Why is sorry still the hardest word to say for the Federal Opposition?

In response to expectations Kevin Rudd will make a formal Australian Government apology to the Stolen Generations a key order of business during the first sitting week of the new parliament, Brendan Nelson is blowing the dog whistle he inherited from John Howard.

The Opposition leader has condemned the Prime Minister’s plans to prioritise a national apology, saying the issues of petrol prices and interest rates should take precedence over finally implementing the key recommendation of the ten-year-old Bringing Them Home report on the Stolen Generations. But the election of the Rudd Government signalled a shift in the priorities of Australians – they voted not only for change but for more heart in government. And try as Brendan Nelson might to subdue the national conscience by dragging the focus back to a narrow, soulless fixation on hip-pocket economics, the country has moved on.

The Opposition leader is also arguing that white Australians should be formally consulted prior to an apology being issued. Newsflash Dr Nelson: Australians voted for a Rudd Government knowing Labor had promised to prioritise an apology to the generations of Indigenous Australians forcibly removed from their families in an act the Stolen Generations Inquiry found was genocidal.

While John Howard swore blind he’d never utter a personal or collective apology to the Stolen Generations, Brendan Nelson has a chance to avoid Howard’s legacy of poisoning black-white relations. In the 12 years of the Howard Government, so many bridges to Aboriginal Australia were burned and so many long-suffering people further alienated, that history will inevitably record those years as divisive and counter-productive to the essential task of reconciliation. But instead of being bold and injecting some social values into Australian Conservative politics, the good doctor is determined to follow in the destructive footsteps of yesterday’s man.

He’s towing Howard’s line – that the current generation of Australians has no responsibility for the “largely well intentioned” policies of past governments. But he claims he’s shed tears about the violent history of white-black relations in Australia and has spoken of his deep respect for and empathy with Aboriginal Australians. Incongruous.

In an attempt to justify his stance, Nelson argues that the Rudd government should focus on the very high mortality and sexual abuse rates among Aboriginal Australians – those he calls the "real issues" - rather than an apology to the Indigenous community. But he fails to acknowledge that these problems are the product of the generational effects of the racist policies of past governments and they can’t ever be adequately addressed without healing the deeper wounds that sustain them. An apology to the Stolen Generations is both a moral necessity and a fundamental stepping stone to reconciliation which is, in turn, essential to the transformation of the lives of Indigenous Australians.

The reconciliation process - which looked so inspired and promising under Paul Keating’s leadership in the early 90’s - stagnated so badly in the Howard Years that Howard’s own hand-picked National Indigenous Council considered resigning in the lead up to the Federal Election in protest at the hopelessness of the situation. Therefore it is imperative Kevin Rudd act decisively and forcefully to salvage the process and an official apology to Indigenous Australians is the place he knows he must start.

In any relationship breakdown there is one word that’s crucial to mending wounds and rebuilding bridges – the very essence of reconciliation. That word is sorry and as the song says it is often the hardest word to say, but it is also the straightest path to genuine forgiveness - the healing power of relationship reconstruction. It's a word Aboriginal Australians and supporters of the reconciliation movement want to hear - in recognition of over two centuries of massacre, abuse, disenfranchisement, discrimination and ongoing disadvantage. It's a word that's already been uttered by many in public life and it is one which will soon finally be cemented by the Australian Parliament.

Despite the claims of Howardesque conservatives and revisionist historians, an official apology to the Stolen generations is not about misplaced guilt. Aboriginal Australia doesn’t want white guilt (although as a friend suggested to me recently, guilt may be the basis of social caring). But Indigenous Australians do want the past acknowledged and they need the healing that could flow from the utterance of that small word we all insist our children learn in their first grasp of language.

Let’s hope Brendan Nelson finds it in his heart to resist the cheap political points that may flow from moving against an apology in the parliament. Having the courage to do what’s right instead of just what is easy or popular is a true measure of leadership. And in Nelson's case there's an Opposition leader-in-waiting (Malcom Turnbull) who has endorsed an official apology to the Stolen Generations.

Let’s hope Kevin Rudd is prepared to drive the reconciliation process forward, beyond the powerful symbolism of an apology.

Update: Kevin Rudd has confirmed the Australian Government will apologise to the Stolen Generations on February 13th. The Ngunnawal people of Canberra will hold a special ceremony marking the opening of the first parliament of the Rudd Government the previous day.

Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin is pleading for bi-partisan backing of the apology but the Federal Opposition leadership is digging in its divisive heels, resisting calls for a conscience vote on the apology and opposing the Government's strategy at every turn. Shadow Indigenous Affairs spokesman Tony Abbott claims an apology is unnecessary because some things were 'done right'. I presume he also thinks Priests who sexually abuse their young parishioners shouldn't have to apologise either because they still presided over Holy Communion with dilligence.

Opposition leader-in-waiting, Malcolm Turnbull is the lone voice of reason among senior Liberals, calling for the Coalition to back the apology or risk being relegated to irrelevancy. Turnbull's stance has the strong backing of former Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser who campaigned strongly against Howard government racism.

On a more uplifting note, members of the Stolen Generations around the country have poured out their hearts in response to news of the apology many thought they'd never live to hear. The moving stories have made tears of grief and relief well up in my eyes. And in an act of generosity that gives me hope for the reconciliation process, ABC listeners have come to the aid of a woman who told her story of forced removal to AM and expressed a desire to hear the apology for herself. Sixty eight year old Zita Wallace told AM she couldn't afford the cost of the trip from Alice Springs to Canberra. But within minutes of her story being aired, five listeners had rung the ABC switch offering to fund Ms Wallace's journey. "I think they're just being true-spirited Aussies, and coming out in them their generosity to help another human being, and I feel very honoured that they've selected me and my group to assist."She told PM She is now looking forward to hearing those letters S-O-R-R-Y in person.

Meanwhile, you can read the Stolen Generations' Alliance recommendations on the national apology in this report presented to the government last week..    [read more]

The good news is: Australia Day festivities in Camden – recent hotspot of Islamophobia – transpired without need for the police riot squad on standby to intervene.

The bad news is: the day has clearly been hijacked by yobbos and boofheads.

It’s long been known as Invasion Day by Aboriginal Australians while for others it was traditionally little more than a day for reflection on the elusive definition of Australian identity while searing snags on a barbie. If there was one unifying theme, it was multiculturalism - a celebration of our diversity. But Australia Day is now wrapped in patriotism of a brand as kitsch and aggressive as the idiots, dressed in clothing fashioned from the flag, roaming the streets yelling ‘Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, oi, oi, oi!”. What the Hell does that stupid catchcry mean anyway? It makes me cringe with embarrassment to be Australian.

I’ve long despaired about the impact of Howard’s decade of glorification and sanitisation of ugly chapters of Australian history – Gallipoli and the genocide of Aborigines to name a couple. As a University lecturer, I’ve witnessed the rise of a new brand of US-style patriotism among young people – one which defines itself in isolation from the Other; one which celebrates homogeneity above diversity. But I wasn’t prepared for the scenes I witnessed on the streets of Wollongong, my home town, on Saturday night.

Australia Day is my father’s birthday – ironic considering he was labelled a wog by his schoolmates because of his Italian heritage. So, I headed to The ‘Gong to help him celebrate. I knew it was going to be an interesting night towards the end of the journey from Canberra. The utes adorned with Australian flags began to appear on the outskirts of Camden. By the time we reached the bottom of the Illawarra escarpment, we’d lost count of the number of vehicles we’d seen with enormous flags stuck to car bonnets, roofs and boots; smaller ones flying from makeshift flagpoles attached to aerials and those being waved out windows by ‘flag enthusiasts’.

When we arrived at the car-park of the upmarket beachside restaurant, the hordes were thronging their way to the beachfront. Some were wearing flags as skirts and capes; others added hats made from bits of flag, nationalistic singlets carrying that bloody catchcry and flag tattoos. This is Wollongong – birthplace of Australian multiculturalism where nearly 20% of the population speaks a language other than English at home and many post WW11 immigrants spent their first months in the country. I baulked at the size and youthfulness of the crowds expressing a sort of nationalistic fervour that wouldn’t have been out of place at a Nuremburg rally.

But my disquiet gave way to stunned silence when I entered the restaurant. The waitresses were dressed in nationalistic costume. One wore a flag like a towel; another had fashioned one into a mini-skirt. Most sported t-shirts bearing their allegiance to Aussie crassness. As the Greek-accented head waiter took our order, I noticed his bald head was tattooed with mini-flags and the Southern Cross. Habibi, the African wine-waiter, wore a flag as a cape. Mini Australian flags were strung from the ceiling around the periphery of the room like bunting. It was like walking onto the set of Kath and Kim – I expected Kel to pop out any moment to spruik his roo and tomato sauce snags. In fact, we did eat kangaroo sausages and emu prosciutto ('Straya Day' specials) but thankfully the cuisine was far superior to the décor and atmosphere.

When we left the restaurant to view the beach fireworks the crowds had swollen and beer-swilling yobs were yelling “Aussie, Aussie…etc” at the tops of their hoarse voices. It was a very unappealing scene. From the balconies of million-dollar beachfront apartments more flags flew and the air was thick with testosterone. This was Aussie ‘blokiness’ at its most vile – in bed with nationalism.

I felt unexpectedly threatened amongst the mob being sans-flag and deflecting demands to respond to “Aussie, Aussie, Aussie” with “oi, oi, oi” like Pavlov’s dog. I can only begin to imagine how the woman in the hijab sitting on the park bench nearby felt.

The mob, allegedly so proud of their country, trashed the Wollongong beachfront during their patriotic rampage. It took 15 council workers on an 'emu-parade' and a street-sweeper truck to clean up their mess on Sunday morning.

I certainly wasn’t a proud Aussie on Saturday night. Some will say that makes me ‘un-Australian’, to coin one of Howard’s favourite put downs applied to dissenting voices. There was a time when being anti-establishment was considered a trait of the typical Australian character. These days it seems you’re not authentic unless you’re running with the mob. If that’s the case, I’m proud to be un-Australian.

Aside: Moderately successful country crooner Lee Kernaghan is Australian of the Year. Need I say more?    [read more]

The President-in-waiting and the head of the police force are facing corruption charges. It’s alleged the politician took bribes from arms dealers…his anthem sung by loyal followers is translated as “bring me my machine gun”. The police chief is linked to a crime boss, who is in turn implicated in a high profile murder, but is favoured by the current president whose days are numbered thanks to the successful power-bid by his allegedly corrupt political rival. Meanwhile, the Chief Prosecutor planning to bring the action against the police chief is stood down by the current president and a senior intelligence operative in charge of the investigation is arrested in an apparently retaliatory strike.

You may think it sounds like the plot of a best selling crime drama which sees corruption and organised crime reaching all the way to the presidency but it’s actually the real life drama unfolding in crime-ridden South Africa (SA) as the Rainbow Nation morphs into Banana Republic.

SA President, Thabo Mbeki, stood by the National Commissioner for Police, Jackie Selebi until it was announced this week that he would face charges of corruption and defeating the course of justice. Selebi is now on extended leave and he’s been forced to resign from his position as president of the international crime fighting body, Interpol.

Selebi is accused of racketeering, money laundering, bribery and fraud. Central to these allegations is his “friendship” with the convicted SA drug trafficker, Dennis Agliotti, who is also facing charges connected to the murder of mining magnate, Brett Kebble. A payment of approximately AU $200,000, luxury gifts allegedly given to Selebi, his wife, mistress and children by Agliotti, along with claims Selebi turned a blind eye to drug-smuggling are features of the evidence against him. It's also alleged he received a payment from Kebble, the slain mining magnate.

Shortly after informing Mbeki in writing that the National Prosecuting Authority was investigating Selebi, the National Director of Public Prosecutions, Vusi Pikoli, was stood down. Months of speculation surrounding the case against Selebi ensued as the hesitant acting DPP, Mokotedi Mpshe, kept his cards close to his chest and the elite crime unit in charge of the investigation known as the Scorpions built their case against the police chief.

Then, as the NPA prepared to pounce, the Scorpions’ chief investigator in the case, Gerrie Nel, was arrested in a public show of strength by a barrage of police officers. He was charged with corruption and defeating the ends of justice but those charges were withdrawn this week after Selebi failed in a last ditch bid in the Pretoria High Court to have the investigation against him halted.

Meantime, the man who defeated Mbeki as President of the ANC late last year, Jacob Zuma, is preparing to go to trial on separate corruption charges. Zuma, who has already defeated one lot of similar charges and an allegation of rape, is effectively SA’s President-elect as the leader of the ruling political party.

Zuma, who was sacked as Deputy President by Mbeki in 2005, faces 16 charges including racketeering, corruption, money laundering and fraud. The charges revolve around his his dealings with arms companies (two SA subsidiaries of Thales International - formerly Thomson-CFS - are also facing charges of racketeering and corruption). Zuma’s former financial advisor is already serving jail time for fraud and corruption in connection with the arms deal scandal.

Zuma’s supporters allege the case against him has been politically manipulated by Mbeki. Mbeki is simultaneously accused of striving to protect his disgraced police chief.

Zuma is expected to stand trial in August while Selebi will appear in court on February 1st.

But more pressing than official corruption in the lives of everyday South Africans is the extraordinarily high rate of violent crime. Murder, rape, armed robbery and car-jackings are commonplace in what’s regarded as one of the world’s most dangerous countries. For example, the murder rate in SA is eight times the international average and according to the latest crime statistics, violent home break-ins have increased by 7%, truck hijacking by over 53% and robberies on business have risen by more than 29%.

The police are pushing the good news angle that murder and violent assault decreased slightly over the same period but that is surely of little comfort to the people who the same statistics render less safe in their homes and workplaces than on the street.

It's hardly the Rainbow Nation dream envisaged by Nelson Mandela and the optimistic young democracy that embraced his leadership in the 1990's. And the hope that characterised those early days is gradually being replaced by fear and cynicism...hope won't fill the stomach or keep the door bolted against intruders.

Further Reading: The Editor of the independent South African quality newspaper, Mail and Guardian, Ferial Haffajee has written an insightful piece of analysis on the sad state of SA affairs. She says "Post-Polokwane (the recent ANC conference @ which Zuma was elected Party President - Jp), our country has lost its standing... This view is reinforced by the corruption charges against national police commissioner Jackie Selebi. When the man who wants to be president and the country’s top cop both face serious charges of accepting bribes, racketeering and selling their souls to crooked businessmen, we can reach no other conclusion." You can read the full article here

Update: As if that weren't enough to make you mutter "that country's turning into a basket case" try this: SA has been plunged into darkness by persistent power cuts due to electricity shortages that point to the chronic failure of the system of supply. Trains have been stopped mid-journey (prompting some protesting commuters to set carriages alight); tourists at Cape Town's Table Mountain were left stranded mid-air in cable cars last night (21/1) when the power failed; traffic lights go out at busy Jo'burg intersections; newspaper's printing presses are halted; international investment is under threat as is the economy. Now South Africans are being told electricity rationing will be enforced.

Meantime, Zuma has launched an attack on the SA media, indicating he won't be stepping away from Mbeki's anti-free speech stance. He is currently suing a range of journalists and publications along with a leading cartoonist for defamation. You can read about his stance here and here.

And, the elite crime investigation unit, the Scorpions, which headed the Selebi inquiry is being disbanded by the Mbeki government and merged with the South African Police Service. That's one way to thwart corruption probes.

Further Update: 28/1/08 The power crisis is now so severe SA's economy-dependent gold and platinum mines are being shut down for days at a time. Meanwhile Kiwi anti-apartheid activist John Minto has rejected the top SA honour for foreigners saying he was too dismayed with the state of the country to accept the award. In an open letter to President Mbeki, he wrote "...we were not fighting for a small black elite to become millionaires... .The faces at the top have changed from white to black but the substance of change is an illusion."

For a lighter, brighter perspective on the current crises besetting SA read this blog post    [read more]

2GB – Sydney’s number one talk radio station – has become the first commercial radio operation in Australia to take its news service online.

The ABC, with its bi-media history, has been online since 1997 but Australia’s commercial stations have been slow to join the digital revolution. The lag in commercial radio’s web-presence is dangerous – the future of news is no doubt digital and multi-platform. And while traditional radio talk content will remain relevant, diversification and online accessibility are essential if future audiences are to be found and profits sustained.

The reluctance of radio networks to make the move online can be understood as a product of a blinkered one-platform approach to the business, the under-estimation of the marketability of news and information and the post 80’s boom-time de-funding of quality commercial news services – essential for content production. But change is finally afoot.

2GB – once the centre-pin of the formerly vast Macquarie radio news network - now operates as a single-city station with a bureau in the Canberra press gallery. Its star is Alan Jones - the top-rating and widely syndicated right-wing shock-jock known by detractors as “The Parrott”.

The station’s new online news service – Live News – blends conventional radio content filed by its journalists in Sydney and Canberra with multi-media reports, produced by specialist online reporters based in both centres, with a minimum of wire service stories. Alan Jones also has a ‘spruik spot’ and reporters’ blogs are in development.

The site is gaining popularity (although management isn’t making the figures public) with a significant increase in visitor traffic during the Federal Election and anecdotal evidence from the Canberra bureau of Press Gallery reporters chasing stories from the site.

University of Canberra journalism graduate, John Barrington, is the multimedia reporter based in the Gallery. He came to the job after short stints in regional commercial radio and with AAP. His job is effectively across three platforms. He files radio stories to the traditional news service as required, takes a TV camera to press conferences to file vision online and produces multi-media features for the site. He acknowledges the pressures of multiple-media reporting and the potential for diminution of quality across the board but he maintains a commitment to quality of content over speed in an effort to value-add rather than simply bombarding the site with content.

The vision he files to Live News is used to enhance the text-based representation of radio news stories but he also films, edits and files TV news-style packages with overlay collected from around the national capital.

One curious aspect of Live News, though, is its obvious attempt to distance itself from the radio station it derives its content from. Instead of banking on the successful brand of 2GB/Macquarie News and attempting to bring its existing audience online while building a new, presumably younger, audience through the website, it’s attempted to create an exclusive, disconnected new identity. There’s not even a mention of the radio station on the website. And they’ve started replacing 2GB station identifications with Live News ones on reporters’ microphones in Sydney, emphasising the importance of the new venture.

This approach is short-sighted and underlines the failure of contemporary commercial radio stations to adequately recognise the value of quality news gathering and the brand recognition that exists in association with successful news services.

At the same time, though, the main focus of news gathering and delivery remains the on-air 2GB presence. Radio stories are quarantined from online upload until they’ve been broadcast, reporters’ number one filing priority is to the radio bulletins and the online commitments of the dedicated multi-media reporters are subjugated to the needs of the radio news service as required on busy news days or during staff shortages.

This ordering of priorities may change as the operation establishes itself and online content begins to prove its value but for now the online version of 2GB News is a little confused about its identity. Nevertheless, it's a pioneering step for an Australian commercial radio station and one which should be watched with interest.

While modes of delivery may alter and value-adding through multimedia output is likely to become the norm, the future of radio journalism is potentially bright. There will always be a place for live, interactive broadcasting (regardless of the delivery platform) and radio journalists’ skills should be the most sought after by producers of online content. Radio news reporters are traditionally the fastest gatherers, interpreters and disseminators of news and these skills are well suited to the insatiable appetite of online news. Independent operators and tech-savvy as a requirement of the mobile, single-operator approach to radio news gathering, radio reporters are also adaptable media workers who have the potential to thrive in the age of digital journalism.

Video didn't kill radio’s star and neither will the digital revolution but recognising the value of quality journalism and building multimedia content around radio news is central to the medium's survival in the online age.    [read more]

Australia Day (January 26th) – that nationalistic celebration of the First Fleet's landing which Aborigines refer to as “Invasion Day” – is shaping up as a potentially dangerous event in Camden.

The town on Sydney’s south-western outskirts is the site of a proposed Islamic School and a racist backlash against the plans.

A rally held less than a week before Christmas in opposition to the school attracted nearly 800 residents and high profile conservative politicians. The public strategy of the anti-school lobby has been to oppose the proposal on planning grounds. But the racism underpinning the campaign is palpable.

Angry young men wearing the Australian flag as an accessory hurled anti-Muslim abuse outside last month’s protest meeting. Pigs heads were thrust onto stakes suspending the Australian flag on the site of the proposed school the previous month and last week a car full of men yelled racial abuse and swore at a Muslim woman being interviewed by a Sun Herald journalist at the site. The woman, Jameela Ahmed, was speaking of peace – she’s planning a forum to try to educate the community about Islam and the school proposal, believing much of the opposition is based on fear and misconceptions. "We just want to educate and calm the situation," she told the Sun-Herald.

But while her attempts at building community cohesion are admirable, the President of the Camden McArthur Residents Group, Emil Sremchevich, has defended the right of Australia First - the extremist political party with white supremacist leanings - to hold a rally in Camden on Australia Day. The party was accused of fuelling the 2005 Cronulla race riots and reportedly plans to distribute anti-Muslim propaganda on Australia Day. Racist text messages calling for protests on January 26th against Muslims have already been in circulation.

While Mr Sremchevich said the group wouldn’t officially support the Australia First rally because the media would just focus on the ‘rednecks’, he told AAP Australia Day was an appropriate time for such a rally because it celebrated "what Australia's become, its democratic rights ... and freedom of speech".

Mr Sremchevich denies his opposition is motivated by prejudice but his message is clearly populist. “The majority rules, the governments are elected by the majority ... if the minority doesn't like it, bad luck” he told the Sydney Morning Herald. One can’t help but wonder if his own non-Anglo background may not have caused him to suffer as a minority.

The nationalistic zealotry fueled by former Prime Minister John Howard has made racists more brazen and Camden is a firestorm waiting to happen. Love of country is now confused with nationalism and patriotism has an ugly overtone. Scenes of beer swilling, marauding yobbos desecrating the beaches of Gallipoli on ANZAC Day are now commonplace thanks to the revival of a brand of mass-produced, ignorant, misplaced patriotism. The mob violence in Cronulla tapped into this phenomenon and confronted Australia with its racist underbelly while demonstrating the threat posed to social cohesion by large groups of stupid, loosely organised people exposed to the right triggers for violence.

What happened to Australian identity being expressed in terms of multiculturalism, tolerance and a fair go for all? The xenophobic alternative is an ugly badge I can’t stand seeing my country wear.

The traditional Australia Day fireworks display risks becoming a powder keg in Camden and the opportunities for protective community building in that town are fast running out.    [read more]

It’s been another bad news start to a new year. The aftermath of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan; the bloodbath that continues following a flawed election in Kenya; the deadly quagmire that is Iraq…

It would be easy to become overwhelmed by the human suffering and environmental devastation that comprise so much of our daily news consumption. And sometimes I do feel like shutting the door on the world and retreating into my imagination. But the stuff of life propels me and I’m determined to seek out love and beauty beneath the deep surface cracks of my existence and the world I inhabit.

I’m inspired by resilient people who persevere in the face of hardship. Some of these characters inhabit the subtext of the stories in our news feeds. Among them are the ones who risk their lives for peace and democracy. But I also find inspiration among my students, my friends and family.

Scratch the surface of any life and you’ll encounter suffering. But it’s hope and survival that really interest me. In my own life, I’ve just escaped a decade in which my husband was twice diagnosed with a life-threatening form of cancer and underwent horrendous treatment regimes; I broke my back, watched my ABC career disintegrate and spent years in court fighting an Australian corporate giant while the prospect of bankruptcy loomed; and I lost three babies to miscarriage among the usual twists and turns of life.

Through the negative news filter this story – my story - is a one dimensional, utterly depressing tale. But there’s another angle. I am still here and I’m still laughing and crying and loving and fighting to suck all the joy and experience I can from life. Yes, there were dark patches where the days were as negative as the headlines but there was also friendship and the warmth of the sun on my sore back and sunsets viewed from my front porch with kangaroos in the foreground and birdsong in the air. There were travels as well as travails…sublime moments nestled between the sadness and the suffering.

I was proud to find I had the inner strength and tenacity to survive these experiences and now I’m starting to thrive again. But I marvel at others around me who live full lives in the face of daily struggles where hope for a different outcome is just not realistic.

Witness my sister: the very model of a superwoman. She has two jobs, a husband and two beautiful children, one of whom suffers from an extremely rare genetic kidney disease called Nephrogenic Diabetes Insipidus (NDI). My 3-year-old nephew, Liam, was hospitalised at 12 weeks of age, close to death and with a multitude of symptoms that baffled myriad specialists until he received the dubious honour of being named a boy with NDI - one in four million. This disease - that threatens Liam's life and slows his development - has my sister rising at least three times a night to change her son’s bed-sheets and administer four different drugs.

My sister and her kids stayed with me this week and whenever I witness the burden of the disease first-hand, my astonishment at her extraordinary coping and life-management skills is renewed. Liam is a gorgeous boy, who is thriving despite his illness, and he brings her joy but there is real hardship in caring for him. She is nurse, mother, executive producer, counsellor, sister, friend, wife, salesperson and household chair of the board rolled into one beautiful package. Her perseverance, determination, stamina and strength in the face of this disease inspire me. Love drives her and defines her.

Every story has its inspirational characters and positive angle. I encourage you to look beneath the headlines of your life and the lives of others; to expose what’s rich and beautiful; to follow unexpected paths; to take a risk; to abandon your fear of love. There will be dark and painful days in the year ahead but survival is in waking up and embracing the bright days.

My motto for 2008 is tried and true: Carpe Diem (seize the day)!    [read more]

My kingdom for an ironing man.

I have a pile of ironing that reaches for the ceiling in my spare room. Much to my Mother-In-Law’s chagrin, I instituted an 'iron-as-you-wear' policy when I moved in with my partner. That was over 18 years ago.

So, when two male detractors lodged a blatantly sexist protest against Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign today with placards bearing the slogan “Iron My Shirt”, their efforts seemed amusingly anachronistic.

Did they really believe their slogan? Maybe they did. It’s clear dinosaurs still walk the earth - the glass ceiling remains intact in many workplaces, rape is still a powerful weapon on the streets and international battlefields and domestic abuse (physical, psychological, economic and sexual) continues to be a blight on society that breaks through racial and class barriers.

But the protesters taking a stand against Senator Clinton on the eve of her uphill struggle to win the New Hampshire primary - considered a vital victory in the race for Democratic nomination - may have been seeking just to 'rattle her cage' in an effort to force a 'typically female' emotional reaction of the kind voters would find unseemly in a future president.

God forbid a national leader display heart, fragility, passion and wrinkles along with intellect, will and legislative prowess. “Ah, the remnants of sexism - alive and well," Senator Clinton told the applauding crowd at the New Hampshire rally where the men in search of well-pressed shirts attempted to disrupt proceedings.

Is it just me or is a man who indicates to the world that he’s not capable of ironing his own clothes actually screaming “Help! I’m impotent”? It really is laughable that some men (and possibly some women affronted by those of us who forcefully thrust in the direction of the ubiquitous glass ceiling) think a woman isn’t capable of leading a country in the 21st century.

Much of the political analysis surrounding the Democratic Party nomination process pits a man, Barack Obama, seeking to be the first black president, against a woman aiming to be the first female calling the shots in the White House. So goes the theory, Americans are less scared of a black man with a Muslim background than a white woman. This may be a shallow analysis – Obama’s youth and anti-establishment credentials (in contrast with Hillary’s connections to the power elite and the tarnish on the office left by her husband Bill Clinton's terms as President) might be the real source of the groundswell which looks increasingly likely to secure him the Democrats’ top billing. But the media's assessment of Senator Clinton’s potential success or failure as being inextricably linked to her gender, highlights the steep path women seeking election to the highest office still have to tread – Margaret Thatcher and Helen Clark's victories notwithstanding.

I’m personally having a tough time trying to decide who I prefer. I’m cheering for Hillary Clinton as she attempts to smash the West Wing’s glass ceiling but I’m also barracking for Obama (bad pun intended, sorry!) because of the change he represents politically along with his enthusiasm and youthful appeal…I also suspect he’s capable of ironing his own shirts.

I realise this is a revelation that will open me up to accusations of political naiveté but I long for the day when a black woman can run for the Presidency or seek election as Australia’s Prime Minister without race and/or gender being the main discourses in the debate surrounding her leadership potential...and on that day a white man would be proud to iron her blouse.

*THUD* That was the sound of me crashing back to earth.

UPDATE: So Hillary Clinton is being dubbed the Comeback Kid 2 (a sequel to Bill's performance in 1992)after embarrassing the pollsters and defeating Barack Obama in the New Hampshire Primary.

She has attributed the victory to her emotional vulnerability - she was seen close to tears in an exchange with a voter on the eve of the poll. Some say this was manufactured but it was a display of vulnerability that clearly resonated with voters used to seeing her portrayed as cold, calculating and emotionally disengaged.

Others have assessed her win as a product of Feminism - the 'sisterhood' came out in force to vote, they say. I suspect the boys with the placards and an ironing disability may have contributed to any such backlash. Some may suggest they were plants.

But whichever way you examine this result, the race for the Democratic nomination is now genuinely close and exciting. Let's hope this leads to the prioritisation of substance over spin, wit over waffle and sharp over shallow media analysis.

   [read more]

A young friend told me this week she thought I needed to raise my ‘freak flag’ higher.

This followed her initiation of a discussion on my Facebook wall about the sex appeal of men in women’s underwear. Her view: “Seriously, what is not totally lust-worthy about boys in girls’ clothes?” My perspective: “Nope, 'fraid I can't say men in heels and women's clothes really ‘do it’ for me”. I agreed to visualise a swoon-worthy guy in a pair of lacy 'panties' to challenge my prudishness but it was to no avail. “Experiment undertaken; results in. And, nope, still not ‘doing it’ for me. More a dampener than a tingle-inducer for moi, I'm afraid!” I wrote on my FB wall.

The sexual bravado of some of my young female friends and students regularly makes me blush. Their frank and pragmatic approach to sex and their eagerness to discuss their experimentation with one another does make me feel like an inexperienced prude at times.

Their openness may be a product of the Sex and the City generation or a sign that women have begun to appropriate the casual attitude to sex they long criticised men for possessing. I’ve admired their confidence but also wondered what regrets may flow from such rampant sexual activity largely disconnected, they argue, from emotional involvement.

But perhaps this isn’t a new phenomenon. Hey, I come from a long line of sexually repressed women! My mother is deeply religious and conservative (some may call her a bona fide prude but I wouldn’t because she may actually one day figure out how to connect to the internet and find this blog :). Her mother is Presbyterian. Read for: we didn’t discuss politics or religion at the dinner table and nobody ever mentioned sex…ever!

Case in point: my grandmother recently argued with me about a little sexual innuendo I playfully accused her of. She said of Colin Firth, with a cheeky smile on her face, “He can put his shoes under my bed any day!” “Ooh Granny” I said, “Did you just intimate you wanted to sleep with Mr Darcy?” (Confession: I’m a big fan of Firth in sodden white shirts and riding breeches… swoon!). She was shocked – “No of course not, I just meant that he’d be welcome to put his shoes under my bed”, she said emphatically. “But that’s what that saying means, Granny – why else would he be taking his shoes off and putting them under your bed?” I asked. Her retort signalled the conversation was over: “Well not in my day it didn’t!” Her day is in the distant past. She’s 89.

She certainly would be embarrassed by her granddaughter’s recent behaviour. In the grip of an uncharacteristic man-hating moment, inspired by the misogynistic backlash against my Crikey story on the up-skirting of Maxine McKew, I drove into a city shopping car park with Lucinda Williams’ song ‘Come On’ blaring on my car stereo. I was in full voice: “You think you're in hot demand but you don't know where to put your hand. Let me tell you where you stand, you didn't even make me, come on!” Then, without thinking or altering the volume, I lowered the window to collect the parking ticket. As I pressed the button to deliver the ticket, an elderly couple walked right past my window with their shopping trolley and Lucinda screeched “All you do is talk the talk. You can't back it up with your walk. You can't light my fire so f**k offfff”. My frantic efforts to mute the sound failed and the look of shock on their faces made me worry about the state of their cardiac health as the song continued “…You didn't even make me, come on!”

But my inner prude was in play again today. I went grocery shopping on my way home from work and decided to buy some condoms while in the pharmaceuticals aisle. I don’t know if I’ve ever shopped alone for condoms before…I’ve been married for a really long time! But my current desire to avoid pregnancy in the aftermath of a recent miscarriage has made me determined to take every precaution. So, there I was, competing with teenage couples and male shoppers for access to the plastic-wrapped boxes and I have to confess I was overwhelmed with embarrassment. I felt like people were judging me… “She’s clearly not adventurous enough for the pink, flavoured ones (gag) or the ones with the accompanying pyrotechnics display (whiz bang)”, I imagined them thinking.

When I got to the checkout, I found myself burying the condom boxes (yes, that’s plural folks. I couldn’t decide which ones to buy – too much pressure!) beneath the cereal and meat. This was a mistake. When the shy young Pakistani man on the checkout excavated the boxes there was genuine shock on his face. He was totally unprepared for what he found and clearly very embarrassed. He stared at the boxes for a few seconds, presumably trying to decide whether or not to pick them up. I’d been feigning nonchalance up until that point but the humour of the situation finally broke through the embarrassment and I laughed out loud. He continued to swipe items like nothing had happened.

Part of my recent personal revival has been a sexual re-awakening – learning (again) to appreciate my sensuality and appeal after so many years of feeling undesirable. So, it was surprising to be confronted with my embarrassment about something as straight forward as buying condoms. But this once demure woman is comin’ out of her shell. I’ve been re-reading Anais Nin and I’m even writing about sex…at the dining table – shock, horror!

I also posted a rather alluring (if I do say so myself) Facebook photo this week eliciting this wall post from the young friend who couldn’t fathom my lack of attraction to men in heels and women’s undies: “You saucy bint - look at that new profile picture!” I think my freak flag must be on the rise - ever so slightly ;)

Postscript: I've been thinking some more about these issues and their interaction with Third Wave Feminism since posting last night and I read an article which neatly illustrates some of the underlying themes. The author, Deborah Siegel writes:

"What is liberating to one generation is oppressive to the next. This year, modesty champion Wendy Shalit, author of the new book Girls Gone Mild, blames the “third-wave feminist establishment” for carrying their sexual revolution too far. Shalit maintains that third-wave feminists, among other forces, have conditioned young women to become sluts.

Many of the self-described third- wave writers and leaders I interviewed for my book, Sisterhood Interrupted: From Radical Women to Grrls Gone Wild, take issue with the notion that free love and a stripping pole in every living room were all they set out to achieve. Third-wave feminists have been hard at work. In the United States, for instance, they have founded organisations and launched projects such as the Young Women’s Project, the Third Wave Foundation, the Younger Women’s Task Force and the Real Hot 100. In the United Kingdom they have created alternative media -- six new feminist publications launched in the past 18 months.

Feminists are blogging about the same searing questions that women have been asking for years: are women equal? If not, why not? And feminism’s daughters are asking a new question, too -- what does it mean for women to be powerful? For an unimaginative few, power meant sexual power and stopped there. But for the majority of feminism’s young reinventors, sex is not the only issue, and power continues to mean parity across political, economic, social and domestic realms. They are third wavers. Hear them roar." Read the full article here.    [read more]

So, what are you doing for New Year's Eve?

I’m heading out to a party but I’m also thinking about a journalist whose courage and fearless reporting of South Africa’s evil apartheid regime helped change history and had a formative impact on my journalism.

30 years ago tonight crusading editor, Donald Woods, made a daring escape from South Africa after being banned from writing, speaking publicly and moving freely. Woods' banning followed his campaigning journalism in the wake of the brutal murder of his friend, the Black Consciousness leader, Steve Biko.

Assuming the identity of a Catholic priest, he fled across the border into the kingdom of Lesotho. He used the cover of New Year’s Eve frivolity to avoid detection and his escape was aided by the Australian diplomat, Bruce Haigh.

In his grasp was a manuscript about Biko's murder, secretly penned during his banning. It included post-mortem photos indicating Biko had been beaten to death while in custody. Woods lived in exile in the UK where he continued to write and campaign against apartheid. His activism and pursuit of Steve Biko's killers helped mobilise international opposition to apartheid.

Woods' courage and his story (which was turned into the excellent film, 'Cry Freedom') inspired my journalism and my belief that journalists can't always be simply bystanders to history.

So, when I raise my glass tonight, I'll think of Donald Woods and draw inspiration from his story as I contemplate the year ahead.

On a lighter note, I’ll also toast the bravado of the Sri Lankan journalists who last week detained a government minister after he stormed their TV station, angry about the newsroom’s decision not to cover one of his speeches.

According to the BBC, angry journalists at Rupavahini TV locked up the Labour Minister, Mervyn Silva, after one of his aides allegedly assaulted the News Director.

They shut him in an office, telling him he would not be released until he apologised for the assault. Mr Silva was splattered with red paint before he was eventually “rescued” by commandos.

Let this be a lesson to all Governments who believe journalists should be propagandists and public broadcasters should be servants of the 'state'. And to doctors of spin: beware the journalists' revenge!

Finally, I'll laugh heartily at the irony of the claim from Australia's shadow Justice Spokesman Christopher Pyne that the Federal Government is engaging in the suppression of free speech in the David Hicks case. In the aftermath of Hicks' release from prison at the weekend, Pyne accused the AFP of spiriting Hicks out of the limelight when the prison doors opened, denying journalists their right to pursue the story. "The last time I looked, there was a free press in this country and there shouldn't be a government action taken to prevent the media doing their job" he told The Australian.

Too funny, Chris! Wasn't it your Coalition Government that ensured Hicks was locked up for five years without trial in Guantanamo Bay and which supported an unenforceable gag order imposed by the US specifically banning him from speaking to the media? But you want us to take you seriously when you say the new Labor Government, in cahoots with the AFP, is undermining freedom of speech and the independence of the media? Thanks, I needed a good belly laugh and that little gag will keep me chuckling all the way into 2008.

UPDATE: The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has revealed 2007 was a deadly year for reporters with 171 killed in the course of their work.

134 of the dead journalists were murdered or killed violently with one third of all the deaths occurring in Iraq.

Raise your glass for them too and toast the much maligned profession which at its heart sees workers risking their lives on a daily basis to bring us the news others would prefer we didn't hear.    [read more]

For me this has been a year of victories and losses…exhilarating highs and devastating lows.

My individual experiences have in some ways paralleled Australia’s year of upheaval and revival. Personally, I won a fiercely contested, long running legal case in the ACT Supreme Court against a corporate bastard. On a national scale, Kevin Rudd won government in a landslide victory against our former Prime Minister John Howard - who also lost his seat to respected former ABC journalist, Maxine McKew.

I haven’t written about my personal battle before but I think it’s time I did. So, I’ll begin here…at the end of the story. The end of the story is the place I have to start because the injury, its consequences and the trauma inflicted by the seven year legal fight are still too raw for me to unearth.

My case for damages against Kosciusko Thredbo Pty Ltd (KT) was brought after I seriously injured my back when I slipped on a ramp at the ski resort while covering the 1997 landslide disaster for the ABC. I crushed a vertebrae when I fell on that ramp, which was found to be in breach of planning and building regulations, with a gradient at least three times steeper than legally allowed. Ultimately, my fall also crushed my career aspirations as a political journalist and wannabe foreign correspondent. As a result of my fall I was “medically terminated” (an appalling descriptor for an action that amounted to being dismissed on medical grounds without benefits) by the ABC and I was left with chronic, life-long back pain.

In February, the Master of the ACT Supreme Court, David Harper, handed down a million dollar plus judgement in my favour – after deliberating for seven months. It was the second time he’d delivered judgement in my case. The first time – in 2004 – he found against me on a technicality. That judgement took him 11 months to hand down and it threatened to bankrupt me as KT announced its determination to pursue legal costs, estimated at over $1m. With nothing to lose, I appealed and won before the ACT Appeals Court which, acknowledging the appearance of a potential miscarriage of justice, recommended the case be returned to the Supreme Court to allow further evidence to be heard on the issue of building regulations. Next, KT took the case to the High Court, continuing their strategy of delaying the legal process step-by-step, but they failed to secure Leave To Appeal.

The company again threatened to appeal all the way to the High Court after Master Harper delivered his final judgement but eventually settled the case in March this year – although they threatened to rescind the settlement after I told my story to the Sydney Morning Herald (the story and my reaction to it will be the subject of a future post). By May the cheque had cleared but a millionaire I was not – despite media inferences and the assumptions of others! Once legal, medical and rehabilitation debts were repaid as required, I was left with just enough money to make a significant dent on my mortgage, allowing me some insurance against the costs of my future medical needs.

But while the verdict failed to enrich me, the relief was overwhelming – as was the knowledge that the Commonwealth insurer, Comcare, was out of my life for good. This agency makes Centrelink look benevolent.

So the champagne corks were popped and joy eventually supplanted the disbelief. For this I am extremely grateful to my legal team who offered support as well as legal advice and worked tirelessly for victory and justice on my behalf. Their ongoing friendship is the highlight of my legal struggle.

In June, my partner and I took off for Europe via Singapore – a timely journey of celebration mixed with enriching intellectual engagement and professional development for me. I attended four international academic conferences and made presentations at two of them on my PhD research into the news media’s coverage of Muslim women.

A highlight of these experiences was making some wonderful new friends – one of them, who inspired a personal revival, also encouraged me to start this blog which has, in turn, led to a journalistic resurgence. Two others I sailed the Amsterdam canals with during a conference dinner none of the other diners will forget - thanks to our raucous laughter and uncensored Australian political commentary which was heavily influenced by the fruits of European vineyards. They’ve now become colleagues on projects revolving around Multicultural reporting. Serendipitous synchronicity!

But one of the year’s devastating losses interfered with this joy and destroyed one of the highs. In Europe I discovered I was pregnant but on the flight home I started to miscarry. My partner and I felt the loss acutely – it was my third consecutive miscarriage. I’m a frenetic coper – thanks to myriad life crises which turned me into a fighter and a survivor – so my recovery (as much as you can recover from such experiences) was relatively swift. And it was aided by a productive bout of ‘workaholism’, some valued relationships and sabbatical from my lecturing duties at the University of Canberra.

I've also found professional purpose and meaning in my new career as a journalism academic. My students inspire me and my research expands my mind. Perhaps, in time, I'll come to see my fall as the necessary stumble that set me on this new path of discovery. Or perhaps it will just fade into the background as the discourses of the story shift to perseverance, survival, triumph and renewal.

I liken my year to trampolining – up, down, up, down, somersault, up, down, up, down, back-flip, up, down, up, down, star-jump, up...you get the picture. But that’s life isn’t it? The lows ground you and offer perspective, the highs keep you jumping and shooting for the stars.

For 2008 my hopes are for personal enrichment – not material but emotional, intellectual and spiritual. I need to continue my recovery from the trauma of the past decade and focus on the future; seizing opportunities and celebrating life, friendship and love. For my family and friends I wish for the fulfillment of their hearts’ desires. For you, I hope for peace and happiness. For my country, that new leadership translates to more heart in government. And, for the world…that it survives humanity and man’s inhumanity to man.

But wherever you are, whoever you're with, whatever you're drinking, raise your glass on New Year's Eve and toast life - the highs, lows; laughter, tears; loves, losses...all of which enrich our existence.    [read more]

Hello J-Scribers, I'm taking a short break over Christmas but I'll be back raising Hell and exposing myself to more ridicule by New Year's Eve!

Meantime, have a fabulous festive season, don't drink and drive and be sure to stand under the mistletoe for long enough to attract the attention of a smoocher! :)

Best wishes for a happy and healthy 2008!    [read more]

Angry scenes from outside a community meeting in Camden last night evoked frightening memories of the Cronulla Riots for many Muslim Australians.

Nearly 800 people turned up to the meeting called to protest plans for an Islamic school in the semi-rural town on Sydney’s outskirts. Police turned away around 100 people when the community hall where the meeting was staged became over-crowded.

Outside the Hall, young people draped in Australian flags, sported clothing and placards adorned with anti-Muslim slogans, chanted “Aussie, Aussie, Oi, Oi, Oi” and yelled racial abuse. One yobbo was caught on film threatening any Muslim who fronted with physical violence. This follows a recent hate crime at the site of the planned school involving the suspension of a pig's head between two stakes.

The school, which is proposed to accommodate 1200 students, would sit adjacent to an existing public school but it is being opposed on racial, religious and planning grounds by local residents. Over 2500 submissions have been made to the council with only 600 in support of the Islamic school proposal.

Inside the hall, NSW MLA, Rev. Fred Nile, was the keynote speaker at the meeting. He claimed Islamic schools were breeding grounds for terrorists. Fred Nile quoted from the Koran to justify his anti-Muslim stance. If he’d consulted his Bible and considered the example of Jesus who preached tolerance towards minorities he may have been able to represent a genuinely Christian perspective on the issue.

Nile’s Christian Democratic Party (CDP) campaigned against Muslim immigration at the Federal Election and is opposing both the Camden school proposal and one planned for Bass Hill. The Party’s number one NSW Senate candidate, Pastor Paul Green, ran on a platform of “No More Muslims, No More Mosques” and appeared in election propaganda wearing a tuxedo and bow tie. He preached disdain towards Muslims (bordering at times on hate-speech)on the campaign trail: “Every vote for the Christian Democratic Party is a vote for a ten year moratorium on Muslim immigration. And as a Senator I’ll be asking every Council in Australia to refuse all applications for new mosques until a Christian Church can legally be built in Saudi Arabia. Then Australian Muslims can have one mosque for every Christian Church built in Saudi Arabia." Neat argument – apply the standards of democracy practiced by Saudi Arabia. I thought Christianity had moved on from the principle of an “eye for an eye”?

Another NSW upper house MP, Liberal Charlie Lynn, also voiced his opposition to the proposal at the meeting – on planning grounds. This is the line which was also adopted by the Labor Party candidate for the seat with Kevin Rudd’s support during the election campaign.

Islamic groups - who were not invited to put their case to the meeting - said the tenor of the gathering and the political contributions were disappointing and irrational. The Quranic Society, which is behind the school proposal, told the ABC they just want to build a school for their children like a Catholic or Jewish school.

Tonight, members of the Community Relations Commission, the Police and the Camden Mayor have met in the town in an effort to ease community tension following the meeting.

This issue is a powder-keg. It highlights the racist undercurrent empowered by the dog-whistling of the Howard Government and the hate-speak of people like Pauline Hanson and the CDP. The result is a dangerous, racially driven mob mentality which has already crossed over into physical violence once at Cronulla.

History shows us powerful examples of the manifestation of racist mob violence fed by fear. In another time and place - Germany circa 1938 - Jewish people endured a night of horror called Kristallnacht (crystal night) which involved hordes of racists smashing thousands of Jewish shopkeepers’ windows and ransacking their homes. There are scary parallels between the rise of anti-Semitism in 1930’s Germany and the post-September 11th development of Islamophobia.

As I’ve argued before, Kevin Rudd must tackle Islamophobia head on and engage Australian Muslims in meaningful, cross-cultural bridge building exercises which he can drag the rest of Australia along with – kicking and screaming if need be. Failure to provide such national leadership will simply encourage racism to thrive and fuel the potential for hate-crimes and mob violence on the scale of Cronulla or worse.    [read more]

Hilary Clinton has been reduced to wrinkles in a pants suit. Maxine McKew's skirt is centre stage. What's the show called? "Misogyny in Da House".

I've considered starving the issue - negative media representation of women in politics - of oxygen but this is a problem that clearly needs further public airing.

Why? Because when a woman of Hilary Clinton's character, experience and intelligence is deemed unfit for the White House because of perceptions the voting public will be turned off by the prospect of watching a woman age before their eyes, it sends a message to the world that feminism is still several battles from winning the gender equality war. And, because far too many men just don't get it.

Lest I be accused of being a reactionary man-hater (again!), I say this from the perspective of a feminist woman who is actually rather fond of men. I also have evidence - in the form of a sexist backlash against my Crikey! story from earlier this week on the Canberra Times' attempt to diminish Maxine McKew's defeat of John Howard via a demeaning front page photograph selected unapologetically by Editor, Mark Baker.

My story about the fiasco attracted a significant number of comments on
Crikey! and a similar number of responses via my blog. Then
there were the emails...many of them were personalised, misogynistic rants that displayed the most extraordinary ignorance. At Crikey, where 30 comments were posted, over 60% of respondents were men. The vast bulk of identifiably male responses took issue with my critique of the Canberra Times' decision to run the tasteless "up-the-skirt shot" of Maxine McKew. At my own blog, while most of the respondents were men, their reactions were almost evenly split along positive/negative lines. But those expressing distaste for my opinion mounted similarly misogynistic arguments.

Some comments were so sexist they were laughable - like this one from Kevin Charles Herbert: "Julie Posetti is showing signs of her damage at the hands of the Catholic eduction system. I commend Mark Baker for not backing down to the hairy chested feminists who exist in every newsroom". (Note to Kevin: I went to public school and I don't need to wax my chest!)

And others’ like Tom Mclaughlin, helped argue my case: “I kno (sic) this is dangerous turf, and yes sexist photo, but here's the thing: Sexy tv presenter does not a serious public policy talent make”. This was my point: McKew was being judged by the Canberra Times in the context of her appearance and sex appeal as being unworthy of the sort of respect afforded to male politicians.

More seethe-worthy was the assertion from a number of male respondents that women offended by the Canberra Times' treatment of Maxine McKew were whinging about nothing and that her choice of clothing was the real problem - that is, she "asked for it". (Uncovered meat comparison anyone?).Take for example this comment from David: "Maxine sexualised herself with her choice of dress. Why should only male politicians should (sic) have a dress code?" On my blog, David was on about pants suits again: “…the effort of people like Julia Gillard and her modest pantsuits should be applauded for giving government the respect it deserves.” This “a lady should wear a nice demure pants suit” argument is amusingly ironic. Who’s wearing the pants in this story? What’s their point? That it really is a man’s world and the only way a woman can be taken seriously in public life is to adopt a male dress code?

Another correspondent, Rob Garnett underlined the problem when he asked of my story “What is this woman going on about. Maxine has been made a parly sec, Julia's the deputy leader, we have a female health minister and Penny Wong is on the world stage. Get some perspective.” Er, that was my perspective, Rob – all that womanly achievement and yet media representation that sexualises and objectifies women continues to undermine their status in comparison to men.

Meanwhile, as the media's commentary on Hilary's pants suits (a discourse which has distracted from coverage of her policies and intellectual gravitas) has proved, even women politicians who wear pants can't escape gender bias in the media.

This was a point echoed by a Queensland correspondent to my blog "...so outraged by Maxine's photo being published I can barely type...women politicians in Queensland are often described in the press in terms of their shoes...Hilary's pant suits have featured in the last four articles I've read on her campaign. My five year old daughter just doesn't get it and asks why they don't put photos of men's shoes in the paper?"

This is not a “pseudo-controversy” and I (like many other women who were equally offended) will not simply “get over it”. As Crikey reader MA Smith (gender unknown) commented, “The issue is not just her underwear. It's how a woman is portrayed on the front page when she has just taken on the most powerful man in the country, and won. As an aggressive whore.”

I wonder if this rampant sexism is another product of the Howard assault on respect for difference derided as "political correctness" by the former PM? Newsflash guys: feminism is no longer a dirty word! And, thankfully, this is a view shared by many men. Take, for example, the perspective of Crikey reader Malcolm Thurston: "I totally concur with Julie. Baker was caught out. His pathetic excuse in the Canberra Times,was exposed for what it was, when an appropriate photo of the same event appeared on p2 of the same days SMH,by the same photographer.The 'Times photo was crude".

But the most encouraging reaction came from a young male Canberra journalist who wrote to me "My two bob in - as a young male, I can easily recognise when someone has a dirty mind. The CT editor is one of them. ...It's frankly embarrassing to see editorial decisions like that being made. In a time where women are gaining more control in the newsroom, there needs to be a level of respect that news organisations have to abide by. XY reporter for the CT, echoed your sentiments...My news editor XX was spitting chips as well.”

When I watched my 3rd year students graduate from their journalism course this week at the University of Canberra I was struck once again by the gender shift among the ranks of junior reporters. Relevantly, I'm regularly asked by News Editors for the names of successful male students because their newsrooms are already "female dominated". But while the ranks of women journalists have swollen dramatically over the past 20 years, most editorial management and senior reporting positions are still occupied by men. Newsrooms remain sexist workplaces (something female Channel 9 reporters subjected to John Westacott's 'f**kability index' could testify to) and women journalists make life choices to avoid being crushed by the glass ceiling on a daily basis. But we shouldn't have to wait for equality in newsrooms for women to be reported equally by the media.

Men are just as capable of understanding the consequences of female subjugation and stereotyping as they are of appreciating racist representation of black men from a white male perspective. But they have to want to remove their blinkers.

Note: A version of this story was first published at Crikey!    [read more]

Australia’s Channel 7 has banned its staff from ‘Facebooking’, blocking their access to the popular social networking site via a central firewall. What a short-sighted, anachronistic means of attempting to boost productivity in a business that revolves around journalism and entertainment.

Web 2.0 platforms like blogging, YouTube and Facebook are not just time-wasting distractions from the business of media, they are also increasingly important research tools for journalists.

I note Channel 7 isn’t attempting to block access to YouTube – they obviously appreciate that web 2.0 platform as a source of news and vision from citizen journalists. So, why ban Facebook? It offers members the opportunity to send video, post links and provide tips to journalists in a more targeted way than YouTube. Did they originally consider banning journalists from access to email – the pre-cursor to Facebook?

From a reporter’s perspective, social media sites like Facebook are the new version of the indispensable contact book – supplementing the telephone book as a tool for locating sources. As a 7 news worker told the Daily Telegraph, the ban is counter-productive: "It's annoying for people like us who actually need to use it for work - seriously, we use it for research, trying to locate people and that sort of thing… It's not like we're sitting there poking or sending virtual cocktails." Indeed!

Consider the role Facebook played in coverage of the recent Federal Election. Politicians' FB pages became the source of stories – stories about their engagement (or lack thereof) with young voters, their popularity (Kevin Rudd kept having to create replica pages so he could add more FB friends…John Howard kept his page private because he had hardly any) and their capacity to interact with new technology. In short, their FB status became a metaphor for their social relevance.

And, as the US election approaches, Facebook is actually becoming another platform for media outlets to reach new audiences as newspapers and broadcasters struggle to keep pace with online media. ABC America not only allows its reporters to use Facebook at work its actually formed a ground-breaking partnership with FB to provide election coverage on the site. Reporters have been given their own pages to allow them to interact with audiences and a specific ABC-FB group, “US Politics”, has been established which effectively creates a mini, network-based, themed news-site on the platform allowing FB users to track coverage and participate in debate around the issues along with the reporting of them. So, ABC reporters may now find themselves adding ‘Facebook correspondent’ to their other roles as filers of traditional TV news stories and providers of text, audio, video and multimedia productions to the network’s online output. Watch that space – it’s a trend that’s likely to spread to these shores.

Meantime, Australian journalists also use the site for networking and debate with colleagues within their news organisation and from other media outlets. It provides an online version of the ‘pub debate’ model of reflexive practice that allows reporters to debrief, analyse and critique each others' work - a healthy professional practice which should be encouraged, not stifled. Employers should also consider the potential Occupational Health and Safety benefits of Facebook for journalists. It could, for example, serve a useful purpose in trauma-related recovery as journalists exposed to horrific events in their daily work find a safe space to discuss their feelings and experiences.

The other point for Channel 7 to consider relates to the role of Facebook as a marketing tool. It’s a virtual popularity index for individual members and is increasingly used by advertisers, celebrities and organisations to promote their products and causes. Seven’s celebrities and the programs in which they star are already featured on Facebook and there’s been an angry reaction from the network’s stable of stars to the FB blockade.

Someone needs to tell the bean counters at 7 Network headquarters that they’re peddling a false economy. Maybe they need a good trout-slapping via ‘superpoke’?

Declaration: I'm a certified Facebook addict and any attempt by the University of Canberra to block my access will be met with fierce opposition involving 'poking' with a blunt stick.    [read more]

It was an extraordinary week for women in Australian politics.

On the one hand, Julia Gillard became Australia’s first female Prime Minister – albeit in an acting capacity while Kevin Rudd was at the Bali Climate conference. But as she told the Sydney Morning Herald "I think if there's one girl who looks at the TV screen over the the next few days and says 'I might like to do that in the future', well that's a good thing."

On the other hand, newly elected Labor MP, Maxine McKew - the woman who ousted former Prime Minister John Howard from his seat - was publicly humiliated by the Canberra Times’ decision to publish a revealing front-page photo of her which evoked Sharon Stones’ performance in Basic Instinct.

The photo opportunity was the official Australian Electoral Commission declaration of McKew’s victory in Bennelong. There she sat – elegant in a fawn suit with an enormous grin on her face, giving the appearance of mocking the man she defeated as she locked eyes on the disgruntled looking Howard whose body language highlighted his humiliation. The images seemed to sum-up the election aftermath. But one photo taken from a questionable angle stole the show. Taken front-on, apparently at the height of the seated McKew’s skirt (i.e. from perve’s eye view), the photograph appeared at first glance to suggest McKew was fond of going both ‘Brazilian’ and ‘commando’.

Most of the national print media ran an alternative tasteful, evocative photo taken by the same photographer while The Age ran the offending shot but cropped it above skirt-level. The Canberra Times, however, chose instead to run the sexist, demeaning shot, uncropped in a full frontal assault on its readership. What was the Editor, Mark Baker, thinking? Was it the day of the CT Christmas party? Did he join the darkroom boys in a few filthy jokes and agree to indulge in a ‘Chaser-style prank’? The joke was on him. Talk-back sessions on Canberra ABC station, Triple 6, were flooded by callers complaining about the photograph and the newspaper was inundated by Letters to the Editor – 11 of which were published yesterday under the headline “An Unflattering View of a Historical Political Moment”. Highlights included “Sharon Stone eat your heart out”, threats and promises from angry readers and advertisers to boycott the paper and this: “It looks like Maxine McKew was after the Brazilian vote." Another reader set Mark Baker a fair challenge: “Perhaps the editor could write us a learned piece on the difference between a perve using a concealed camera to film up the dress of a woman on public transport and a newspaper photographer using an unconcealed camera to try to do the same in a public place?"

While it could be reasonably argued that the photographer should have used greater discretion, the real problem is the editorial decision to run that photograph on the front page. It cannot have been unconsciously done but that’s exactly the defensive line being taken by Baker. He told AAP he maintained it was a "tremendous picture". He says it never occurred to him that readers might find it offensive. "There's nothing immodest or undignified about it”, he said. Er, nothing undignified about publishing a large colour shot looking up the skirt of a woman – the sort of photo that, if taken on a mobile phone in the CT newsroom of a female reporter, would likely result in charges of sexual harassment? Get with the program, Mark! In a memo he later sent to CT staff, he wrote: "It was not obscene. It was not voyeuristic. Those suggesting the picture shows more have vivid imaginations." Oh, so readers with filthy little minds are the problem? No, Mark, your lack of tact, discretion and respect for women is the problem.

What makes Baker’s decision to run the photo even more offensive is the fact that, redolent of misogyny, it undermined what should have been a story about female power – of a woman punching through the glass ceiling and claiming the most prized political scalp in the country. Instead, the focus shifted to the sexual exploitation of women and, once again, to the dress code of women in politics.

Until the media figures out how treat men and women in power equally, female politicians will continue to suffer the indignity of the treatment meted out to Maxine McKew – even on a day when a woman is in charge of the country.

UPDATE: J-scribe has learned a female sub-editor at the Canberra Times complained about the photo before it went to print saying she found it "offensive and wrong" but her objections were over-ruled. What would she know? She was obviously just an overly sensitive, hairy-legged feminist!(Seethe)

Below: The front page of the Canberra Times displaying the offending photo

   [read more]

It’s customary to whinge at this time of year about the hollow celebration of the birth of the central character in the Christian story…to lament the crass commercialism and the incongruous merger of a winter European-style festival and the Australian summer heat. Then there’s the family politics.

But I usually enjoy Christmas – merry-making, good food, seeing friends and family who slip through the year without crossing my path. I used to even secretly delight in the TV re-runs and the Chrissy carols. Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong’s Christmas album would play on a loop on my ipod while I decorated the house and I put loads of thought into picking just the right gift for every person.

This year, though, I just can’t get into the spirit. Not sure why. It’s like someone stole my Christmas joy. People keep sending the Grinch after me on Facebook – maybe that’s got something to do with it? Maybe I’m just getting old? Maybe it’s because it’s been a year of deep lows and uplifting highs and I’m tired from the emotional upheaval? Maybe it’s because after months of soul searching and quiet intellectual reflection while on study leave I’m in a different head and heart space to everyone around me? Maybe it’s because Christmas came early on November 24th when John Howard lost both government and his seat in parliament?

Whatever the reason – the season just aint doin’ it for me this year. The really low point came when I was lined up at the David Jones perfume counter during a hit-and-run gift-buying expedition this week. The sales assistant said to the woman in front of me: “There’s really nothing worse than not having a perfume you like”. That comment hung there, cartoon-like, in a balloon emerging from the corner of her shallow mouth. Really - nothing worse? What about not having a roof over your head or clean water to drink? Rape? Child sexual assault? War? Famine? Chronic unemployment? Cancer? I wanted to reach across the counter and slap her. Instead, I made polite conversation and bought several bottles of designer label scent to put under the tree. It was at this point I realised I’d become just another consumer sustaining the commodification of a religious festival.

Christmas began as a celebration of the birth of a Jewish baby in the poorest of circumstances, who would rise to become regarded as one of the greatest prophets of all time and who many believe was actually the Son of God. Regardless of your faith, there’s much to appreciate in the Jesus story – he was a radical political activist, a friend of the ostracised, a rebel with a cause, an advocate for the sick, poor and marginalised. He spoke of love and justice and mercy, challenged prejudice and condemned the powerful and corrupt.

We could use a champion like that in our society – a social justice campaigner who advocates – across class, cultural and economic divides - for asylum seekers; the abused; Indigenous Australians; the permanently unemployed; the sick and disadvantaged

Maybe contemplating the original meaning of the Jesus story will help me rediscover my festive season joy? I think I’ll go and try to cultivate some authentic Christmas spirit.    [read more]

This post originally appeared on New Matilda

One of the early casualties of the Howard era was journalism with bite.

At the ABC, evidence of muted reporting and self-censorship emerged quickly as Aunty was harassed by Howard’s henchmen from day one. The National Broadcaster was beaten so viciously with the ‘anti-bias’ stick its managers and editorial staff began to recoil from challenging critique and tough interviewing. A form of self-censorship — conscious and unconscious — threatened the ABC's integrity at times.

Richard Alston’s official assault on the AM program via his abuse of complaints procedures, the stacking of the ABC board with ultra-conservatives and revisionist historians, and the appointment of seriously Right-wing commentators in an effort to create the impression of balance, all contributed to timidity and a palpable reluctance to criticise the Howard Government. There were of course stand-out performances from some during the Howard era — with Lateline being the star rebel.

But Howard Government bullying of the media didn’t stop with the ABC. More recently, SBS has been in its sights. Commercial TV, radio and print operations also reflected the resultant lack of strident, opinionated journalism during an era where freedom of speech was under constant attack, government spin was on overdrive, and scandal after scandal failed to dent the Coalition’s electoral appeal. It’s not that there was a total absence of enterprising journalism during this period — ultimately, the Coalition was called to account by journalists over the Solon and Rau cases, Children Overboard, Tampa and Haneef, but the Government frequently got off lightly.

Take the media’s treatment of Howard’s justification for Australia’s involvement in the Iraq War. In a recent presentation at the Public Right to Know Conference at Sydney’s University of Technology, free speech advocate and former senior public servant Richard Mills criticised the national media for its unquestioning stance on the Weapons of Mass Destruction debate. According to Mills’ research, newspapers largely failed to link the tenuous security advice being claimed by Howard as justification for going to war to an assessment of the consequences of invasion and a longer term plan for Iraq.

One explanation for the media’s lack of censure of the Howard Government may lie in Mills’ identification of at least six well known techniques of media manipulation. He listed these as 1) Selectivity, 2) Denial of Fact, 3) Deception, 4) Fabrication, 5) Deliberate Misquoting and 6) Bland Deflection.

These trusted tools of spin-doctoring were put to very effective use on the Canberra Press Gallery which was under constant assault from Howard’s PR apparatchiks. Add to this the daily grind of journalism with its ever increasing deadlines, multiple platform reporting requirements and under-resourcing and you can further understand the diminution in quality of critique.

In the Howard years, those of us seeking serious critical analysis ironically turned to satire. In the aftermath of APEC, following the episode in which The Chaser drove a 'Trojan Horse' through the security overkill, I asked if it was the new model for Australian investigative journalism. The program is billed as comedy but at times it came close to the most confronting, critical TV journalism on offer.

The Haneef case, however, marked a turning point in the media’s attitude to the Howard Government. Finally fed up with the deception and spin, journalists seemed to put their teeth back in and used investigative skill to extract fact after fact with which they exposed the injustice, duplicity, bigotry and fallaciousness inherent in the Government’s case against the Gold Coast Doctor who’s still fighting to have his visa reinstated. This was a transforming moment in Howard Era journalism — an era which I believe required activism in combination with stringent investigative techniques and more enterprising journalism.

This is a controversial view in Western journalism because the model of Advocacy Journalism is eschewed in favour of outdated notions of objectivity which value and present arguments and perspectives equally, regardless of their validity. Is that ‘fair’ reporting?

This approach to objectivity allowed the Howard Government to beat journalists around the head with allegations of bias or a ‘lack of balance’ whenever the Coalition was critically scrutinised. This policy of media manipulation succeeded in part because journalists interpreted balanced reporting as equal measure of time and tone when democracy and social justice demanded a more strident approach. The ‘he said, she said’ model of reporting on which so many journalists rely, delivers the sort of benign societal reflection that conservative politicians would like to restrict journalists to — like a populist version of Hansard, instead of the critical analysis a healthy democracy demands of its independent media.

Those who rejected the activist, liberal model of journalism should consider the role that radical journalism played in South Africa during apartheid. In that setting, journalists who failed to critique the racist regime effectively aided and abetted the oppressors, and it wasn’t accusations of bias that stole their integrity and professional credibility. Those who toed the Government line soon found themselves confessing their sins — for helping to sustain official racism.

I’m not suggesting the pro-Howard sycophancy evident in much mainstream reporting of politics and social policy in the past 12 years equates to the succour given to the apartheid regime by weak and/or racist journalists in South Africa, but the ‘balance defence’ in response to coverage of Howard’s xenophobic politics and policies springs from the same well.

I’m advocating a model of journalism which values social justice and sees itself as a democratising force — a model informed by alternative international professional practice. I’m hoping the election of a Rudd Government will be a victory for free speech, unleashing journalism with bite in this country. We need more inspiring, brave, forthright, reflective and analytical reporting which challenges the straight-jacketed approach of the Howard years.

Update: Read this great article by Mark Davis for New Matilda for more detail on the impact of Howard's media management and his assault on Australia's public institutions    [read more]

Hands up if you think it's OK to copy someone else's work or to take credit for someone else's words? Those of you who have been to university or practiced journalism would be aware that appropriating another person's work and passing it off as your own is verboten. In fact, plagiarism is a serious academic and professional sin which has swallowed the careers of prominent journalists and Vice Chancellors alike.

That's why a story about apparent plagiarism in a popular international journalism textbook, broken in South Africa today (read original story here), is so shocking. Professor Guy Berger, the head of Rhodes University's Journalism School, has revealed tracts of the latest edition of Global Journalism (2004) have been lifted from an earlier version without alteration and attributed to other authors without acknowledgment. The cut-and-paste job has also rendered the content utterly out of date.

And rather than acknowledging the errors of their ways and issuing a public mea culpa, the book's editors (Arrie De Beer and John Merrill)and the publisher (Pearson Education) have employed the classic tools of media manipulation: stonewall,deny, deflect and threaten.

There are important lessons here for journalists, journalism academics and journalism students alike and some very worrying mixed signals about professional practice.

If a student committed such an act of plagiarism they may be expelled; if a journalist was so exposed they may find themselves unemployed. Double standards defence anyone?    [read more]

This article originally appeared on Crikey!

Kevin Rudd must make tackling the growing problem of Islamophobia in Australia a key priority in government.

After nearly 12 years of populist, race-driven politics under John Howard, racist and xenophobic Australians feel justified in vilifying minorities and believe religious bigotry is tolerable. This will be Howard’s enduring legacy - the price the country has paid for his retro-form agenda, highlighted by his war on so called "political correctness" which included appropriating Pauline Hanson’s agenda, decrying a "black-arm band view" of Indigenous history and demonising Muslim Australians, asylum
seekers and African refugees.

He also exaggerated the threat of terrorism to fuel fear of the ‘other’ and promoted anger towards law-abiding Muslim Australians for electoral gain. Think Tampa, Children Overboard, Haneef, the dishonest justification of the War in Iraq and claims African refugees couldn't "integrate".

The latent underbelly of Australian racism and nationalism tipped into public violence two years ago during the Cronulla Riots and the new Prime Minister needs to appreciate the danger of leaving Howard’s legacy unaddressed.

The vile attack on the site of a proposed Muslim School in South West Sydney, in the aftermath of Labor’s landslide win, soured the victory for tolerance and highlighted the potential for a backlash against resurgent multiculturalism by racists emboldened by the Howard years and an often complicit media. Police are continuing to investigate the incident, which involved an Australian flag being suspended between pigs heads impaled on stakes on the vacant lot in semi-rural Camden where there has been strong, organised local opposition to the school.

The new Labor government will need to show strong leadership in combating racism, particularly as it relates to Muslim communities – arguably now the most vilified group of Australians.

The seriousness of Australia’s moral decline towards official racism became starkly apparent to me during my attendance at the recent International Diversity Conference in Amsterdam. I anchored a discussion group about cultural diversity and the media and, in that forum, the distance we've fallen became patently obvious.

There were several Australians in the room and the discussion quickly turned to the coverage of multiculturalism in our country and, from there, to a critique of the political drivers behind what we agreed was increasingly narrow and racist reporting. This didn't surprise me - although there was catharsis in the shared disgust. What did unsettle me, though, were the reactions of other international contributors to the discussion. Most notably, two Afrikaner South Africans in the group. They sat with jaws open and gasped while we debated the issues. "Do you mean they've abolished multiculturalism" they asked incredulously. "Yes" the Australians answered collectively. As a young Canadian post-grad student astutely observed: "What you've told us reminds the rest of us just how quickly the gains can be lost and the clock turned back on tolerance."

Academic study undertaken during the Howard years offers further evidence of the way in which racism has become entrenched. As part of a study of media coverage of cultural diversity in which I was involved – Journalism in Multicultural Australia – research by Murdoch University concluded that:

While non-Anglo Australians are almost inevitably represented as "bad", "sad", "mad" or "other", in the current political climate, the focus of the fear has overwhelmingly been Muslim terrorism which has in turn led to a suspicion of all things Muslim. (Phillips &Tapsall, 2006)

Further, Professor Peter Manning, whose PhD research examined the print reporting of Muslims, has accused Howard era politicians of "stoking up the embers of racist hatred (in a nation) ... awash with misunderstanding about Islam". Meantime, Sydney academic, Scott Poynting argues that political opportunism and the sensationalist headlines triggered by it, led to, and gave licence to, racist attacks in shops, streets and workplaces. And, in a study drawing on his and others’ research which factored in the 2001 asylum seeker debate, the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission concluded that:

The need for action is urgent. In the current environment of fear and suspicion fostered by terrorism and the ‘war on terror’, our multicultural values of social equity and respect for diversity are at risk of diminishing.

Kevin Rudd has a chance to arrest the decline: he must take a stand for tolerance and revive multiculturalism as official policy while using his role to educate bigoted Australians out of their irrational, terror-fuelled fear of all things Islam. This is not a job he can afford to put on the back-burner – it requires immediate action and serious investment if we are to avoid another Cronulla or worse.

The lessons of "home-grown terrorism" which thrives on disaffection, ostracism and bigotry should be motivation enough.    [read more]