The Masters degree continues to go well, but I hate how much I panic about the value of my work. Should I ever get the chance to write a thesis I’m gonna be a wreck.
Anyone with an interest in interesting things should read Wark’s Hackers Manifesto and Free Culture by Lessig. Go on. It wont kill you, I’ll wait.
This week I have been plagued by dreams of zombies, due, no doubt, to hearing Michael Jackon’s Thriller over and over on the radio, and becaue I have been playing a lot of Dead Rising on the Xbox, a game which I easily rate as the most frustrating game I have ever played.
Anyone who has played it or read about it knows that the save system is terrible, but this is only the first cause of my ire towards this potentially aweome game. The second hassle is the aiming system, which is awful for a fe reasons. The major one, is that you are glued to the floor once you enter the over the shoulder targeting view. This is naff for the simple reason that even I, about as far as you can get from an ultra hard core army guy, am able to aim whilst I slowly shuffle forwards, the way you can in most other first person shooters. I find this concreted aiming system incredibly counter-intuitive, and endlessly frustrating when I decide to hurl an item at the walking dead.
However, the real reason I find this game so incredibly frustrating is the same reason I truly fear a zombie outbreak…the dead don’t stop coming. And this frustration is a good thign, because…as ridiculous as this is to type, I guess its…you know, kinda what would happen…right?
When I stand in game and communicate with an NPC, whilst trying to work out what the text says on my GIANT FREAKIN’ TELLY, which is another point of frustration I just remembrered, I can hear the undead approaching, and when I am finally ready to move on with the NPC trailing along, there are hundreds of the moaning mother fuckers all around me, and I can’t find the chainsaw I dropped when one of them hit me…and then the game immediately selects the next item in my menu and as I line up to smack a zombie in the face…I end up reading the book I was holding in my gear menu? FUUUUCK…Fuck, another point of frustration.
But truthfully, I’ll be playing it again tonight until the desire to throw the controller through the window over powers me, because I like the frustration of being completely out numbered by the walking dead, and even though I absolutely hate those psychos in the jeep who constantly kill me, I do enjoy walking around, smacking things with a fry pan, or slicing them with the katana. And I am looking forward to Dead Rising 2, which will, hopefully, address some of these issues, without removing the good frustrating bits.
EDIT. This rant has been written whilst I impatiently wait to hear if I am going to be doing my Masters this year…anyone who has dealt with academics in relation to bureaucratic differences between two types of paperwork called ‘academic transcripts’ and ‘statement of academic record’ will understand that this level of frustration makes one dream of something as simple as an outbreak of zombification.
I quit smoking 2 months ago, and since then have had a constantly blocked nose and small amounts of blood up one nostril.
The temptation to google the term ‘blocked nose + blood” is almost overpowering, but I don’t want to know. Not really.
I mean, a bit, sure.
And I am moving house again…I think this is house number 17/18 or there abouts, I’ve lost count. Really want to be able to settle somewhere, without the need to move on again after 12 months. That was the plan for this house, a 12 month lease with an option for a second one…but the owner has decided to sell it so off we move again.
This same thing happened at the previous house. Still searching for a rewarding and worthwhile career, once I have that sorted I can start really thinking about buying a house. One day.
Until then, we pack.
Again.
I quite like how it ended up looking.
My friend Fish was happy to see things happening.
http://vimeo.com/1874573
The greatest Australian citizens don’t swing cricket bats for a profession or play a totally awesome guitar solo infront of a crowd of thousands.
They probably don’t really care that pavlova might have come from New Zealand, and if they heard that it did, they probably wouldn’t get into a fight over it. I’d say some of the greatest Aussie’s don’t even care about lamingtons, haven’t invented lawnmowers.
Hell, some of them probably don’t even drink beer, and might not even request bacon and eggs for brekkie on a Sunday morning.
My Aussie hero is this bloke I met while queueing up to vote last time in Mordialloc.
He was a man of Arab decent, no idea what country he was from though, and when the woman at the desk told him that he could not vote this year he burst into tears.
We need more Aussie’s like this guy, a man who understood the value and importance of his vote. He wasn’t a standard Aussie who views voting as a wasted Saturday morning, instead of the one act of democratic action he has the hard fought for right to complete.
A man who knows that across the world people are killed and tortured even for suggesting that perhaps the lowest person in the country has the right to a voice.
So sorry Sir Don, Bob Hawke, Boonie and Kochie and anyone else who has, at one time or other, tried their hardest to prove how truly fucking hard core Aussie they are, but this little fella who wasn’t allowed to vote is the best Aussie I have ever met.
And I tell ya what, when it was my turn to vote, I really took my time and made sure that my damn vote was going to count, especially after I heard the woman at the desk tell this hero that ‘it doesn’t matter…you can try again next election’.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 Australia License.
For no real reason, here is an essay about journalism.
Please don’t plagarise it, that’s shit behaviour.
Journalism is often cited as being a vital element of society, because it acts as an independent check on the government, and keeps the public informed on issues which are important to them, but which they may not learn about if not reported in the daily newspapers or on nightly news television shows. The role of the journalist has changed greatly over the centuries, but the idealised role of the traditional journalist has not changed at all. Mark Deuze (2005) lists five ideal-typical traits or values, which include objectivity, providing a public service, autonomy, immediacy and ethics.
This idealised role that journalists traditionally carry is today countered by many other elements of journalism, which cast the role of the journalist into a negative light. Stories in which journalists are accused of hounding grieving parents or friends are a common complaint, as is the idea that some journalists do not operate within the ethical guidelines of the profession. The blurring of the lines between providing a public service and acting as a vulture has led to a decline in public opinion of journalism as a profession.
In a recent poll asking which professions are most and least trusted by the public, journalists ranked 36th out of forty professions, beating politicians, car salesmen, telemarketers, real estate agents and sex workers. (“Burns pioneer Wood tops trust ratings”, 2008) The suggestion being that journalists, who are ethically obliged to report fairly and print stories that are balanced and honest, are widely regarded as dishonest and untrustworthy. The reasons for this are varied, the confusion between what is journalism and what is public relations being a strong element of the decline in trust and credibility, as is the negative influence of behaviours of an element of the journalistic community.
Where once journalism was considered the fourth estate operating as a watch dog operating for the people, in the 20th Century it has also become responsible for covering all events which might be of interest to the public, be that the private life of celebrities, or reporting on the aftermath of a murder or any other disaster.
For this reason, the image of the journalist providing a public service has become clouded, as journalists are now knocking on the front door of people who might have recently lost a child or friend. In a similar vein, paparazzi are easily, though not necessarily correctly, viewed as ‘eager journalists’ operating outside of the ethical boundaries. Thus, public opinion of journalists as a whole drops when paparazzi are accused of crossing the lines of decency, as seen in the death of Princess Diana in 1997. The blurring of the lines between what is, and what isn’t journalism gets even murkier when the role of the public relations (PR) is added in. Without digressing too far into the different roles journalists and PR representatives play, it is easy to see how, to the public, the two seem to be almost interchangeable at times. Sally White (1991) goes to great lengths to suggest that PR can be a useful tool for the journalist, as long as the journalist continues to investigate the information being given to them, just as if they had uncovered the story themselves. “It [PR] provides a stream of information into the newsroom…[but] it has sapped initiative by providing story ideas that can be covered at the first reporting layer without check or challenge.” (White, S. 1991) The worry is that the journalist, instead of investigating the information handed out by the PR representative, will instead treat the media release as fact and essentially report it ‘as is’, becoming a spokesperson for the body which has released the information, instead of an independent, and unbiased, reporter acting in the service of the public. Lee Salter (2005) goes so far as to suggest that “there is a quite explicit danger of merging public relations and journalism that can only diminish the effectiveness of journalism in fulfilling its normative role.” (Salter, L. 2005) The dangers of this merge relate to the different goals between the two occupations. Ideally, journalists are ethically obliged to serve the public, whereas PR agents are principally concerned with working in the best interest of the company or body they represent. “Public relations is structurally unable to generate a coherent ethical practice…even those with good intentions are unable to act ethically without prejudicing their capacity to be (instrumentally) good [sic] public relations agents. In contrast, it is the contention that a good [sic] journalist is necessarily ethically orientated.” (Salter, L. 2005) The notion of ethics is essentially destroyed if, as Sally White suggests happens, “[media handouts] are published as finished articles…To the reader, handouts look like the work of an independent reporter but they tell only one side of the story.” (White, S. 1991) It would seem then that the greatest and most important aspect separating the journalist and the public relations agent is the oft times slippery ideal of ‘ethics’. To a member of the public, with more interest in the story they are reading than any interest in the idealistic role of the journalist, will not easily separate a ‘puff piece’ from a carefully researched, fully investigated and objectively written article. To the public, the story is the work of a reporter, and thus, when enough one sided ‘advetorials’ have been written, it is obvious that trust and good opinion for the profession will falter.
The role of the journalist as a watchdog has, as mentioned earlier, evolved into other fields. Many of the ‘beats’ modern journalists walk today have not changed, the crime beat, as an example, is as vital today as it was one hundred years ago, and there is rarely any mention of unethical behaviour. Yet along with these more traditional areas of interest, the 20th Century has given the idea of the ‘star story’. These are the stories about people in the public sphere, football players, actors and so forth. Famous people are often newsworthy in and of themselves. “A journalistic adage is that ‘names make news’. A large proportion of news is about leaders of nations, towns, companies…institutions of all kinds.” (White, S. 1991) Celebrities, be they sports stars or actors are also ‘names’ that make news. Their arrival at an event, would be covered by the press, it would not be ‘hard news’, nor necessarily interesting, but it does met the criteria of informing the pubic of things which may be of interest to them. Yet often eager reporters will delve into unethical behaviour in the misguided understanding that what is not known about the celebrity can also be newsworthy, and here we can see how the actions of an individual journalist can tarnish the reputation of the profession as a whole. In 2007 Dylan Howard, a Channel 7 reporter, paid $3000 for a folder of medical records which listed AFL football players who were involved in drug rehabilitation programs. Channel 7 began running promo’s promising the ‘AFL story of the century’, but once the new story broke about how Dylan Howard came upon the files, a far greater story began Soon Channel 7 were facing a ban by AFL footballers, who refused to answer questions asked by any Channel 7 reporter. Dylan Howard was eventually stood down from his position and the contents of the medical reports were never publicly released.
It is easy to see how the journalist stumbled upon a big story and he and the media outlet were interested in breaking the story. Yet ethically, it sits uncomfortably for a viewer. Whilst AFL footballers have celebrity status, particularly in Victoria, very few would be willing to suggest that private and personal medical records are suitable for a public airing, or that doing so is truly in the publics best interest. Because the story evolved into one where football players were banning an entire television station, the contents of the medical files became secondary to how the reporter came across them, and the ethics of the individual and the station in question. This story highlights how the actions of a well respected journalist can tarnish the reputation the profession. While not as clearly intrusive as the actions of the paparazzi, it is obviously inappropriate and unethical.
Another aspect of journalism which acts to lowers public opinion of the profession is the rise of ‘check book journalism’. In recent months Roberta Williams, ex-wife of convicted murderer and drug trafficker Carl Williams, has been the target in several fights between rival programs Today Tonight and A Current Affair. A sum of $40,000 was eventually paid for an interview with Roberta Williams about her former mother-in-law’s suicide. Again, it is easy to see how an element of the journalism profession can be viewed in a negative light, when it is known that the media has paid for a story.
Looking at the methods used by journalists to get their stories, there are some signs as to why the public may have a low opinion of the profession. The “deathknock”, in which a journalist will approach a bereaved friend or family member, is an interesting method of news gathering which will clearly place the journalist in a negative light. John Harrison (1990) says that “their [journalists] professional socialisation leads journalists to be unquestioning of the deathknock as a legitimate journalistic practice…competition, and more fundamentally ratings and sales, and the bottom line, the dollar, is argued as making deathknocks inevitable.” (Harrison, J. 1990) This particular journalistic practice seems to cross the line of what is ethically, or perhaps morally, right and wrong. Despite all the rhetoric about the journalist’s role in acting as a watchdog, and informing the public, and ignoring all the discussion about the different roles and ethical responsibilities of the journalist and the public relations agent, it is very likely that actions such as the deathknock, viewed as a ‘legitimate practice’ by industry professionals, have led to a lowering of opinion in the public’s eye. The person handing in this essay is a plagarist. Janet Blank-Libra (2008) makes a strong point that compassion has a place in the journalists occupation. “That the journalist can put a human face on the everyday events is not a news flash. It is, however, a fact that the traditional journalistic approach directs the journalist to remain detached in order to function objectively.” (Blank-Libra, J, 2008) Should journalists stop making the deathknocks, perhaps the public will again view them as the idealised fourth estate once again, but in doing so journalists are being asked to disregard the notion of objectivity, which as discussed earlier, is one of the ideal-typical traits which makes up the idealised role of the traditional journalist. Yet approaching a deathknock with compassion, whilst helping the person being interviewed, will not necessarily change the opinions of those who witness the approach from afar. In a theoretical world it is easy to see ways in which journalists are, perhaps unfairly, viewed in a negative light, yet in the real world, perhaps it is these practices which, more than the theoretical ideas, have caused the public’s opinion of journalists to drop.
REFERENCES
Blank-Libra, Janet (2008) “The Inaugural Moment: The Lost Poetry of Compassion” http://vikingdays.com/pub/values/JanetBlank-Libra080218.pdf. Retrieved 03/12/08
Deuze, Mark (2005) “What is Journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered”, Journalism 6 (4).
Harrison, John (1990) “Deathknocks: the media come to grief”, in John Henningham (ed) Issues in Australian Journalism. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
Hastie, D. & Rucci, M. 2007, ‘No interviews until channel apologises’ The Herald Sun
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22325098-11088,00.html retrieved 29/11/08
Salter, Lee (2005) ‘The communicative structures of journalism and public relations’, Journalism 6(1)
White, Sally (1991) Reporting in Australia, Melbourne, MacMillan Publishers.
2008, ‘Burns Pioneer Wood tops trust ratings’, The Age,
http://www.theage.com.au/national/burns-pioneer-wood-tops-trust-ratings-20080618-2seu.html?page=2 retrieved 29/11/08
This isn’t an academically researched essay, nor is it really a mad diatribe.
This is a confession of sorts.
Reality TV…oh you dirty low life preacher of all things evil and stupid in society. How you promised to show us real people in unreal positions, or highlight a strange few who have jobs and tasks and dreams which make our own appear so small and infantile in comparison.
I like reality TV shows, not all of them, but many of them are quite high on my television agenda. Masterchef, Biggest Loser and a few others, not the documentray ones though. Things like The Recruits and Border Security bore me to tears.
The trick to enjoying reality TV though, is to be cynical when you watch it. Without getting all academic (cause I can’t be arsed…if you want academic, ask) Reality TV is edited, the arguments, the announcements and the ‘drama’ are creations of clever editing and gentle guiding on behalf of the show’s creators.
BLAH
I’m over this now, going to go and write a stage play for my wife to direct.
Shoulda mentioned that my darling wife paid for the tickets as a birthday present to me, her unthoughtful bastard of a husband.
She also drove home because I had far too much to drink.
I should also mention that she let me eat some wedges off her plate of Parma, which came with a beer she let me drink.
Chopper Read stands on the stage, looking shorter than I thought he’d be in real life.
Jacob turns to me, “Chopper Read? Awesome.”
Chopper explains that the greatest fucking band to ever fucking come out of fucking England are here tonight.
Cheers from the audience.
“Better than the Rolling Fucking Stones” he says.
“Who?” replies the audience.
“That’s fucking right who are the fucking Rolling Stones?”
And so on.
Then the Alabama 3 come on stage and like always, they errupt into that unique sound that the fans love and that new listener’s either immediatly shun or enjoy.
I think it was an hour and a half…maybe two hours, but it was a great show, not as small and personal as the unplugged tour last time they came to Australia, but louder, and with a more full sound.
It looks like I have found a location for going underground again…apparently this one is a good one too, one of the better sights beneath Melbourne.
Hopefully this time I can remember to take my camera, if so, photos will follow.
