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

Despite fallout from the expenses scandal and Bondi, Labor still holds a 54–46 lead in Resolve, but Anthony Albanese’s ratings have slumped. Newspoll analysis has One Nation’s surge concentrated with voters of lower educational attainment.

A special national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers, conducted after the Bondi attacks on December 17–20 from a sample of 1,010 (well below the normal Resolve sample size of 1,800), gave Labor a 54–46 lead by respondent preferences, a one-point gain for the Coalition since the regular early December Resolve poll.

Primary votes were 32% Labor (down three), 28% Coalition (up two), 16% One Nation (up two), 12% Greens (up one), 8% independents (steady) and 4% others (down two). By 2025 election preference flows, Labor would have led by under 54–46, about a 2.5-point gain for the Coalition.

Albanese’s net approval slumped 15 points to -9, the lowest it has been in this poll since the May election, with 49% giving him a poor rating and 40% a good rating. Sussan Ley’s net approval also fell seven points to -4. Albanese led Ley as preferred PM by 38–30 (41–26 in early December).

There had been stories about the expenses scandal in the week before the Bondi attacks, and the Morgan poll below had Labor dropping on the expenses scandal. It’s not clear whether Albanese and Labor were damaged by the expenses, Bondi or both.

By 46–29, respondents in Resolve thought the federal government’s response to Bondi was weak rather than strong. By 37–30, they thought social cohesion was good rather than poor.

By 72–9, respondents thought there had been a rise in racism in Australia as a result of the Israel-Gaza conflict (69–12 when this question was last asked in January 2025). By 55–13, they thought there had been more antisemitism than Islamophobia in recent months (54–9 last January).

On gun laws, 76% wanted them to be toughened, 10% kept as they are and just 6% thought they should be relaxed. Four of five proposals for toughening gun laws had over 80% support, with “restrict gun licences to Australian citizens” the exception at 72% support.

Asked to pick two priorities for the government, 49% selected preventing terrorism, 45% tackling crime generally, 35% restricting access to guns, 33% preventing extremism, 29% tackling antisemitism and 26% tackling hate speech.

By 66–9, respondents thought Australia needs stronger laws to ban hate speech on the basis of religion and faith. The most popular proposal for tackling antisemitism was tougher immigration screening to identify antisemitic views (76–7 support). Holding a Royal Commission was at 48–17 support.

In the small New South Wales subsample of around 300 voters, Labor Premier Chris Minns’ net likeability jumped eight points since November to +22.

In a post-Bondi YouGov national poll that was conducted December 15–22 from a sample of 1,509, 44% wanted personal guns like those used in the attacks made illegal, 48% wanted tighter gun laws and just 8% wanted no change to gun laws. By 81–19, respondents thought Ahmed al Ahmed, who disarmed one of the Bondi gunmen, deserved to be made Australian of the Year.

Labor slides in Morgan poll after expenses scandal

Morgan released its November 17 to December 14 national poll broken into two periods. For the first three weeks, November 17 to December 7, Labor had a 56–44 lead, similar to the 56.5–43.5 Labor lead in October to November.

For the last week, December 8–14 with a one-week sample of 1,574, Labor’s lead dropped to 54.5–45.5 by respondent preferences, a 1.5-point gain for the Coalition from weeks 1–3.

Primary votes were 30.5% Labor (down 2.5), 27.5% Coalition (up 1.5), 17% One Nation (up two), 13% Greens (down 0.5) and 12% for all Others (down 0.5). By 2025 election preference flows, Labor would have led by about 53–47, the lowest Labor lead by this measure of any poll since the last election.

The Redbridge poll suggested Labor had not been damaged by the expenses claims, but this poll contradicts that. All interviews were conducted before the Bondi attacks.

Read more:
Labor maintains dominant lead in Redbridge poll despite expenses claims

The full four-week poll had a sample of 4,862. In state and demographic breakdowns, the Coalition regained the lead in Queensland by 50.5–49.5, but Labor led in the other five states. Labor led by 58.5–41.5 with women and 52.5–47.5 with men.

Labor led by 69.5–30.5 with those aged 18–34 and by 58.5–41.5 with those aged 35–49. The Coalition made its biggest gains with those aged 50–64 to lead by 50.5–49.5, a 4.5-point swing to the Coalition. The Coalition led with those aged 65 and over by 54.5–45.5. One Nation’s highest support was with those aged 50–64 (20.5%) and they had 22% in Queensland.

Newspoll aggregate data for September to November

The Australian released aggregate data for the three national Newspolls conducted between September 29 and November 20 on December 26. The total sample size was 3,774, with Labor holding an overall 57–43 lead. These polls were taken before the expenses scandal and Bondi.

Labor led by 58–42 in NSW, (a two-point gain for the Coalition since the September quarter Newspoll aggregate according to The Poll Bludger), 60–40 in Victoria (a two-point gain for Labor), 52–48 in Queensland (a one-point gain for Labor), 56–44 in Western Australia (a two-point gain for Labor) and 58–42 in South Australia (a three-point gain for Labor).

Among those without a tertiary education, primary votes were 30% Labor (down two), 26% Coalition (down six), 20% One Nation (up nine) and 14% Greens (up one), for an unchanged 53–47 Labor lead. With TAFE educated, primary votes were 35% Labor (down two), 24% Coalition (down one), 19% One Nation (up seven) and 9% Greens (steady) for a 54–46 Labor lead (a three-point gain for the Coalition).

However, with the university educated, primary votes were 41% Labor (up three), 26% Coalition (down three), 13% Greens (down two) and 6% One Nation (up one), for a 62–38 Labor lead (a two-point gain for Labor).

Resolve likeabilty poll

Resolve’s poll of net likeability of federal politicians was taken in early December, before Bondi and the expenses scandal. Only two politicians had negative net likeability: Lidia Thorpe (-12) and Barnaby Joyce (-4).

Net likeability of prominent Labor politicians were Chris Bowen (net zero), Murray Watt (+4), Jim Chalmers (+5), Richard Marles (+6), Tony Burke (+7), Tanya Plibersek (+9) and Penny Wong (+11). David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie were on top with both at +15. Greens leader Larissa Waters was at +5.

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson’s net likeability increased 16 points since December 2024 to +3, but was down five points since November. Joyce’s net likeability was up 18 since December 2024 and up four since November. Thorpe’s net likeability surged 29 points since December 2024.

Only one politician suffered a fall in net likeability since December 2024: Liberal Jacinta Price was down five points to +3.

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. Labor and Albanese take a hit in post-Bondi Resolve poll – https://theconversation.com/labor-and-albanese-take-a-hit-in-post-bondi-resolve-poll-272266

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle O’Shea, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Western Sydney University

This year, Australian drowning deaths reached their worst level in three decades. Tragically, 357 drownings were reported between July 1 2024 and June 30 2025, with many more non-fatal incidents.

Australian drowning fatalities have surged because of “crisis-level” declines in swimming skills, especially among regional, remote and migrant communities.

Swimming at unpatrolled beaches and inland waterways that typically don’t have lifesaving services has also contributed to these deadly trends. So too has rock fishing.

With people now off work and enjoying the summer holidays, drowning risk is even higher than normal.

Education and awareness remain tried and tested ways to reduce drowning fatalities.

For example, this summer, Surf Life Saving Australia’s virtual “Beach Passport Campaign” is enabling the public to easily locate patrolled beaches. But water safety experts are also partnering with computer scientists to harness the power of algorithms and artificial intelligence (AI) to help save lives.

High-tech watchtowers

Surveillance AI for lifesaving is one key advancement.

Cameras at coastal hazard sites (selected based on historical incident data) capture continuous video feeds. These are then analysed by AI to identify emergency events.

The advantage of Al drowning detection is in reducing emergency response times in dynamic environments.

For example, if a rock fisher was washed off the rocks and into the water, AI identifies the event and alerts emergency services (within seconds) so they can validate the emergency and deploy rescue resources.

Smartphones and citizen scientists

Rip currents are strong, narrow, fast-flowing currents of water that occur on many beaches and are difficult for swimmers to identify.

Thousands of images containing rip currents are needed to train an AI-based model.

Australian researchers are leading this endeavour with a huge repository of images collected through CoastSnap – a community-driven initiative where beach goers can take an image of the beach with their smartphones.

In partnership with Surf Life Saving Australia, RipEye is helping train lifeguards in rip detection and lifeguards are helping train AI.

A smartphone app available to the general public is also being developed for the future. At a beach location users can capture real time wave movements and currents with the app signalling if swimming conditions are safe.

AI aiding pool safety

Public swimming pools are important community assets providing health, social and economic benefits.

With 421 million visits annually, and councils increasing access through campaigns such as $2 entry, lifeguards are on high alert.

To aid pool safety, local councils are investing in cameras, sensors and AI algorithms to monitor pools, identifying potential drowning incidents and alerting lifeguards in real time.

Using overhead cameras to continuously monitor swimmer activity, AI algorithms are trained through machine learning to detect signs of swimmer distress. These can include prolonged submersion or erratic movements.

Lifeguards scan wide, complex scenes while managing glare, noise, heat, rain, crowds and fatigue. Smartwatch alerts fed by AI can significantly enhance detection.

Like other operators in fields such as emergency services, defence and aviation, lifeguards already receive training in scanning techniques, hazard recognition and decision-making under pressure.

But even highly trained operators are subject to the fundamental cognitive and perceptual limits of the human brain.

Read more:
Why should my child take swimming lessons? And what do they need to know?

Designing information for the human brain

To work effectively, an AI-powered alert system must consider several basic human-centred questions.

For example, what information should be shown? Too much detail overwhelms; too little is ignored.

How should the information be presented? Visual cues (such as text, shapes, colours, icons, motion, flicker) or audio tones, or subtle vibrations each have advantages and drawbacks.

Where should alerts appear? On a smartwatch, a wall display, augmented-reality glasses? Poor placement can block vision or pull attention away from other incidents.

When should alerts appear? Too early and people may attend to other things; too late and the chance to intervene is lost.

These design decisions matter because drowning detection is a vigilance task – a type of attention known to decline rapidly under fatigue or stress.

Not a perfect solution

The advantage of AI drowning detection is in reducing response times in dynamic pool and beach environments.

However, this requires nearby and available rescue resources.

Many of the technologies involve camera-based image analysis, which can also introduce privacy concerns.

Another issue is that AI drowning detection is imperfect. It sometimes produces false alarms and fails to detect people in distress.

To overcome this, it’s important that people are not just properly trained in how to use AI to detect drownings, but also that an AI system clearly explains how an assessment was made, and adapts when errors occur so that lifesavers work with the system as partners and not simply as responders.

The benefit of AI alerts depends on human operators’ ability to interpret, trust and act. So the question isn’t just whether AI can detect danger – it’s whether the information it delivers is cognitively digestible when lifesavers need it.

But AI-powered lifesaving methods are no substitute for swimming skills. So if you do cool off with a swim this summer, always remember: never swim alone, swim between the flags, listen to lifesavers and be vigilant around the water.

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. Drownings are surging in Australia. AI can help – https://theconversation.com/drownings-are-surging-in-australia-ai-can-help-269716

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Bergman, International Affairs Editor, The Conversation

The list of people Donald Trump has punished or threatened to punish since returning to office is long. It includes the likes of James Comey, Letitia James, John Bolton, as well as members of the opposition, such as Adam Schiff, Mark Kelly and Kamala Harris.

In fact, he has gone so far as to call Democrats “the enemy from within”, saying they are more dangerous than US adversaries like Russia and China.

According to Lucan Way, a professor of democracy at the University of Toronto, when a leader attacks the opposition like this, it’s a clear sign a country is slipping into authoritarianism.

As Way says in episode 5 of The Making of an Autocrat:

 In other kind of countries with weaker justice systems, you can literally jail members of opposition or bankrupt them. In a country like the United States, where the rule of law is quite robust, this is not possible, you can’t just jail rivals at will.

But Trump has other ways of making the cost of opposing him too high for his critics to bear. This includes investigations, lawsuits, audits, personal attacks – anything to distract and silence them.

The effect is his opponents become much more reluctant to engage in behaviour they know that Trump won’t like, Way says.

So it really has this kind of broader silencing effect that I think is quite pernicious.

Listen to the interview with Lucan Way at The Making of an Autocrat podcast.

This episode was written by Justin Bergman and produced and edited by Isabella Podwinski and Ashlynne McGhee. Sound design by Michelle Macklem.

Newsclips in this episode WCNC, MS NOW, WHAS11, and Radio Free Europe.

Listen to The Conversation Weekly via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here. A transcript of this episode is available via the Apple Podcasts or Spotify apps.

Lucan Way has received funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Autocrats have long lists of political enemies. This is how Donald Trump has tried to silence his – https://theconversation.com/autocrats-have-long-lists-of-political-enemies-this-is-how-donald-trump-has-tried-to-silence-his-272252

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland

If you’ve spent any time on TikTok or Instagram lately, you may have seen people blending oats with water or juice and calling it “oatzempic.”

The name is a nod to Ozempic, a prescription medication used primarily for type 2 diabetes that also suppresses appetite. Videos of the oatzempic drink usually promise easy weight loss, effortless fullness and a “natural alternative” to medication.

But is oatzempic supported by science? The short answer is no. Let’s unpack why.

What exactly is oatzempic?

There is no standard recipe for oatzempic, but most videos show people blending one to two tablespoons of rolled oats with a glass of water. Others add lemon or lime juice, cinnamon or soak the oats first.

The suggested benefit is that drinking the mixture will create a sense of fullness and reduce appetite.

Some TikTok videos recommend to have oatzempic instead of breakfast. Others say to drink it as a mid-afternoon snack to prevent overeating later in the day.

What happens when you eat oatzempic?

Many users on social media report feeling fuller after drinking oatzempic which is not surprising.

Oats are rich in beta-glucan, a type of soluble fibre that forms a gel-like substance when mixed with water. This slows down digestion which helps you to feel full.
There is good evidence that diets rich in viscous soluble fibre (like that from oats) modestly improve appetite control, reduce post-meal blood glucose (blood sugar) spikes and help regulate cholesterol.

Oats aren’t the only source of viscous soluble fibre though. Foods such as apples, citrus fruits, flaxseeds, barley, psyllium husk and legumes (beans, lentils) also provide soluble fibres that form gels in the gut and have similar effects of making us feel full, as well as improving overall health.

So, the claim that oats can help people feel full is well-founded. But feeling full is not the same as achieving meaningful or sustainable weight loss.

Long-term weight management requires balanced nutrition and physical activity – rather than relying solely on feeling full.

Has oatzempic been tested for weight loss?

No. There are no scientific studies that look at the “oatzempic drink” for weight loss, appetite control or other health outcomes. There is no official recipe, no recommended amount, and no long-term research.

So, if someone loses weight while drinking it, it’s hard to know if that’s because of the oatzempic drink, eating fewer calories overall, or other changes in their lifestyle.

What we do know is that oats and other high-fibre foods (for example, brown rice, nuts and seeds, berries, broccoli and Brussel sprouts) have been studied for decades. Research shows they can help you feel a little fuller, improve your blood glucose control and support heart health. For example:

• a randomised crossover trial showed adding oat fibre (beta-glucan) to a meal made people feel fuller and less hungry compared to a similar meal without it

• a review of multiple studies (meta-analyses) reported that oat beta-glucan can modestly reduce LDL-cholesterol (the bad type) and help control blood glucose levels, both important for heart and metabolic health.

But, these benefits occur when oats are part of a healthy, balanced diet, not when consumed as a standalone “magic drink”.

From a scientific standpoint, oatzempic is a fibre-rich drink. It does not work like Ozempic, the prescription medication. Ozempic affects hormones that control appetite and blood glucose levels in a much more powerful way.

Read more:
The rise of Ozempic: how surprise discoveries and lizard venom led to a new class of weight-loss drugs

Could oatzempic still be helpful for some people?

Yes. A drink that helps you feel fuller could slow down eating and better support portion control.

For those who often skip breakfast or grab food on the run, an oats-based drink may be a more nutritious option than not eating at all. But these benefits come from fibre and hydration.

You’d get a greater nutritional benefit by making a simple smoothie with oats, a banana or berries, a spoonful of nut or seed butter and a splash of milk or yoghurt. This combination adds protein, potassium, healthy fats and a range of vitamins and minerals, offering a more balanced and nourishing option for your health.

Are there any risks?

For most people, drinking oatzempic in small amounts is safe. But there are some important considerations:

• it’s not a complete meal. Oatzempic is low in protein, healthy fats and several essential micronutrients. If it regularly replaces meals, it could lead to nutrient gaps or even under-eating

• sudden fibre increases can cause discomfort. For those not used to high-fibre diets, a rapid increase can trigger bloating or gastrointestinal symptoms – especially if fluid intake is inadequate

• the name can be misleading. “Oatzempic” invites comparison with a prescription medication, which may give the impression that the drink has drug-like effects

• it could delay evidence-based care. Relying on a fad drink instead of seeking professional dietary or medical advice may prevent people from accessing the support they truly need.

What actually works for sustainable weight management?

Research supports a combination of strategies for long-term, sustainable weight management:

• cooking healthy meals at home that focus on adequate protein, healthy fats, unprocessed carbohydrates and fibre

• reducing intake of added sugar and processed foods and drinks

• drinking enough water

• consistent physical activity

• good sleep and stress management.

If you need advice about improving your diet, talk to your GP or visit an accredited practising dietitian.

Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Health and Wellbeing Queensland, Heart Foundation, Gallipoli Medical Research and Mater Health, Springfield City Group. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, a Director of the Darling Downs and West Moreton Primary Health Network and an Associate Member of the Australian Academy of Health and Medical Sciences.

Emily Burch 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 ‘oatzempic’? Does it actually work for weight loss? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-oatzempic-does-it-actually-work-for-weight-loss-269603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David M Watson, Professor in Ecology, Charles Sturt University

In Kosciuszko National Park in Australia’s alpine region, the landscape is slowly changing. Patches of native vegetation cropped bald by horses are regrowing. Some long-eroded creek banks look less compacted along the edges. Visitors come across fewer horses standing on the roads, a real traffic hazard.

In 2023, New South Wales authorised the aerial shooting of feral horses in Kosciuszko National Park. And in late November, the government passed a bill to repeal the law that recognised feral horses as having “heritage status” in the park.

This change removed the legal protections on horses in Kosciuszko that had set them apart from other introduced species such as deer, pigs, foxes and rabbits. Now horses will be treated the same way as other invasive species across Australia, restoring consistency to managing their impact on the landscape.

The latest survey estimates around 3,000 horses remain in Kosciuszko National Park, down from roughly 17,000 a year ago. More than 9,000 horses have been culled since 2021.

The current management plan is designed to retain 3,000 horses – a compromise between ecological protection and perceived heritage values. It will remain in place until mid-2027.

So what are the environmental effects of having fewer horses in Kosciuszko? And what could the park look like in the future?

The damage

For decades, feral horses have been a major source of ecological damage in Kosciuszko’s alpine landscapes. Their impacts have been especially pronounced in the past decade, as horse numbers within the fragile high country grew largely unchecked.

Empirical studies and analyses of satellite imagery show horses reduce vegetation cover, break down soil structure, and damage streambanks, peat beds and alpine bogs – carbon-rich soils built over tens of thousands of years.

Some of this damage results from their feeding on slow-growing alpine grasses and herbs. Horses typically eat 2% of their body mass daily, which equates to about 8 kilograms each day. Compare this to the largest native herbivore in the high country, the Eastern Grey Kangaroo, which eats roughly 600 grams per day, a 13-fold difference.

But the real damage is done by their feet. Feral horses walk up to 50 kilometres a day, and their hard hooves collapse the sphagnum moss layers and compact the deep peat soils. This plants and soils normally act like slow-release water sponges, storing snowmelt and feeding streams throughout summer. And unlike wombats, kangaroos and other native wildlife, feral horses follow each other in single file, making deep walking paths that crisscross alpine meadows, draining them dry.

Read more:
Feral horses in Australia’s high country are damaging peatlands, decreasing carbon stores

Those changes affect the whole ecosystem. Alpine skinks, broad-toothed rats, corroboree frogs, mountain pygmy possums, and native fish all depend on dense vegetation, intact moss beds or sediment-free streams — the very features horses degrade.

Waterways have been hit especially hard. The Australian Alps supply nearly a third of the surface water that enters the Murray–Darling Basin, yet horse trampling around waterways muddies clear streams and destabilises the slow, steady inflows on which these catchments rely.

These impacts aren’t confined to the park. In recent years, large numbers of horses have moved into adjoining areas, including state forests, where their disturbance compounds the effects of commercial logging and endangers visitors and overnight campers.

Although most attention about horse impacts have focused on Kosciuszko and alpine ecosystems more generally, almost half a million feral horses affect landscapes Australia-wide, with tropical woodlands and semi-arid rangelands hardest hit.

What we’ve seen so far

We have spent a lot of time working in the park over the past year. And we’ve begun to notice small shifts in the high country that align with what we’d expect from feral animal control.

We’ve spotted fewer horses during our days in the field. In areas that were repeatedly trampled, tiny pockets of vegetation are creeping into bare patches. Even some long-eroded banks look softer at the edges.

These impressions are strictly anecdotal, not formal evidence. But they hint at a landscape starting to breathe again as the pressure eases.

And there’s a safety element too. Anyone who drives the alpine roads knows the shock of rounding a bend among the snowgums to find a horse, or an entire mob, standing on the bitumen. Fewer horses mean fewer of those dangerous encounters for researchers, National Parks staff, and visitors alike.

The slow return

With far fewer horses in the high country, these pressures are beginning to ease.

As trampling declines, bogs and fens are expected to start recovering and hold water for longer. Moss beds will start to regrow and other peat-forming plants will be able to regain a foothold in soils that aren’t constantly compacted and overgrazed.

Less grazing means alpine herbs, sedges and snow-grass have room to return. Bare ground stabilises. Stream edges settle. Creeklines begin to clear.

Those improvements flow upwards: more stable soils and denser vegetation creates better habitat for the frogs, skinks, small mammals and invertebrates that rely on cool, wet, structured alpine environments.

Recovery will take time – decades, not months. Long-term empirical studies will be essential to show what is changing and identify parts of the park where targeted restoration efforts will be needed to hasten recovery.

Finally, a real chance

None of this will happen quickly.

Alpine ecosystems heal slowly, and decades of damage can’t be undone overnight. Short growing seasons mean plants return gradually, not in sudden flushes. Many slopes and creeklines still show the scars of cattle grazing more than 60 years after livestock were removed. Disturbance lingers here for generations.

Lower horse numbers are only a beginning, but they’re the essential first step. And now — with fewer horses on the ground and the legal barriers removed — Kosciuszko finally has a realistic path to recovery. The coming decade will determine how much of its fragile alpine heritage can be restored.

David M Watson receives research funding from the Federal Government (through ARC, DAFF, DCCEEW), and is on the board of the Holbrook Landcare Network and the Great Eastern Ranges. He served two terms on the NSW Threatened Species Scientific Committee, prior to resigning when the Wild Horse Heritage Act became law in June 2018.

Patrick Finnerty is the current director for early career ecology at the Ecological Society of Australia, the Early Career Coordinator at the Australasian Wildlife Management Society, and a council member for the Royal Zoological Society of NSW. He receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. With thousands of feral horses gone, Kosciuszko’s fragile ecosystems are slowly recovering – https://theconversation.com/with-thousands-of-feral-horses-gone-kosciuszkos-fragile-ecosystems-are-slowly-recovering-270658

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Barbara Plester, Senior Lecturer, Management and International Business, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Groaning your way back into the new work year? It’s an occupational hazard after the holiday break, of course, but these days there is the consolation (for some) of hybrid working.

For jobs that allow it, hybrid work is the new normal, allowing employees to work both remotely, usually from home, and in the office.

But hybrid work is also creating cultural shifts, and workers and managers must navigate ways to keep people connected, social and happy in the blended workplace.

How to do that? Video calls can’t replicate real-world interactions, and the kinds of activities companies organise to build culture and morale can fall flat in a virtual format.

This is particularly relevant to me because my research interests cover the social aspects of work life, with a specific focus on workplace fun, humour and happiness.

So, to explore how we’re all adapting, I immersed myself in two local companies to experience how they maintained a fun culture when some workers were online and others worked in the office.

This allowed me to observe behaviour, talk to workers, interview people from all levels of the business and interact with people online. I also interviewed others from a variety of different workplaces. The research grew into my recently released book Hybrid Happiness: Fun and Freedom in Flexible Work.

What I found were fun, lively, vibrant cultures that the companies were proud of and keen to maintain and develop. But fun is subjective, too, and forcing it in a hybrid setting has its own pitfalls.

Hybrid happiness

Workers were unanimous in wanting to retain hybrid work. They claimed it made them happier due to the freedom, flexibility and autonomy it allowed – and, most importantly, the feeling they were trusted by their company.

They listed the now familiar benefits of hybrid working: saving time and money by not having to commute every day, being able to manage family and pet care needs, going for a walk in nature during the workday, or working online from a cafe.

At the same time, workers agreed that fun and sociability have changed. There is significantly less table tennis, and Friday drinks are not as well attended as they used to be.

Some teams had opted for Thursday “cheese and chat” sessions as more people are likely to be in the office in the three middle weekdays. Laughing around the water cooler has been partly replaced by online chat streams with emojis, messaging and memes.

Quizzes and online games are increasingly popular and can pepper the workday to offer relief from overload and stress.

“Anchor days” are important, too, when everyone is in the office in person, boosting social connection and collegiality (especially when the company provides bagels and coffee).

Getting the mix right

However, hybrid work is not all lightness and laughter. There are still frustrations and failures. Sometimes fun activities go wrong or fail to engage certain people, such as the self-described introverts.

One young worker described an in-person fashion catwalk event he felt forced to join, even though he was highly uncomfortable. An online “fun” quiz starting at the end of the day can feel like another task to endure before knocking off.

Emojis in online messages can be misinterpreted or annoying, especially when colleagues use too many. Overdoing fun activities can feel contrived and distract people from their deadlines.

In short, fun cannot be forced. A simple opt-out clause can be useful to avoid people having to play when they feel uncomfortable or are just not in the mood.

This is where hybrid work can actually be a game-changer for some people. It feels simpler not to click the link when you’re too busy or the activity does not appeal.

When you’re online it’s also easier to evade colleagues encouraging and pushing you into an activity, whereas this can be harder to avoid in the office and face to face.

Happiness works

Why does this matter? Because workers want choice and flexibility – the freedom to work at home but also the connection and stimulation of office time to connect in person and maintain relationships.

Some people work better when physically among their colleagues. Others are more effective away from the hubbub but still connected through technology. Hybrid work offers all of these benefits.

When people are working in a personally optimal way, they are more likely to be happy. Individual happiness transfers to and feeds workplace culture, creating a sparky, motivated group that interacts in multiple ways.

A thriving workplace culture is a collective ideal founded on worker buy-in and commitment. So, while there can be challenges making it work, overall it seems workplace culture may even improve in the new office environment.

Happy hybrid new year!

Barbara Plester 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. Can office culture survive the work-from-home revolution? Yes, but you can’t force the fun – https://theconversation.com/can-office-culture-survive-the-work-from-home-revolution-yes-but-you-cant-force-the-fun-269702

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

Everyone always loves a holiday – at least, that’s how we portray them. Holidays present a chance to unwind, relax and decompress from life’s day-to-day struggles. But they don’t always go to plan, and they’re not always as amazing, relaxing or enriching as we like to think.

Yet admitting you didn’t enjoy your holiday remains surprisingly taboo.

The holiday performance

For most of human history, ordinary people didn’t take holidays at all. Holidays were once the preserve of the extremely wealthy, like those aristocrats who embarked on a Grand Tour of Europe in the 1800s.

Echoes of that aristocratic impulse still pervade the way we talk about holidays to this day. On social media travel has become a form of very visible cultural capital – a way of overtly signalling not just where you’ve been, but your tastes, knowledge and refinement. The trip itself isn’t important. What is important is what the destination – and the way it’s shared – says about you.

A holiday is the perfect stage to perform status, by jetting off to the right (most popular) destinations or by photographing iconic landmarks.

In the social media age, we can expect to be bombarded with photos, reels and videos of holiday content every summer – sun-drenched beaches, sunset cocktails, mountain vistas and smiling families who appear to have achieved the perfect blend of leisure, self-care and cultural sophistication.

In this, the modern holiday has become less about encountering a place and more about signalling that you know where to go, how to look, and how to curate the experience for an audience. We follow a certain holiday script. This is known as the tourist gaze.

The American economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen described this over a century ago: the affluent signal status through what he called “conspicuous consumption”.

And this performance pressure helps explain a peculiar taboo: we rarely admit to having a bad holiday.

Why we can’t admit to a bad holiday

To say a holiday was stressful, disappointing or simply ordinary disrupts the moral script of travel as inherently enriching and restorative. It challenges the idea that holidays are not just leisure but proof of a life well lived.

Taking a holiday – and all the myriad choices that come into play in the decision – has a lot to do with signalling taste, class and status.

The choice of holiday destination, restaurant, even the “aesthetic” of the trip all function as cultural capital. And the idea that all of this can sum up to a bad experience can be seen as “failure” or to have morally erred.

As in any performance, there’s little room for error, lest there be great disappointment. And the stakes now are higher than ever.

A bad holiday can feel like a step backwards in a person’s identity building – in this case, the identity of cultural sophistication and being “well traveled”.

Therefore, the bad holiday must be carefully curated online, so as not to reveal its true nature. This is what is called “impression management” – the way we consciously shape how others see us by controlling what we show and what we hide.

We curate our “front stage” selves for an audience, concealing the mundane or messy behind the scenes. Social media turns holidays into content and travellers into performers. The trip must not only be enjoyed. It must be seen to be enjoyed.

And when everyone is having the best holiday ever (online) that pressure compounds. To return from Bali or Paris having had an awful time is practically heretical. A character flaw. A personal failure at least.

In an era where image is everything, and people prioritise experiences over and above material possessions, holidays are some of our most visible and expensive acts.

They function as a form of prestige signalling; enabling us to demonstrate our social position, resources and means to others. Travelling to the “right” places and curating aesthetically pleasing images is a subtle way of communicating: I have the means, knowledge and cultural competency to do this properly.

Prestige signalling also helps explain why certain destinations become cultural gold. A trip to Sicily, Iceland or Kyoto carries different symbolic weight from a budget hotel in Surfers Paradise – not because one is necessarily more enjoyable or even better, but because one signals a higher level of social capital and prestige.

It’s not surprising then, that admitting to not enjoying a holiday carries an element of reputational risk.

It’s unrealistic to think that all travel will always be glorious, leisurely, enriching and rewarding. At some point and time, we’ll all find ourselves having a bad experience.

Perhaps it’s time we were honest about it, to ourselves and others.

Samuel Cornell receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

– ref. Why can’t we admit to not enjoying a bad holiday? – https://theconversation.com/why-cant-we-admit-to-not-enjoying-a-bad-holiday-267978

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Megan Willis, Associate Professor, School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University

As the New Year rolls around, dating apps often see a surge in new sign-ups. Some are dipping their toes in for the first time, while others are rejoining with renewed hope of finding love after a break.

The right swipe has undoubtedly led to many success stories – long-term relationships, marriages and babies.

But it has also produced countless tales of the darker side of dating apps. Highlights from my own dating app adventures include the reverse image search that revealed my match’s photos belonged to a Canadian actor, a “single” man who forgot to mention his wife, and the unsolicited dick pics, which I respond to by politely advising that I’m not that kind of doctor.

If you’ll be looking for love online in the new year, it helps to know what may lie ahead.

Prepare for rejection

Rejection is common on dating apps. A 2025 experimental study that simulated dating app swiping found on average, participants rejected about 80% of profiles. Real-world data tell a similar story.

One study using dummy profiles on Tinder found men received as little as 0.6% of matches for every right swipe, compared to 10.5% for women. The same study found even when a match occurs, conversation is far from guaranteed – 21% of women sent a message to a new match, compared to just 7% of men.

A 2019 analysis of Hinge data indicated out of all potential matches (all profiles the algorithm showed users, based on their profiles and preferences), only 1 in 200 led to an actual conversation, and just one 1 in 800 resulted in an exchange of contact information.

Taken together, this suggests the likelihood of a single swipe progressing to a connection beyond the app is extremely low.

While dating apps open up the possibility of meeting people you might otherwise never encounter, the sheer volume of users can make people feel overwhelmed by choice. Research shows exposure to large numbers of potential partners makes people more selective and gives them a “rejection mind-set”.

Unsurprisingly, repeated rejection is not fun. And can lead to lower mood and diminished self-esteem.

Ghosting

On dating apps, rejection often takes the form of ghosting – when someone cuts off all communication without explanation. Some users see ghosting as a normal part of dating, particularly in short-term relationships.

Yet research shows being ghosted can trigger anger, anxiety and distress for those on the receiving end, with the ambiguity of the rejection often leading to self-blame and rumination (getting stuck in repetitive, negative thoughts about what happened).

Sexual Violence

Dating apps also expose users to sexual violence at disturbingly high rates.

Research from the Australian Institute of Criminology found almost three in four dating app users have experienced some form of online sexual violence.

This is most commonly sexual harassment, abusive or threatening language, and unsolicited sexual images. A further one in three users also reported experiencing in-person sexual violence from someone they met through a dating app.

Dishonesty

It is also common for people to misrepresent themselves on dating apps. This can range from embellishing one’s height, weight or age to more extreme forms, such as catfishing, where people use a false or stolen identity to deceive others. A 2018 study indicated around 20% of Tinder users were married or in a long-term relationship.

Discovering this kind of deception can trigger anger, embarrassment, self-blame, and an erosion of trust that can make future interactions feel unsafe or daunting.

4 tips to look after yourself

Given these risks, it’s important to navigate dating apps in a way that protects your safety and wellbeing. Here are some tips to do just that.

1. Manage your expectations

Rejection and ghosting are common on dating apps, and it’s important not to personalise these experiences.

Expecting these things may occur can reduce the emotional shock when they do. If and when they do, seek support from trusted friends and allow yourself to feel disappointed without ruminating. Try reframing these experiences as a product of dating app design rather than a reflection of your worth. One way to put this into practice is to say to yourself

I feel really disappointed this match didn’t work out, but it doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with me. Dating apps are impersonal, and rejection is common.

2. Take it slow

Given misrepresentation is widespread on dating apps, it’s wise not to emotionally invest too quickly.

Always meet for the first time in a public place, share your location with a friend, and avoid putting too much hope into a match until you’ve met in person a few times and confirmed their story checks out.

3. Take a break if it’s getting you down

Repeated cycles of rejection, superficial interactions and harmful experiences can lead to what researchers call “mobile dating fatigue”. This is marked by emotional exhaustion, cynicism and a decline in self-worth. Taking a break can be an important act of self-care that can allow an emotional reset.

4. Maintain a full life outside of the apps

Dating apps can become harmful when they begin to negatively impact your mental health and psychological wellbeing.

Strong friendships, hobbies and a sense of purpose outside of dating apps can buffer against distress. They can also help ensure your sense of self isn’t being defined by dating app experiences but by parts of your life you can control.

Megan Willis 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. Just joined a dating app? Here’s how to look after yourself and handle rejection – https://theconversation.com/just-joined-a-dating-app-heres-how-to-look-after-yourself-and-handle-rejection-271312