currents – large mussel-shaped scoops were discovered.

Uncertainties remain

Exactly how some of these features form is still unknown.

New simulations that allow the ice-water boundary to move in time show the “self-sculpting” behaviour of ice melt. This is similar to how dunes form and move in a desert.

However, new computer models are needed to simulate the formation and evolution of the whole icescape.

Some of the recent advances highlighted here are helping to reduce the uncertainty in our understanding of the contribution of the Antarctic ice sheet to global sea level rise.

However, incorporating our new understanding of basal melt, and the dynamic icescape it forms, into climate and ice sheet models still presents a huge challenge.

Overcoming this challenge is urgent. Accurate representation of melt in climate and ice sheet models will reduce the deep uncertainty in sea level rise projections, especially as ocean conditions – and ice shelf melt regimes – shift into the future.

Madelaine Gamble Rosevear receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Ben Galton-Fenzi is employed by the Australian Antarctic DIvision.

Bishakhdatta Gayen is employed by the University of Melbourne. He receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is affiliated with Indian Institute of Sciences.

Catherine Vreugdenhil receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. How is Antarctica melting, exactly? Crucial details are beginning to come into focus – https://theconversation.com/how-is-antarctica-melting-exactly-crucial-details-are-beginning-to-come-into-focus-245660

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruth McHugh-Dillon, Assistant Health Editor

A new report by a GP listing company made headlines this week showing low rates of bulk billing for GP visits across Australia.

Bulk billing means the consultation is free for the patient and the GP accepts what Medicare covers (the “benefit” or “rebate”) as the full payment.

The highest reported bulk billing rate was in New South Wales (34.5%) and the lowest in the ACT (3.3%) and Tasmania (0%). This caused the Tasmanian health minister to declare bulk billing “dead” in her state.

But does this really mean no Tasmanians are being bulk-billed at the GP?

No – as federal health minister Mark Butler was quick to point out after the report’s release, the company asked 6,925 GP clinics only whether they had standard, weekday consultations available to be bulk-billed for adults with no concessions.

A range of people do have concessions – children under 16, pensioners and people with a health care card – meaning the actual bulk-billing rate is much higher, although Butler said he’d like it to be higher still.

How high should we be aiming? Many Australians may assume universal health care means it should be free to see a GP, regardless of your age, income or postcode.

So we asked five experts: should we be aiming to bulk-bill everyone?

Four out of five said yes.

Here are their detailed responses.

– ref. Should we aim to bulk-bill everyone for GP visits? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/should-we-aim-to-bulk-bill-everyone-for-gp-visits-we-asked-5-experts-247223

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jess Melbourne-Thomas, Transdisciplinary Researcher & Knowledge Broker, CSIRO

Australia’s natural environment is changing rapidly as the world warms, and many species are struggling to keep up. The pace of change is staggering, with 2024 declared Earth’s hottest year, shattering the previous record set in 2023.

Conservation managers recognise the need for new ways to help species and ecosystems adapt to climate change. But dreaming up new tactics and testing them out requires lots of time, effort and – often – money.

So we decided to gather examples of new tactics from Australia and around the world and offer them up in one place. Our free new online tool is full of fresh ideas to help Australian conservation groups find out about what might be worth trying on their patch.

The catalogue contains more than 400 interventions such as purpose-built shelters and cooling systems, or relocation programs moving species to areas where the future climate may be more suitable. Having a ready-made toolkit means we can respond more rapidly and effectively to the changing environment, helping preserve Australia’s unique biodiversity.

Replacing lost habitat: from cod logs to frog bogs

Our project team searched through academic papers, reports and plans, and connected with dozens of different organisations undertaking climate change adaptation in Australia.

We found many new tactics are being tested to help wildlife adapt to climate change. We fed this information into the new Adaptation Catalogue for Conservation we call “AdaptLog” – a searchable public repository of conservation interventions for climate adaptation. We also invited conservation groups to add to the database.

Here are just a few of the inspiring success stories.

The Mary River (Moonaboola) in southeastern Queensland is a sanctuary for several threatened freshwater species, including the endangered Mary River cod. But recent floods have washed away many of the natural spawning habitats these fish need to breed. So “cod logs” are being trialled to house spawning native fish.

These logs are made from local, hollowed-out timber. They are then placed in the river to provide shelter and nesting habitat for the endangered Mary River cod.

Early results have been encouraging, with researchers monitoring large male cod using the logs as nesting sites, protecting their brood of eggs.

Tailor-made frog habitat is being recreated after fires, or during dry times.

More than half of East Gippsland in Victoria burned during the 2019–20 Black Summer Bushfires, forcing many frogs into urban areas. In response, the East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority urged people to build temporary habitats for frogs in their backyards.

A “frog hotel” can be built using a large container or pot, soil, native plants and PVC pipes. They allow frogs to take refuge during the heat of the day. They also provide protection from predators such as kookaburras, dogs and cats.

The West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority worked with the conservation group Greening Australia to create another type of tailor-made frog habitat they call “frog bogs”. Frog bogs look deceptively simple, just like ordinary farm dams, but they contain multiple chambers at various depths, allowing tadpoles to grow, shelter and safely feed. Native vegetation is planted around the edges, water plants are added and rocks allows frogs to bask.

Keeping cool

WWF-Australia responded to our invitation to share their conservation efforts, such as placing sprinklers in trees to help fruit bat colonies cool down and using irrigation to keep green turtle nests the right temperature.

Many groups around Australia are testing atmospheric cooling systems for keeping heat-sensitive flying foxes cool after mass deaths during heatwaves. One of these trials, jointly funded by WWF-Australia, the City of Greater Bendigo and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, was a success in Bendigo’s Rosalind Park. Hundreds of flying foxes had died in a record-breaking heatwave in the previous year, but despite temperatures climbing above 40°C during the trial, no deaths were recorded.

These systems need more testing and are a far cry from the scale needed to support functioning ecosystems and populations. But it is heartening to see lots of passionate people working so hard to support nature in these challenging times.

The Turtle Cooling Project – a partnership between WWF-Australia, The University of Queensland and the Conflict Islands Conservation Initiative, with funding support from furniture company Koala – tested ways to cool turtle nests on the beach, so more males would hatch. Further testing promises to identify which beaches need these interventions most, and how communities can get involved around Australia and the world.

Sharing is caring

By sharing these strategies, we can help conservation managers act quickly and decisively, drawing on evidence of what has worked elsewhere. We can also provide more opportunities for communities to get involved as volunteers helping out with different kinds of adaptation actions.

Conservation managers in Australia and globally can now use this tool to share and find new ideas. They can also add more examples and tactics to the tool, to help with testing and learning what works in different settings.

It is very early days for this field of climate adaptation research and practice, so there is still a long way to go to build an evidence base. But by collating what is happening already, we hope to encourage the development and dissemination of more innovative approaches to give wildlife a fighting chance.

We would like to acknowledge the following people for their contributions to the development of AdaptLog: Jason Hartog, Alistair Hobday, Sarah Boulter, Ingrid van Putten, Jenny Styger, the Project 2.7 Steering Committee, AdaptLog beta testers and CS2.7 case study participants. This work was funded through the National Environmental Science Program (NESP) Climate Systems Hub.

Jess Melbourne-Thomas receives funding for this work from the Australian Commonwealth Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water via the National Environmental Science Program (NESP).

Claire Mason receives funding for this work from the Australian Commonwealth Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water via the National Environmental Science Program (NESP).

– ref. From cod logs to frog bogs: we catalogued 400 ways to help species survive a warmer world – https://theconversation.com/from-cod-logs-to-frog-bogs-we-catalogued-400-ways-to-help-species-survive-a-warmer-world-247107

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Talia Fell, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, The University of Queensland

The Los Angeles wildfires are causing the devastating loss of people’s homes.

From A-list celebrities such as Paris Hilton to an Australian family living in LA, thousands of houses have been destroyed, leaving their owners shocked and grieving. And climate science points towards figures that suggest more such events are waiting.

These events strip away precious memories created over many years, and sometimes over lifetimes. They prompt us to ask: what does it mean to lose the place I care most deeply about?

Philosophy explains how our personal losses connect to a broader, more profound loss of home rooted in our dependence on the ecosystems we live in.

The concept of ‘home’

In her 1949 text The Second Sex, philosopher Simone de Beauvoir writes that, for many cultures, the home has represented values of tradition, safety and family. Inside its walls we preserve the past in furniture, knick knacks and photographs, and we associate these objects with memories created with loved ones.

The home also represents separation from the people and events of the outside. It is “refuge, retreat, grotto, womb, it protects against outside dangers”, Beauvoir writes.

But she explains how this understanding of home is culturally specific to civilisations founded on landed property, which contain intersecting structures of patriarchy and capitalism.

After all, patriarchy sees women as the caretakers of the home, providing for the physical and emotional needs of its inhabitants. Meanwhile, the functioning of the home also relies on the income of those who work outside it.

At the same time, many of us, Beauvoir writes, have a more instrumental understanding of home. It is where we rest, sleep, eat and store the objects we own and use.

Barriers to having a sense of ‘home’

The traditional understanding of home as a protective structure is complicated when you realise certain people do not have the privilege of calling one particular place “home”.

For many, the home exists as a point of inequality, instability and unsafety.

In Australia, homelessness continues to rise in the middle of the ongoing housing crisis. Home is also often the most dangerous place for women.

Australian philosopher Val Plumwood puts these issues into perspective when she argues the expression of “one’s place” or “homeplace” often represents a privileged and exclusionary sense of place. She writes:

Those who are most vulnerable and powerless are at most risk of losing control over their ability to remain in a home place or place of attachment.

She further argues that, under capitalism, the idea of personal belonging to a particular place or dwelling is often framed as being more important than many other vital attachments to place, such as connection to land.

She uses the term “shadow places” to describe the ecosystems we exclude and exploit – including our forests and waterways – even though they are fundamental to our existence. These places provide essential labour, nourishment and the conditions we need to survive and flourish.

Ironically, our detachment from these places is what props up our limited understanding of the “home” as a fixed, four-walled dwelling.

For Plumwood, an expanded sense of “home” would encompass the broader ecological context we exist within.

Our sense of ‘home’ in the climate crisis

In her 1998 article, Indigenous Australian law scholar Irene Watson emphasises the issue of colonialism in detachment from the land.

Watson explains colonisers were already alienated from a sense of connection to land when they came to “Australia”. This disconnection led them to plunder the land, treating it as a commodity rather than a living, complex ecosystem that nurtures and is nurtured by First Nations peoples.

As philosopher Teresa Brennan puts it, to commodify a living thing is to turn it into something that can be bought and owned. Once commodified, nature can no longer reproduce itself, nor decompose to nourish other life forms.

Brennan explains how the tendency to commodify (and therefore exploit) nature represents a denial of nature’s reproductive capacity.

And this denial is not sustainable, as it drives the exploitation of every available natural resource. Under capitalism, a stop to exploitation means a stop to profits.

Turning to philosophy to rethink our values

Many people fail to see the rich complexity of nature: its unique intelligence and age-old memories that extend beyond our personal lifetimes.

Brennan argues nature is valuable beyond its profitability for the most powerful individuals. Perhaps, then, our sense of “home” should extend beyond the bounds of a dwelling filled with sentimental objects to include the wider lands and ecosystems we are part of.

In doing so, we can accelerate the shift towards social, political and economic systems that acknowledge that what is good for our planet is good for each of us, too.

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.

– ref. Climate change is forcing us to rethink our sense
of ‘home’ – and what it means to lose it – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-forcing-us-to-rethink-our-sense-of-home-and-what-it-means-to-lose-it-247234

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexandra Sherlock, Lecturer, School of Fashion and Textiles, RMIT University

Australian-owned brand UGG Since 1974 has announced it will change its name to “Since 74” for sales outside Australia and New Zealand.

There has been a long-running battle over the rights to use the name “ugg” to sell the iconic sheepskin boots worldwide.

This latest development follows years of legal challenges between small Australian manufacturers and American footwear giant Deckers Brands.

While courts in the United States have ruled “ugg” can be used by brands in Australia and New Zealand, where it has become a generic name for sheepskin boots, Deckers own the rights to use ugg internationally. They are now pursuing UGG Since 1974 for using the name.

UGG Since 1974 is an established maker of the boots, predating establishment of the Deckers brand. But locally, uggs are made – and advertised as uggs – by many small Australian manufacturers.

The origins of uggs

Ugg boots are widely understood to have been invented in Australia.

They made their first documented appearances on surfers’ feet in the 1950s.

By the 1970s, they were commonplace across Australia. In 1981, ug (with one “g”) made its way into the Macquarie Dictionary as a generic term for sheepskin boots.

Over the years, they have become an internationally recognised Australian icon.

In late 1970s, Australian entrepreneur Brian Smith took the style to California before registering the name as a brand in the United States.

Deckers later bought the rights from Smith and trademarked it as “UGG Australia” in 1995. The company has since dropped the “Australia”, and has aggressively pursued Australian makers who attempt to use the term “ugg” when selling overseas.

What’s in a (brand) name?

In a successful 2019 infringement case against Australian manufacturer Eddie Oygur, Deckers argued Americans did not recognise “ugg” as a descriptive term but only as a brand name.

When a brand name enters everyday language as a generic term, companies often fight hard to protect their trademark rights. A trademark can lose its protection when the name becomes generic. Examples include thermos, aspirin and sellotape, which were once protected brand names but became general terms.

The lengths brands will go to prevent their trademarks becoming generic can be quite extreme. A notable example is French fashion house Chanel, which took out a full-page advertisement in Women’s Wear Daily in 2010 that threatened legal action against journalists who used terms like “Chanel-issime, Chanel-ed, Chanels, and Chanel-ized” to describe other designers’ work.

The image of a brand

What makes Deckers’ aggressive trademark defence particularly interesting is that they are claiming global trademark rights over a term that was already generic in its country of origin. This has caused some to question whether the rights should have been granted in the first place.

Their actions against smaller Australian brands also appear to contradict their carefully cultivated brand image.

The company’s website and code of ethics promote values like authenticity and cultural engagement, stating they exist to “positively impact the world by uniting purposeful brands with diverse people”.

In many senses Deckers do maintain impressive standards of corporate social responsibility and hold themselves to high standards. Yet here they are attempting to monopolise a term that has become deeply embedded in Australian culture.

The company’s actions have sparked significant backlash, with the UGG Since 1974’s TikTok announcement receiving 1.1 million likes and 79,000 shares in only two days. Social media users have said they will now be boycotting Deckers Brands in favour of Australian makers.

The controversy highlights a growing tension between intellectual property rights and cultural sustainability. While environmental sustainability is becoming a priority for brands and the media, cultural sustainability – which includes preserving heritage, cultural diversity and local practices – often takes a back seat.

Cultural legacy

For Todd Watts, grandson of UGG Since 1974’s founders, the decision to rebrand as “Since 74” outside Australia represents both a legal necessity and a statement of authenticity.

His company continues to handcraft boots in Australia using local materials and labour, maintaining a tradition that predates Deckers’ involvement with the product by decades.

And even if they will no longer be called “UGG Since 74”, it is likely the use of ugg as a generic name will stick.

While Deckers won the legal right to the ugg name, Australian manufacturers like Watts continue to defend their cultural legitimacy through local production and connection to the product’s heritage.

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.

– ref. Legally, they can’t be called ‘uggs’ outside of Australia – but the name will stick regardless – https://theconversation.com/legally-they-cant-be-called-uggs-outside-of-australia-but-the-name-will-stick-regardless-247562

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Parmeter, Research scholar, Middle East studies, Australian National University

The ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, to come into effect on Sunday, has understandably been welcomed by the overwhelming majority of Israelis and Palestinians.

Israelis are relieved that a process for freeing 33 more hostages in Hamas custody is to begin, with more to come in future phases.

Palestinians can now hope the daily bombing that has killed nearly 50,000 Gazans over the past 15 months will finally end, and that desperately needed humanitarian assistance will start to flow into the strip.

But once the euphoria subsides, hard issues will emerge. Here are six key questions arising from this new agreement. The answers, as yet unclear, will shape the region and the lives of those who live in it.

Read more:
Israel and Hamas have agreed to a ceasefire. It doesn’t guarantee a peaceful end to a devastating war

1. Why did it take so long?

As US President Joe Biden said in announcing the agreement, the deal now reached was initially proposed by him in May last year.

Why, then, has it taken nearly eight months to be accepted by both sides?

Palestinian civilians in Gaza, who have borne the pain and suffering of the Israeli onslaught, can rightly ask whether Hamas could have made concessions to enable a ceasefire earlier.

Israelis are already asking if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deliberately held back his government’s agreement to a ceasefire to safeguard his political position and keep his government in office.

Even more darkly, did Netanyahu choose to prolong the war until President-elect Donald Trump could be in a position to claim credit for achieving the release of the remaining hostages? Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff was reportedly involved in discussions with Netanyahu in the final phase of the negotiations in Qatar.

2. How will aid get into Gaza?

An important part of the ceasefire is the urgent provision of humanitarian aid. Some 600 trucks of provisions are reportedly ready to begin entering Gaza on a daily basis.

But how will the aid be distributed?

In November last year, the Israeli Knesset passed a law banning official Israeli dealings with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the UN body responsible for helping Palestinian refugees.

That means Israeli visas cannot be issued to UNRWA foreign staff, so they cannot operate within Israel or Israeli-controlled territory.

The ban was imposed because Israel believes some 13 UNRWA staff were involved in the October 7 2023 attack that ignited the war.

However, the UN says no other body is currently equipped to administer aid distribution inside the strip.

3. What will happen in the next phases?

The second and third phases of the Biden plan still have to be negotiated. That involves a long-term end to the conflict, the release of remaining hostages – those still alive and the remains of those who have died – and the start of the reconstruction of Gaza.

Those two phases will be much harder to finalise than the initial ceasefire.

Hamas is demanding all Israeli forces leave Gaza. Israel is refusing.

Israel is also demanding Hamas have no part in governance of Gaza. But if that point is conceded, it raises the question of who or what will take over Hamas’s governing role.

The Palestinian Authority, which oversees Palestinian affairs in the West Bank, is unpopular in Gaza.

Without a viable alternative, what are the chances of Gaza descending into administrative lawlessness, with the strip divided into rule by rival gangs? Unfortunately, quite high.

4. How is Israeli domestic politics affected?

Netanyahu has spent the conflict trying to appease right-wing elements of his party, particularly National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

Both strongly oppose the ceasefire agreement and have threatened to quit the government.

The deal is reported to have enough support to pass. But whether and how they might have been placated in the final internal negotiations remains to be seen.

Have they been offered broader scope on settlements, or even annexation of the West Bank, to ensure they don’t scuttle the ceasefire by withdrawing from the government and forcing new elections?

5. Will Hamas survive?

Hamas is degraded, but not destroyed. It is now more like a guerilla band than an organised military force.

But despite the fact that total elimination of Hamas was one of Netanyahu’s war aims, it’s still standing.

Netanyahu can point to his other successes in the war, such as the killing of Hamas’s top leadership structure.

Israel also neutralised Hamas’s ally, Lebanese Hizballah (also spelt Hezbollah), through the extraordinary exploding pagers and walkie-talkies and killing of Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

But critics will claim Netanyahu has fallen short of his war aims. As long as Hamas is still active, many Israelis will fear it will have the capacity to rebuild and threaten Israel again.

6. What does the future hold for Netanyahu?

Netanyahu is one of Israel’s great political survivors. But he has been badly damaged by the war.

The Hamas attack of October 7 2023 happened on his watch. It traumatised Israelis deeply and they won’t easily forgive or forget.

Moreover, he is now subject to an International Criminal Court arrest warrant on charges that he breached international humanitarian law in his conduct of the war.

And the International Court of Justice has said there is a “plausible” case that Israel’s retaliation for the Hamas attacks has been genocidal. This is not good for Israel’s international image.

On top of all that, his trial over three corruption charges is proceeding. There are now serious doubts his government would survive if it were forced to elections before the end of next year, when they are formally due.

The next six weeks, as the first phase of the ceasefire takes effect, will provide answers to some of these questions – but probably not all.

Ian Parmeter 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.

– ref. Beyond the Israel–Hamas ceasefire, the future looks unclear. Here are six key unanswered questions – https://theconversation.com/beyond-the-israel-hamas-ceasefire-the-future-looks-unclear-here-are-six-key-unanswered-questions-247558

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christine Carson, Senior Research Fellow, School of Medicine, The University of Western Australia

Over the past several days, the world has watched on in shock as wildfires have devastated large parts of Los Angeles.

Beyond the obvious destruction – to landscapes, homes, businesses and more – fires at this scale have far-reaching effects on communities. A number of these concern human health.

We know fire can harm directly, causing injuries and death. Tragically, the death toll in LA is now at least 24.

But wildfires, or bushfires, can also have indirect consequences for human health. In particular, they can promote the incidence and spread of a range of infections.

Effects on the immune system

Most people appreciate that fires can cause burns and smoke inhalation, both of which can be life-threatening in their own right.

What’s perhaps less well known is that both burns and smoke inhalation can cause acute and chronic changes in the immune system. This can leave those affected vulnerable to infections at the time of the injury, and for years to come.

Burns induce profound changes in the immune system. Some parts go into overdrive, becoming too reactive and leading to hyper-inflammation. In the immediate aftermath of serious burns, this can contribute to sepsis and organ failure.

Other parts of the immune system appear to be suppressed. Our ability to recognise and fight off bugs can be compromised after sustaining burns. Research shows people who have experienced serious burns have an increased risk of influenza, pneumonia and other types of respiratory infections for at least the first five years after injury compared to people who haven’t experienced burns.

Wildfire smoke is a complex mixture containing particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, ozone, toxic gases, and microbes. When people inhale smoke during wildfires, each of these elements can play a role in increasing inflammation in the airways, which can lead to increased susceptibility to respiratory infections and asthma.

Research published after Australia’s Black Summer of 2019–20 found a higher risk of COVID infections in areas of New South Wales where bushfires had occurred weeks earlier.

We need more research to understand the magnitude of these increased risks, how long they persist after exposure, and the mechanisms. But these effects are thought to be due to sustained changes to the immune response.

Microbes travel in smoky air

Another opportunity for infection arises from the fire-induced movement of microbes from niches they usually occupy in soils and plants in natural areas, into densely populated urban areas.

Recent evidence from forest fires in Utah shows microbes, such as bacteria and fungal spores, can be transported in smoke. These microbes are associated with particles from the source, such as burned vegetation and soil.

There are thousands of different species of microbes in smoke, many of which are not common in background, non-smoky air.

Only a small number of studies on this have been published so far, but researchers have shown the majority of microbes in smoke are still alive and remain alive in smoke long enough to colonise the places where they eventually land.

How far specific microbes can be transported remains an open question, but fungi associated with smoke particles have been detected hundreds of miles downwind from wildfires, even weeks after the fire.

Read more:
LA fires: Long-term exposure to wildfire smoke is poorly understood − and a growing risk

So does this cause human infections?

A subset of these airborne microbes are known to cause infections in humans.

Scientists are probing records of human fungal infections in relation to wildfire smoke exposure. In particular, they’re looking at soil-borne infectious agents such as the fungi Coccidioides immitis and Coccidioides posadasii which thrive in dry soils that can be picked up in dust and smoke plumes.

These fungi cause valley fever, a lung infection with symptoms that can resemble the flu, across arid western parts of the United States.

A study of wildland firefighters in California showed high rates of valley fever infections, which spurred occupational health warnings including recommended use of respirators when in endemic regions.

A California-based study of the wider population showed a 20% increase in hospital admissions for valley fever following any amount of exposure to wildfire smoke.

However, another found only limited evidence of excess cases after smoke exposure in wildfire-adjacent populations in California’s San Joaquin Valley.

These contrasting results show more research is needed to evaluate the infectious potential of wildfire smoke from this and other fungal and bacterial causes.

Staying safe

Much remains to be learned about the links between wildfires and infections, and the multiple pathways by which wildfires can increase the risk of certain infections.

There’s also a risk people gathering together after a disaster like this, such as in potentially overcrowded shelters, can increase the transmission of infections. We’ve seen this happen after previous natural disasters.

Despite the gaps in our knowledge, public health responses to wildfires should encompass infection prevention (such as through the provision of effective masks) and surveillance to enable early detection and effective management of any outbreaks.

Leda Kobziar receives funding from the US National Science Foundation, the United States Department of Agriculture, the W. M. Keck Foundation, the Murdock Charitable Trust, the US Joint Fire Science Program, and she is affiliated with the Association for Fire Ecology and The Stewardship Project.

Christine Carson 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.

– ref. Wildfires ignite infection risks, by weakening the body’s immune defences and spreading bugs in smoke – https://theconversation.com/wildfires-ignite-infection-risks-by-weakening-the-bodys-immune-defences-and-spreading-bugs-in-smoke-247332

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rose Cairns, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacy, NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow, University of Sydney

TikTok and Instagram influencers have been peddling the “Barbie drug” to help you tan.

But melanotan-II, as it’s called officially, is a solution that’s too good to be true. Just like tanning, this unapproved drug has a dark side.

Doctors, researchers and Australia’s drug regulator have been warning about its side effects – from nausea and vomiting to brain swelling and erection problems.

There are also safer ways of getting the tanned look, if that’s what you’re after.

What is melanotan-II?

No, it’s not a typo. Melanotan-II is very different from melatonin, which is a hormonal supplement used for insomnia and jet lag.

Melanotan-II is a synthetic version of the naturally ocurring hormone α-melanocyte stimulating hormone. This means the drug mimics the body’s hormone that stimulates production of the pigment melanin. This is what promotes skin darkening or tanning, even in people with little melanin.

Although the drug is promoted as a way of getting a “sunless tan”, it is usually promoted for use with UV exposure, to enhance the effect of UV and kickstart the tanning process.

Melanotan-II is related to, but different from, melanotan-I (afamelanotide), an approved drug used to treat the skin condition erythropoietic protoporphyria.

Melanotan-II is not registered for use with Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). It is illegal to advertise it to the public or to provide it without a prescription.

However, social media has been driving unlicensed melanotan-II sales, a study published last year confirms.

There are many black market suppliers of melanotan-II injections, tablets and creams. More recently, nasal sprays have become more popular.

What are the risks?

Just like any drug, melanotan-II comes with the risk of side effects, many of which we’ve known about for more than a decade. These include changes in the size and pigmentation of moles, rapid appearance of new moles, flushing to the face, abdominal cramps, nausea, vomiting, chest pain and brain swelling.

It can also cause rhabdomyolysis, a dangerous syndrome where muscle breaks down and releases proteins into the bloodstream that damage the kidneys.

For men, the drug can cause priapism – a painful erection that does not go away and can damage the penis, requiring emergency treatment.

Its use has been linked with melanoma developing from existing moles either during or shortly after using the drug. This is thought to be due to stimulating pigment cells and causing the proliferation of abnormal cells.

Despite reports of melanoma, according to a study of social media posts the drug is often marketed as protecting against skin cancer. In fact, there’s no evidence to show it does this.

Social media posts about melanotan-II rarely mention health risks.

There are no studies on long-term safety of melanotan-II use.

Then there’s the issue of the drug not held to the high safety standards as TGA-approved products. This could result in variability in dose, undeclared ingredients and potential microbial contamination.

The TGA has previously warned consumers to steer clear of the drug due to its “serious side effects that can be very damaging to your health”.

According to an ABC article published earlier this week, the TGA is cracking down on the illegal promotion of the drug on various websites. However, we know banned sellers can pop back up under a different name.

TikTok has banned the hashtags #tanningnasalspray, #melanotan and #melanotan2, but these products continue to be promoted with more generic hashtags, such as #tanning.

Part of a wider trend

Australia has some of the highest rates of skin cancer in the world. The “slip, slop, slap” campaign is a public health success story, with increased awareness of sun safety, a cultural shift and a decline in melanoma in young people.

However, the image of a bronzed beach body remains a beauty standard, especially among some young people.

Disturbingly, tan lines are trending on TikTok as a sought after summer accessory and the hashtag #sunburnttanlines has millions of views. We’ve also seen a backlash against sunscreen among some young people, again promoted on TikTok.

The Cancer Council is so concerned about the trend towards normalising tanning it has launched the campaign End the Trend.

You have other options

There are options beyond spraying an illegal, unregulated product up your nose, or risking unprotected sun exposure: fake tan.

Fake tan tends to be much safer than melanotan-II and there’s more long-term safety data. It also comes with potential side effects, albeit rare ones, including breathing issues (with spray products) and skin inflammation in some people.

Better still, you can embrace your natural skin tone.

Rose Cairns 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.

– ref. No, you don’t need the ‘Barbie drug’ to tan, whatever TikTok says. Here’s why melanotan-II is so risky – https://theconversation.com/no-you-dont-need-the-barbie-drug-to-tan-whatever-tiktok-says-heres-why-melanotan-ii-is-so-risky-247445