Tag: SMH

Roebuck v Swanton

The SMH’s two best cricket columnists go head to head today with accounts from the first test in South Africa. I’ve always been a fan of Roebuck – but I think Swanton is gaining the ascendancy as the Herald’s best cricket scribe. 

Sportswriting remains the one place in the English language where a penchant for wordplay, particularly for cliche, simile, metaphor and analogy delivered without apology – is not a curse but a blessing. 

Here are some examples from today:
Swanton:

“The overnight total was sneakily strong on a ground where you could bowl an apple and get swing and seam.”

“Michael Clarke came in, full of pep. Then again, Clarke could be stabbed in a dark Johannesburg alley and remain full of pep.”

Roebuck

“Despite encountering the daunting combination of Dale Steyn in full flight, a shaky score on the board and the sort of light featured in the more disreputable discos, North looked confident as he took guard. “

“From the outset the new man’s work on the leg-side was efficient. Anything heading towards his pads was neatly tucked with a bat as straight as a Roman road.”

“Given the chance to drive through the covers, he does so with an unexpected flash. Bending, he pushes his hands at the ball and dispatches with a bat as loose as a drunkard’s tie. It’s the only shot he does not control and the ball hurries away, sometimes off the meat, sometimes off the grizzle.”

February 28, 2009

Passing Degas

Annabel Crabb reports on an uproar in Federal Parliament yesterday regarding the National Gallery’s purchase of a $1.1 million painting of a woman going to the toilet. It’s by Degas. The gallery bought it at an auction. In the interests of protecting any prudish readers I have painted clothes onto her to include her here.

degas1

In the real thing she’s not wearing any clothes. Seems a little tasteless to me. The opposition seized on the opposition to slam the Government for the national institution’s decision to purchase the painting rather than using the money to create jobs (some of the money came from taxpayers, most from benefactors).

Line of the day:

“”It’s not as if this is Blue Poles. It’s Yellow Pools!” protested one Opposition tactician, believed to be Joe Hockey.”

So should the Government be spending money on foreign art? Aren’t Australian artists going hungry? This could have fed twenty artists in Australia for a year – and paid for 20 paintings.

February 26, 2009

Who said this…

“I had two women police officers come around who looked like cabaret artistes – all fishnet stockings and deep cleavage – and they did not exactly engender confidence.”

Answer: Australia’s celebrated feminist Germaine Greer after her home was broken into. Talk about undermining equality in the workplace.

February 25, 2009

Crabb on Costello

The political coverage in the SMH today is all about one thing. The schism in the Liberal Party. It’s nice to have the Herald’s attention drawn so far away from any other schism.

Here’s a nice little analogy that even Ben – analogy hater of some renown – is sure to appreciate. Crabb argues that Costello is waiting in the political wings. Costello keeps saying “I’m doing nothing.”

“But Costello is like a hippo in a ballerina skirt – he’s kind of noticeable even when he’s not doing anything.”

February 21, 2009

Devine intervention

Miranda Devine sparked controversy by pre-emptively blaming green policy for the fires in the SMH last week. There was an outcry. I even wrote about it. I started following a fake Miranda Devine on Twitter (there’s also a fake Andrew Bolt) – but I can’t link to them because Twitter is down again.

The same venerated publication has another scribe – who leans more to the left – Elizabeth Farrelly. She fired this verbiage seemingly in the direction of her colleague in her take on events.

“Cut the trees! Burn the undergrowth! Hunt the sharks! Lynch the greens! Reprise, repay, repel. But in truth, to swim fish-filled, murky waters at twilight is to tattoo a big ‘BAIT’ sign on your behind. And to inhabit the bush, especially as climate change takes hold, is to make yourself fuel.

Certainly, we should feel compassion. And certainly, there should be regulations. Quite probably there should be more assiduous back-burning. But to blame green policies – to cull already endangered shark species, to reduce tree cover – is to blame nature for human folly.”

Now all the Herald’s big guns (except Annabel Crabb and Peter Hartcher who both write exclusively about politics) have had their say on the matter.

February 19, 2009

Benaud steps down

Sad. But now I guess we’ll see how accurate the 12th Man’s portrayal of the handover process was.

I’ll never be able to think of Benaud as anything but a constipated turtle thanks to someone who made that comment in my youth, but cricket won’t be the same without him.

Oh well, as long as Bill Lawry doesn’t get more air time out of this I’ll be ok.

February 18, 2009

Gittins on Disaster Reporting

The discussion on the reporting of Disasters goes on, here on my post, and elsewhere. Ross Gittins, the SMH’s chief economic reporter, has an interesting piece on it from an insider’s perspective. It’s worth a read. I’ll admit I’ve played devil’s advocate a little in discussions on my post. I think there’s a need to cover disasters and coverage can be helpful to highlight the plight of people suffering as a result of the event. And I think the bushfires are a big deal. The biggest disaster we’ve had to confront on our soil. I stand by those comments. But I also agree with Stuss and Amy that the coverage has gone too far and for too long.

Here’s Gittins’ thesis:

“But media coverage of this one’s gone way over the top. And it’s served to strengthen my suspicion that the community’s reaction to natural disasters is exploitative, voyeuristic, unfair, self-gratifying and even pathological.”

Here are some gems from Gittins thoughtful piece:

On why we watch

“Our emotion-driven caring is highly selective. People with problems get wonderful treatment provided their problems make good TV footage and for the 15 minutes they’re in the media spotlight. People with chronic (old-hat), unphotogenic problems get ignored.”

“Modern city life leaves us with weaker connections to our extended families and neighbours, so whereas once we could let our emotions loose on the misadventures of people we knew, now we need the mass media to provide our emotional exercise.”

On why they broadcast

“Our preoccupation lasts a week or two before the media senses our waning interest and turns away, waiting for the next natural disaster to get excited about.”

“But don’t blame it all on the media. They do what they do because they know it’s what their audience wants.”

“They want the media to give their feelings of sympathy, sorrow and grief a good workout.”

On why we give

“But I also suspect that feeling sympathy for the victims of disasters and rushing to make donations is intended to make us feel good about ourselves.”

“Why does ABC Classic FM carry ads “urging” its listeners to donate? Because management wants its listeners to think well of the station. Why does a bank take out full-page ads announcing all the concessions it’s prepared to make to its affected customers? Because it wants to improve its battered image. I wonder whether the cost of those concessions will come out of the bank’s profits or be spread between its other customers.”

On politics

“Politicians want to be wherever the TV cameras are trained on something exciting. They want to be seen as always on the job, demonstrating their humanity by expressing their profound sympathy for the victims and acting like generals who lead from the front.”

“Like so many things, natural disasters advantage the political incumbents over their opposition. But politicians also act out of fear – fear of the criticism they’d attract from know-all talkback jockeys should they fail visit the scene, or should government agencies be judged to have bungled their response to the tragedy.”

On the shelf life of the coverage

The reason I’m cynical is that I know how fleeting all the professed concern is. I hate things that are fashionable, where everyone has the same opinion and does the same thing at the same time.

But like all fashions, it never lasts. Our preoccupation lasts a week or two before the media senses our waning interest and turns away, waiting for the next natural disaster to get excited about.

February 18, 2009

Black mark on green movement

While the green movement are trying not to jump up and down screaming “I told you so” when it comes to climate change and the fires/floods covering parts of Australia at the moment, and the loony “Christian” fringe is out blaming abortion laws, the right wing of the Australian media is lining up its ducks and preemptively declaring it open season on the green argument.

Arch conservative Herald columnist Miranda Devine – the paper’s attempt at providing “balanced” coverage – has weighed into the debate early. Blaming the green movement for the fires. I’m unsympathetic to anyone trying to advance their ideologies on the basis of tragedy. And giving air to this just “fans that flame” so to speak. Perhaps a poor choice of words…

The Herald ran this story alongside a piece on a resident who became an environmental vandal hero – after illegally clearing trees on his property to create a firebreak.  Perhaps the Fairfax group has decided inflicting “earth hour” upon the whole world wasn’t enough to give their environmental credentials any credibility next to News Ltd’s “One degree” committment. Maybe they’ve decided to throw out the centre left contingency and pitch to the Telegraph’s established right wing core… but here’s some of what Miss Devine had to say (readers from Townsville should note that she’s the columnist who said people who live in the tropics shouldn’t get cyclone aid because of their choice to live in a cyclone zone)… She’s shaping up as the Germaine Greer of the right (funnily enough she’d consider Greer as a nemesis in the true sense of the word).

“It was the power of green ideology over government to oppose attempts to reduce fuel hazards before a megafire erupts, and which prevents landholders from clearing vegetation to protect themselves.

So many people need not have died so horribly. The warnings have been there for a decade. If politicians are intent on whipping up a lynch mob to divert attention from their own culpability, it is not arsonists who should be hanging from lamp-posts but greenies.

Governments appeasing the green beast have ignored numerous state and federal bushfire inquiries over the past decade, almost all of which have recommended increasing the practice of “prescribed burning”. Also known as “hazard reduction”, it is a methodical regime of burning off flammable ground cover in cooler months, in a controlled fashion, so it does not fuel the inevitable summer bushfires.”

Scarily, Devine actually makes a bit of sense regarding what is a stupid green policy. It’s just not the right time to be launching ideologically motivated political attacks.

February 12, 2009

A couple of extra links

Interesting piece in the SMH on Darwin and limitations of Darwinism/new atheism as a worldview by Charles Sturt University Theology Lecturer Tom Frame. Highlight:

“Even his [Dawkin’s] much-publicised atheism lacks commitment and courage. It is a cultural preference rather than a philosophical conviction. Nietzsche and Camus believed the death of God would be revolutionary and terrifying. Jean-Paul Sartre said “atheism is a cruel and long-range affair”. All that Dawkins can offer is a revival of old-fashioned secular humanism, whose hopes and aspirations are summarised in John Lennon’s insipid 1971 composition Imagine.”

And arch-conservative Andrew Bolt on the unfortunate statement from Catch the Fire Ministries.  Highlight – the whole string of comments showing why this isn’t a case of being seasoned with salt and loving non-believers.

February 10, 2009

Death by firing squad

More than 100 people are now known to be dead due to these fires in southern Australia. They weren’t all deliberately lit, but some were.

I don’t understand the inner workings of the mind of an arsonist. That’s probably a good thing. I confess, I enjoy fire as much as the next pyromaniac. Scores of plastic soldiers can attest to that. But I do not understand how someone hears an extreme fire danger warning and decides to light a bunch of fires.

Here’s a study of the inner workings of an arsonists mind – and a “profile” of your average arsonist based on FBI cases…
Profile of an Arsonist
1. Have a below average IQ – somewhere between 70 and 90 points, one in four arsonists will fall below 70 points – the level at which people are considered mentally retarded.
2. They will often be “angry”.
3. Half of all arsons are committed by those younger than age 18; the other half is typically in their late 20s.
4.In arson cases involving older people, the motivation is usually for profit.
5. About 90% of arsonists are male.
6. Arsonists are are usually white (in the US).
7. If the arsonist is not angry there’s a fair chance they’re sexually aroused by fires.

Potential “red flags” to identify juvenile arsonists:

  • Children who start playing with matches or fire as early as age 3
  • Children who frequently engage in “daredevil” behavior, especially near fire
  • Children who mix chemicals or engage in “secret” fire settings in which they try different mixtures
  • Those who are noticeably excited while watching fires

Perhaps the media needs to reconsider broadcasting such warnings. There’s pretty much a blanket ban on reporting suicides in Australian news because of the fear of inspiring copycats. I wonder if the psyche of a clearly mentally unfit arsonist requires a similar level of protection. Perhaps a greater level given the harm they’re capable of causing.

There’s anecdotal evidence that arsonists are often members of the volunteer fire brigade – they use their training and knowledge to set the best possible fire, and then get to play around trying to put it out. That’s the mark of a sick mind.

The good news is that the perpetrators will face murder charges if caught.

February 9, 2009

When will she go away?

“Former US Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin is still mad at media coverage of her candidacy, particularly “anonymous, pathetic bloggers” who she says spread falsehoods about her.”

Guilty as charged. Although I’m not anonymous. And I don’t think anything I said was false. From the SMH.

“”If I were giving advice to myself back on the day my candidacy was announced, I’d say, ‘Tell the campaign that you’ll be callin’ some of the shots. Don’t just assume that they know you well enough to make all your decisions for ya,” Palin said.”

That would have been a real difference maker. She can’t open her mouth without sounding like an illiterate yokel.

“When I was in high school, my desire was to be a sportscaster,” she said. “Until I learned that you’d have to move to Bristol, Connecticut. It was far away. So instead, I had a daughter and named her Bristol.””

February 6, 2009

More stimulating discussion

“By contrast, new converts to Keynesianism, such as Rudd and Barack Obama, believe in a positive multiplier. They believe extra government spending, like handouts to those most likely to spend it, creates new income on top of the governmental spend, as the unemployed are put to work.

This process is brilliantly satirised by Norman Lindsay’s magic pudding, which freely recreates itself the more that is eaten. The magic pudding perfectly captures the unmet promises of Australian politicians.”

UNSW Professor of Finance Peter Swan in the SMH.

I probably tend to think this policy is a bad idea. But I want to have my cake and eat it too. How’s that for a mixed metaphor.

I would like the government to give me $950. It’s only fair after they taxed me to give all that money to other people.

But I think it’s a bad idea for them to give other people money. I suspect a large amount will be whacked into paying off debt or savings accounts. Which is a positive cultural turn.

Treasury secretary Ken Henry says the stimulus will work – and interest rates will still need to be lowered. At least I think that’s what I heard on the Today Show this morning. If we weren’t planning to become students again at some point in the future now would be a great time to buy. Although I think there’s more hurt for home prices to come.

February 6, 2009

Today’s linkage February 6th

Best of the interweb

  • Coffee – My coffee page.
  • Tarzan Turnbull swings into a jungle full of trouble – Annabel Crabb on Turnbull#039;s fiscal stimulus opposition:
    quot;Swinging through the trees, Tarzan Turnbull alighted before the dispatch box and, giving his chest a vigorous, if figurative thump, performed his most dazzling feat of machismo yet.quot;

    quot;His colleagues quickly caught the crazy-brave spirit.

    quot;When somebody holds a gun to your head, maybe it#039;s a bit silly, but I say – #039;Well mate, pull the trigger#039;,quot; offered Joe Hockey, always a man for frankness in a crisis.

    The Prime Minister won#039;t hesitate to pull the trigger, either.

    The genius of his $42 billion gambit is that it is a sophisticated quot;Vote Yes, Or The Puppy Gets Itquot; device.

    Anyone voting against it will need to explain to forlorn local kiddies why they don#039;t get a school library, or to sad-eyed single parents why $950 won#039;t be coming their way after all.quot;

February 5, 2009

Stimulating discussion

There’s a bunch of interesting commentary on the current stimulus package and associated bickering. It’s stimulating, if you’re into that sort of thing.

The Libs are taking the high “unpopular road” looking to block it. Claiming they’re doing the right thing, while the Labor Party is politicking “like a scared soldier firing all their ammo at once” – not a bad quote there from Turnbull.

It’s a dangerous game keeping money from voters while calling for lower taxes. Looks a bit like protecting the wealthy. Trickle down economics. I know I’ll be annoyed if they block it.

If Rudd wanted to score maximum points out of this politically he should have gone with a much bigger figure than $950. Say $3000. Something the coalition would have to block, rather than just grandstanding. Then when they blocked it and triggered a double dissolution the coalition would have to try dislodging a popular PM, having just robbed the voters of $3000. Political suicide. How much is a vote worth I wonder…

Articles from the SMH are written by, or quote, the following people:

Peter Costello

“Rudd, the fiscal conservative of last year, was attacking the Coalition government because it hadn’t cut spending enough. He promised to do more. He wasn’t worried about all those “neo-liberal” ideas on careful spending, balanced budgets and low debt. He was complaining it hadn’t gone far enough.”

Costello Re: the last stimulus package…

“If the purpose of the payment was to boost sales at Woolworths, the Government should have bought the goods and distributed them to pensioners and families. But it is a low-quality use of $10 billion.”

And more commentary from Annabel Crabb… on parliament yesterday…

“Hilarious nerd insults were exchanged.Rudd accused Turnbull of fancying Milton Friedman, and Turnbull retaliated by calling Rudd “Whitlamite”, the nastiest word in the Liberal nerd insult dictionary.

Then Lindsay Tanner accused Julie Bishop of having a soft spot for the Reagan-era economist Arthur Laffer.

Really, they all sounded like back row hecklers at a second-year economics open mike night.

Debate was then suspended for several minutes while a noisy band of protesters shrieked: “Human rights for all. Stop the intervention.”

In case you were wondering, they were not talking about the socialist state’s intervention in the free market.”

Even Top Gear’s Jeremy Clarkson, out here on an Australian tour, weighed in with this sterling commentary:

“”He (Rudd) genuinely looked terrified. The poor man, he’s actually seen the books.“[In the UK] we’ve got this one-eyed Scottish idiot, he keeps telling us everything’s fine and he’s saved the world and we know he’s lying, but he’s smooth at telling us.”

The last word goes to Economics columnist Ross Gittins – who explains that this stimulus is unusual but might work.

“But it will be the most anticipated recession we’ve had. Normally we get the recession and then the response to it. This time we’re getting the cure before we’ve seen all the symptoms.

Why? Because so much of the global recession we are caught up in emanates from the Wall Street debacle. Since the crisis reached its peak in October we’ve been able to see its consequences coming, like a slow-motion tsunami rolling across the Pacific.”

February 4, 2009

Bookmarks for January 4th

Best of the interweb:

February 3, 2009