Placeholder Content Image

How much sport will you be able to watch for free under proposed new Australian broadcast rules?

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hunter-fujak-290599">Hunter Fujak</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-rowe-16403">David Rowe</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a></em></p> <p>Watching sport on television and other screens is integral to the <a href="https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws%3A57259">cultural lives of many Australians</a>.</p> <p>This is why, in 1995, the anti-siphoning scheme was introduced to ensure sport “<a href="http://www.tandfebooks.com/isbn/9780203758397">events of national importance and cultural significance</a>” would not be captured exclusively by pay TV at the expense of free-to-air coverage.</p> <p>There have been enormous <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780429402265-5/television-tony-bennett-modesto-gayo-david-rowe-graeme-turner">changes in television</a> since and this analogue-era legislation is increasingly out of step with the modern digital media landscape.</p> <p>Critically, under current definitions, streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon fall outside a scheme restricting subscription broadcasters like Foxtel.</p> <p>The federal government <a href="https://anthonyalbanese.com.au/media-centre/labor-will-support-local-tv-free-sport-in-the-streaming-age">promised</a> before its election in 2022 to review the anti-siphoning scheme. Its subsequent <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7132">Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023</a> is designed to close the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/streaming-platforms-will-soon-be-required-to-invest-more-in-australian-tv-and-films-which-could-be-good-news-for-our-screen-sector-198757">regulatory gap</a>” that has emerged within media law since Netflix’s launch in Australia in 2015.</p> <p>The Senate referred the bill to its Environment and Communications Legislation Committee. Its report has just been released and will help shape Australians’ access to sport media content.</p> <h2>The importance of prominence</h2> <p>“Prominence” refers to the discoverability of individual media applications, such as Netflix or 9Now, on the user homepage of smart televisions.</p> <p>The federal government is troubled by overseas services like YouTube and Amazon being immediately visible on smart televisions through commercial licensing agreements, effectively “burying” Australian free-to-air TV.</p> <p>Public service broadcaster SBS, for example, <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/anti-siphoning-prominence-laws-australia-free-to-air-tv-channels/87bc8ddd-4120-4542-864e-2c84a781411e">claimed</a> during Senate hearings that one television manufacturer demanded both a placement fee and a 15% share of revenue to feature on the television’s homepage.</p> <p>Prominence is crucial in sport because anti-siphoning legislation is based on the principle that, although in <a href="https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/finance/finance-news/2023/03/06/tv-habits-australia">general decline</a>, free-to-air TV is still the most effective, <a href="https://accan.org.au/files/Reports/ACCAN%20Research%20Snapshot%20How%20Australians%20Watch%20TV.pdf">low-cost, readily-accessed</a> vehicle for delivering premium sport to a majority of Australian households.</p> <h2>Anti-siphoning</h2> <p>While often criticised by <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/anti-siphoning-scheme-review">subscription media companies and many sports</a> as anti-competitive, anti-siphoning legislation is significantly responsible for the continued abundance of free major sport on our televisions.</p> <p>In a portent of the risks ahead, <a href="https://www.cricket.com.au/news/3807634/amazon-prime-video-secures-icc-broadcast-rights-in-australia-t20-odi-world-cup-world-test-championship-2024-27">International Cricket Council</a> World Cups will disappear from free-to-air television between 2024 and 2027, after the world governing body signed an exclusive four-year deal with streaming platform Amazon.</p> <p>The <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-boss-flies-to-us-for-talks-with-media-companies-20220425-p5ag16.html">AFL</a> also reportedly met Amazon in 2022 as part of its media rights negotiations.</p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/regardless-of-the-rules-sport-is-fleeing-free-tv-for-pay-and-it-might-be-an-avalanche-154640">Loopholes</a> in the scheme are also being increasingly exploited. This problem was exposed in 2018 when <a href="https://www.cricket.com.au/news/3296093/tvs-antisiphon-list-and-cricket-explained">Australian one-day international cricket matches</a> went behind a paywall, despite being listed as free-to-air events.</p> <p>As <a href="https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/streaming/nrl-calls-for-technologically-neutral-overhaul-to-sport-broadcasting/news-story/31fc06ab986e12c7e6f720df33d23ad1">Foxtel</a> told the Senate hearing, both Nine (Stan) and Ten (Paramount+) are now hybrid networks, able to move acquired sports from free-to-air broadcast to behind a streaming paywall.</p> <p>At present, free-to-air networks cannot be compelled to acquire the rights to any sport, broadcast them if they do, or refrain from on-selling them to a pay platform.</p> <h2>What are the implications for sport and other viewers?</h2> <p>The majority Senate report broadly supported the federal government’s existing <a href="https://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/rowland/media-release/exposure-draft-prominence-regulations-released">exposure draft</a>.</p> <p>Regarding prominence, this means free-to-air channel “tiles” will be highly visible when you turn on a new smart TV. A 12-month phased implementation of a prominence framework was recommended by the committee – and would only apply to new televisions.</p> <p>The committee also broadly accepted the draft bill’s anti-siphoning provisions, which will affect what and where sport is viewed by fans.</p> <p>First, the listed events will be expanded by 30% and incorporate more women’s and parasports. They include the AFLW and NRLW finals, NRLW State of Origin, and the Summer Paralympic Games.</p> <p>To provide counterbalancing benefits to subscription broadcasters, sport events not acquired by a free-to-air broadcaster will become more quickly available to subscription platforms (12 months before an event starts, rather than six months before). This provides subscription platforms with greater lead-in times to plan, organise and promote their content schedules.</p> <p>The most controversial recommendation related to the scope of anti-siphoning laws, affecting how Australian viewers can access sport in the medium term.</p> <p>It supported the government’s position, on grounds of excessive competitive advantage, that anti-siphoning should only apply to terrestrial broadcasting. This excludes digital rights for live streaming through broadcast video on demand apps such as 9Now, Seven+, iView and SBS On Demand.</p> <p>Commercial free-to-air broadcasters called this a “<a href="https://www.mediaweek.com.au/industry-reacts-to-prominence-and-anti-siphoning-findings/">nightmare scenario</a>”, as they <a href="https://www.freetv.com.au/access-to-local-tv-services-and-free-sport-under-threat-unless-laws-are-strengthened/">estimate</a> 50% of households will be watching TV online by 2027.</p> <p>For viewers without televisions connected to aerials, this could make major sport events on free-to-air TV unavailable. Although terrestrial TV is still the most <a href="https://intellectdiscover.com/content/journals/10.1386/jdmp_00098_1">universally available screen sport vehicle</a>, aerials are no longer routinely installed in new housing developments.</p> <p>Research by the <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/television-research">Australian Communications and Media Authority</a>, though, indicates that free-to-air network claims about disappearing TV aerials are somewhat exaggerated. Nonetheless, as modernisation was a central justification for the anti-siphoning reforms, the strategic compromise over broadcast video on demand apps will inevitably be scrutinised.</p> <p>Notably, in a dissenting minority report, the Greens were unhappy the bill did not go far enough in either prominence or anti-siphoning. They reserved their right to reject it unless suitably amended to guarantee global corporations could not capture Australian sports rights.</p> <h2>What happens next?</h2> <p>The amended bill must pass through Parliament to become law, and its final shape and the fate of any amendments are as yet unknown.</p> <p>While it is widely, though not universally, acknowledged action is needed to protect free screen sport viewing, intense disagreement remains among competing interest groups over what is to be done now and in the future.</p> <p>To safeguard their viewing interests, Australian sport fans will need to watch these formidably technical debates as closely as their favourite sport contests.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226499/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hunter-fujak-290599">Hunter Fujak</a>, Senior Lecturer in Sport Management, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-rowe-16403">David Rowe</a>, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Research, Institute for Culture and Society, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images </em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-much-sport-will-you-be-able-to-watch-for-free-under-proposed-new-australian-broadcast-rules-226499">original article</a>.</em></p>

TV

Placeholder Content Image

Dad kicked off Jetstar flight for breaking cardinal rule

<p>A dad has been kicked off a Jetstar flight after snapping a picture of his family boarding the plane from the tarmac. </p> <p>Jimmy Mitchell was with his wife Pauline and their two children as they went to board their flight from Sydney to Brisbane, where they were embarking on a cruise. </p> <p>As the family were boarding the plane from the tarmac, Jimmy quickly took a picture of his kids and his wife who were walking up the rear stairs of the plane. </p> <p>According to Jimmy, who is a seasoned traveller, he didn't hear an announcement be made that passengers were prohibited from taking photos on the tarmac because the plane was refuelling. </p> <p>He was eventually able to board the flight after being confronted by cabin crew, but described the debacle as “one of the most traumatic experiences” he’s had.</p> <p>In a viral TikTok, he alleged that while he was taking the photo, a cabin crew member called him an “idiot”. He said that when she tried to get his attention to put the device away it left him embarrassed and shocked. </p> <p>“This is the worst experience I’ve ever had flying,” he said in the clip.</p> <p>“I try and get on the plane, I take a photo of my kids as they get on the plane, in flight mode, and the lady calls me an idiot,” he said.</p> <p>After he confronted the staff member, Mr Mitchell claims he was told he won’t be allowed to board the flight.</p> <p>“I turned around in disbelief because I was half way up the stairs at this point. I basically stormed over to her and I was like, ‘Are you serious? What did you just call me?’</p> <p>“She was basically saying ‘you can’t take photos on the tarmac, you can’t take photos on the tarmac’.”</p> <p>The pair allegedly went back and forth before the father-of-two, known for his travel content, was rejected from boarding the plane. </p> <p>“If she had literally just said anything else, like ‘get off your phone’, I would have done it.”</p> <p>“Apparently, they made an announcement, but I had noise cancelling headphones, Pauline (wife) told me after the fact – I didn’t hear it, there was no notifications about it, there was no signage, no nothing."</p> <p>“All she had to do was say something constructive. ‘Get off your phone,’ ‘you can’t have your phone out’ and I would have been like ‘sorry’, but she screams across the tarmac calling me an idiot.”</p> <p>“I can see how she maybe felt I was being intimidating because I am a big guy and I am a loud guy. She turns around to me and goes ‘you almost assaulted me, get off the tarmac, you’re not getting on this plane’.”</p> <p>Mr Mitchell then walked back inside the terminal where he awaited further instructions, and was later able to board the flight “after cooler heads prevailed” but wants the airline to apologise to him and his family over the “stressful” situation.</p> <p>“The way they treated Pauline and the kids and not allowing me to communicate with them what was going on, was completely unacceptable,” he said.</p> <p>The debacle has sparked a huge debate on his TikTok and Instagram over who is in the wrong.</p> <p>“Wow … that’s insane! So sorry that happened to you!” one person wrote.</p> <p>“Take it further and don’t let them get away with what they have done,” a second person said.</p> <p>However, others were quick to comment that as a seasoned traveller, Jimmy should've been well versed in the rules of not taking photos on the tarmac.</p> <p><em>Image credits: TikTok</em></p>

Travel Trouble

Placeholder Content Image

Why do airlines charge so much for checked bags? This obscure rule helps explain why

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jay-l-zagorsky-152952">Jay L. Zagorsky</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/boston-university-898">Boston University</a></em></p> <p>Five out of the six <a href="https://www.oag.com/blog/biggest-airlines-in-the-us">biggest U.S. airlines</a> have <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/05/delta-is-the-latest-airline-to-raise-its-checked-bag-fee.html">raised their checked bag fees</a> since January 2024.</p> <p>Take American Airlines. In 2023, it cost US$30 to check a standard bag in with the airline; <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2024/02/20/american-airlines-bag-fees-mileage-earning/72669245007/">today, as of March 2024, it costs $40</a> at a U.S. airport – a whopping 33% increase.</p> <p>As a <a href="https://www.bu.edu/questrom/">business school</a> <a href="https://www.bu.edu/questrom/profile/jay-zagorsky/">professor who studies travel</a>, I’m often asked why airlines alienate their customers with baggage fees instead of bundling all charges together. <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/4/16/8431465/airlines-carry-on-bags">There are</a> <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/2023/06/21/bag-fees-will-stay-a-while-cruising-altitude/70338849007/">many reasons</a>, but an important, often overlooked cause is buried in the U.S. tax code.</p> <h2>A tax-law loophole</h2> <p>Airlines pay the federal government <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-26/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-49/subpart-D">7.5% of the ticket price</a> when <a href="https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/tax/library/aircraft-club-nov-2023-air-transport-excise-tax-rates-for-2024.html">flying people domestically, alongside other fees</a>. The airlines dislike these charges, with their <a href="https://www.airlines.org/dataset/government-imposed-taxes-on-air-transportation/">trade association arguing</a> that they boost the cost to the consumer of a typical air ticket by around one-fifth.</p> <p>However, the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-26/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-49/subpart-D/section-49.4261-8">specifically excludes baggage</a> from the 7.5% transportation tax as long as “the charge is separable from the payment for the transportation of a person and is shown in the exact amount.”</p> <p>This means if an airline charges a combined $300 to fly you and a bag round-trip within the U.S., it owes $22.50 in tax. If the airline charges $220 to fly you plus separately charges $40 each way for the bag, then your total cost is the same — but the airline only owes the government $16.50 in taxes. Splitting out baggage charges saves the airline $6.</p> <p>Now $6 might not seem like much, but it can add up. Last year, passengers took <a href="https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=1">more than 800 million trips on major airlines</a>. Even if only a fraction of them check their bags, that means large savings for the industry.</p> <p>How large? The government has <a href="https://www.bts.dot.gov/topics/airlines-and-airports/baggage-fees-airline-2023">tracked revenue from bag fees</a> for decades. In 2002, airlines charged passengers a total of $180 million to check bags, which worked out to around 33 cents per passenger.</p> <p>Today, as any flyer can attest, bag fees are a lot higher. Airlines collected over 40 times more money in bag fees last year than they did in 2002.</p> <p>When the full data is in for 2023, <a href="https://www.bts.dot.gov/baggage-fees">total bag fees</a> will likely top $7 billion, which is about $9 for the average domestic passenger. <a href="https://viewfromthewing.com/the-real-reason-airlines-charge-checked-bag-fees-and-its-not-what-you-think">By splitting out the cost of bags</a>, airlines avoided paying about half a billion dollars in taxes just last year.</p> <p>In the two decades since 2002, flyers paid a total of about $70 billion in bag fees. This means separately charging for bags saved airlines about $5 billion in taxes.</p> <p><iframe id="88MYD" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/88MYD/2/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <p>It seems clear to me that tax savings are one driver of the unbundling of baggage fees because of a quirk in the law.</p> <p>The U.S. government doesn’t apply the 7.5% tax to <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-26/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-49/subpart-D/section-49.4261-3">international flights that go more than 225 miles</a> beyond the nation’s borders. Instead, there are fixed <a href="https://www.airlines.org/dataset/government-imposed-taxes-on-air-transportation">international departure and arrival taxes</a>. This is why major airlines charge $35 to $40 <a href="https://www.aa.com/i18n/travel-info/baggage/checked-baggage-policy.jsp">for bags if you’re flying domestically</a>, but don’t charge a bag fee when you’re flying to Europe or Asia.</p> <h2>Do travelers get anything for that money?</h2> <p>This system raises an interesting question: Do baggage fees force airlines to be more careful with bags, since customers who pay more expect better service? To find out, I checked with the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, which has been <a href="https://www.bts.gov/content/mishandled-baggage-reports-filed-passengers-largest-us-air-carriersa">tracking lost luggage for decades</a>.</p> <p>For many years, it calculated the number of mishandled-baggage reports per thousand airline passengers. The government’s data showed mishandled bags peaked in 2007 with about seven reports of lost or damaged luggage for every thousand passengers. That means you could expect your luggage to go on a different trip than the one you are taking about once every 140 or so flights. By 2018, that estimate had fallen to once every 350 flights.</p> <p>In 2019, the government <a href="https://www.bts.gov/topics/airlines-and-airports/number-30a-technical-directive-mishandled-baggage-amended-effective-jan">changed how it tracks</a> mishandled bags, calculating figures based on the total number of bags checked, rather than the total number of passengers. The new data show about six bags per thousand checked get lost or damaged, which is less than 1% of checked bags. Unfortunately, the data doesn’t show improvement since 2019.</p> <p>Is there anything that you can do about higher bag fees? Complaining to politicians probably won’t help. In 2010, two senators <a href="https://www.nj.com/business/2010/04/us_senators_present_bill_to_ba.html">tried to ban bag fees</a>, and their bill went nowhere.</p> <p>Given that congressional action failed, there’s a simple way to avoid higher bag fees: <a href="https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/packing-expert-travel-world-handbag/index.html">travel light</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/08/opinion/carry-on-packing-airlines-lost-luggage.html">don’t check any luggage</a>. It may sound tough not to have all your belongings when traveling, but it might be the best option as bag fees take off.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225857/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jay-l-zagorsky-152952">Jay L. Zagorsky</a>, Associate Professor of Markets, Public Policy and Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/boston-university-898">Boston University</a></em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-do-airlines-charge-so-much-for-checked-bags-this-obscure-rule-helps-explain-why-225857">original article</a>.</em></p>

Travel Trouble

Placeholder Content Image

“Absolute monster”: Bridezilla slammed for unreasonable bridesmaid rules

<p dir="ltr">A woman has shared the reason she quit her best friend’s bridal party, after she was presented with a 14-page contract to be a bridesmaid. </p> <p dir="ltr">The woman was excited to celebrate her friend Laura’s wedding to the love of her life James, and shared how Laura was a very regimented bride. </p> <p dir="ltr">“We began planning everything, having multiple meetings to make sure we all are up to date on all plans,” the bridesmaid said in a Reddit thread.</p> <p dir="ltr">“She is a bit of a neat person and very organised. She made all five bridesmaids and her maid of honour a binder of our duties... We keep track of appointments, vendors — pretty standard stuff.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“But that’s not all that’s in there.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The bridesmaid then shared an extensive list of rules the bridal party had to follow for the big day in relation to their physical appearance. </p> <p dir="ltr">The list included 12 bizarre rules about how they were to look on the big day, saying everyone must wear size-eight dresses, tattoos must be covered or removed and brown eyes are banned.</p> <p dir="ltr">“No visible tattoos. Must be removed or covered with makeup. No jackets or long sleeves to cover them,” the bride began in the extensive list.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Full head of hair. No shaved sides or back. Must have a professional wig on if a haircut is not acceptable.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“Hair can not be too short. It must be able to be braided. Also if your hair is too long like to your waist, it will need to be cut. Hair must be blonde or black. I will tell you what colour is best for you.</p> <p dir="ltr">“You must fit into a size eight dress. I don’t want to see tents (too big) or rolls (too tight). Dresses have been ordered at size eight only.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“No brown eyes. That’s James’ and my eye colour so you will need to get contacts. Blue is required.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Other things banned in the bridal party are “harsh tans”, visible scars and eyeglasses.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Get contacts or go without for the day,” the bride added.</p> <p dir="ltr">The bridesmaid felt the rules were directed at her, as she was furious with her friend and decided to leave the bridal party. </p> <p dir="ltr">“Here is where I started to backpedal and want to walk away,” she said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I have very thick but fine hair. I keep the sides shaved down and the top and back long like halfway down my back which helps my migraines.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“I also have an Eeyore tattoo and a bear paw print tattoo that shows. I also just had bariatric (gastric sleeve) surgery so I’m working on losing weight. I also have glasses.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Upon looking through the contract, she was mortified to see what the bride expected of her bridesmaids.</p> <p dir="ltr">“The final kick in the pants was the contract — 14 pages front and back of everything we are required to do. Like not getting pregnant, attend meetings and events, as well as constantly communicate,” the bridesmaid said.</p> <p dir="ltr">Along with the demands, the bridesmaids were each required to gift the bride and groom a minimum of $150 and “some type of expensive alcohol”, along with a $400 fee to be a bridesmaid.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I tried to explain I can’t afford this and she told me I had to figure it out. I figured she lost a bridesmaid, me.”</p> <p dir="ltr">In a follow-up post, the bridesmaid confirmed she was no longer in the bridal party after she quit.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I am not doing the wedding. The bride is mad but I don’t care,” she said.</p> <p dir="ltr">Her post has been met with more than 640 comments, with many describing the bride as an “absolute monster”, “cruel” and a “bully” over her outrageous demands. </p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image credits: Getty Images / Reddit</em></p>

Relationships

Placeholder Content Image

“It’s not personal”: New mum shares divisive list of rules

<p dir="ltr">An expecting mum has divided opinions with an extensive list of strict rules her family and friends must follow if they want to meet her new baby. </p> <p dir="ltr">KIIS FM hosts Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O read out the list live on air, as they debated the rules and regulations put in place by the pregnant woman. </p> <p dir="ltr">The rules included not touching the baby, being vaccinated and only going to see the child if you've been asked, with the hosts asking listeners if they thought the rules were “too strict” or “reasonable”.</p> <p dir="ltr">“We're drawing closer to the birth of our daughter, and we couldn't be more excited, but unfortunately we have to implement some boundaries. We hope you can respect our wishes and no one takes these personally,” the mum's announcement read.</p> <p dir="ltr">First, the mum declared that there will be no information about the baby put online, including photos and information of the child’s name, or even an announcement that she had given birth. </p> <p dir="ltr">“If we want you to know, you'll know,” the mum outlined. </p> <p dir="ltr">Next, she said that only those who have “checked in” with the expecting parents since the announcement of the pregnancy will be notified of the birth. </p> <p dir="ltr">The mum took a brutal swing at anyone else she hasn't heard from and wrote, “Otherwise we have taken your silence as not being interested in our friendship and it is also reciprocated.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The couple went on to add that for the first two weeks following the birth, they will not be having any visitors. </p> <p dir="ltr">“No exceptions, no texts, no calls,” the mum wrote in capital letters, further explaining that no visitors will be welcome at either the hospital or at home. </p> <p dir="ltr">The couple also expect those who want to meet the baby to be vaccinated. </p> <p dir="ltr">“Don't be offended if we ask for proof. We will not be putting her health at risk,” the point read. </p> <p dir="ltr">The mum also asked visitors to “not smell of cigarettes or wear cologne or perfume that is too strong when meeting the baby”. </p> <p dir="ltr">Lastly, if family or friends visit the couple at home they will need to bring their own snacks and drinks.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Please do not expect to be hosted. Mum will probably be tired,” the list read. </p> <p dir="ltr">After sharing a video on TikTok, some mentioned the number one parenting rule of all: “their baby, their rules”. </p> <p dir="ltr">“Not a single one of those rules is unreasonable,” one person commented online. </p> <p dir="ltr">“The people triggered over this are the type of people these boundaries are intended for,” another added. </p> <p dir="ltr">However, others deemed the list as “passive aggressive”.  </p> <p dir="ltr">“Yeah right, nice knowing ya,” one wrote, while another said, “I hope she knows what she's doing.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

Woman sparks debate after copping $116 fine for "absurd" rule

<p>Shakira Coldwell, 21, has sparked debate online after copping a $116 parking fine for an "absurd" rule she claims she didn't even know existed. </p> <p>The Aussie woman took to TikTok to share her confusion, and asked if anyone else was aware of the rule. </p> <p>“Was I the only one that didn’t know you can get a parking fine for parking nose in, like the front of your car goes in first instead of backing into a car park?” she asked. </p> <p>She then asked whether the rule was only enforced in Noosa, saying that she was "pretty sure" you could park in any way as long as you stay between the lines. </p> <p>Coldwell then shared a photo of how she parked her car when she received the fine and said that she was “clearly” within the parking lines but hadn’t backed into her space like the car next to her.</p> <p>“Does that not just seem a bit absurd, a bit bizarre?” she said.</p> <p>She also said that she was only just made aware of the fine, as she had been travelling, which means that she may be copping even bigger fees as her payment was now overdue. </p> <p>“I’ve asked a couple of people about this and they literally had no idea that rule even existed. Like, I’m within the lines, it doesn’t matter how I’m parked,” she continued. </p> <p>According to the Brisbane City Council website, failing to park as indicated by an angle parking sign will result in a $116 fine, but Coldwell claims that she didn't see any signs. </p> <p>“So I am a bit confused. Is this just Noosa rule or does everyone know this because I literally did not know this was a rule. And low key $116 for a parking fine that's a bit absurd, given I was within the lines,” she said.</p> <p>Many commenters were quick to inform her that it was actually a common parking rule that wasn't restricted to Noosa. </p> <p>“As someone who lives in Noosa I can 100% guarantee there was a sign saying you had to back in,” one person wrote. </p> <p>“Being within the lines literally has nothing to do with it lol,” another said.</p> <p>A few others said that parking the wrong way in angled spots can make it “dangerous” when backing out into traffic, with one commenter claiming “everyone knows this”.</p> <p>However, a few others were just as baffled as the 21-year-old. </p> <p>“I’d be challenging that. I have never heard of it and there should definitely be signs so if you can go and check the signage,” one said. </p> <p>“Never heard of this before I wouldn’t pay it tell them where to go,” another wrote. </p> <p>According to the <a href="https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/community/local-laws/parking-regulations" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Noosa Council website</a>, rear-in angle parking is enforced in certain areas to “ensure a safer parking experience for everyone in the area," and to prevent cars from crossing into oncoming traffic as they try to exit the parking bay. </p> <p><em>Images: TikTok</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Huge news for baby "Methamphetamine Rules"

<p>Three months after ABC journalist Kirsten Drysdale <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/lifestyle/family-pets/why-an-abc-journalist-named-her-newborn-after-an-illicit-drug" target="_blank" rel="noopener">named her newborn</a> after an illicit drug, her son now has a new name. </p> <p>In September, Drysdale was investigating the limits of the naming registry for her show <em>WTFAQ</em> on the public broadcaster, in which audience members asked "What can I legally name my baby?" </p> <p>At the time, Drysdale wasn't getting a clear answer from the registry about the boundaries of naming a child, so decided to take matters into her own hands. </p> <p>"We thought, what is the most outrageous name we can think of that will definitely not be accepted?” Drysdale told <em><a href="https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/current-affairs/abc-journalist-kirsten-drysdales-wild-name-for-newborn-son/news-story/c4568f521ee9cfb5b68179a84667d92b#xd_co_f=YTM5MzVmOGQtNTY4My00NWE1LThjNDctMTUxMjJlNjVhMWNj~" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news.com.au</a></em> at the time.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Methamphetamine Rules we thought would surely get rejected, and then when it does, we can find out what name the Registrar chooses.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“It was really just a lighthearted, curious attempt to get an answer to this question.”</p> <p>As an experiment, Drysdale, who had just given birth to her son, submitted for him to be named "Methamphetamine Rules", with the naming registry approving the joke moniker. </p> <p>Now, Drysdale has shared that baby Meth has a new name. </p> <p>Appearing on <em>The Project</em>, the ABC presenter told the panel the naming mishap was now "all sorted", saying, “That name has been removed. It no longer is on his birth certificate.”</p> <p>“He has a new birth certificate with his real name on it.”</p> <p>She chose not to reveal her child’s new name, but assured viewers it is incredibly "normal".</p> <p>“He will not have to, for the rest of his life answer ‘have you ever been known by any other name’,” she said.</p> <p>“You’re not taking methamphetamines to any parties this Christmas?” host Sarah Harris asked jokingly.</p> <p>“No, Baby Meth is going to have a quiet Christmas at home this year,” Ms Drysdale said. <span style="color: #202223; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: large; background-color: #ffffff;"> </span></p> <p><em>Image credits: The Project / A Current Affair</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

7 rules for a respectful and worthwhile Voice referendum

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/joe-mcintyre-251004">Joe McIntyre</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a></em></p> <p>In October, Australians are, for the first time in a generation, going to the polls to vote in a referendum.</p> <p>Unfortunately, we’re out of practice in how to conduct ourselves in a referendum. This process is supposed to promote dialogue about the fundamental rules and identity of our nation.</p> <p>Yet passions can run hot, and misinformation is rife. How can we make sure our discussions with friends and family are respectful? How can we find reliable sources to ensure we make an informed choice? These seven rules may help.</p> <h2>Rule 1: remember there is no right answer</h2> <p>First, there is no one right answer. No side has the exclusive claim to the right(eous) solution, and there are valid concerns and arguments for both sides. You are not racist because you vote “no”. You are not a woke idealist because you vote “yes”.</p> <p>While the “<a href="https://www.yes23.com.au/">yes</a>” and “<a href="https://www.fairaustralia.com.au/">no</a>” campaigns rely heavily on emotional motifs, ultimately each Australian voter is entitled to make their own choice based on the best evidence.</p> <p>Even some experts disagree, for example, on whether the change is constitutionally <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/uploads/1/4/6/3/146303838/very_high_risk_very_low_reward_this_voice_referendum_deserves_to_be_defeated.pdf">risky</a> or <a href="https://theconversation.com/solicitor-general-confirms-voice-model-is-legally-sound-will-not-fetter-or-impede-parliament-204266">not</a> – depending on their risk appetite and ideological viewpoints. There is no single answer, and the consequences of either choice are uncertain.</p> <p>A proposal to change the Constitution is an opportunity for us to reflect on the type of nation we wish to be. In a democracy, that means valuing a wide range of different perspectives and opinions.</p> <p>The <a href="https://ulurustatement.org/the-statement/view-the-statement/">Uluru Statement</a> offered one vision for recognition of First Nations people in Australia. It was an invitation from a significant body of Indigenous leaders to walk a particular path.</p> <p>At the referendum we are asking whether that path is, at this time, the specific path the Australian people wish to walk.</p> <h2>Rule 2: don’t approach a referendum as if it is an election</h2> <p>Given the lack of bipartisan support for the proposal, it’s easy to default to the tribal operating mode of the three-year electoral cycle. This is wrong. A referendum is not like an election, in which we support one party or another. Instead, we have three parts:</p> <ol> <li>what is being proposed</li> <li>the case for reform</li> <li>the case against reform.</li> </ol> <p>In the bipartisan 1967 referendum, little attention was paid to what was being proposed – with the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-03/voice-referendum-vote-on-92-words-stay-out-of-weeds/102800166">result that it remains poorly understood</a>.</p> <p>The ‘67 referendum allowed the government to make special laws for Indigenous people, and ensured all Indigenous people were counted in the census. However many people mistakenly believe the referendum gave Indigenous people the right to <a href="https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/1967-referendum">vote</a>, or <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/indigenous-citizenship-myth-shrouds-1967-referendum/#:%7E:text=This%20is%20false.,were%20granted%20citizenship%20in%201948.">citizenship</a>, or that they were previously counted as <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-20/fact-check-flora-and-fauna-1967-referendum/9550650">flora and fauna</a>.</p> <p>The benefit of a contested Voice referendum is that there is accurate, impartial and accessible information about the proposal – including its <a href="https://voice.gov.au/about-voice/voice-principles">design</a>, <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/voicehistory.html">history</a> and <a href="https://ulurustatement.org/the-voice/what-is-the-voice/">objectives</a>.</p> <p>The challenge is to remain alert to the distinction between the factual question of what is being proposed, and the policy question of whether we support it or not.</p> <h2>Rule 3: remember the Constitution belongs to all of us, and we can change it</h2> <p>It’s important to understand some key points about our constitution. Constitutions serve <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/con.html">a number of roles</a>: they create the basic political and legal institutions of a society, and regulate how they operate, interact and are limited.</p> <p>But they are also a potent symbol of national identity and a means of refining and crafting a defining national narrative.</p> <p><a href="https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/the-australian-constitution/australian-constitution/">Australia’s Constitution</a> is not a religious text. It was designed to evolve and change. It should not be viewed as static or set in stone.</p> <p>We have had <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2223/Quick_Guides/ConstitutionalReferendumsAustralia">44 referendums</a> in our history, at an average of one every 2.7 years.</p> <p>While only eight referendums have passed, five received majority support and another <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/referendumhistory.html">nine achieved more than 49% support</a>.</p> <p>The Constitution belongs to all of us, and we all have a right to have a say in its development. We are entitled to renew and reform it – and if something doesn’t work, to try again.</p> <h2>Rule 4: don’t believe (or repeat) everything you hear</h2> <p>Unfortunately, both <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-we-can-avoid-political-misinformation-in-the-lead-up-to-the-voice-referendum-206500">disinformation and misinformation</a> are rife in the public debate about the Voice. Both campaigns can (lawfully) <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-is-it-legal-to-tell-lies-during-the-voice-referendum-campaign-209211">lie to you</a>.</p> <p>While the Australian Electoral Commission has an online <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/media/disinformation-register-ref.htm">referendum disinformation register</a> addressing errors about the referendum <em>process</em>, there is no register of misinformation about the Voice proposal itself.</p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-do-the-yes-and-no-cases-stack-up-constitutional-law-experts-take-a-look-212364">Academics</a> and media organisations (including <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck">RMIT ABC Fact Check</a>, <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/">AAP Fact Check</a> and <a href="https://factcheck.afp.com/afp-australia">AFP Fact Check</a>) are fact-checking claims about the Voice.</p> <p>Yet it remains difficult to isolate accurate information in a contested space. There remains a key difference between factual claims that can be verified, and subjective claims or opinions which cannot.</p> <p>This referendum demands we critically reflect on the source, authority and ambitions underlying all information we see, hear and share.</p> <h2>Rule 5: it’s OK to find this hard and confusing</h2> <p>The contested nature of the referendum, endless misinformation, complex social issues and lack of practice with referendums will leave many of us feeling confused and overwhelmed. This is OK. This referendum is complex, and raises many issues.</p> <p>This is compounded by our lack of <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/legalliteracy.html">legal literacy</a> and civics education. Too often, Australians feel alienated from our legal institutions.</p> <p>Every year, <a href="http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/app/6DDF12F188975AC9CA257A910006089D.html.">one in four</a> Australians experience a substantial legal problem. However, only 3% of those problems are resolved through the legal system, with many choosing not to take action due to cost or not knowing what to do, or resolving the matter outside of the courts.</p> <p>Without meaningful regular engagement with the law, we too often lack the language and framework to understand something so complex and archaic. It’s therefore completely understandable we may struggle with esoteric issues such as constitutional law.</p> <h2>Rule 6: don’t be afraid of expertise</h2> <p>The corollary of this, however, is that we should not be afraid of turning to experts to understand and assess the issue. The referendum is replete with issues that are technical and specialised.</p> <p>The good news is there are lots of experts trying to help the public understand the issues, including <a href="https://lawcouncil.au/policy-agenda/the-referendum-for-an-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-voice">Law Councils</a>, former <a href="https://www.auspublaw.org/first-nations-voice/the-voice-a-step-forward-for-australian-nationhood">judges</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-will-vote-in-a-referendum-on-october-14-what-do-you-need-to-know-195352">legal</a> <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/legal-analysis-by-the-experts.html">academics</a>.</p> <h2>Rule 7: if you don’t know, learn</h2> <p>This leads to perhaps the most important point: as citizens, we have an obligation to ensure we are informed about the key ideas and issues before we enter the ballot box.</p> <p>Fortunately, there are many excellent sources - including <a href="https://ucfm.com.au/series/its-the-constitution/">podcasts</a>, <a href="https://www.unimelb.edu.au/voice/voicefacts">short videos</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalclarion1901">discussions</a>, and <a href="https://www.monash.edu/law/research/centres/castancentre/our-areas-of-work/indigenous/voice-to-parliament-resources">carefully</a> curated <a href="https://www.referendum-voice.com.au/">websites</a> – that have been designed by experts to ensure Australians are empowered to make a meaningfully informed choice. These sources are designed to provide impartial, accurate and accessible information.</p> <p>Ultimately, the Voice proposal is about the dignity offered by listening to diverse opinions. Our challenge is to bring this same approach to our discussions about the referendum. These rules should help.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212974/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/joe-mcintyre-251004">Joe McIntyre</a>, Associate Professor of Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/7-rules-for-a-respectful-and-worthwhile-voice-referendum-212974">original article</a>.</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Would you do this at home? Why we are more likely to do stupid things on holidays

<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/denis-tolkach-11345">Denis Tolkach</a>, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a></em> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephen-pratt-335188">Stephen Pratt</a>, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-the-south-pacific-1881">The University of the South Pacific</a></em></p> <p>As the COVID pandemic took hold, Ohio’s Brady Sluder went to Miami for spring break, despite <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/us/coronavirus-brady-sluder-spring-break.html">urgent calls</a> for people to stay home and socially distance.</p> <p>Interviewed by CBS News, Sluder’s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/us/coronavirus-brady-sluder-spring-break.html">arrogant justfication</a> for his trip went viral.</p> <p>"If I get corona, I get corona. At the end of the day, I’m not gonna let it stop me from partying […] about two months we’ve had this trip planned."</p> <p>A week later — now an international “celebrity” for all the wrong reasons — he was forced to issue a grovelling apology.</p> <p>If you think Sluder’s partying was stupid, we share your feelings.</p> <p>With the festive season upon us, as the pandemic continues, we can only hope <a href="https://theconversation.com/iso-boomer-remover-and-quarantini-how-coronavirus-is-changing-our-language-136729">covidiots</a> listen to the rules. As many of us also head off on summer breaks, now is also a good time to reflect on stupidity in tourism.</p> <p>We may be tempted to think a stupid person has certain demographic or psychological characteristics. However, anyone can behave stupidly, especially in unfamiliar environments — like holidays — where it is difficult to judge the right course of action.</p> <h2>The laws of human stupidity</h2> <p>In our recently published <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2020.1828555">journal article</a> on stupidity in tourism, we see stupidity as an action without insight or sound judgement. This results in losses or harm to the perpetrator and others. In a holiday context, it can negatively affect tourists themselves, as well as other people, animals, organisations, or destinations.</p> <p>In 1976, Italian economist Carlo Cipolla published a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/apr/09/improbable-research-human-stupidity">definitive essay</a> called The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity. Although we prefer to focus on stupid behaviour rather than stupid people, we agree with his five laws:</p> <ol> <li> <p>Always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.</p> </li> <li> <p>The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.</p> </li> <li> <p>A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.</p> </li> <li> <p>Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular, non-stupid people constantly forget dealing with or associating with stupid people always and everywhere turns out to be a costly mistake.</p> </li> <li> <p>A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.</p> </li> </ol> <p>Why is stupid behaviour so dangerous? Because it is irrational and so the outcome is unpredictable.</p> <p>Who could have thought so many people would die <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/selfie-accidents-range-silly-deadly-world/story?id=53636494">when taking a selfie</a> that you can now <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/life-insurance-for-selfie-deaths-have-we-reached-peak-stupid-20191003-p52xe2.html">take out insurance</a> on the act? Or that aeroplane passengers would <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50979485#:%7E:text=A%20Chinese%20man%20who%20was,near%20one%20of%20its%20engines.">throw coins into engines</a> for good luck?</p> <h2>What causes stupidity?</h2> <p>How can we better understand our own stupid behaviour, or recognise it in others? Stupidity is generally caused by an excess of one or more of the following factors:</p> <ul> <li>the person believing they know everything</li> <li>the person believing they can do anything</li> <li>the person being extremely self-centred</li> <li>the person believing nothing will harm them</li> <li>the person’s emotions (for example, fear or anger)</li> <li>the person’s state (for example, exhausted or drunk).</li> </ul> <h2>Why stupid behaviour is more likely on holidays</h2> <p>Tourists can be affected by all of these factors.</p> <p>Leisure tourism, by its nature, is a very self-centred and pleasure-seeking activity. People often travel to relax and enjoy themselves.</p> <p>In pursuit of trying something new or escaping their daily routine, people may go to places with very different cultures or practices than their own, or try things they wouldn’t normally do — such as adventure activities. As a result, individuals can act differently while on holidays.</p> <p>There also seem to be fewer social constraints. Tourists may not follow rules and social norms while travelling, because relatives, friends, colleagues, bosses are less likely to find out. Of course, tourists may not be aware of the commonly-accepted rules of where they travelling, as well.</p> <p>All of the above increases the likelihood of stupidity. And one certainly doesn’t need to travel overseas to be stupid. A case in point is a tourist who <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-05/tourist-allegedly-broke-into-uluru-kata-tjuta-park-coronavirus/12526084">snuck into Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park</a>, which was closed-off in August due to COVID concerns in the local indigenous community. The woman injured her ankle and had to be rescued.</p> <h2>The importance of thinking first</h2> <p>So, what to do about stupid tourist behaviour?</p> <p>Strict regulation, physical barriers, warning signs and other punitive measures alone may not work. This is seen in the case of a man who climbed over a zoo fence in 2017 to avoid the entry fee. He ended up <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-30/man-mauled-by-tiger-after-climbing-to-fence-avoid-buying-ticket/8225016">being mauled to death</a> by a tiger.</p> <p>Education of tourists on how to behave during travels <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160738317300063">has some effect</a>. But more importantly, tourists need to be <a href="https://theconversation.com/tourists-behaving-badly-how-culture-shapes-conduct-when-were-on-holiday-72285">self-aware</a>. They need to consider what is likely to happen as a result of their behaviour, how likely is it that things will go wrong, and whether they would do this at home.</p> <p>While stupidity is impossible to eliminate, it can be less frequent and do much less damage, if we take time to reflect on our behaviour and attitudes.</p> <p>So, have fun during the holiday … but don’t be stupid!<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/150287/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/denis-tolkach-11345">Denis Tolkach</a>, Senior Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephen-pratt-335188">Stephen Pratt</a>, Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-the-south-pacific-1881">The University of the South Pacific</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/would-you-do-this-at-home-why-we-are-more-likely-to-do-stupid-things-on-holidays-150287">original article</a>.</em></p>

Travel Trouble

Placeholder Content Image

“That sounds dodgy”: Ben Fordham slams “bizarre” Voice to Parliament voting rules

<p dir="ltr">Ben Fordham has slammed the “bizarre” rules Aussies will have to abide by when casting their vote in the Voice to Parliament referendum.</p> <p dir="ltr">The confusion over the rules for the upcoming vote was sparked when the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) suggested that ticks will be counted as Yes votes but crosses will not be counted as No votes.</p> <p dir="ltr">On referendum day, which is widely expected to be October 14th, Aussies will be asked to write either “yes” or “no” in English on the ballot paper to the question, “A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?”</p> <p dir="ltr">On Wednesday, AEC commissioner Tom Rogers was asked by <em>Sky News</em> host Tom Connell how Australians will be asked to vote on the ballot.</p> <p dir="ltr">“It’s a bit simpler than a normal election, it’s a yes or no — are you accepting anything inside the box?” Connell said. “A tick, a cross, a yes, a number one? How broad will you allow this, given the intention of people is going to be pretty clear, you’d think?”</p> <p dir="ltr">Mr Rogers said it was a “great question”, saying, “Now there are some savings provisions, but I need to be very clear with people – when we look at that, it is likely that a tick will be accepted as a formal vote for yes, but a cross will not be accepted as a formal vote.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“We’re being very clear with people, part of our education campaign will talk about this, the materials in the polling place so people can look at it. But please, make sure you write ‘yes’ or ‘no’ clearly on the ballot paper in English. That way you can assure yourself that your vote will count.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Ben Fordham went on to slam Rogers’ comments, saying the ticks and crosses system would favour the Yes vote. </p> <p dir="ltr">“How bizarre,” he said. “A tick counts as yes but a cross does not count as no. That sounds dodgy. If you’re going to count the ticks, you’ve got to count the crosses, don’t you? Otherwise the yes camp has an advantage. Surely he would see the unlevel playing field here. But apparently not.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Fordham said the AEC “has one job”.</p> <p dir="ltr">“We’re giving them $365 million to hold the referendum,” he said. “Tom Rogers is on more than the Prime Minister, he earns $600,000 a year. How hard is it to get this right?”</p> <p dir="ltr">Opposition leader Peter Dutton also slammed the voting rules, urging Anthony Albanese to draft legislation to make it clear what will be accepted on the voting ballot.</p> <p dir="ltr">“It’s completely outrageous, to be honest,” he told 2GB.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I mean, if a tick counts for Yes then a cross should count for No. It’s as clear as that. Otherwise it gives a very, very strong advantage to the Yes case. I just think Australians want a fair vote. They want to be informed.”</p> <p><em>Image credits: 2GB / AEC</em></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

"Disparaging and insulting": Kyle Sandilands found in breach of decency rules

<p>The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) found that Kyle Sandilands breached the decency rules over the <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/health/caring/kyle-sandilands-under-fire-for-hurtful-monkeypox-comments" target="_blank" rel="noopener">monkeypox comments</a> he made on-air in <em>The Kyle and Jackie O </em>show <span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">last year</span><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">. </span></p> <p>The ACMA found that he breached the Commercial Radio Code of Practice with "offensive, exclusionary comments explicitly aimed at the presumed conduct of gay men". </p> <p>"The ACMA found that the overall sentiment of the segment stereotyped gay men as irresponsible in regard to their sexual health," the media watchdog found. </p> <p>"This made them the prime carriers of a virus that presented a danger to the community and, as a result, they were not deserving of sympathy or compassion."</p> <p>Monkeypox was declared a global health emergency in July 2022. </p> <p>At the time, Sandilands called the virus "the big gay disease" and that "it’s only gays getting it." </p> <p>In defence of Sandilands' comments, the broadcaster told the ACMA the segment may have contained "unfavourable descriptions of those susceptible to the virus, being homosexual males".</p> <p>They also claimed that the segment was "well-intended" in terms of bringing awareness to the community about the public health risk around the transmission of the virus and the availability of a vaccine. </p> <p>They also said that there was an insufficient amount of content that demonstrated  "ill-will towards (the) LGBTQIA+ community."</p> <p>However, ACMA Chairperson Nerida O'Loughlin called the comments "derisive and insulting". </p> <p>"We acknowledge that the program's audience does not expect the presentation style of either the program or the presenter to always be formal and nuanced," O'Loughlin said. </p> <p>"Although there was a basis at the time for a public discussion about mpox that involved reference to gay sexuality, the segment went beyond any acceptable standards by conveying that gay men were irresponsible, were a risk to the community and did not deserve any sympathy even when presenting for medical assistance."</p> <p>"Broadcasters have a responsibility to maintain appropriate levels of decency, and in this case the comments by Sandilands were overly disparaging and insulting."</p> <p><em>KIIS</em> have agreed to deliver sensitivity training to the hosts, producers, censors and other staff. </p> <p>They must also report back to the ACMA on their progress every six months for  two years. </p> <p><em>Images: KIIS FM</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

10 helpful etiquette rules for posting a loved one’s death on social media

<p><strong>There’s no right way to deal with death on social media</strong></p> <p>The first thing to bear in mind when sharing or hearing of a loss on social media is that everyone is different. “When it comes to grief, there’s no one way to deal with it, and no correct prescription, so each person’s way needs to be respected,” says Dr Fran Walfish, a family and relationship psychotherapist.</p> <p> “When people are experiencing a loss, it’s very important to step aside, not tell them what to do, and take your cues from them.”</p> <p><strong>Let the closest loved ones post first</strong></p> <p>While anyone affected by a death can feel a strong impulse to share the news on social media, such announcements should be left to the deceased person’s closest family members, who should have the prerogative to decide when, what, and how they want to post. “Sharing is really for the closest loved ones’ benefit, so leave it up to that core group to post the initial news of the passing,” says Stef Woods, who teaches classes on social media.</p> <p>“Note what information has been included or excluded from that post, then follow suit and show support.” A recent study found that the content of those posts can vary depending on the social media platform used. In a 2016 paper, two University of Washington students who had analysed the feeds of deceased Twitter users found, “People use the site to acknowledge death in a blend of public and private behaviour that differs from how it is addressed on other social media sites,” according to a press release.</p> <p><strong>Streamline logistics</strong></p> <p>Because social media has the power to reach such a large network simultaneously, it can be a helpful tool for a family dealing with preparations for a service or memorial. “When the loss is fresh and there are lots of plans to coordinate, it can save people time and emotional energy rather than re-sharing the same information in call after call,” says Woods.</p> <p>If you’re on the phone with someone, she explains, you could get stuck in a conversation that’s not just about you relaying information, it’s also about the other person processing it, and you may not have the time or mental patience for such an exchange. “It can be easier to post the information on Facebook, and then go focus on logistics. It can help give the closest loved ones their own time,” she adds.</p> <p><strong>Get your facts straight</strong></p> <p>While it seems like it should go without saying, when posting about a death on social media, it’s especially crucial to make sure your information is accurate. “I have a niece who was in the ICU for many months with pneumonia teetering between life and death, and all of a sudden on Facebook, I saw a close friend of my brother express condolences, but my niece was still alive!” says Walfish.</p> <p>She rushed to do damage control by contacting the friend – who was a kind, well-meaning person – to prevent her brother from ever seeing such an upsetting post. Fortunately her niece ultimately recovered. “We were lucky in my case, but you can’t always erase what goes out there.”</p> <p><strong>Be careful with details</strong></p> <p>People hearing of a death on social media may want to get more information, understandably, but your curiosity is less important than the family’s need for privacy. “If the core group doesn’t indicate the details of how someone passed in the post, there’s some reason they included or excluded that information,” says Woods. If you happen to know details that weren’t publicly shared by the relatives, it isn’t your place to put that information out there. “Let the core group take the lead,” adds Woods, who points out that ultimately, “finding out the Why and How doesn’t change the fact that someone is gone.”</p> <p>In addition, whether you’re the closest family or the most distant friend of the deceased, be aware that whatever information you post could be viewed by children. “So, if God forbid there was a suicide or any kind of questionable circumstances to the death, be very cautious about how and what you say if you don’t want a teenager or younger child to see it,” says Walfish.</p> <p><strong>Respond in the medium in which you received the news</strong></p> <p>Remember that in the first hours and days after someone passes, the loved ones of the deceased are dealing not only with a storm of emotion but also a long list of logistics. While social media can help that core group to share information more easily, such a public announcement can leave them open to getting bombarded with hundreds of calls and texts. “If you’ve been notified on social media rather than receiving a call, that means for whatever reason that the closest family members didn’t want to or didn’t have time to talk to everyone,” says Woods.</p> <p>“So when acknowledging the news, stick to the medium through which you received the information.” If someone posts on Facebook, she says, reply briefly online, but don’t rush to call or text; instead, give the family space to deal with what they need to deal with. “Wait and reach out later,” Woods advises. “The loss will still be felt long after the services have passed.” An exception may be if you can offer to help in any way – by taking care of children, for example, or hosting out-of-town relatives who may come in for the funeral.</p> <p><strong>Decide whether to keep the departed’s online profiles</strong></p> <p>There’s a good chance that the person who passed has an online profile, and it’s up to their loved ones to decide what to do with it. “Sometimes a person’s profile page is deleted, sometimes the page is kept up, sometimes a separate memorial site is created,” says Woods. “It’s all up to what’s best for those who are grieving the most – there’s no right or wrong way to handle it.” If a deceased person’s Facebook page, for example, continues to be active with respectful photos and posts, it can become a space where everyone can process the loss and remember together.</p> <p>“It can be healthy to express that those who are gone are not forgotten,” says Woods. For some, however, maintaining a lost loved one’s online presence can be detrimental. “When someone keeps a deceased person’s page alive, in a way it’s parallel to memorialising the deceased by making a shrine in your home,” says Walfish. “It can stop some people from moving forward in their life; it’s like not allowing the final resolution of acceptance.”</p> <p><strong>Make your own wishes known</strong></p> <p>When it comes to looking ahead to your own passing, if you have specific wishes about your own social media presence, share them with your loved ones, says financial planner, Pamela Sandy. “Because we live so much of our lives on various social media platforms, we need to think about whether we want all that out there after we’re gone,” she says. Speaking from personal experience, Sandy adds that when her significant other passed, she wasn’t sure of his wishes for his Facebook page and didn’t know where his username and password was.</p> <p>After a time, she found his login credentials and deleted his page, which is what she believes he would have wanted. In order to help her clients avoid similar situations, Sandy includes an online platform that stores people’s changing usernames and passwords to be accessed by their loved ones after their passing – among the services she offers. Additionally, in 2015 Facebook introduced a feature that lets people choose a legacy contact – a family member or friend who can manage their account when they pass away, according to a company press release.</p> <p><strong>Avoid platitudes</strong></p> <p>When you’re trying to show support for someone who has experienced a loss, avoid comments containing trite platitudes such as “They’re in a better place,” especially if you don’t know the family’s beliefs.</p> <p>“For example, saying the person lived a long life may not sit well because the family may not feel it was long enough,” says Woods, adding that it’s fine to be honest and say you don’t know what to say. “It’s OK to write ‘I’m so sorry; there are no words,’” says Woods. “It’s OK to be honest and sincere.”</p> <p><strong>Check your privacy settings</strong></p> <p>When posting, sharing, or commenting on any sensitive information – such as a death – make sure you understand who will be able to see it. “People have different social media privacy settings, so they may think no one can see a particular post when they can,” says Woods.</p> <p>“If you’re sharing a post, say, on Instagram and connecting it with Facebook, it automatically defers to your Instagram setting. Or your phone may have a different default setting than your laptop.”</p> <p><strong>Don’t give into a grief Olympics</strong></p> <p>Sometimes a close family member’s post about the loss of a loved one can attract not only sincere condolences, but also comments in which more distant family or friends get carried away with their own feelings. “It can become a ‘grief Olympics,’ and it should be avoided,” says Woods. Once news of someone’s passing has been announced by their core group, she says, avoid comments about yourself such as bemoaning how hard the news is for you.</p> <p>“If you feel the need to process your own grief, record that processing on your own page,” she suggests. “And do so without tagging any of the core loved ones or the person who passed. If they want to know your views, they’ll see it.”</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/culture/etiquette-rules-for-dealing-with-death-on-social-media?pages=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Reader's Digest</a>. </em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

"Insultingly stupid": Rock legend slams tributes to Sinead O'Connor

<p>Morrissey has taken aim at some "disingenuous" people who have paid tribute to Sinead O'Connor in the hours after her death. </p> <p>The Irish singer was <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/news/news/sin-ad-o-connor-passes-away-at-just-56" target="_blank" rel="noopener">tragically passed away</a> at the age of 56 on Thursday, after a statement from her family confirmed the devastating news. </p> <p>"It is with great sadness that we announce the passing of our beloved Sinéad. Her family and friends are devastated and have requested privacy at this very difficult time," the singer's family said in a statement, prompting a wave of homages online from her fans.</p> <p>However, the former frontman of The Smiths has shared a furious note on his website, criticising some of the tributes which he described as "sterile slop". </p> <p>He wrote that he believes people are only praising her work and activism now that she has passed, and the gushing tributes have largely come from people who criticised her career while she was alive. </p> <p>He wrote, “She was dropped by her label after selling 7 million albums for them.”</p> <p>“She had proud vulnerability … and there is a certain music industry hatred for singers who don’t ‘fit in’ (this I know only too well), and they are never praised until death – when, finally, they can’t answer back. The cruel playpen of fame gushes with praise for Sinead today … with the usual moronic labels of 'icon' and 'legend'." </p> <p>“You praise her now ONLY because it is too late. You hadn’t the guts to support her when she was alive and she was looking for you.”</p> <p>He also blasted others in the wider industry for not giving O’Connor props while she was alive. </p> <p>“The press will label artists as pests because of what they withhold … and they would call Sinead sad, fat, shocking, insane … oh but not today! Music CEOs who had put on their most charming smile as they refused her for their roster are queuing-up to call her a ‘feminist icon’, and 15 minute celebrities and goblins from hell and record labels of artificially aroused diversity are squeezing onto Twitter to twitter their jibber-jabber … when it was YOU who talked Sinead into giving up … because she refused to be labelled, and she was degraded, as those few who move the world are always degraded.”</p> <p>He went on to compare O’Connor to other entertainers who died at a young age, such as Judy Garland, Whitney Houston and Amy Winehouse, asking “why is ANYBODY surprised” that they died. </p> <p>“Where do you go when death can be the best outcome?” he asked.</p> <p>He finished with an instruction to those who had offered the “insultingly stupid” and "disingenuous" tributes that O’Connor was an “icon” and a “legend”, saying “Sinead doesn’t need your sterile slop.”</p> <p>Morrissey's rant was met with a mixed response from fans, while other celebrities shared their support of his sentiment. </p> <p>Boy George tweeted his agreeance, shared a photo of himself with Sinead and writing, “Morrissey is both wrong and right. Most people had zero influence over Sinead. She was her own person with her own issues. At time like this you can only offer prayers because we are out of solutions. My mum and I had great chats about Sinead. We all wanted her fixed.”</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Music

Placeholder Content Image

Kate Middleton's strict post-birth rule

<p>As Prince George celebrated his 10th birthday, reports have emerged of a strict rule that Kate Middleton had to follow after she brought her first child into the world one decade ago. </p> <p>The Princess of Wales gave birth to Prince George at St. Mary's Hospital in London on July 22nd 2013, with the news of the future heir of the throne making waves around the world. </p> <p>When Prince George was born, centuries of royal tradition and protocol meant no one was allowed to know about the royal birth until the late Queen Elizabeth was told first.</p> <p>This strict rule meant that Kate had to wait to tell her parents, family and friends until it was confirmed that the Queen was aware of Prince George's birth.</p> <p>According to reports from <a href="https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/royals/queen-elizabeth-found-out-prince-george-birth/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><em>Marie Claire</em></a>, those in the delivery room were also sworn to secrecy to keep their lips sealed. </p> <p>They also reported the Royal protocol in full, which states that the current monarch should be the first call following the birth of a future monarch.</p> <p>In terms of how Queen Elizabeth found out, it was revealed that Prince William - the now next-in-line to the throne - called his grandmother from a specially encrypted phone to break the good news.</p> <p>This isn't the only rule involved in the birth of a royal either, with the huge news coming with a strict set of rules.</p> <p>As well as being the first to learn of the young prince's birth, Queen Elizabeth also had to approve his name due to the fact that he was a direct heir to the throne, and luckily, Prince George Alexander Louis was a hit!</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

6 reasons cats need some indoor rules

<p><strong>Kitty cat behaviours</strong></p> <p>Cat behaviour is both wildly entertaining and, at times, perplexing. Even the most in-tune owner has to wonder why cats knock things over, why cats love boxes or why cats meow at people but chirp at birds and squirrels. What cat lovers do know is that kitties crave spaces with bird’s-eye views to observe their world – you know, like kitchen counters.</p> <p>But if you’re trying to keep foods toxic to cats away from your little lion, or you’re just fed up with constantly cleaning your kitchen to get rid of cat hair and little pieces of cat litter, here’s how to keep cats off counters for good.</p> <p><strong>Why do cats like to climb on counters?</strong></p> <p>It’s a curious conundrum: Why do cats hate water yet jump on kitchen counters to play with a dripping faucet? An even more puzzling question: Why do cats like to hang out on our countertops in the first place?</p> <p>“Cats are both predators and prey, so being able to survey their territory from above keeps them safe from predators and allows them to spot prey to catch,” says Samantha Bell, a cat expert with Best Friends Animal Society. That’s understandable, but domestic cats don’t have to catch their food, and they certainly don’t have to worry about predators, so why do they like to be up on the counter so much?</p> <p>“Counters are so attractive to cats because they’re up high, sturdy, right in the middle of the action and full of food,” Bell says. (Which may be one reason your cat licks you when you’re making a meal – it smells food on your hands.)</p> <p>Your actions can reinforce this counter-jumping habit. If you pet and talk to your cat while it’s on the counter, it’ll quickly learn that this is a place where it can get attention, says Dr Ragen T.S. McGowan, an animal behaviour scientist with Purina. “Many cats will jump up on the counter just to be close to human family members,” she says.</p> <p><strong>Can you train a cat to not be on your counters?</strong></p> <p>Absolutely, but there are two vital cat facts you should know when it comes to how to keep cats off counters, Bell says. To start, you can’t extinguish instinctive behaviours, like climbing high to be near the action.</p> <p>Furthermore – and this is a biggie – punishment doesn’t work. In fact, it can even cause cat anxiety and destructive behaviours. Here are a few ways you can teach your kitty to stay off your counters for good.</p> <p><strong>Remove the reward</strong></p> <p>You can train a cat to do a lot of things, and yes, staying off the counters is one of them. Here’s a critical question to ask when figuring out how to keep cats off counters: What is your cat’s reward for counter surfing?</p> <p>We know our feline friends hop on countertops to get food and attention and to socialise with humans. Maybe your cat is motivated by one or all of those factors. Or maybe it loves watching birds out the kitchen window. Whatever the case may be, you can train a cat to stay off the counters by removing rewards and positive reinforcement, McGowan says.</p> <p>Let’s say your cat is curious about the water dripping from the sink tap, likes to watch birds out the window or wants to nibble on food left on the counter. “Remove the reward by drawing the shades, fixing the tap or removing food from the countertops when possible,” says McGowan.</p> <p>And don’t fall into the trap of rewarding this bad behaviour. “For many cats, even the act of picking them up off the counter is rewarding and thus reinforces the behaviour,” says McGowan. Think about it: Your cat may rub against you while it’s on the counter and purr when you pick it up – both ways cats show affection. When you pick it up, you’re giving affection and attention and essentially telling your cat that climbing on the counter is a good way to get cuddles.</p> <p><strong>Redirect the cat's attention</strong></p> <p>Your cat may be climbing to get your attention, but before you give in and pet it, redirect its attention from the counter. “If their motivation is touch [being picked up or petted], then tossing a treat or toy and petting them only after they are on the floor can help to redirect them,” says McGowan.</p> <p>As tempting as it is, don’t pet your cat when it’s on the counter, as this can inadvertently reward the behaviour. Instead, call your cat to another part of the kitchen before giving it a treat or toy. Otherwise, McGowan says, it might learn a new trick: “If I get on the counter, Mum or Dad will throw a treat.”</p> <p>Consistently provide the rewards when your cat is not on the counter, and it’ll learn that being in other places gets it a reward, according to McGowan.</p> <p><strong>Teach it that counters are boring</strong></p> <p>It’s the old switcheroo! With this technique, you’re training your cat to choose a new place to hang out, one that’s still at the height level it prefers. Place a tall chair or stool near the counter, then reward your four-legged friend each time it sits there.</p> <p>We know what you’re thinking: This sounds counterintuitive. Won’t the cat use the barstool to jump onto the counter? “Yes, but they were getting on the counter anyway. The point is that you only reward them when they’re on the stool,” says Bell. “When you catch your cat on the stool, reward them with something of great value to them.”</p> <p>Don’t place the cat on the stool yourself. But you can lure it up to the stool by putting treats on it. If your cat jumps up on the counter during this training phase, play it cool. Remember, some cats have learned that being picked up from the counter means they’re going to get affection and cuddles. “Don’t say anything. Don’t look at them. Just quickly and gently set them on the ground,” says Bell.</p> <p>The goal is to show your cat there is nothing exciting about being on the counter. It only gets rewarded when it’s on the stool or high chair. “They learn quickly which location gets rewarded,” Bell adds.</p> <p>Granted, training takes some time and patience, but once cats realise rewards come when they’re on the barstool, you’ll have cat-free counters, Bell says. Once your pet nails the behaviour, you can stop giving it treats every time it gets on the stool. “That could cause a slot machine behaviour effect of ‘I’ll keep trying until I win,’” she says.</p> <p><strong>Set up cat-climbing alternatives</strong></p> <p>You’ve probably heard the saying “location, location, location.” It tops the wish list of most hopeful home buyers. For cats, that location is vertical. “Cats are drawn to high places to perch and survey the world, as they feel more secure from a high vantage point,” McGowan says. You can satisfy their desire for elevated living without sacrificing your clean countertops.</p> <p>For a simple and free option, Bell suggests putting a nightstand close to a dresser so your cat can easily jump to the dresser. Make it extra comfy and put a cosy blanket or cat bed on top of the dresser.</p> <p>You can give your cat a bird’s-eye view with products that put it at eye level with the action – wall shelves and bridges, window seats perfect for cat naps and cat trees with built-in scratching posts, toys and plush hideaways. Next, find the answer to a question every cat-parent has had once in their life – do cats know their names?</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/food-home-garden/pets/6-reasons-cats-need-some-indoor-rules" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Reader's Digest</a>. </em></p>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

Dr Chris Brown calls out Seven’s “stupid” Logies decision

<p dir="ltr">Dr Chris Brown has jokingly called out Seven’s “stupid” decision to make him co-host of this year’s TV Week Logies red carpet.</p> <p dir="ltr">The <em>Bondi Vet</em> star is set to present at the red carpet alongside Sonia Kruger on July 30, but he is still unsure as to why he was chosen.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Can I just tell you, it is one of the more stupid decisions ever made by Channel 7 to put me on the Red Carpet,” he joked during his guest appearance on Triple M’s<em> Mick &amp; MG in the Morning</em> on July 13.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I know nothing about fashion... and I am also colourblind,” he said, which made the radio hosts chuckle.</p> <p dir="ltr">Brown wondered how he would comment on the stars’ gowns given his condition.</p> <p dir="ltr">“The joy that I’m going to have in telling women that I love their green dress and (I’m) gonna be told it’s red... what could possibly go wrong?” he told the radio hosts.</p> <p dir="ltr">“The insulting nature of my commentary is going to be worth it.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Mick Molloy then joked that he was “going to make the carpet green” for extra laughs, to which Brown replied: “it might as well be, Micky”.</p> <p dir="ltr">Brown and Kruger will present the star-studded event and bring viewers straight into the action from the Logies red carpet at Sydney’s The Star on Sunday, July 30.</p> <p dir="ltr">This will be Brown’s first official role at Seven since he<a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/the-doctor-is-out-chris-brown-changes-the-script" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> left <em>Network Ten</em></a> in February, where he had worked for the last 15 years.</p> <p><em>Image: News.com.au/ Triple M’s Mick &amp; MG in the Morning</em></p>

TV

Placeholder Content Image

What happens when doctors don’t act as they should? And what’s the ruling against neurosurgeon Charlie Teo?

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/christopher-rudge-108366">Christopher Rudge</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a></em></p> <p>After several years of controversy, and both praise and blame for his willingness to perform high-risk surgeries, neurosurgeon Charlie Teo has been subject to <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWMPSC//2023/2.html">practice restrictions</a> by a special committee of the Medical Council of New South Wales.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Charlie Teo was fighting two complaints of unprofessional conduct from the families of two different women, who say they were not properly warned about the risk of death before consenting to surgery. <a href="https://t.co/gvhiQdWnRF">https://t.co/gvhiQdWnRF</a></p> <p>— ABC News (@abcnews) <a href="https://twitter.com/abcnews/status/1678952850238349312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 12, 2023</a></p></blockquote> <p>So how does the process of restricting doctors’ medical practice work? And what did this mean for Teo?</p> <h2>How are health practitioners regulated in Australia?</h2> <p>Health practitioner regulators in Australia aren’t generally empowered to make <em>punitive</em> decisions about health professionals’ conduct.</p> <p>Instead, Australia’s health practitioner regulations (the so-called “national law”) require decision-makers to exercise their powers to <em>protect</em> patients. They operate in what is often called a “<a href="https://www.mcnsw.org.au/sites/default/files/case_note_-_legal_case_note_-_medical_council_v_lee_-_concerning_stay_applications.pdf">protective jurisdiction</a>”.</p> <p>And though the regulator may sometimes impose fines, it is rare. That’s because it may do so only <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-86a#sec.146C">when</a> it is “satisfied there is no other order, or combination of orders, that is appropriate in the public interest”.</p> <p>In all state <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-86a#sec.3A">versions</a> of the national law, regulators may <a href="https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-hprnlq#sec.3A">restrict doctors’ medical practices</a> only if it’s “necessary to ensure health services are provided safely and of an appropriate quality”.</p> <p>But the NSW national law includes additional wording. In all its decisions, the regulator <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-2009-86a#sec.3A">must regard</a> the “health and safety of the public” as the “paramount consideration.”</p> <p>This can have unusual effects. As the <a href="https://www.ama.com.au/sites/default/files/2022-03/Ahpra---Regulatory-guide---a-full-guide.PDF">Australian Health Practitioners Regulation Agency (AHPRA)</a> acknowledges, requirements to protect the public may sometimes result in “a determination that is harsher on the practitioner than if punishment were the sole purpose”.</p> <h2>What happened in the Teo case?</h2> <p>In late 2022, proceedings commenced against Teo via two complaints by the New South Wales <a href="https://www.hccc.nsw.gov.au/">Health Care Complaints Commission</a> (HCCC).</p> <p>The complaints concerned two brain surgeries on two patients. Both involved “radical resections” (“en bloc” removals) of these patients’ brain tumours. Tragically, neither patient regained consciousness after the operations and both patients died – one just ten days after.</p> <p>In legal terms, the complaints were based on a provision of the national law that defines certain categories of wrongdoing as <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-2009-86a#sec.139B">unsatisfactory professional conduct</a>.</p> <p>The HCCC alleged Teo had engaged in two categories of this wrongdoing: conduct below the standard reasonably expected of a doctor of his training and experience, and unethical conduct.</p> <p>The HCCC alleged Teo’s decisions to operate were inappropriate and substandard because the risks of “neurological morbidity” (so-called brain death) outweighed the (potential) benefits of the interventions. There was no allegation that Teo’s surgical skills were substandard.</p> <p>The surgeries were also unethical, it was alleged, as informed consent had not been obtained from the patients and one patient was required to pay an expensive upfront fee in circumstances of clear vulnerability.</p> <h2>What were the findings and consequences for Teo?</h2> <p>The HCCC Professional Standards Committee, made up of an experienced judge, two expert neurosurgeons and a lay member, applied the civil standard of proof – the balance of probabilities – to the evidence. Though the committee is not legally bound to <a href="https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-86a#sch.5D-sec.2">apply the rules of evidence</a> applied in criminal courts, it decided, broadly for procedural fairness reasons, to receive and consider all of Teo’s unchallenged evidence.</p> <p>In a decision of more than 100 pages, the committee found Teo guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct. It determined to “reprimand” Teo (this means a <a href="https://www.medicalboard.gov.au/sitecore/content/Home/Registration/Monitoring-and-compliance/Removal-of-reprimands.aspx">record of “reprimand” is</a> noted on the public copy of his practitioner licence) and to impose four conditions on his practice.</p> <p>Three conditions involve increased oversight of his practice records. But a more restrictive condition will require Teo to obtain written support from a neurosurgeon approved by the Medical Council of New South Wales for any neurosurgery involving “recurring malignant tumours in the brain or brain stem”.</p> <p>While this order was hotly contested in the proceedings, the committee determined that, for reasons including Teo’s evidenced “isolation from his peers”, the condition was “necessary to protect the health and safety of the public”.</p> <h2>What about patient autonomy or clinical freedom?</h2> <p>Difficult ethical questions arise in medical regulation. Here, the committee had to balance the practitioner’s right to practise medicine against the paramount consideration of patient health and safety and against the patient’s right to exercise autonomy.</p> <p>This last right is sometimes seen as a patient’s <a href="https://jme.bmj.com/content/40/5/293">moral right to be wrong</a>. On these considerations, the committee relied on accepted evidence from ethical experts that proposed that, as a matter of ethics, "a surgeon does not have a licence to undertake any conceivable procedure even with the agreement or acquiescence of the patient."</p> <h2>Is medical regulation strict in Australia and NSW?</h2> <p>Many <a href="https://www.ahpra.gov.au/News/2016-08-10-Independent-review-on-chaperoning.aspx">reviews</a> and <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3668054">academic</a> <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34907681/">studies</a> find the national law to be fair and appropriate, or not strict enough.</p> <p>However, some scholars and representative groups including the Australian Medical Association (AMA) find some aspects <a href="https://www.ama.com.au/ama-rounds/16-july-2021/articles/upholding-natural-justice-doctors">are</a> too <a href="https://www.ama.com.au/media/law-change-threatens-doctors-hard-earned-reputations-and-risks-their-mental-health">strict</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36763016/">unsympathetic</a> to practitioners.</p> <p>But a potted history of NSW medical history showcases how successive medical scandals have tended to drive strong regulatory reform. In 1984, when the tragic impacts of the shocking and unethical treatment at <a href="https://piac.asn.au/legal-help/public-interest-cases/deep-sleep-tragedy/">Chelmsford psychiatric hospital</a> were <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ALRCRefJl/1988/77.pdf">coming to light</a>, NSW was the first jurisdiction globally to establish a complaints body for health consumers. Known as the Complaints Unit, this body is now the HCCC.</p> <p>Another milestone occurred in the early 2000s following several scandals, including the so-called “Butcher of Bega” episode. An <a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/ladocs/inquiries/2112/Final%20Report%20on%20Graeme%20Reeves.pdf">inquiry</a> into these events prompted the NSW government to introduce laws permitting medical practitioners to be immediately suspended if the regulator considered it was in the “public interest”.</p> <p>This was the first power of its kind in Australia and was only adopted into the broader national law of other states in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1071/AH19293">2018</a>.</p> <h2>What next for Teo?</h2> <p>Teo may appeal the orders of the committee to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal or seek a review of the conditions. But as the conditions are not subject to an end date, it appears they will otherwise continue indefinitely.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209612/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/christopher-rudge-108366">Christopher Rudge</a>, Law lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Instagram</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happens-when-doctors-dont-act-as-they-should-and-whats-the-ruling-against-neurosurgeon-charlie-teo-209612">original article</a>.</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Wimbledon’s history-making rule change comes into effect

<p dir="ltr">While Wimbledon is widely anticipated for its star-studded tennis line-up and fierce competition, the 2023 tournament is bringing something new to the table - or rather, to the dressing room. </p> <p dir="ltr">Since the tournament’s inception, the rules have required all players to wear white - including but not limited to the likes of bras and underwear - while competing in the prestigious event.</p> <p dir="ltr">However, in the wake of heavy criticism and petition from Wimbledon’s menstruating competitors, <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/lifestyle/beauty-style/wimbledon-to-make-key-change-to-all-white-dress-code">the All England Club finally relaxed the strict dress code</a>, allowing for players the opportunity to wear coloured undershorts rather than just white.</p> <p dir="ltr">And while the move was announced in 2022, the 2023 contest will be the first time players - and viewers - experience the update.</p> <p dir="ltr">Most were thrilled with the outcome, and were looking forward to reaping the benefits of the long-awaited update, but some players had their hesitations and weren’t sure if they’d be hopping onboard with the others. </p> <p dir="ltr">As 2022 Wimbledon finalist and Tunisian tennis star Ons Jabeur told <em>The Mirror</em>, there were “two things” holding her back. </p> <p dir="ltr">“One thing, it’s better definitely not to be paranoid,” she allowed, before noting that “the other thing, everybody will know that you have your period. So I’m not sure which part of it is good.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I don’t think I’m going to wear anything,” she revealed. “If all the girls will wear it, I think it will make it better. But I think it’s a great thing that Wimbledon is trying to help women feel more comfortable on the court.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The campaign behind that ‘help’ skyrocketed in 2022 when Judy Murray - tennis coach and mother to Andy and Jamie Murray - declared her support for the cause. </p> <p dir="ltr">She later voiced her support for the update while speaking to <em>CLAY</em>, telling the publication that “it was many years ago that perhaps Wimbledon didn't understand the trauma of women players playing during the period, fearing what might happen if you wear white. </p> <p dir="ltr">“Thank goodness that's changed."</p> <p dir="ltr">And the people in charge had positive words to share on the matter too, with All England Club CEO Sally Bolton releasing a statement that read, "we are committed to supporting the players and listening to their feedback as to how they can perform at their best …</p> <p dir="ltr">"It is our hope that this rule adjustment will help players focus purely on their performance by relieving a potential source of anxiety."</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Influencer’s extensive list of plane etiquette rules reignites age-old debate

<p dir="ltr">A travel influencer has shared an extensive list of what you should and shouldn’t do on a plane, reigniting an age-old debate about in-flight etiquette. </p> <p dir="ltr">Ben Keenan, a frequent traveller from Seattle in the US, posted his list of dos and don’ts in a now-viral TikTok, saying it is “disgusting” for a passenger to take off their shoes and you should always check behind before reclining your seat.</p> <p dir="ltr">Keenan begins his list with his least controversial point, saying travellers should always greet their flight attendants when boarding the plane, pointing out that it costs nothing to be friendly and polite. </p> <p dir="ltr">He then broaches the topic of taking off your shoes on a plane, which was met with mixed responses. </p> <p dir="ltr">“Do not take off your shoes or socks when you’re sitting in your seat, you disgusting people,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">He went on to urge people not to pick an aisle seat if you plan on sleeping through your journey. </p> <p dir="ltr">“When selecting your seat before the flight, go ahead and determine what type of flyer you are. Are you someone that sleeps or are you someone that’s awake?” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Because if you’re on an aisle seat, you need to be prepared to stand up and move out of the way multiple times during the flight – and I know this sucks but that truly means that you should not be a sleeper.”</p> <p dir="ltr">He continued, “Speaking of sleeping on the plane, if you’re going to recline your seat to do that, go ahead and make sure the people behind you aren’t resting their head on your seat or using that tray table because do you know how many times I’ve been smashed in the head by somebody who just aggressively leans back.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Keenan’s list of etiquette rules was met with a mixed response, with people both praising and criticising certain unspoken rules. </p> <p dir="ltr">“Nope … definitely taking my shoes off! And I’m not turning back to check … I will recline gently though,” one traveller said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“If it is a long flight, shoes are allowed to come off (8+ hours),” another wrote.</p> <p dir="ltr"> One flyer agreed with Keenan’s rules, admitting, “I approach every flight like I'm being graded, and the flight attendants will give me an A+ for my flight etiquette.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Another bemused viewer put it simply, writing, “I’ve never flown but this all seems like common sense?”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image credits: TikTok</em></p>

Travel Tips

Placeholder Content Image

5 golden rules for safe shore excursions

<p>While safety is paramount on any holiday, there are a few key things you can do to stay safe when disembarking your cruise for a trip to shore. These are our top tips for staying safe on excursions.</p> <p><strong>1. Do your research</strong></p> <p>As with all travel, safety can vary hugely between destinations when you’re cruising. On cruises around Australia, in the South Pacific or New Zealand you’ll feel as safe as you do at home and shouldn’t need to take any extra precautions. For other destinations, do some research online before you go, looking at sites like Smartraveller that list any official government warnings in place. You can also chat to your cruise director or some of the shore excursion team to see if there are any specific details you should be aware of.</p> <p><strong>2. Minimise your risk</strong></p> <p>Generally, the best advice is to try to blend in and avoid looking like an obvious tourist. Don’t wear lots of jewellery or carry an expensive camera around your neck. Always keep your belongings with you and be particularly careful in crowded places like markets. Try to travel in groups rather than on your own and keep alcohol intake to a minimum – a drunk target is an easy target.</p> <p><strong>3. Only take the essentials</strong></p> <p>If the worst should happen and you are robbed, you don’t want to be carrying all of your money and every credit card. Only take what you need and leave the rest in your cabin safe. You shouldn’t need your passport to reboard the ship, so never take it ashore with you. Mobile phones are one of the most commonly stolen items from tourists, so unless you desperately need it this is another one to stick in the safe.</p> <p><strong>4. Join an organised tour</strong></p> <p>If you’re nervous about exploring a port on your own, then book a shore excursion through the cruise line. That way you’ll be travelling with a group of other passengers and at least one guide, most likely a local. Cruise lines only work with reputable companies so you can feel confident that you won’t be ripped off or left in danger.</p> <p><strong>5. Check the safety gear</strong></p> <p>Many cruise ports offer exciting excursions like hiking, ATV tours, diving or zip lining. Unfortunately, not everywhere is as strict with their safety standards as Australia and you may arrive at your excursion to find out of date equipment, no protective gear or a route that makes you feel uncomfortable. Use common sense – if you don’t feel safe, don’t do it. You also need to be aware of your own physical limits. Don’t push yourself too hard, especially in the heat, or you could quickly find yourself in the local hospital.</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images </em></p>

Cruising

Our Partners