Aussie/Kiwi media

Xavi6

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, look, I couldn't believe that the world contained a newspaper worse than the Sunday Independent until I moved to Perth and found the West Australian.

Between ads on every second page and editorial copied and pasted from AAP, it's an absolute joke of a newspaper.

The dunny thing is, I know a few journalists working there who are excellent but aren't allowed sneeze without being pulled up on it by the editorial team. The suppression is terrible to the point where a good few are taking voluntary redundancy just to gtfo.

jackbhoy

Xavi6 wrote: »

Between ads on every second page and editorial copied and pasted from AAP, it's an absolute joke of a newspaper.

The dunny thing is, I know a few journalists working there who are excellent but aren't allowed sneeze without being pulled up on it by the editorial team. The suppression is terrible to the point where a good few are taking voluntary redundancy just to gtfo.

I have seen that quite a bit in Aus, where you can tell some journos are quite good writers and could be excellent but they have to toe the editorial line. But then most are just hacks who have no idea how to construct a coherent paragraph.

The editing and proof reading is also shocking at times, you often see
paragraph, or even sentences within paragraphs, which have been quite obviously removed or amended by editors (probably to reduce word count so it can fit in between surfing cat stories) without any thought to whether the new structure makes any sense.

Peregrinus

The Aussie wrote: »

Are the any breakdown of statistics available?

Lots of one-line quotes, but the authoritative sources of the data are not easy to trace - because, one suspects, it suits the government. The Department publishes a detailed and well-laid-out report on its offshore humanitarian programme each year, full of fascinating information, but there is no corresponding report for the onshore programme, which is the one that covers people who arrive by boat, and then seek asylum.

But the data can be traced, by those willing to do a bit of spadework. The annual reports of the Dept of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs do give some relevant figures, though you'll have to hunt for them, and if you want to compare year to year, or compile figures that aggregate several years, you'll have to do that yourself.

Here, for instance, is the 2008-09 report: http://www.immi.gov.au/about/reports/annual/2008-09/html/. It shows (in section 1.2.2) that 217 Refugee Status Assessments were completed for people who had arrived by boat on Christmas Island. Of these, 206 were sucessful and 11 were unsuccessful (and one of the "unsuccessful" determinations was reversed on appeal).

mandrake04

Peregrinus wrote: »

That would be just after they've thrown their children overboard, right? :rolleyes:

I don't think there have been any reports of children being thrown over board, just documents. :rolleyes:

Peregrinus

mandrake04 wrote: »

I don't think there have been any reports of children being thrown over board, just documents. :rolleyes:

You've completely forgotten the reports of children being thrown overboard in the "Children Overboard" Affair, then, have you?

mandrake04

Peregrinus wrote: »

You've completely forgotten the reports of children being thrown overboard in the "Children Overboard" Affair, then, have you?

Never even heard of it, only been living in Australia 7 years and by the looks of it that case was over 11 years ago.

So how did I forget?

Still doesn't mean that these people today 2012 don't throw their documents overboard.

Peregrinus

mandrake04 wrote: »

Never even heard of it, only been living in Australia 7 years and by the looks of it that case was over 11 years ago.

So how did I forget?

It;s pretty notorious, and still much talked about today. You don't have to take too much interest in refugee/asylum seeker matters to be aware of it. Like yourself, I didn't come to Australia until afterwards either - I arrived in 2003 - and I can honestly say that you're the first person I've ever come across who didn't instantly recognise a reference to "children overboard".

mandrake04 wrote: »

Still doesn't mean that these people today 2012 don't throw their documents overboard.

It should perhaps enourage you to treat such reports with scepticism, though.

What evidence do you have that people are throwing their documents overboard?

mandrake04

Peregrinus wrote: »

It;s pretty notorious, and still much talked about today. You don't have to take too much interest in refugee/asylum seeker matters to be aware of it. Like yourself, I didn't come to Australia until afterwards either - I arrived in 2003 - and I can honestly say that you're the first person I've ever come across who didn't instantly recognise a reference to "children overboard".

I do apologise for not being Mr. Current Affair, all that humanity rubbish is not my game. I have nothing against asylum seekers/boat people as they never did me any harm, but lets face it if the they decided to throw their kids overboard I wont lose much sleep over it... thats their choice and last time I checked it was a free world.

Peregrinus wrote: »

It should perhaps enourage you to treat such reports with scepticism, though.

What evidence do you have that people are throwing their documents overboard?

I read about it on the Parliament of Australia website, then again maybe you are right that I should be sceptical.

Peregrinus

mandrake04 wrote: »

I do apologise for not being Mr. Current Affair, all that humanity rubbish is not my game. I have nothing against asylum seekers/boat people as they never did me any harm, but lets face it if the they decided to throw their kids overboard I wont lose much sleep over it... thats their choice and last time I checked it was a free world.

'Nuff said!

Chiparus

I lived in Australia when the children overboard issue was raised.
One thing that truly shocked me was that the Australian Navy opened fire above the boat filled with civilians.
Most Australians had no problem with this.

The Aussie

Chiparus wrote: »

One thing that truly shocked me was that the Australian Navy opened fire above the boat filled with civilians.
Most Australians had no problem with this.

Most Navies around the world do it after repeated warnings, even the Irish Navy was threatening to fire across the bow of a Fishing Trawler a few years ago, so nothing to get shocked about.

I was not in the country at the time and never heard of it, sounds like a political football that turned square shaped.

Chiparus

They fired warning shots over a boat with women and children, the next step is to fire at the boat.
Yes the Irish navy fired at a fishing boat , and they sunk it.

They also directed a boat to save another boat load of refugees. Then when that ship tried to enter Australian waters they sent in the SAS and arrested the boat. ( MV TAMPA)

catbear

you'd think there'd be a solution to all these boat people by now, after all they've been coming for centuries at this stage!

The Aussie

Peregrinus wrote: »

Lots of one-line quotes, but the authoritative sources of the data are not easy to trace - because, one suspects, it suits the government. The Department publishes a detailed and well-laid-out report on its offshore humanitarian programme each year, full of fascinating information, but there is no corresponding report for the onshore programme, which is the one that covers people who arrive by boat, and then seek asylum.

But the data can be traced, by those willing to do a bit of spadework. The annual reports of the Dept of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs do give some relevant figures, though you'll have to hunt for them, and if you want to compare year to year, or compile figures that aggregate several years, you'll have to do that yourself.

Here, for instance, is the 2008-09 report: http://www.immi.gov.au/about/reports/annual/2008-09/html/. It shows (in section 1.2.2) that 217 Refugee Status Assessments were completed for people who had arrived by boat on Christmas Island. Of these, 206 were sucessful and 11 were unsuccessful (and one of the "unsuccessful" determinations was reversed on appeal).

Your not to far wrong about the facts and figures being buried amongst double speak and fogging and more "spade work" than can be done on a iPad is required, one thing that popped out was the years 2008-9 was also corresponding with the closing of the Nauru detention Centre (2008), Kevin Rudd being elected in December 2007 (the only Prime Minister who has tried to tackle the immigration issue with his Big Australia idea, before he realised to late that it was ultimately leading to his downfall and turned his back on it, C'est La Vie), and of course we can't forget Little Johnny CHoward, who would have had Minsters slowing up claims for Asylum in the lead up to the Federal Election to show he was being tough on "que jumpers", although that religious zealot Tony Abbott will be worse the Little Johnny ever was.

So back to the original question I posed, the answer is Who Knows. As i can't find any statistics relating to those who apply for Asylum arriving by Sea or Air.
Any who....

The Aussie

Chiparus wrote: »

They fired warning shots over a boat with women and children, the next step is to fire at the boat.

Why can't I get Helen Lovejoy's voice out of my head when I read that :rolleyes:
What about the poor Somali "Fisherman" who is only trying to feed his Clan when he gets fired upon by the Military arm of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize winners.
"won't somebody please think of the Somali Fishermans children"

Chiparus wrote: »

Yes the Irish navy fired at a fishing boat , and they sunk it.

According to you own Government they fired over 600 "warning shots" and the trawler in question sunk in bad weather, what evidence do you have that the Irish Navy sunk the trawler?

Peregrinus

Chiparus wrote: »

They fired warning shots over a boat with women and children, the next step is to fire at the boat.

Actually, they fired warning shots not over the boat, but across its bows. That's a long-established signal to heave to, used when a boat has ignored visual signals and audible directions (which this boat had).

The boat didn't heave to, and the next step was not in fact to fire at the boat, but to send a boarding party.

I'm not a fan of the Australian way of handling asylum-seekers who arrive by sea, as you may have gathered, but I don't have any criticisms to make of the way in which this vessel was arrested. (It's what happened after the arrest that bothers me.)

Chiparus

The Aussie wrote: »

According to you own Government they fired over 600 "warning shots" and the trawler in question sunk in bad weather, what evidence do you have that the Irish Navy sunk the trawler?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1301&dat=19841022&id=2boyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=WegDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4897,3913716

catbear

The Slipper case seems to be a complete media circus, the amount of vitriol and hearsay that has passed as "news" only highlights how much the print media is struggling to retain its audience as it circles the sinkhole.

The only paper worth its fee is the Australian Financial Review, anything of real consequence will be covered and with good detail. I really like macrobusiness.com.au for keeping up with economic matters, especially for news related to mining.

The Aussie

Chiparus wrote: »

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1301&dat=19841022&id=2boyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=WegDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4897,3913716

That's the way the media wrongly reported it at the time, but according to the owners of the Sonia when they were claiming the insurance for the sunken vessel it did not sink due to being fired on at all, but due to bad weather. If it had been sunk by the Irish Navy there would never have been a payout. The official line by the Irish Government is the same as the owners of the vessel and the Spanish Government has never made a compliant over the incident.

Mind you it's not lost on me how you linked a page to an Austrailan news paper on a thread bemoaning the quality of the Australian media. Epic LOL is Epic.

Chiparus

So the owners did not make a complaint as if they did they would not have been paid?


Must have changed their story for insurance purposes.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19841021&id=budVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=VuEDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5638,5237623

I think a lot of Australian media is quite good, especially ABC and SBS. The channel 7 and 9 is poor ,The newspapers are no worse than the Star, Sun ,Mirror or sunday independent. But thats what the punters want.

The Aussie

Marty, your stuck in 1984. To get back home you have to get the DeLorean up to 88mph...

Slidey

To get back on topic I have finally given in and purchased foxtel. I just cant cope with the number and quality of ads on the tv.

My flatmate has gotten iinet broadband and told me it was the fastest broadband available to her



Its shyte. I was getting way better speeds living in the arsehole of Sligo from Eircom, a bastion of good customer service :rolleyes:

jackbhoy

Slidey wrote: »

To get back on topic I have finally given in and purchased foxtel. I just cant cope with the number and quality of ads on the tv.

My flatmate has gotten iinet broadband and told me it was the fastest broadband available to her



Its shyte. I was getting way better speeds living in the arsehole of Sligo from Eircom, a bastion of good customer service :rolleyes:

Meh, surely that's not representative of most internet connections? Below is speedtest from my phone's 4G connection from Brunswick, Melbourne:

Chiparus

The Aussie wrote: »

Marty, your stuck in 1984. To get back home you have to get the DeLorean up to 88mph...

ha ha , good riposte sir.