NewzIntel.com

Category: Evening Report

  • MIL-Evening Report: Autocrats and cities: how capitals have become a battleground for protest and control

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Jackman, Departmental Lecturer in Development Studies, University of Oxford

    Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the world’s longest reigning female political leader, fled Bangladesh on 5 August 2024 for the safety of India. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of protesters descended on Bangladesh’s capital city, Dhaka. The crowds ransacked her official residence, occupied the nation’s parliament and burnt down her family home.

    Hasina, who had ruled the country for more than 20 years in total, had been widely accused of turning autocratic and clamping down severely on any opposition to her rule.

    For many, the Bangladesh revolution offers hope in the context of growing global authoritarianism. It illustrates the power of the youth to confront entrenched leaders, and the fragility of authoritarianism. It also highlights a striking feature of contemporary global politics: how central capital cities are to the political life of nations.

    In our new book, Controlling the Capital: Political Dominance in the Urbanizing World, a diverse range of scholars argue that capital cities are crucial political sites. They’re where governing elites seek to assert and maintain political control, and they are also stages for political contestation.

    The book is focused on sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, the two fastest-urbanising regions of the world.

    Authors explore the strategies and tactics used by ruling elites to politically dominate their capital cities in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

    The authors also consider how urban populations have engaged with these efforts. People may resist authority, but they can also cooperate with it in ways that benefit themselves – which sometimes reinforces or supports authoritarian control.

    This is increasingly important in the context of two contemporary trends. First, authoritarianism is growing globally. Just 10 years ago under half of the world’s population lived under authoritarian rule; now the figure is at 71%. The second trend is the ongoing rapid urbanisation of the world’s population, with the majority of us globally now living in urban areas.

    Urban unrest

    Over the past year we’ve seen how capital cities are spaces for contestation.

    Some pro-democracy movements draw from their own histories of struggle and the paths that have been carved by those before them. The template of Bangladesh’s 2024 revolution is ingrained in politics from the ways in which liberation was fought and how later struggles against authoritarian rule were won. The capital city has also been crucial, and students at Dhaka University were key mobilisers in such movements.

    In other contexts, the link between political resistance and urban areas is a relatively new and surprising route to political change. One example is “the struggle” seen in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo and the unseating of the Rajapaksa family, who were perceived as increasingly authoritarian rulers of the country. The Colombo chapter in this volume highlights how such protests emerged in a context where urban unrest had rarely threatened those in power before.

    Even where anti-authoritarian protests have proved futile time and again, urban populations rarely remain quiet.

    In Kampala, Uganda, demonstrations prior to the 2021 elections resulted in a horrifying government crackdown. Inspired by events in neighbouring Kenya, protesters took to the streets once more in July 2024 to demonstrate against corruption.



    Read more:
    Kenya’s protests happened in every major urban centre – why these spaces are explosive

    The protests that erupted in Nairobi from late June 2024 against tax rises engulfed the capital city. They continued for some time, fuelled by the brutal police response. Similarly, Nigeria’s 2020 #EndSARS protests against police brutality created a powerful movement in cities such as Abuja and Lagos which shook government, and resonated across much of the continent.

    In an age of social media, learning and mimicry across national borders is increasingly common. One of the defining images of Kenya’s 2024 urban uprising was of a group of men with their arms raised and crossed at the wrists – a gesture of anti-authoritarian protest that gained particular resonance several years back during neighbouring Ethiopia’s own uprising.

    As urban protest seems set to continue and spread – often taking intentionally similar forms – techniques of urban authoritarian control are more varied and complex.

    Strategies to dominate and control city populations can be dramatic and repressive – such as the brute force of police violence – and they can also be subtle, deeply ingrained, and sometimes difficult to discern.

    Authoritarian tactics

    Our book argues that authoritarian leaders are increasingly aware of the power of the urban masses. As a result, they are using a range of subtle, and not-so-subtle, tactics to entrench their domination in capital cities.

    We broadly described two types of interventions that elites use.

    The first are policies and favours that actively build support among urban groups. These can range from inclusion in political parties to investments in social provisions or infrastructure to win support. The book’s chapter on Addis Ababa shows how the latter were particularly striking under the previous governing regime in Ethiopia.

    The second are repressive interventions that aim to crush opposition. These are also diverse, and include violent crackdowns, but also surveillance and intimidation.

    In practice, the two types of interventions often overlap. The line also blurs through various forms of manipulation. For instance, misinformation or the delivery of goods in exchange for performances of political loyalty, underpinned by implicit threats of coercion.

    We also highlight the significance of urban geography.

    Ruling elites often seek to divide city populations (for example inner-city dwellers versus the peripheries). This is evident in our book’s chapter on Colombo, Sri Lanka. The Rajapaksas tried to consolidate power by appealing to the new middle class suburbanites through “beautification” projects. But these displaced and excluded the inner-city poor.

    Chapters on Harare and Kampala also show how particular peripheral areas have become central to efforts to build an urban support base by Zanu-PF and the National Resistance Movement. This often plays out through the informal parcelling out of land to supporters.

    Contesting autocratic rule

    Concerns about authoritarian politics are at an all-time high.

    The above Google Ngram highlights the perilous rise in the use of the term “autocratization” in published work over the past decade.

    Meanwhile, the contestation of autocratic rule will continue to erupt in cities, especially in rapidly urbanising parts of the world. In this context, the need to understand how autocracy and urbanisation collide could hardly be more important.

    If pro-democracy forces are to have any hope of prevailing against efforts by authoritarian ruling elites to entrench their position, there is a crucial need to better understand their urban strategies and tactics.

    David Jackman received funding from the Leverhulme Trust.

    Tom Goodfellow is currently a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, which funded part of the research on which this book is based.

    – ref. Autocrats and cities: how capitals have become a battleground for protest and control – https://theconversation.com/autocrats-and-cities-how-capitals-have-become-a-battleground-for-protest-and-control-240377

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Freddy Krueger at 40 – the ultimate horror movie monster (and Halloween costume)

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Daniel, Associate Lecturer in Communications, Western Sydney University

    IMDB/New Line Cinema

    Movie monsters have captivated audiences since the days of early cinema. They evoke fascination and terror, allowing audiences to confront their fears from the safety of the movie theatre or living room.

    Arguably one of the most enduring and captivating of these monsters is Freddy Krueger, the villain of the A Nightmare on Elm Street series who celebrates his 40th screen birthday this November.

    Memorably played by Robert Englund, Freddy quickly became a cultural icon of the 1980s and 1990s. Beyond his burned face and iconic bladed glove, Freddy’s dark humour and acidic personality set him apart from other silent, faceless killers of the era, such as Michael Myers in Halloween or Jason Vorhees in Friday the 13th.

    Written and directed by horror maven Wes Craven, 1984’s A Nightmare on Elm Street garnered positive reviews for its innovative concept: Freddy stalked and attacked his victims in their dreams, making him inescapable and allowing him to tap into their deepest fears. The series (seven films plus a 2010 remake and Freddy vs. Jason spin offs) blended supernatural horror and surrealism with a dark and twisted sense of humour.

    Scary … but funny

    Humour was key to Freddy’s “popularity”. Both sinister and strangely charismatic, Freddy’s psychological torture of his adolescent victims often oscillated between terrifying and amusing.

    A famous kill scene from 1987’s A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors demonstrates this paradox.

    Aspiring actress Jennifer drifts off to sleep while watching a talk show on TV. In her dream, the host of the talk show suddenly transforms into Freddy, who attacks his guest before the TV blinks out. When Jennifer timidly approaches the TV set, Freddy’s head and clawed hands emerge from the device, snatching her while delivering an iconic one-liner: “This is it, Jennifer – your big break in TV!”

    Freddy turns his victims’ fears or aspirations – their dreams – against them.

    ‘Whatever you do, don’t fall asleep.’

    Creating a monster

    Craven has shared how the character of Krueger came to life in Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy, an oral history of the series.

    He described a childhood experience of seeing a strange mumbling man walking past his childhood home. The man stopped, he said, and looked directly at him “with a sick sense of malice”. This deeply unsettling experience helped shape Freddy’s menacing presence.

    The character’s creation also emerged from the filmmaker’s interest in numerous reports of Southeast Asian refugees dying in their sleep after experiencing vivid nightmares.

    In the film, Krueger’s origin story reveals him as a child murderer who was apprehended but released due to a technicality in his arrest. Seeking justice, the parents of his victims take matters into their own hands, and form a vigilante mob. They corner him in his boiler room and burn him alive. But Freddy’s spirit survives to haunt and kill the children of his executioners.



    Read more:
    Halloween films: the good, the bad and the truly scary

    Cultural repression, expressed on film

    Film critic and essayist Robin Wood argued horror films often bring to the surface elements society has repressed. These fears, desires, or cultural taboos are not openly acknowledged.

    But movie monsters act as manifestations of what society suppresses, such as sexuality, violence or deviant behaviour. American academic Gary Heba argues Freddy is:

    an example of America’s political unconscious violently unleashed upon itself, manifesting everything that is unspeakable and repressed in the master narrative (perversion, child abuse and murder, vigilantism, the breakdown of rationality, order, and the family, among others), but still always present in the collective unconscious of the dominant culture.

    Actor Robert Englund calls Freddy Krueger ‘the gift that keeps on giving’.

    The monster decades

    The 1970s and 1980s marked a golden era for the creation of horror film nasties like Krueger, Myers, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’s Leatherface and killer doll Chucky.

    Since then, the landscape of horror has shifted, with fewer singular monsters emerging. The diversification of horror sub-genres (zombie virus horror, anyone?), the rise of psychological horror (Hereditary), and an emphasis on human-driven terror (Wolf Creek) or supernatural forces all contribute to this shift.

    While modern horror continues to thrive, few characters have achieved the same iconic status as Freddy – although some would argue Art the Clown from the recent Terrifier franchise and the reinvigorated Pennywise from IT could join this exclusive group.

    ‘Five, six, grab your crucifix.’ A 2010 Nightmare on Elm St reboot failed to fire.

    Happy Halloween!

    Despite a failed reboot in 2010, the legacy of A Nightmare on Elm Street is strong, having influenced numerous filmmakers with its skilful mix of surrealism and slasher horror.

    However, it’s the orchestrator of the titular nightmares whose legacy is perhaps the strongest.

    With each Halloween, new fans choose Freddy for their costume. All it takes is a tattered striped sweater, a brown fedora hat, and a glove with sharp, finger-lengthening blades. Don’t forget makeup to re-create Krueger’s grisly facial burns. Sweet dreams!

    Adam Daniel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Freddy Krueger at 40 – the ultimate horror movie monster (and Halloween costume) – https://theconversation.com/freddy-krueger-at-40-the-ultimate-horror-movie-monster-and-halloween-costume-240905

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What is necro-branding? And what’s it got to do with Elvis, Princess Diana and Taylor Swift?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Baumann, Professor in Business, Macquarie University

    bissig/Shutterstock

    Do you own any memorabilia depicting Elvis, Princess Diana, David Bowie, Prince or Michael Jackson? Perhaps a beloved t-shirt, a favourite mug, a special keyring or a novelty plate? You might not know it, but you are participating in something known as “necro-branding”.

    Necro-branding is where the image of a celebrity is sold to the public, perhaps by their estate or by their fans, long after the celebrity has died.

    These necro-branded items act almost like talismans, helping us preserve the past and remind us of an era long gone.

    Necro-branding is also shaping up to be a multibillion-dollar industry. Even the stars of today – such as Taylor Swift – will inevitably one day become the necro-brands of tomorrow.

    And with the astonishingly rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI), we can expect celebrities’ images to be “reincarnated” even more in the future, and their legacies extended far beyond death.

    Necro-branding is everywhere

    As colleagues and I argued in our recent paper in the journal Celebrity Studies, the quintessential necro-branded celebrity is Elvis Presley.

    From Elvis impersonators to countless items of Elvis memorabilia, the Elvis brand has only increased after the star’s death. Elvis-themed postage stamps issued by the US Postal Service reportedly became the top-selling commemorative postage stamps of all time. He’s also appeared on stamps issued by countries all around the world, such as the Republic of Congo, Rwanda, and Burundi.

    As we explain in our recent paper:

    At the time of his death, Elvis was worth an estimated US$5 million dollars ($40  million in today’s terms), but by 2022, it was estimated that Elvis Presley Enterprises has a net worth of between $400 million and $500 million. The use of his image on merchandise and memorabilia contributes to the continuation of his legacy.

    And it’s not just necro-branding marketed to older fans; younger generations are also a target with Elvis marketing.

    Think, for example, of the stratospherically successful early-2000s dance track version of A Little Less Conversation, by Dutch musician Junkie XL. Or, for instance, of the way Elvis tracks are woven throughout the Disney animated movie Lilo and Stitch.

    Of course, Elvis is not the only necro-branded celebrity. David Bowie, Prince, Michael Jackson, John Lennon and Johnny Cash are other obvious examples, with countless pieces of merchandise bearing their images. Their brand value has increased once the star has passed away.

    Deceased royals – such as Princess Diana and, more recently, Queen Elizabeth – are another obvious example, especially because living royals already enjoy such massive brand values.

    Necro-branding works because of the deep connection fans feel with celebrities. One study of fans of NBA basketballer Kobe Bryant found that as fans’ grief and shock waned, other stronger emotional responses, such as love, actually increased.

    Another 2024 study analysing fans of Johnny Cash and John Lennon suggested that fans acted “religiously” in honouring the memories of these beloved musicians.

    Marilyn Monroe is another heavily necro-branded celebrity. As we argue in our recent paper

    Her brand has shown strong durability in terms of earnings and is now licensed to the same management group that owns the bulk of the Elvis brand, Authentic Brands Group (ABG). Monroe often made the top ten list of earners in the Dead Celebrities List from 2001 to 2008.

    Necro-branding and AI

    AI already plays a pivotal role in branding of celebrities, alive and dead, and will no doubt be used more in future to extend the marketability of today’s celebrities.

    Think, for instance, of the way some of the recordings from the past are imperfect. Elvis footage from the 1970s often has good sound quality, but the actual video footage reflects the technology of the time.

    While this can be partially rectified with remastering, future AI-powered technology will allow entire reproductions of shows, with all imperfections removed.

    Perhaps, many decades from now, an AI-generated version of Taylor Swift will be performing for fans of that era. Whole personas can be altered to meet the demands of different generations of fans, maintaining their legacy indefinitely.

    Brand new songs can be performed by a necro-celebrity who never actually sang them, or songs from other entertainers (dead or alive) can be performed by the avatar of a dead singer.

    AI has already been used to create a version of the song Barbie Girl sung in the “voice” of Johnny Cash, alongside a medley of other pop hits.

    A whole new frontier

    Even if you’re new to the term, you’re already part of the necro-branding market. And there is more to come once AI advances and consumers can no longer distinguish between fake and real.

    The lines will become blurry, as the branding of necro-celebrities become a whole new frontier for marketing and AI develops ever faster and better.

    Joanne Soviner, a year 12 student at North Sydney Girls High School, contributed to this article.

    Chris Baumann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. What is necro-branding? And what’s it got to do with Elvis, Princess Diana and Taylor Swift? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-necro-branding-and-whats-it-got-to-do-with-elvis-princess-diana-and-taylor-swift-240989

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why is my kid using a baby voice? How can I manage it?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Westrupp, Associate Professor in Psychology, Deakin University

    MIA Studio/ Shutterstock

    Pweeeeese! I want cwacker!

    If you’ve ever found yourself cringing when your child suddenly starts talking in a high-pitched, baby-like voice, you’re not alone.

    Many parents and caregivers find this behaviour jarring — and yes, a little bit annoying.

    Why do older children sometimes revert to baby talk? And what can you do to manage it?

    Why do kids use a baby voice?

    Children may revert to speaking like a baby when they are seeking comfort, affection and reassurance.

    For children, being a baby reminds them of a time when they were safe, and all their needs were taken care of. When they revert to using a baby voice, they are signalling to us they’re feeling vulnerable, tired, stressed, uncertain or overwhelmed, and are wanting more connection and practical help from us.

    Most regressions are normal, and very common. In fact, healthy learning and development is never perfectly linear. This is reflected in nature, where there are cycles of rapid growth followed by periods of rest and dormancy. After a burst of development, children can be tired, or miss having the same level of support from us.

    Children are also more likely to use a baby voice when they’re managing a change or stressful life event. For example, the birth of a new baby in the family, starting school, moving house, or parents separating, are common times when children need more support.

    Using baby talk could be a sign your child is feeling stressed or vulnerable.
    Fizkes/Shutterstock

    Help! Why is a baby voice so annoying?

    As parents and carers, it can be confusing and grating when our older, capable child seems to be moving backwards in development, and using a voice they used many years ago.

    Parents might associate a baby voice with neediness, or immaturity, and feel anxious about what this means for their child’s development.

    In the past, this behaviour was viewed as a problem.

    So the advice was to ignore it and only respond when children use their normal voice. However, this can can create shame in our child and make them afraid to express their feelings and needs.

    If your child is using a baby voice, they may need more comforting and attention.
    Media_Photos/ Shutterstock

    Tips for managing baby voice

    Developmentally, there’s no problem with children occasionally using a baby voice, so we don’t need to try to stop this behaviour.

    Instead, we can be curious. What might be happening for our child?

    1. Acknowledge their feelings: we can empathise with, validate and accept our child’s underlying emotions. And then try to meet their need for safety and connection. We might say:

    Oh my love, sounds like you’re finding everything hard today, and can’t manage putting your shoes on? Are you feeling tired?

    2. Meet their needs: if they’re wanting extra help or connection, we should give it. We can think of this as a “refuelling” pit stop – they might need a little extra care as they manage their current stage of development, or cope with a change. We can say:

    I’d love to help you put your shoes on, let’s do it together. How about you do the socks, and I’ll tie your laces?

    Remember, providing extra help doesn’t mean you’ll always have to do so. Children have a natural drive towards skill development and independence. When they have the energy, they’ll want to keep practising their skills.

    3. Be kind to yourself: if your child’s baby voice is getting on your nerves, it’s understandable, and normal. Providing extra care can be taxing, and sometimes it’s hard to find that extra energy. We can remind our child that we all need rest.

    I hear you’re so tired today and want my help. The problem is I’m feeling so tired too! I wonder if we can help each other? Can we start with a big cuddle?

    4. If in doubt, seek help: if your child shows other signs of developmental regression for more than two weeks, talk to your GP.

    Depending on age, this might include lost skills related to language and communication, walking and balance, self-care (such as dressing, toileting), sleeping, or becoming more clingy, having meltdowns and losing interest in interacting or playing with others.

    Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is affiliated with the Parenting and Family Research Alliance, and is a registered clinical psychologist.

    – ref. Why is my kid using a baby voice? How can I manage it? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-my-kid-using-a-baby-voice-how-can-i-manage-it-240436

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: You can keep your ghosts and ghouls – the ‘Cordyceps’ fungus creates real-life zombies

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne

    annguyen87, Shutterstock

    I have never really been interested in ghosts, mummies or zombies, not even at Halloween. But as October 31 approaches each year I am reminded of a biological tale involving all three. It’s the real-life horror story of a flesh-eating, brain-warping fungus from the genus Cordyceps, which inspired the zombie-apocalypse video game and TV series The Last of Us.

    Worldwide, there are hundreds of species of Cordyceps. Most of them prey on insects. They’re famous for hijacking the brains of some ants. Once the fungus takes over, it directs the ant to climb to a high point on a plant and then bite down on the stem or twig in a macabre death grip. The reproductive structures of this parasitic fungus will soon burst out of the ant’s head, spreading its spores to infect another unsuspecting host.

    But the species with which I am most familiar (Cordyceps gunnii) doesn’t attack ants – it parasitises insects such as rather large “ghost” caterpillars. This species doesn’t force its victims to climb, but takes control when they are buried in the soil.

    You might spot a grotesque-looking dead caterpillar pushing up through the earth as if rising from the grave, with a large fungal growth emerging from its head. Some are about the size of an adult finger, but cream and dark brown in colour. It is truly a thing that could trigger nightmares.

    ‘Zombie’ Parasite Cordyceps Fungus Takes Over Insects Through Mind Control | National Geographic.

    Consuming the ghostly host

    Unsuspecting insects become infected with Cordyceps when they eat them by mistake, or when spores attach to their bodies.

    The caterpillar of the Australian ghost moth (Abantiades labrynthicus) tends to burrow straight down into the soil to graze on roots of gum trees and some other species related to eucalypts. So it probably picks up the fungus as it burrows into the earth. The fungus then penetrates the exoskeleton or digestive tract of the insect with a thin, needle-like tube.

    Once inside the caterpillar, the fungus starts to grow rapidly. It produces very fine threads (hyphae) that spread through the body of the insect, replacing its structure. The fungus expands to fill the available space, assuming ultimate control. Exactly how the fungus takes control of the insect brain is not fully understood, but we know the fungus produces a range of chemicals that influence the brain in a way that meets the environmental and reproductive needs of the fungus.

    The caterpillar is doomed as soon as the fungus starts to grow inside it. After being taken over by another life form, the zombie caterpillar dies. All of this happens out of sight, under the soil surface.

    But Cordyceps is not done with the caterpillar just yet. It consumes all the resources the insect can offer, then pushes antler-like reproductive structures out through the caterpillar’s head. These spore-producing structures can be more than 10cm long. They’re clearly visible above ground, but can be hard to spot as they look a bit like a twig. Wind carries the spores to infect more unwary caterpillars.

    These fungus-filled caterpillars are now fully mummified. Nothing remains of the caterpillar but a brittle exoskeleton.

    As the reproductive structures dry and wither, they gently tug on the mummy to which they are still attached. If the soil is dry, the now empty exoskeleton of the caterpillar emerges from its hole. As it does so, the fungal reproductive structures are often lost and all you see remaining is the empty husk.

    The Last of Us: Could it happen? Infectious disease doctor explains cordyceps (UC Davis Health).

    Half animal, half vegetable

    Members of the genus Cordyceps boast the unusual common name of vegetable caterpillars. This strange name comes from a belief, which persisted until the 1800s, that the caterpillars had somehow transformed from insects to fungi, or from animal to plant.

    This was a much debated and widely written about example of transmutation, a theory that was not uncommon in pre-Darwinian times. It was not until the early 1900s that the true, full and gruesome nature of the relationship between Cordyceps and its insect victims was revealed.

    On the lookout for Cordyceps

    Cordyceps gunnii is the most commonly seen species of vegetable caterpillar in southeastern Australia, found in several states.

    Another less conspicuous species, the fawn vegetable caterpillar, Cordyceps hawkesii, occurs along Autralia’s east coast, often under wattles, but is even harder to see. Naturalists hunting for this vegetable caterpillar often find they have already inadvertently trampled over it before they spot it.

    Yet another species, Cordyceps taylori, can also be regularly seen emerging from large ghost moth caterpillars in Victoria. When the husks of these dead, mummified caterpillars appear to emerge from their holes in the ground, they look particularly striking.

    The classification of these vegetable caterpillar fungi is still being debated by experts. It is likely not all are closely related. Some are now placed in a new genus, Ophiocordyceps, but regardless of the name, they are all capable of making zombies and mummies of their victims.

    You can join in the process of hunting for and mapping these elusive species through citizen science projects such as he Great Aussie Fungi Hunt or iNaturalist Australia.

    Traditional medicines and the vegetable caterpillar

    As Halloween approaches, you may be wondering whether humans need worry about being zombified and mummified by Cordyceps fungi. Could the naturalists hunting the vegetable caterpillars become the hunted? The answer is a resounding no. In fact, the opposite is true – these macabre creatures have a long history in traditional medicine.

    Cordyceps sinensis, a Chinese vegetable caterpillar very similar to C. gunnii, has been used in traditional medicine for centuries. Modern research shows there may be benefits from its use (or extracts from it) in treatments associated with autoimmune responses. While the fungus has been cultivated for about 40 years, naturally growing, wild fungi can be very expensive as they are still relatively rare and difficult to find. A kilogram can retail for A$30,000, driving a fungal gold rush across the Himalayas.

    Members of the genus Coryceps, or more correctly the Ophiocordyceps genus, have been around for more than 45 million years. Despite their depiction in The Last of Us, humans have nothing to worry about. The fungi are quite particular about their victims. But if you are a certain species of ant or ghost moth, then Halloween may take on a whole new meaning.

    Gregory Moore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. You can keep your ghosts and ghouls – the ‘Cordyceps’ fungus creates real-life zombies – https://theconversation.com/you-can-keep-your-ghosts-and-ghouls-the-cordyceps-fungus-creates-real-life-zombies-241901

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gender is playing a crucial role in this US election – and it’s not just about Kamala Harris

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carol Johnson, Emerita Professor, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Adelaide

    Having a female presidential candidate has made gender obvious in this US presidential election, even to many who normally neglect its role. The specific contest between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, along with the prominence of issues such as abortion, has resulted in a particularly large gender voting gap. Far more women have consistently indicated support for Harris and far more men for Trump.

    However, gender has always been crucial in US presidential elections, not just because of gender voting patterns but because competing performances of masculinity have always played a major role.

    Role of masculinity in 2020 election

    The last presidential election saw Joe Biden’s form of kind and caring protective masculinity being explicitly contrasted with Trump’s divisive, hyper-masculine one.

    Furthermore, strong male leaders are meant to protect the people from physical, social and economic harm. I have argued that one factor that contributed to Trump’s 2020 electoral defeat was a protective masculinity failure, especially in regard to COVID.

    For example, former President Barack Obama argued that, unlike Biden, Trump could not be counted on to protect Americans:

    Eight months into this pandemic, new cases are breaking records. Donald Trump isn’t going to suddenly protect all of us. He can’t even take the basic steps to protect himself […]. Joe understands […] that the first job of a president is to keep us safe from all threats: domestic, foreign, and microscopic.

    Trump’s re-energised protective masculinity

    However, since his 2020 electoral defeat, Trump has resurrected himself as a strong masculine protector. He claims that “our enemies” are trying to use legal charges to take away his freedom and silence him because he “will always stand” in the way of their attempt to silence the American people and take away their freedom.

    He will also be a vengeful protector, declaring:

    I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed: I am your retribution. I will totally obliterate the deep state.

    Trump has long appealed to men who feel that traditional masculinity, and its related entitlements, are under threat.

    He is currently courting white males, the youth manosphere, “techno bros”, “crypto bros”, conservative male unionists threatened by globalisation and offshoring, and conservative black and Latino men.

    He has been explicitly mobilising misogyny, including by making lewd references to Harris. JD Vance has assisted Trump’s efforts.

    Nonetheless, Trump claims that he will be a strong male protector of women, protecting them from illegal immigrants, crime, foreign threats and other anxieties:

    You will be protected and I will be your protector. Women will be happy, healthy, confident and free.

    Trump has even promised that, as a result, women “will no longer be thinking about abortion.” This is all despite his own alleged history of sexual assault.

    Harris, gender and the women’s vote

    By 2024, Biden’s apparent physical and cognitive decline meant that he was no longer a convincing masculine protector (or viable ongoing presidential candidate).

    The choice of Harris as his replacement candidate had advantages, but it was also a gamble given the combined roles of gender and race. After all, despite the long history of US racism, it still proved easier to elect a black man (Obama) to the presidency than a white woman (Hillary Clinton).

    However, the women’s vote is particularly important this election. As well as Harris’ appeal to younger and black women, Democrats have emphasised the importance of her appeal to white women, including some who previously voted Republican. Anti-Trump Republicans such as Liz Cheney are assisting Harris in appealing to the latter.

    Issues such as abortion are crucial. The overturning of Roe v Wade abortion rights, enabled by Trump stacking the Supreme Court, also puts IVF at risk by not clarifying when life begins (with implications for frozen embryos). Senate Republicans have twice blocked a vote on a Democrat-led bill designed to protect IVF. Harris has pledged to sign a law protecting abortion rights (if Congress passes it).

    Trump claims he supports IVF, won’t bring in a national ban on abortion and believes in abortion “exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother”.

    However, Trump Republicans are courting, and influenced by, the American religious right on abortion. There aren’t such exceptions in several Republican states, as Harris’s heartrending accounts of the impact on women and their health reveals. Furthermore, Missouri, Kansas and Idaho are also trying to drastically reduce legal access to the abortion drug mifepristone.

    Harris also emphasises other issues of particular significance for women, such as affordable childcare and better pay for care workers.

    Harris and “tonic” masculinity

    Given the role of competing masculinities in US presidential elections, Harris’ campaign has intentionally appealed to a very different form of protective masculinity from Trump’s.

    Vice presidential candidate, Tim Walz’s, “America’s dad” image (of being a warm, caring but sports loving coach, national guard serving, gun owning, hunter) is used to contrast his “tonic masculinity” with Trump’s “toxic” masculinity. Harris’s husband, Doug Emhoff, is depicted as a supportive “wife-guy” who has “reshaped the perception of masculinity” (while strongly denying allegations he once slapped a woman).

    Despite conservative claims of men being economically left behind, the Biden/Harris administration argues it has revitalised manufacturing and male jobs along with it and Harris will continue to do so. Meanwhile, Obama has urged black men to get behind Harris and the Harris campaign has highlighted its policies benefiting black men.

    Can Harris mobilise protective femininity?

    Given the major role of gender in US presidential elections, a key issue is whether Harris can successfully evoke a caring, motherly, protective femininity that promises security and economic benefits to voters and helps to counter Trump’s protective masculinity.

    Other women politicians have been able to (for example, Germany’s Angela Merkel). Women leaders particularly mobilised protective femininity during the COVID health crisis (for example, New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern). However, it always seemed likely masculinist leadership stereotypes would re-emerge once the economy needed rebuilding after the pandemic.

    Harris has pledged she will “create an opportunity economy” and “protect our fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right of a woman to make decisions about her own body and not have her government tell her what to do”. She promises to be the kind of president “who cares about you and is not putting themselves first”. Whether such electoral pitches are successful remains to be seen.

    Why the outcome of this election is crucial for gender equality.

    A woman US president is long overdue after 46 male ones. A Trump victory would have major implications for abortion, IVF and women’s rights generally, including progress on the Biden/Harris National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality. Immigrant and black women will be particularly vulnerable. A Trump victory would also have major implications for which models of masculinity are publicly endorsed.

    A Trump victory would embolden conservative so-called anti-gender ideology campaigns. The Trump campaign has recently spent US $21 million (A$31.9 million) on ads associating Harris with LGBTIQ+ equality, especially transgender rights.

    The Trump campaign asserts that “Kamala’s for they/them. President Trump is for you.” While Trump has also pledged that “we will get critical race theory and transgender insanity the hell out of our schools.”

    A Trump victory will influence the future US economy, including risking increasing gender inequality in an Elon Musk-style unregulated technopoly.

    Finally, academic commentators have drawn attention to the way in which socially conservative views on gender have been mobilised to support new forms of authoritarian regimes in Europe and elsewhere.

    In short, this presidential election is a crucial one for the American people generally, but for the female half of the population in particular.

    Carol Johnson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Gender is playing a crucial role in this US election – and it’s not just about Kamala Harris – https://theconversation.com/gender-is-playing-a-crucial-role-in-this-us-election-and-its-not-just-about-kamala-harris-242113

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Vanuatu AG condemns Trump’s Paris climate treaty exit as ‘troubling precedent’

    By Harry Pearl of BenarNews

    Vanuatu’s top lawyer has called out the United States for “bad behavior” after newly inaugurated President Donald Trump withdrew the world’s biggest historic emitter of greenhouse gasses from the Paris Agreement for a second time.

    The Pacific nation’s Attorney-General Arnold Loughman, who led Vanuatu’s landmark International Court of Justice climate case at The Hague last month, said the withdrawal represented an “undeniable setback” for international action on global warming.

    “The Paris Agreement remains key to the world’s efforts to combat climate change and respond to its effects, and the participation of major economies like the US is crucial,” he told BenarNews in a statement.

    The withdrawal could also set a “troubling precedent” regarding the accountability of rich nations that are disproportionately responsible for global warming, said Loughman.

    “At the same time, the US’ bad behavior could inspire resolve on behalf of developed countries to act more responsibly to try and safeguard the international rule of law,” he said.

    “Ultimately, the whole world stands to lose if the international legal framework is allowed to erode.”

    Vanuatu’s Attorney-General Arnold Loughman at the International Court of Justice last month . . . “The whole world stands to lose if the international legal framework is allowed to erode.” Image: ICJ-CIJ

    Trump’s announcement on Monday came less than two weeks after scientists confirmed that 2024 was the hottest year on record and the first in which average temperatures exceeded 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

    Agreed to ‘pursue efforts’
    Under the Paris Agreement adopted in 2015, leaders agreed to “pursue efforts” to limit warming under the 1.5°C threshold or, failing that, keep rises “well below” 2°C  by the end of the century.

    Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said on Wednesday in a brief comment that Trump’s action would “force us to rethink our position” but the US president must do “what is in the best interest of the United States of America”.

    Other Pacific leaders and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) regional intergovernmental body have not responded to BenarNews requests for comment.

    The forum — comprising 18 Pacific states and territories — in its 2018 Boe Declaration said: “Climate change remains the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of the peoples of the Pacific and [we reaffirm] our commitment to progress the implementation of the Paris Agreement.”

    Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka speaks at the opening of the new Nabouwalu Water Treatment Plant this week . . . Trump’s action would “force us to rethink our position”. Image: Fiji govt

    Trump’s executive order sparked dismay and criticism in the Pacific, where the impacts of a warming planet are already being felt in the form of more intense storms and rising seas.

    Jacynta Fa’amau, regional Pacific campaigner with environmental group 350 Pacific, said the withdrawal would be a diplomatic setback for the US.

    “The climate crisis has for a long time now been our greatest security threat, especially to the Pacific,” she told BenarNews.

    A clear signal
    “This withdrawal from the agreement is a clear signal about how much the US values the survival of Pacific nations and all communities on the front lines.”

    New Zealand’s former Minister for Pacific Peoples, Aupito William Sio, said that if the US withdrew from its traditional leadership roles in multilateral organisations China would fill the gap.

    “Some people may not like how China plays its role,” wrote the former Labour MP on Facebook. “But when the great USA withdraws from these global organisations . . . it just means China can now go about providing global leadership.”

    Analysts and former White House advisers told BenarNews last year that climate change could be a potential “flashpoint” between Pacific nations and a second Trump administration at a time of heightened geopolitical competition with China.

    Trump’s announcement was not unexpected. During his first term he withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement, only for former President Joe Biden to promptly rejoin in 2021.

    The latest withdrawal puts the US, the world’s largest historic emitter of greenhouse gases, alongside only Iran, Libya and Yemen outside the climate pact.

    In his executive order, Trump said the US would immediately begin withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and from any other commitments made under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

    US also ending climate finance
    The US would also end its international climate finance programme to developing countries — a blow to small Pacific island states that already struggle to obtain funding for resilience and mitigation.

    Press releases by the Biden administration were removed from the White House website immediately after President Donald Trump’s inauguration. Image: White House website/Screen capture on Monday

    A fact sheet published by the Biden administration on November 17, which has now been removed from the White House website, said that US international climate finance reached more than US$11 billion in 2024.

    Loughman said the cessation of climate finance payments was particularly concerning for the Pacific region.

    “These funds are essential for building resilience and supporting adaptation strategies,” he said. “Losing this support could severely hinder ongoing and future projects aimed at protecting our vulnerable ecosystems and communities.”

    George Carter, deputy head of the Department of Pacific Affairs at the Australian National University and member of the COP29 Scientific Council, said at the centre of the Biden administration’s re-engagement with the South Pacific was a regional programme on climate adaptation.

    “While the majority of climate finance that flows through the Pacific comes from Australia, Japan, European Union, New Zealand — then the United States — the climate networks and knowledge production from the US to the Pacific are substantial,” he said.

    Sala George Carter (third from right) hosted a panel discussion at COP29 highlighting key challenges Indigenous communities face from climate change last November. Image: Sera Sefeti/BenarNews

    Climate actions plans
    Pacific island states, like all other signatories to the Paris Agreement, will this year be submitting Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs, outlining their climate action plans for the next five years.

    “All climate actions, policies and activities are conditional on international climate finance,” Carter said.

    Pacific island nations are being disproportionately affected by climate change despite contributing just 0.02 percent of global emissions, according to a UN report released last year.

    Low-lying islands are particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels and extreme weather events like cyclones, floods and marine heatwaves, which are projected to occur more frequently this century as a result of higher average global temperatures.

    On January 10, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) confirmed that last year for the first time the global mean temperature tipped over 1.5°C above the 1850-1900 average.

    WMO experts emphasised that a single year of more than 1.5°C does not mean that the world has failed to meet long-term temperature goals, which are measured over decades, but added that “leaders must act — now” to avert negative impacts.

    Harry Pearl is a BenarNews journalist. This article was first published by BenarNews and is republished at Asia Pacific Report with permission.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Wenda praises PNG’s Marape over ‘brave ambush’ over West Papua

    Asia Pacific Report

    An exiled West Papuan leader has praised Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape for his “brave ambush” in questioning new Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto over West Papua.

    Prabowo offered an “amnesty” for West Papuan pro-independence activists during Marape’s revent meeting with Prabowo on the fringes of the inauguration, the PNG leader revealed.

    The offer was reported by Asia Pacific Report last week.

    Wenda, a London-based officer of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), said in a statement that he wanted to thank Marape on behalf of the people of West Papua for directly raising the issue of West Papua in his meeting with President Prabowo.

    “This was a brave move on behalf of his brothers and sisters in West Papua,” Wenda said.

    “The offer of amnesty for West Papuans by Prabowo is a direct result of him being ambushed by PM Marape on West Papua.

    “But what does amnesty mean? All West Papuans support Merdeka, independence; all West Papuans want to raise the [banned flag] Morning Star; all West Papuans want to be free from colonial rule.”

    Wenda said pro-independence actions of any kind were illegal in West Papua.

    ‘Beaten, arrested or jailed’
    “If we raise our flag or call for self-determination, we are beaten, arrested or jailed. If the offer of amnesty is real, it must involve releasing all West Papuan political prisoners.

    “It must involve allowing us to peacefully struggle for our freedom without the threat of imprisonment.” 

    Wenda said that in the history of the occupation, it was very rare for Melanesian leaders to openly confront the Indonesian President about West Papua.

    “Marape can become like Moses for West Papua, going to Pharoah and demanding ‘let my people go!’.

    “West Papua and Papua New Guinea are the same people, divided only by an arbitrary colonial line. One day the border between us will fall like the Berlin Wall and we will finally be able celebrate the full liberation of New Guinea together, from Sorong to Samarai.

    “By raising West Papua at Prabowo’s inauguration, Marape is inhabiting the spirit of Melanesian brotherhood and solidarity,” Wenda said.

    Vanuatu Prime Minister and the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) chair Charlot Salwai and Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele were also there as a Melanesian delegation.

    “To Prabowo, I say this: A true amnesty means giving West Papua our land back by withdrawing your military, and allowing the self-determination referendum we have been denied since the 1960s.”

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Inquiry warns distrustful public wouldn’t accept COVID measures in future pandemic

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    The government-appointed inquiry into Australia’s COVID response has warned public trust won’t be so high in a future pandemic and people would be unlikely to accept again many of the measures taken.

    “That means there is a job to be done to rebuild trust, and we must plan a response based on the Australia we are today, not the Australia we were before the pandemic,” the report released on Tuesday said.

    The inquiry was conducted by former NSW public servant Robyn Kirk, epidemiologist Catherine Bennett, and economist Angela Jackson. It examined the health and economic responses; while it did not directly delve into the state responses, it did cover the federal-state interface.

    The overall takeout from the inquiry is that “Australia did well relative to other nations, that experienced larger losses in human life, health system collapse and more severe economic downturns”.

    But “the pandemic response was not as effective as it could have been” for an event for which there was “no playbook for pivotal actions.”

    The inquiry said “with the benefit of hindsight, there was excessive fiscal and monetary policy stimulus provided throughout 2021 and 2022, especially in the construction sector. Combined with supply side disruptions, this contributed to inflationary pressures coming out of the pandemic.”

    The inquiry criticised the Homebuilder program’s contribution to inflation, as well as Jobkeeper’s targeting, and said blanket access to superannuation should not be repeated.

    The government – which might have originally expected the inquiry to have been more critical of the Morrison government – quickly seized on the report’s economic criticisms.

    The panel has made a set of recommendations to ensure better preparation for a future pandemic.

    It highlighted the “tail” the pandemic has left, especially its effect on children, who suffered school closures.

    “Children faced lower health risks from COVID-19; however, broader impacts on the social and emotional development of children are ongoing. These include impacts on mental health, school attendance and academic outcomes for some groups of children.”

    The report noted that the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee had never recommended widespread school closures.

    A lack of clear communication about risks had created the environment for states to decide to go to remote learning.

    The impacts on children should be considered in future pandemic preparations, the inquiry said.

    It strongly backed making permanent the interim Australian Centre for Disease Control. The government will legislate next year for the CDC, to start on January 1 2026, as an independent statutory agency.

    The CDC would be important in rebuilding trust, the report said, as well as “strengthening resilience and preparedness”. It would provide “national coordination to gather evidence necessary to undertake the assessments that can guide the proportionality of public health responses in future crises”.

    The report said trust in government was essential for a successful response to a pandemic.

    At COVID’s outset, the public largely did what was asked of them, complying with restrictive public health orders.

    But the initial strengthening of trust in government did not continue through the pandemic. By the second year, restrictions on personal freedom were less accepted.

    Reasons for the decrease in trust included a lack of transparency in decision making, poor communication, the stringency and duration of restrictions, implementation of mandated measures, access to vaccines and inconsistencies in responses across jurisdictions.

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Inquiry warns distrustful public wouldn’t accept COVID measures in future pandemic – https://theconversation.com/inquiry-warns-distrustful-public-wouldnt-accept-covid-measures-in-future-pandemic-242383

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s COVID inquiry shows why a permanent ‘centre for disease control’ is more urgent than ever

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jocelyne Basseal, Associate Director, Sydney Infectious Diseases Institute (Sydney ID), Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney

    Christie Cooper/Shutterstock

    The long-awaited independent inquiry into Australia’s COVID response was released today, with lessons on how the nation could better prepare for future pandemics.

    The 868-page report outlined nine guiding recommendations and 26 actions, including 19 set for implementation over the next 12 to 18 months. These form the foundation for future pandemic preparedness.

    With initial strong national solidarity, Australia acted quickly to close national borders, the inquiry found. This bought crucial time, but Australia was not adequately prepared for a crisis of the scale of the COVID pandemic.

    Australia’s response lacked strong central co-ordination and leadership. Communication about public health advice was often conflicting or not appropriately communicated with the most vulnerable groups. Public trust was further undermined by a lack of transparency in decision-making, such as disease modelling, which underpinned important public health responses.

    In hindsight, the inquiry concluded a fully fledged Australian Centre for Disease Control (CDC) could have made a huge difference. In response, the federal government today committed A$251 milion to establish such a centre in Canberra.

    What did the inquiry find?

    1. Early rapid response and consensus helped keep us safe. As an inland nation, Australia was able to close its borders while preparing for the ultimate inevitable population-wide spread of SARS CoV-2. But it was unprepared for pandemic-related quarantines.

    2. Initially, the communication was clear and consistent. This didn’t last. Huge uncertainties, rapidly changing circumstances, differing opinions among experts and the politicisation of the response undermined communication strategies. Communication with diverse ethnic groups and vulnerable populations groups were often sub-optimal. In future, misinformation and disinformation needs to be addressed through improving health literacy and proactive communication.

    3. Our health-care infrastructure was lacking and couldn’t cope with emergency surge capacity, the inquiry found, although health-care workers “pulled together” remarkably. Aged care facilities were particularly vulnerable and had poor infection-control practices. More broadly, there were supply chain issues and inadequate stockpiles of essential infection prevention and control equipment, such as masks and gloves. Australia was unable to manufacture these and was left at the mercy of foreign providers.

    4. Analysing the genetic material of the virus and widespread testing were critical to tracking viral evolution and spread. Pathogen genomics in New South Wales and Victoria, for instance, allowed accurate tracking of virus variants and local transmission. But there was poor exchange of data between jurisdictions and limited national coordination to optimise data interpretation and response.

    5. Transparent, evidence-based decision-making was lacking. Disease models that informed key decisions were opaque and not open to scrutiny or peer review.

    6. Vulnerable populations, including children, suffered disproportionately. COVID-related school closures were particularly harmful as they affected learning, socialising and development, and disproportionately affected children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Strict social isolation also increased the risk of family violence, along with anxiety and other mental health impacts. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experienced higher risks due to the inequity of service provision and the social determinants of health.

    7. Research is important and should be rapidly scalable. Good surveillance systems for emerging infectious diseases and future pandemic threats should be in place. Patient specimens need to be stored so we can rapidly explore the mechanisms of disease and develop essential diagnostic tests. The inquiry recognised the need for Australia to develop its own vaccines and for access to mRNA technology was recognised as an important health security measure, given challenges in vaccine access.

    8. Global solidarity and co-operation create a safer word for all.
    The stark inequities in COVID vaccine access, opened major fault lines in international relationships and still complicate the drafting of a global pandemic treaty.

    9. Emerging diseases with a One Health focus should be recognised as a ‘standing threat’. In our modern interconnected world, with highly concentrated human and animal populations combined with stressed ecosystems, new diseases with pandemic potential will continue to emerge at an unprecedented rate. This requires a gobal focus.

    How could a CDC make a difference?

    One of the inquiry’s key take-home messages is that the lack of strong, independent, central co-ordination hampered our pandemic response.

    The inadequate flow of data between jurisdictions were major shortcomings that limited the ability to target responses. This is needed to understand:

    • transmission dynamics
    • the vulnerabilities in those with severe disease
    • the circulating viral variants.

    The inquiry also emphasised the need to analyse data in near real time.

    Good data drive evidence-informed and transparent policy. This is a crucial area for a future Australian CDC to address. The CDC will function as a “data hub”, with Canberra offering the ideal location supporting a multi-jurisdictional “hub-and-spoke” model.

    Australia’s new CDC is expected to be launched by January 2026, pending legislation approval. The ongoing challenge will be to ensure it delivers optimal long-term health benefits for all Australians.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Australia’s COVID inquiry shows why a permanent ‘centre for disease control’ is more urgent than ever – https://theconversation.com/australias-covid-inquiry-shows-why-a-permanent-centre-for-disease-control-is-more-urgent-than-ever-239498

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: View from The Hill: ‘identity politics’ has challenged the Labor Party to define its identity

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    Saturday’s Queensland result provides the latest evidence of the dual tugs on the modern Labor Party, coming from its different constituencies.

    The smallest swing against the Miles government was in inner Brisbane; the swing became bigger in the outer suburbs, and larger again in the regions. The broad state figures were: south-east Queensland 6.3%; rural/regional Queensland 9.2%. The awings in the city were: inner Brisbane 5.0%; outer Brisbane 7.7%.

    This sort of divide reflects a challenge, first recognised decades ago, that’s highlighted by former Labor senator and minister Kim Carr, in his just-published A Long March. In a scathing critique of Labor’s problems, Carr calls this a “cultural crisis.”

    “The Labor ship has struck the rock of identity politics,” Carr writes, “with too many of its spokespeople adopting a censorious tone to those who fail to embrace their particular social policy agendas”.

    From the left, old school and former factional heavyweight, Carr argues Labor has sought to build a new constituency without paying sufficient attention to its traditional support base.

    Over decades, the once-working class party has taken up causes that appeal to the wealthier, better-educated middle- class voters, and these people have moved their support to it. The cost has been an erosion of outer suburban votes, the people now being aggressively targeted by opposition leader Peter Dutton.

    Meanwhile, in inner urban areas Labor has come under increasing pressure from the Greens. The danger for the ALP, Carr believes, is by trying to compete with the Greens on identity politics it will inevitably be outmanoeuvred.

    “The profound challenge for the Labor Party in the 2020s is to find a way to bind together its more affluent and educated support base in the inner and middle suburbs of the big cities with its less well-off and less formally educated supporters in the outer suburbs and regional cities,” Carr says.

    Political historian Paul Strangio, however, warns that while obviously Labor has to straddle constituencies, “there is no returning to an imagined ‘heartland’. The outer suburbs Carr seems to want Labor to focus upon are themselves radically changing. They are not a repository of old-fashioned working class values and priorities, and nor on their own are they sufficient to provide a basis for the party to hold government.”

    Carr says the issue is how to build Labor’s primary vote in its heartland communities.

    On what we’ve seen in recent politics, this appears a formidable, if not insurmountable, hope for any time soon.

    Voters don’t trust parties, let alone join them. The popularity of “community candidates” has seen a record-sized crossbench in the House of Representatives, with an expanded Greens presence and disillusionment with the Liberals making a strong contribution to the number in 2022. Next year’s election will test whether this trend is entrenched.

    Carr points out that Labor has a party membership that’s wealthier and older than the general community. Its membership is “thin” in the outer suburbs and the regions compared with the inner areas.

    Among the consequences is that the messages coming up through the party may not gell with the preoccupations of the broader community, he says.

    Over the years the ALP rank and file has not just shrunk numerically but been deprived of most of the not-inconsiderable power it once had within the party.

    In terms of clout, Labor’s national conference, which sets the platform, is a diminished beast, though massively swollen numerically. The party membership’s power over preselections has been greatly reduced, thanks to factional deal-making and frequent intervention by the party’s national executive. In just one significant way has the rank and file gained power: it now has a 50% voice in electing the party’s leader, so far exercised once, in 2013, when Bill Shorten and Anthony Albanese faced off.

    Given the shrinkage and balkanisation of the party, there is currently not the interest in internal party reform that erupted periodically and often heatedly in earlier years.

    Labor veteran Race Mathews’ career, documented by his wife Iola in Race Mathews: A Life in Politics, has an extraordinarily broad political CV: a staffer for federal and state leaders, MP for the federal seat of Casey (elected on the 1972 Whitlam wave and defeated in the 1975 post-dismissal rout), and a Victorian state minister. An enduring preoccupation for Mathews, who was part of an influx of young, well-educated middle-class activists attracted to Labor in the 1960s and early 1970s, was fighting to make the Labor Party fit for purpose and more internally democratic.

    Serving on Gough Whitlam’s staff in the late 1960s, Mathews was in the thick of the then-opposition leader’s tumultuous battle with the troglodytes of the Victorian party, who preferred political impotence to the power of government. Whitlam knew that unless the ALP organisation was reformed, Labor’s road to office would be obstructed.

    Way back when, the party’s organisation, in which the left flexed a lot of muscle, liked to signal that the MPs were under its thumb. In 1963, then-opposition leader Arthur Calwell and Whitlam, his deputy, were embarrassed when photographed outside a Canberra hotel waiting for the party’s special national conference (to which they were not delegates) to decide Labor’s attitude to the North West Cape joint facility. The ultimate decision was not the problem – the line it was made by “36 faceless men” was.

    Mathews later highlighted the significance of the 1970 federal intervention in Victoria, saying it had led to important reforms in that state and elsewhere. “Good people were brought into parliament and membership was a rewarding experience.” But then factionalism “ossified” the party and “if you weren’t part of the factions, you were marginalised”.

    In his 70s Mathews (who is now aged 89 and suffering from Alzheimer’s Disease) was still fighting for democratisation of Labor’s organisation, which he described as “archaic and decrepit”. While party leaders and others were supportive in principle, the quest for a new wave of change ultimately brought only limited outcomes.

    Iola Mathews quotes her husband’s Facebook answer to those who wondered why he, at 80, he was still in these trenches.

    He wrote: “The fact is that nobody ever changed the party other than from inside it, or ever will. And shaping it closer to our heart’s desire is the only game in town.”

    The truth is, however, it’s a game those who run the Labor Party these days have no serious interest in pursuing. As Strangio observes, “the age of the mass party has passed”.

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. View from The Hill: ‘identity politics’ has challenged the Labor Party to define its identity – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-identity-politics-has-challenged-the-labor-party-to-define-its-identity-242215

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Echoes of a Lost Gaza – Al Jazeera documentary on a brutal war

    Pacific Media Watch

    Mariam Shahin has been making films about Gaza for more than 30 years.

    She has also made many documentaries and short films for Al Jazeera English since it launched in 2006.

    When she moved to Gaza in 2005, she felt a powerful sense of optimism following the Israeli withdrawal.

    Mariam Shahin . . . revisiting the Gaza people and lives the film maker has met over the years. Image: MS

    But by 2009, war had badly damaged its infrastructure, neighbourhoods, businesses and communities — and that optimism had evaporated.

    Now, in the wake of the even more destructive war that began on 7 October 2023, Shahin seeks out the people she has met in Gaza over the years.

    She reflects on the wasted potential and devastated lives after 16 years of blockade and a year of one of the most destructive wars in Middle East history.


    Echoes of a Lost Gaza: 2005-2024.     Video: Al Jazeera

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: You’ve heard of Asterix and Obelix, but who really were the Gauls? And why were they such a problem for Rome?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frederik Juliaan Vervaet, Associate Professor of Ancient History, The University of Melbourne

    JayC75/Shutterstock

    The year is 50 BC. Gaul is entirely occupied by the Romans. Well, not entirely. One small village of indomitable Gauls still holds out against the invaders.

    So begins the Asterix comic series, which positions Julius Caesar as the power-lusting dictator of the mighty Roman Empire who conquered all of Gaul. All except, of course, for one heroic village, where Asterix, Obelix and Dogmatix are among the Gauls (or Gaul dogs) frustrating Rome’s hapless legions.

    Well, that’s the comic book version.

    But who really were the Gauls? And why were they such a problem for Rome?

    The Gauls are the most famous group of Celtic peoples who occupied most of the lands west of the Rhine, thus causing this area to be known in antiquity as Gaul.

    They sported long blonde or reddish dreadlocks (often washing their hair in lime-water and pulling it back to the nape of the neck), handlebar moustaches on the men, colourful shirts and striped coats. The ethnonym Galli is believed to derive from a Celtic root gal- meaning “power” or “ability”, and has been linked to the Irish word gal, meaning “bravery” or “courage”.

    Fearsome warriors

    From the fifth to third centuries BCE, the Celtic tribes of central Europe were among the continent’s most fearsome warriors.

    This 1842 illustration depicts Gaul warriors with their customary large shields, swords, long hair and distinctive helmets.
    Wattier/Marzolino/Shutterstock

    From their heartlands around what is now the Czech Republic (Bohemia derives its name from the powerful Boii Gallic tribe), they conquered the British Isles, all of France and Belgium (Gaul proper) and parts of Spain. They also conquered the fertile alluvial plains of what became known to Romans as Cisalpine Gaul, meaning “Gaul this side of the Alps”.

    The Gauls even conquered lands as far afield as in present-day Turkey. The descendants from these once mighty peoples still live in Ireland (Gaelic comes from the word Gaul), Wales and Brittany.

    The Gauls had a very warlike reputation. They produced tall and muscular warriors who often wore helmets that, according to the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus, sometimes had horns attached or “images of the fore-parts of birds or four-footed animals”. He also wrote that:

    The women of the Gauls are not only like the men in their great stature but they are a match for them in courage as well.

    Gauls fought with long broad-swords, barbed spears, and chariots drawn by two horses. They fastened the severed heads of their enemies about the necks of their horses.

    Possessing huge quantities of alluvial gold, Gallic nobles wore heavy necklaces (known as “torcs”) of solid gold and consumed untold amounts of imported wine, fabulously enriching Italian merchants.

    Their acts of bravery were immortalised by lyric poets called bards, and they put great stock in their shamans, called druids, who also presided over regular human sacrifices.

    In 387 BCE, Gallic raiders from Cisalpine Gaul sacked Rome. They only failed to take the Capitol because of a hostile incursion into their own homelands, forcing them to break camp and return – not before, however, exacting a crippling price in gold from the profoundly humiliated Romans.

    The Romans were so impressed with Gallic military kit they resorted to wholesale plagiarism. The iconic armour of Roman republican legionaries was largely of Celtic origin.

    The Gauls had a very warlike reputation.
    J. Photos/Shutterstock

    Rome rallies against the Gauls

    In 295 BCE, the Senones (a Gallic tribe) inhabiting the Adriatic coastline south of Cisalpine Gaul were part of an alliance soundly defeated by the Roman Republic in the battle of Sentinum.

    This represented a watershed moment on the road to Roman hegemony in the Italian peninsula.

    In 232, against the backdrop of renewed hostilities with the Cisalpine Gauls, leading Roman politician Gaius Flaminius passed legislation redistributing land won from the Senones (following their final defeat in 283) among Romans from the lower property classes.

    To ease Roman colonisation, the same Flaminius in 220 commissioned the construction of the Via Flaminia, a paved speedway from Rome all the way to Rimini, at the doorstep of Cisalpine Gaul.

    Fearing the same fate as the Senones, the Cisalpine Gauls united against Rome, aided by some Transalpine Gauls.

    By 225, this alliance became strong enough to invade peninsular Italy, ravage Tuscany, and threaten Rome itself.

    This famously triggered the Romans to muster all Roman and Italian manpower at their disposal (about 800,000 draftable men, according to ancient the historian Pliny).

    Being now superior in every respect, the Romans and their Italian allies decisively defeated the Cisalpine Gauls in 223 and 222. The Roman general Marcus Claudius Marcellus even managed to kill a Gallic king in single combat.

    The vanquished Cisalpine Gauls then joined the feared Carthaginian general Hannibal, who at the time posed a great risk to Rome and defeated its forces in many battles. They joined Hannibal en masse after he crossed the Alps to invade Italy in 218.

    But Hannibal failed to vanquish Rome and was later defeated. The Roman conquest of Cisalpine Gaul continued after Roman forces defeated Hannibal’s brother Hasdrubal at the Metaurus River in 207.

    To secure their rich holdings in Cisalpine Gaul and the land corridor to their Spanish provinces, the Romans subsequently conquered first Liguria and next southern Gaul, incorporated as the Province of Transalpine Gaul. The area was so thoroughly colonised it is still known today as La Provence (“the province”).

    Caesar’s self-interested war on the Gauls

    Julius Caesar, eager to amass glory and wealth, subjugated all of Gaul in less than a decade (from 58 to 50 BCE).

    He sold this outright aggression to the Senate and people in Rome as a war waged in defence of tribes allied with Rome, a necessary pre-emptive strike of sorts.

    In addition to enslaving perhaps up to one million Gauls, Caesar proudly claimed to have killed well over another million, a staggering casualty rate considered by Pliny the Elder “a prodigious even if unavoidable wrong inflicted on the human race”.

    Julius Caesar subjugated all of Gaul in less than a decade.
    Paolo Gallo/Shutterstock

    Caesar got away with mass murder because he shamelessly played into lingering feelings of metus Gallicus, or “Gallic fear”.

    The Roman fear of Gauls was heightened by the so-called Cimbric War that took place in earlier years, when a formidable confederacy of Germanic and Gallic tribes inflicted a series of costly defeats upon Rome, threatening Italy itself.

    But Rome would triumph in the end. Under the leadership of Gaius Marius, the Romans destroyed these tribes in 102/101 BCE in Transalpine and Cisalpine Gaul.

    Turned into a Roman province in final stages of this war, Cisalpine Gaul eventually became so heavily Romanised it was incorporated into Roman Italy proper in 42 BCE.

    Frederik Juliaan Vervaet receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. You’ve heard of Asterix and Obelix, but who really were the Gauls? And why were they such a problem for Rome? – https://theconversation.com/youve-heard-of-asterix-and-obelix-but-who-really-were-the-gauls-and-why-were-they-such-a-problem-for-rome-233447

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why building more big dams is a costly gamble for our future water security and the environment

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Kandulu, Research Fellow, College of Business, Government and Law, Flinders University

    Climate change and biodiversity loss are mounting threats to Australia’s water security. So ee often hear calls for more dams. But is that the answer?

    Our recent research reveals large dam projects are costly gambles with public money. They often fail to deliver promised economic benefits. They also have major environmental, financial and social impacts.

    In New South Wales, some members of the Lower Lachlan River community were concerned about plans to expand Wyangala Dam. They first asked us in 2020 to investigate its full costs and benefits, with findings presented at a local workshop in 2022.

    The first WaterNSW estimate of capital and operating costs was A$620 million in 2018. Within a few years, it had soared to as much as $2.1 billion. In 2023, the project was scrapped because it wasn’t economically viable.

    Similar concerns surround other projects overseas and in Australia, including Hells Gate Dam in Queensland, and Dungowan Dam and Snowy Hydro 2.0 in NSW.

    To avoid repeating costly mistakes and mismanaging taxpayers’ money, we need a smarter approach to major water projects. This includes independent assessments and greater transparency, with business cases made public and decision-making open to scrutiny. And planning for climate change must become a priority.

    Lessons from past mistakes

    Inadequate economic assessments of big dam projects are a global problem. The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and India’s Subansiri Lower Hydroelectric Project promised big, but had rising price tags and devastating impacts on ecosystems.

    In Australia and worldwide, big dam cost overruns can be up to 825%. The average overrun is 120%. This casts serious doubt on such projects’ financial and social viability. Public costs for private gains are a major concern.

    Our study reviewed the original business case for the Wyangala Dam expansion. The original study had concluded there would be net social benefits and gave the project the green light.

    Our review found the business case was seriously flawed. It overestimated benefits and grossly underestimated physical capital and environmental costs.

    Estimated building costs blew out by 239%. If the project had gone ahead, the costs would undoubtedly have increased.

    On top of this, assessments of impacts on rivers and wetlands were poor and superficial. They greatly undervalued the environmental effects of expanding the dam, particularly on downstream wetlands.

    On the other side of the equation, its benefits were overblown, particularly for water security and agriculture.

    Local voices believed many of their concerns had been ignored. There were deep concerns that flood-dependent farmers downstream might lose some of their livelihoods. Indigenous communities were worried about their cultural sites being destroyed.

    Our analysis provided a more rigorous assessment of benefits and costs of the Wyangala Dam expansion.

    We found total project costs were underestimated by at least 116%. The benefits were inflated by 56%. This meant the true impacts on the environment, agriculture and local communities were misrepresented.

    Rethinking Australia’s water future

    Our analysis provides a salutary lesson on why we need to rethink water security. Instead of sinking billions into dams, we should find smart and sustainable ways to manage our water.

    The fixation on building and expanding dams means innovative alternatives are often ignored. These other options include recycling water, managing demand and carefully recharging aquifers (using aquifers as underground dams).

    The National Water Grid Fund exemplifies the misguided “build more dams” mindset. Its portfolio of 61 large water projects has a total capital cost estimate of up to $10 billion.

    Despite this massive investment, only 23 of these projects have publicly available business cases. It leaves more than $1.7 billion in committed funding shrouded in secrecy.

    This lack of transparency is alarming, given the history of cost overruns and inadequate assessment of environmental damage. It points to the urgent need to reassess our approach to water security. The public has a right to know that their governments are spending wisely.

    To avoid repeating costly mistakes and mismanaging taxpayers’ money, we need a smarter approach. Independent business cases should be mandated for all major water projects.

    We also need a strong public sector capable of transparent evaluation. Promised new National Environmental Standards as part of reforms to environmental protection laws are likely to require rigorous scrutiny too. We must embrace transparency by opening decision-making to public scrutiny and diverse perspectives, including local voices and Indigenous stakeholders, from the start.

    Finally, infrastructure planning must account for long-term climate impacts on water availability. Planning for climate change is vital.

    As projects such as the proposed Wyangala Dam expansion demonstrate, Australia can no longer afford to gamble its water future on outdated, costly and environmentally destructive solutions. It’s time to end the wasteful spending.

    Instead, we need to channel our efforts into truly effective, sustainable and transparent water management. Strategies must give priority to community needs, First Nations’ water rights, environmental protection and long-term climate resilience.

    John Kandulu is a recipient of funding from various sources, such as state and Commonwealth governments, as well as non-profit organisations. His affiliations include the Centre for Social Impact at Flinders University and the Environment Institute at the University of Adelaide.

    Richard Kingsford receives funding from a range of organisations, including the Australian Research Council, state and Commonwealth governments, non-government organisations, including World Wide Fund for Nature and Australian Conservation Foundation. He is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists and a councillor on the Biodiversity Council.

    Sarah Ann Wheeler receives funding from a range of organisations, including the Australian Research Council, state and Commonwealth governments and non-government organisations.

    – ref. Why building more big dams is a costly gamble for our future water security and the environment – https://theconversation.com/why-building-more-big-dams-is-a-costly-gamble-for-our-future-water-security-and-the-environment-239106

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 6 reasons why people enjoy horror movies

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shane Rogers, Lecturer in Psychology, Edith Cowan University

    Tero Vesalainen/Shutterstock

    The creeping shadows and haunting decorations transform the everyday into something eerie at Halloween. And you might be thinking about scaring yourself with a good horror movie.

    Grotesque imagery, extreme violence, startling jump scares and menacing characters are common elements, making viewers feel fear, dread and disgust.

    We generally aim to avoid these negative emotions in our everyday lives.

    So why would some people seek them out, and enjoy them, in horror movies?

    1. Fear can be thrilling

    There is lots of overlap between the emotions of fear and excitement. In both, stress hormones are released that can produce physical symptoms such as increased heart and breathing rates, sweating and muscle tension. People also feel more alert and “on edge”.

    Research has consistently shown people with personalities that crave intense emotional experiences, including fear and excitement, tend to enjoy horror movies.

    But for more fearful people, the jump scares and violent scenes can be too intense. This can result in coping behaviours such as looking away or putting their hands over the ears, especially if they are highly immersed in the movie.

    Although, if they also happen to enjoy intense emotion, they may still enjoy the thrill of the ride.

    Movie makers work hard to get these ‘jump scares’ just right. And viewers enjoy the thrill.

    2. There’s a sense of relief

    People may enjoy horror movies because of a sense of relief after a scary moment has passed.

    Watching a horror movie can be a bit of an emotional rollercoaster, with distinct peaks and troughs of fear and relief over the course of the film.

    For example, in the 2017 movie It the main protagonists survive a series of scary encounters with a demonic clown. The scary moments are separated by calmer scenes, prompting a rollercoaster of emotions.

    In the classic 1975 movie Jaws, viewers experience relief from the scary moments, only to be scared again and again.

    Jaws is a rollercoaster of emotions.

    3. They satisfy our morbid curiosity

    Many horror movies feature supernatural themes and characters such as zombies, werewolves and vampires. So horror movies can help satiate a morbid curiosity.

    The violence, death, destruction and grotesque elements can provide curious people a safe space to explore things that are not safe (or socially appropriate) in the real world.

    Horror movies can help people satisfy their curiosity about death. But why are they curious in the first place?

    4. We can work out our limits

    Horror movies can reflect our deepest fears and prompt introspection about our personal thresholds of fear and disgust.

    So some people may enjoy watching them to get a better understanding of their own limits.

    Watching horror might also be a way to push personal boundaries to potentially become less fearful or grossed out by things in real life.

    In a study one of us (Coltan) conducted, horror movie fans reported less psychological distress during the early months of the COVID pandemic compared with people not identifying as a horror movie fan.

    5. They can be social

    Some people say the social aspect of watching horror movies with others is a big part of their appeal.

    Watching with others might help some people feel safer. Alternatively, this might help amplify the emotional experience by feeding off the emotions of people around them.

    Horror movies are also a common pick as a date night movie. Being scared together gives a good excuse to snuggle and take comfort in each other.

    6. They give us pleasure in other people’s misery

    Horror movies can provide the pleasurable emotion we feel when witnessing the misfortune of others, known as schadenfreude. This occurs most when we feel the person experiencing misfortune deserves it.

    In many horror movies the characters that suffer a gruesome fate are only side characters. Much of the time these unfortunate souls are made out to be unlikeable and often make foolish choices before their grisly end.

    For example, in the 1996 teen witch movie The Craft, the character Chris Hooker is portrayed as being cruel to women. Then he dies by being blasted out of a window.

    Despite the grisly nature of horror movies, a study by one of us (Coltan) found horror fans seem to have the same levels of empathy as anyone else.

    In The Craft, viewers enjoy witnessing the misfortune of others, particularly if the character is a ‘baddy’.

    What do I make of all this?

    Horror movies allow us to confront our deepest fears through the safety of make-believe.

    People enjoy them for lots of different reasons. And the precise combination of reasons differs depending on the specific movie, and the person or people watching it.

    What is certain though, is the increasing popularity of horror movies, with many to choose from.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. 6 reasons why people enjoy horror movies – https://theconversation.com/6-reasons-why-people-enjoy-horror-movies-241480

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What is AI superintelligence? Could it destroy humanity? And is it really almost here?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Flora Salim, Professor, School of Computer Science and Engineering, inaugural Cisco Chair of Digital Transport & AI, UNSW Sydney

    Maxim Berg / Unsplash

    In 2014, the British philosopher Nick Bostrom published a book about the future of artificial intelligence (AI) with the ominous title Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. It proved highly influential in promoting the idea that advanced AI systems – “superintelligences” more capable than humans – might one day take over the world and destroy humanity.

    A decade later, OpenAI boss Sam Altman says superintelligence may only be “a few thousand days” away. A year ago, Altman’s OpenAI cofounder Ilya Sutskever set up a team within the company to focus on “safe superintelligence”, but he and his team have now raised a billion dollars to create a startup of their own to pursue this goal.

    What exactly are they talking about? Broadly speaking, superintelligence is anything more intelligent than humans. But unpacking what that might mean in practice can get a bit tricky.

    Different kinds of AI

    In my view the most useful way to think about different levels and kinds of intelligence in AI was developed by US computer scientist Meredith Ringel Morris and her colleagues at Google.

    Their framework lists six levels of AI performance: no AI, emerging, competent, expert, virtuoso and superhuman. It also makes an important distinction between narrow systems, which can carry out a small range of tasks, and more general systems.

    A narrow, no-AI system is something like a calculator. It carries out various mathematical tasks according to a set of explicitly programmed rules.

    There are already plenty of very successful narrow AI systems. Morris gives the Deep Blue chess program that famously defeated world champion Garry Kasparov way back in 1997 as an example of a virtuoso-level narrow AI system.

    Some narrow systems even have superhuman capabilities. One example is Alphafold, which uses machine learning to predict the structure of protein molecules, and whose creators won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry this year.

    What about general systems? This is software that can tackle a much wider range of tasks, including things like learning new skills.

    A general no-AI system might be something like Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: it can do a wide range of things, but it does them by asking real people.

    Overall, general AI systems are far less advanced than their narrow cousins. According to Morris, the state-of-the-art language models behind chatbots such as ChatGPT are general AI – but they are so far at the “emerging” level (meaning they are “equal to or somewhat better than an unskilled human”), and yet to reach “competent” (as good as 50% of skilled adults).

    So by this reckoning, we are still some distance from general superintelligence.

    How intelligent is AI right now?

    As Morris points out, precisely determining where any given system sits would depend on having reliable tests or benchmarks.

    Depending on our benchmarks, an image-generating system such as DALL-E might be at virtuoso level (because it can produce images 99% of humans could not draw or paint), or it might be emerging (because it produces errors no human would, such as mutant hands and impossible objects).

    There is significant debate even about the capabilities of current systems. One notable 2023 paper argued GPT-4 showed “sparks of artificial general intelligence”.

    OpenAI says its latest language model, o1, can “perform complex reasoning” and “rivals the performance of human experts” on many benchmarks.

    However, a recent paper from Apple researchers found o1 and many other language models have significant trouble solving genuine mathematical reasoning problems. Their experiments show the outputs of these models seem to resemble sophisticated pattern-matching rather than true advanced reasoning. This indicates superintelligence is not as imminent as many have suggested.

    Will AI keep getting smarter?

    Some people think the rapid pace of AI progress over the past few years will continue or even accelerate. Tech companies are investing hundreds of billions of dollars in AI hardware and capabilities, so this doesn’t seem impossible.

    If this happens, we may indeed see general superintelligence within the “few thousand days” proposed by Sam Altman (that’s a decade or so in less scifi terms). Sutskever and his team mentioned a similar timeframe in their superalignment article.

    Many recent successes in AI have come from the application of a technique called “deep learning”, which, in simplistic terms, finds associative patterns in gigantic collections of data. Indeed, this year’s Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded to John Hopfield and also the “Godfather of AI” Geoffrey Hinton, for their invention of Hopfield Networks and Boltzmann machine, which are the foundation for many powerful deep learning models used today.

    General systems such as ChatGPT have relied on data generated by humans, much of it in the form of text from books and websites. Improvements in their capabilities have largely come from increasing the scale of the systems and the amount of data on which they are trained.

    However, there may not be enough human-generated data to take this process much further (although efforts to use data more efficiently, generate synthetic data, and improve transfer of skills between different domains may bring improvements). Even if there were enough data, some researchers say language models such as ChatGPT are fundamentally incapable of reaching what Morris would call general competence.

    One recent paper has suggested an essential feature of superintelligence would be open-endedness, at least from a human perspective. It would need to be able to continuously generate outputs that a human observer would regard as novel and be able to learn from.

    Existing foundation models are not trained in an open-ended way, and existing open-ended systems are quite narrow. This paper also highlights how either novelty or learnability alone is not enough. A new type of open-ended foundation model is needed to achieve superintelligence.

    What are the risks?

    So what does all this mean for the risks of AI? In the short term, at least, we don’t need to worry about superintelligent AI taking over the world.

    But that’s not to say AI doesn’t present risks. Again, Morris and co have thought this through: as AI systems gain great capability, they may also gain greater autonomy. Different levels of capability and autonomy present different risks.

    For example, when AI systems have little autonomy and people use them as a kind of consultant – when we ask ChatGPT to summarise documents, say, or let the YouTube algorithm shape our viewing habits – we might face a risk of over-trusting or over-relying on them.

    In the meantime, Morris points out other risks to watch out for as AI systems become more capable, ranging from people forming parasocial relationships with AI systems to mass job displacement and society-wide ennui.

    What’s next?

    Let’s suppose we do one day have superintelligent, fully autonomous AI agents. Will we then face the risk they could concentrate power or act against human interests?

    Not necessarily. Autonomy and control can go hand in hand. A system can be highly automated, yet provide a high level of human control.

    Like many in the AI research community, I believe safe superintelligence is feasible. However, building it will be a complex and multidisciplinary task, and researchers will have to tread unbeaten paths to get there.

    Flora Salim receives funding from Australian Research Council and Cisco. She acknowledges the support from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S) (CE200100005).

    – ref. What is AI superintelligence? Could it destroy humanity? And is it really almost here? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-ai-superintelligence-could-it-destroy-humanity-and-is-it-really-almost-here-240682

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Where’s the harm in that? How we think about workplace hazards hampers the application of health and safety law

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Louise Deacon, PhD Graduand, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

    Current thinking about workplace problems, mental health and the law is hindering New Zealand’s ability to prevent job-related mental harm.

    The inclusion of mental health in New Zealand’s Health and Safety at Work Act (HSWA) is meant to protect workers from the risk of harm arising from exposure to workplace psychosocial hazards.

    These arise from the way work is designed, managed and led, and the context in which work is carried out. They can cause psychological, social or physical harm. Common examples include long work hours, role ambiguity, emotional demands, job insecurity and bullying.

    Our research examined how the most senior company decision-makers understood their legal duties as they relate to mental health.

    Under the HSWA, these officers – including company directors and chief executives – must exercise due diligence to ensure their company is compliant with the law.

    But most of the 24 research participants, who were officers of large companies, expressed uncertainty and ambiguity about the meaning of “mental health” within the HSWA.

    The harms of work

    Exposure to psychosocial hazards is commonly reported by New Zealand workers.

    Those working in jobs such as policing, nursing and teaching, for example, report high levels of emotional demands.

    Māori and Pacific workers, workers in retail, and workers in their 30s report higher than average levels of job insecurity.

    The harm caused by exposure to these these hazards typically presents as psychological. But it has also been strongly linked to cardiovascular disease and musculoskeletal disorders.

    Lack of expertise

    Managerial decisions relating to how work is designed, organised and managed influence how people experience work and the psychosocial hazards they may face.

    Psychosocial risk often stems from operational and performance decisions relating to things like intensification, staffing, production and market demands.

    In many organisations, these decisions are made in the boardroom – far removed from where the core work of the business is carried out.

    Many of the research participants felt the uncertainty about the meaning of mental health within the HSWA arose from a lack of expertise in New Zealand’s health and safety workforce, a lack of clear regulatory guidance, and the complexity of psychosocial risk.

    As one participant said:

    There’s no boundaries, there’s no playbook, there’s no formula they can follow, it’s hard and it’s complex and it’s different for each person, and there’s nobody who you can point to and go, “They’ve absolutely nailed it”.

    But our analysis also found that uncertainty and ambiguity arose from other factors.

    These included a belief that the risk of exposure was often rooted in the personal characteristics and behaviours of workers rather than in their work. There was also a focus on fixing harm rather than preventing it and the conflation of psychosocial risks with other risks.

    Unfortunately, these beliefs also limited the application of the HSWA.

    Instead of addressing work-related risk, senior managers became distracted by workers’ personal lives and focused on reactive management strategies rather than preventative ones. They adopted an approach to risk management that emphasised “risks to the organisation” rather than “risks to workers”.

    Bullying in the workplace

    These limits were most clearly evident when participants described their oversight of organisational responses to bullying and harassment.

    Many of the causes of bullying and harassment lie in the way work is organised, managed and led.

    However, in detailing their performance of due diligence, participants described ensuring such risks were managed by recounting conflict reporting and resolution systems, support for victims, and organisational policy stressing “zero tolerance” for poor workplace behaviour.

    While these responses might form part of a comprehensive approach to bullying and harassment (although in practice these could be unjust, ineffective or even counterproductive), on their own they may also be inadequate when the problem is considered under work health and safety law.

    The risk-based, preventative nature of the HSWA requires that harm is prevented through understanding, anticipating and intervening in the contributing factors within the work environment.

    Research has firmly established that bullying is more likely in organisations where there are unreasonable workloads, high job demands and job insecurity, along with laissez-faire or “hands off” management, or management strategies that relentlessly require workers do more with less.

    Consideration of these risks may be relevant in the current context of job insecurity and job cuts across the public sector which could result in increased demands on remaining workers.

    The link between hazards and harm

    Risk assessment must focus on what can, and ought to be, known about the relationship between these psychosocial hazards and potential harm. Risk management must aim to eliminate or minimise risks as far as reasonably practicable.

    Importantly, acting on risk does not require evidence of harm. Responding to harm once it has happened is contrary to the overall purpose of the HSWA.

    But addressing deeper organisational factors is much more difficult and uncomfortable for those in charge.

    Preventing bullying and harassment requires considering how decisions about the design, organisation and management of work may contribute to the risk of harm.

    Prevention can therefore explicitly question the decisions and practices of company directors, executives and managers – not traditionally considered within the remit of work health and safety.

    As a result, bullying and harassment tend to be framed as an interpersonal problem between workers and their managers. This is less challenging than bringing the decisions relating to the management and governance of a company into question.

    The preventative focus is then placed on correcting and improving behaviour rather than managing or changing the conditions of work which give rise to bullying and harassment.

    Louise Deacon received a grant from Health and Safety Association of New Zealand and a Massey University Doctoral Scholarship for this research.

    Bevan Catley has recieved funding in the past from The Health Research Council of New Zealand and WorkSafe New Zealand concerning work-related psychosocial risks.

    David Tappin has received research funding in the past from The Health Research Council of New Zealand and WorkSafe New Zealand concerning work-related psychosocial risks.

    – ref. Where’s the harm in that? How we think about workplace hazards hampers the application of health and safety law – https://theconversation.com/wheres-the-harm-in-that-how-we-think-about-workplace-hazards-hampers-the-application-of-health-and-safety-law-240794

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Sexual precarity’: how insecure work puts migrants at risk of being sexually harassed, assaulted or trafficked

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Boucher, Associate Professor in Public Policy and Political Science, University of Sydney

    wiratho/Shutterstock

    Some of the ways migrants are exploited in the workforce get a lot of public attention. We hear tragic stories about wage theft, forced unpaid overtime, unsafe work conditions or discrimination. And we are likely to hear more such grim stories revealed at a NSW parliamentary inquiry that will examine modern slavery in Australia.

    These vulnerabilities all relate to what researchers call workplace precarity – insecurity or uncertainty at work. But too often, a major piece of this picture gets overlooked.

    My recent analysis of more than 900 court cases brought by migrant workers shines a light on migrants being sexually harassed, sexually assaulted or trafficked for sexual reasons in their workplaces.

    Yet, with the exception of a recent landmark research report on sexual harassment experienced by migrant women, this issue has not received the attention it deserves.

    The taboo nature of sexual crimes likely plays a role in this neglect. When it is covered, there is often a somewhat sensationalist focus by the media on the sex work industry.

    In the process, we may overfocus on sex work and neglect many other workplaces in which migrant workers can face forms of sexual violence. Any reckoning with workplace precarity more broadly cannot afford to ignore the risk of sexual exploitation.



    Read more:
    Migrant workers have long been too scared to report employer misconduct. A new visa could change this

    What is ‘precarity’?

    Workplace “precarity” – insecurity or uncertainty at work – can affect us all.

    It can encompass a wide range of aspects, including a lack of workplace protections, job insecurity and social or economic instability at work.

    Visa status, a lack of knowledge of local laws and language barriers can all make migrants more vulnerable to workplace precarity.

    Unscrupulous employers may exploit these known vulnerabilities to extract favours and take advantage.

    Many theories of economic precarity do not consider sexual risk at all.

    Migrants can face unique vulnerabilities in the workforce.
    Chiarascura/Shutterstock

    What my research uncovered

    My research, drawn from more than 900 court cases brought by migrant workers, uncovered some harrowing examples.

    In one case in Canada, an employer sexually harassed and in one case raped two migrant women who worked in his business as fish filleters. One of the women felt she had to comply with demands for fellatio to avoid deportation back to Mexico.

    Following a ruling, the women were awarded damages under Ontario human rights law.

    In another highly publicised case in Australia, a farmer was found guilty of raping a young British backpacker, threatening refusal to sign off on her farm work if she did not comply.

    Such a “sign off” is required for a working holiday maker to be able to extend their visa for an additional year.

    Sex slavery

    A further case concerned sex slavery. Two Thai women entered Australia fraudulently on tourist visas with the intention of undertaking sex work. The sex work began, with their consent.

    However, they came to be subjected to work that went beyond what had been contracted in terms of the number of clients, the nature of sexual services provided, frequency and rest periods.

    One woman suffered damage to her sexual organs. They also had their mobile phones removed. After several legal appeals, this behaviour was found to amount to sex trafficking and the defendant employer was imprisoned.

    An attempt to overturn the conviction was refused.

    Recent research by the NSW Anti Slavery Commissioner’s Office with migrant workers on NSW farms also suggests allegations of sexual violence could be unreported due to a perceived risk of retaliation.

    Interwoven risks

    These cases, and many others, all demonstrate that economic and sexual exploitation can commingle for migrant workers.

    In such cases, employers may use economic and visa vulnerability to extract sexual favours. At times in these cases, there are also egregious examples of underpayment or even non-payment.

    To capture this relationship in migration systems, I developed the term sexual precarity. This has five core components:

    1. restrictive visa conditions
    2. debt bondage
    3. live-in arrangements that heighten exposure to employers during non-working hours
    4. entrapment and slavery
    5. the combination of sexual violence with economic exploitation or other forms of physical injury.

    What needs to be done?

    First, as with broader migrant worker rights, education campaigns for migrants are required.

    These would extend beyond making them better informed about their rights on economic exploitation to issues of discrimination and protection from sexual exploitation.

    Second, practical safeguards can be put in place to protect migrant women in isolated workplaces.

    This might include female-only sleeping dorms, female-only agriculture workforces, support person rules for meetings with male employers and general advice on sexual consent laws for both employers and employees.

    Third, policymakers could consider whether sexual offences that are accompanied by a visa threat should suffer additional penalties under criminal or immigration law.

    This has already been made the case with recent changes to visa sponsorship where employers who coerce migrants into breaching their visa conditions are subjected to certain penalties.

    Anna Boucher received funding from the Australian Research Council and the University of Sydney that funded this prior research. She is Vice President (Independent) on the Australian Institute of Employment Rights. 2023-4 she was on the NSW Anti-Slavery Commissioner’s Advisory Panel.

    – ref. ‘Sexual precarity’: how insecure work puts migrants at risk of being sexually harassed, assaulted or trafficked – https://theconversation.com/sexual-precarity-how-insecure-work-puts-migrants-at-risk-of-being-sexually-harassed-assaulted-or-trafficked-238880

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Is Donald Trump a fascist? No – he’s a new brand of authoritarian

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Geoff M Boucher, Associate Professor in Literary Studies, Deakin University

    Is Donald Trump a fascist? General Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Trump, thinks so. Trump is “fascist to the core,” he warns.

    John Kelly, Trump’s former chief of staff, agrees. So does Vice President Kamala Harris, his opponent in this year’s presidential election.

    But political commentators who have a grounding in history are not so sure. Writing in The Guardian, Sidney Blumenthal calls Trump “Hitlerian” and his rallies “Naziesque”, but stops short of calling him a fascist.

    Michael Tomasky of The New Republic understands the reservations, but he is tired spending time debating the difference between “fascistic” and just plain “fascist”. “He’s damn close enough,” Tomasky writes, “and we’d better fight”.

    I understand this logic. It’s the reason Harris uses the term “fascist” to describe Trump – to send “a 911 call to the American people”. But there’s a problem.

    I have spent the past six years researching right-wing, authoritarian political communication in America. I can say with confidence how these kinds of labels can misfire. They can very easily be made to look like liberal hysteria, playing straight into the hands of the far right.

    Here are the two reasons why it is crucial to call Trump exactly what he is.

    1. Calling Trump a fascist, and then instantly adding, “or close enough,” plays directly into the hands of the far right. “See?” they might say. “Anytime anyone steps outside the liberal consensus, they get labelled a fascist. This is how political correctness silences dissent.”

    2. Trump’s kind of authoritarianism thrives on ambiguity about what sort of right-wing populist figure he is. Its success depends on the fact that “fascist” is the only name we have right now for authoritarian politics.

    In my view, Trump is not a fascist. Rather, he is part of a “new authoritarianism” that subverts democracy from within and solidifies power through administrative, rather than paramilitary, means.

    Why the ‘fascism’ label is unhelpful

    This brand of new authoritarianism hides in plain sight because there is no name for it yet. It looks like something else – for example, right-wing populism that is anti-liberal, but not yet anti-democratic. And then suddenly, it shows itself as anti-democratic extremism, as Trump did in refusing to accept the 2020 election result and encouraging the storming of the Capitol.

    This moment starkly revealed Trump as a new authoritarian. Supplementary debate about whether Trump is like Adolf Hitler risks being pointless. But the problem is that fascism is the only name we have now for anti-democratic extremism.

    All fascists are authoritarians. But not all authoritarians are fascists. It’s crucial to understand there are other types of authoritarianism – and how they differ.

    This is not just important for preventing Trump from seeking to subvert American democracy. It is also vital for stopping Trump imitators, who will now spring forth in other democracies. If there is still no name for what they are other than “fascist,” then they, too, will thrive on ambiguity.

    What is ‘new authoritarianism’?

    I suggest we focus on what Trump actually is – an anti-democratic, “new authoritarian” – and understand what this means and how he is gaining wider support using right-wing populism.

    The new authoritarians don’t necessarily take a sledgehammer to a nation’s institutions, for example, by doing away with elections. Rather, they hollow out democracy from within, so it becomes a façade draped over a one-party state.

    We have many examples of this kind of ruler today: Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Hungary’s Viktor Orban, Belarus’ Alexander Lukashenko, Tunisia’s Kais Saied and, of course, the poster-figure for the new authoritarians, Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

    Trump’s admiration for Putin is a matter of public record. For alt-right thinkers who are influential with Trump, such as Steve Bannon, Putin provides a blueprint for how new authoritarianism works.

    Authoritarians like Putin must govern through the state, not the people, because, as social psychologist Bob Altemeyer explains, they ultimately represent a tiny minority of the population.

    Military dictatorships rule through the armed forces. The fascist regimes of 20th century Europe were ultimately police states. They relied on converting paramilitary death squads into secret police (like the Gestapo) and state security (the SS in Nazi Germany).

    The new authoritarians, however, govern through the transformation of the civil service into their own personal political machines.

    That is why Trump is obsessed with the “deep state”, by which he means the way in which democratic institutions have built-in legal safeguards defended by civil servants, who can potentially frustrate executive orders. The new authoritarian strategy is to appoint a stratum of political loyalists to key positions in their administrations, who can circumvent institutional checks. But that is no easy matter.

    If Trump is elected, he has vowed to “crush the deep state”, for example, by purging thousands of nonpolitical civil service employees. As part of this, he has pledged to establish a “truth and reconciliation commission” oriented to punishing those he thinks opposed him the past.

    Trump has been following this new authoritarian playbook for nearly his entire political career. These are the three steps he is taking to lay the groundwork for authoritarian rule:

    1) Undermine electoral integrity

    The first key to new authoritarianism: subvert democracy by undermining electoral integrity. The acid test here? Authoritarians do not accept election results when the opposition has won. As Trump has very bluntly put it, “I am a very proud election denier”.

    Trump’s opening move in this regard was to take over the Republican Party. He used election denialism to do this, while also marginalising any moderates who opposed him.

    The Trump Republican Party is now a minority party, oriented to white grievance, resentment of immigrants and the anti-democratic idea that a country should be run like a company.

    Its only hope for winning government as a minority party is by trying to suppress the vote of its opponents. To do this, pro-Trump Republican states have passed a number of laws since 2020 to make voting more difficult.

    These states have also aggressively removed people from the voting rolls. Texas alone has stricken one million voters off its rolls since 2021, only 6,500 of whom were deemed non-citizens.

    If Trump wins, he will likely make it even harder for people to vote. Civil rights groups fear he may introduce a citizenship question to the census, use the Department of Justice to conduct a massive purge of voter rolls, and launch criminal investigations of electoral officials.

    As a backup, Trump will likely resurrect the “election integrity commission” he established in 2017 to justify his claims of alleged voter fraud in the 2016 election and support his election denialism narrative.

    2) Weaken the legislative and judicial branches

    The second key to new authoritarianism: circumventing the checks-and-balances function of the legislative branch of government. The goal here is to rule by executive fiat or govern through a stacked legislative majority.

    The new authoritarians often govern through executive orders, including the use of emergency powers. For instance, Trump has envisaged a scenario in which a Republican Congress could enact emergency powers to empower the president to overturn the authority of state governors to fire their prosecutors and use the National Guard for law enforcement.

    Such a development would depend on a number of factors, including the complicity of the judiciary. This is why new authoritarians also attempt to stack the judiciary with loyalists.

    In his first term, Trump not only appointed three Supreme Court justices, he also placed judges to the federal appeals courts, district courts and circuit courts.

    3) Attack their enemies

    This leads to the third pillar of new authoritarianism: decapitating the political opposition and suppressing dissent.

    Trump’s threats to investigate and prosecute his enemies, including leading figures in the Democratic Party, should be taken very seriously. His calls to target the “enemy from within” were pointedly directed at what he deemed “radical left lunatics”.

    Journalists and the news media would also likely be targeted. Trump’s statement that the broadcast licenses of national networks should be revoked, for example, needs to be understood in the context of his pledges to dismantle federal regulatory agencies if elected.

    That matters, because the next step for new authoritarians to solidify their power is through suppressing dissent. Trump has proposed using the military in civil contexts to target criminals and prevent illegal immigration. He has reportedly even questioned why the military couldn’t “just shoot” protesters.

    It is important to understand how this differs from fascism, because it is central to Trump’s ability to retain electoral support.

    Classical fascism under dictators like Hitler and Italy’s Benito Mussolini was based on street-fighting, paramilitary movements, which used violence to intimidate and crush the opposition. The equivalents of this today are right-wing militias such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

    Trump keeps one foot on the edge of this camp. But alt-right figures like Bannon understand that swastika flags and paramilitary uniforms are a political liability. Their preference is for new authoritarianism, which is able to push
    a right-wing extremist agenda by reducing democracy to sham elections, rather than openly setting up a totalitarian regime.

    As such, Trump can dodge accusations of being a “fascist” by telling the Proud Boys to “stand by”, while throwing up a smokescreen of equivocations about the January 6 Capitol insurrection. He can distance himself from kind of paramilitary violence that is reminiscent of classical fascism.

    It is about time to call things by their true names. Trump has the anti-democratic tendencies of a new authoritarian – and, as his opponents point out, he seems likely to put his words into actions if elected a second time.

    Geoff M Boucher does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Is Donald Trump a fascist? No – he’s a new brand of authoritarian – https://theconversation.com/is-donald-trump-a-fascist-no-hes-a-new-brand-of-authoritarian-241586

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Sydney’s beloved Footbridge Theatre launched some of our biggest stars. After nearly 20 years, it’s making a grand return

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Ginters, Associate Professor, Department of Theatre and Performance Studies, University of Sydney

    The Footbridge Theatre in the 1960s, when it was known as the Union Theatre. University of Sydney Archives

    After nearly 20 years as a lecture theatre, the University of Sydney’s Footbridge Theatre is reopening as a live performance venue in the university’s arts precinct.

    The Footbridge is home to a long history of student theatre on campus. When it opened in 1961 as the 655-seat Union Theatre (replacing the old Union Hall) it was the first theatre to have been built in Sydney in more than 20 years.

    Hopes were high for the new venture to be shared by student theatre groups and Sydney’s first professional repertory company, the Union Repertory Theatre Company (not to be confused with the Melbourne Theatre Company’s original name, the Union Theatre Repertory Company).

    For decades, the Footbridge Theatre was host to both industry heavyweights and budding talent from across the arts sectors, before being converted to a lecture hall in 2006. Now, it’s back.

    Hitting the ground running

    The theatre opened with productions from the Sydney University Musical Society, including Claudio Monteverdi’s ballet Il Ballo Delle Ingrate and Henry Purcell’s opera Dido and Aeneas.

    Also on show was the Sydney University Theatre Council’s Serjeant Musgrave’s Dance, starring John Bell in the title role. Ken Horler, with whom Bell founded the famous Nimrod Theatre a decade later, co-directed the play with May Hollinworth, who ran the university’s Dramatic Society in the 1920s and ’30s. The production also featured John Gaden, Bob Ellis, Bruce Beresford, Richard Brennan and Mungo MacCallum.

    The following year, Horler directed Coriolanus, with Bell in the title role and Gaden and Arthur Dignam in the cast.

    John Bell and Arthur Dignam in Coriolanus.
    University of Sydney

    Horler would go on to direct the first Australian production of Bertolt Brecht’s Mother Courage in 1963. The cast included Germaine Greer as Mother Courage, Peter Carroll and Ron Blair.

    Bell also acted in and directed a number of shows in the following years. He returned again in the early 1990s to stage a series of productions with his fledgling Bell Shakespeare company.

    Peter Carroll, Germaine Greer, Maree D’Arcy, Ron Blair and Paul Thom in Mother Courage.
    University of Sydney

    A smidge of controversy

    The university students of the 1960s had been delighted to have their “own” venue after years of makeshift spaces. They produced some adventurous – as well as some scandalous – works.

    When the Dramatic Society staged its Revue of the Absurd in 1963, it included a controversial film by the then-nascent filmmakers Bruce Beresford and Albie Thoms. It Droppeth as the Gentle Rain depicted a cocktail party coming to a sticky end as shit rained down from the sky.

    The film was promptly banned. This ban was reinstated the following year when Beresford and Thoms sought to show it at a gala commemorating the Dramatic Society’s 75th birthday.

    Bruce Beresford and Albie Thoms’ film, It Droppeth as the Gentle Rain, was banned in 1963 – and again the following year.
    University of Sydney

    Student revues were a popular feature of the theatre in its early years. One of these was the 1964 revue called Jump, which starred Colin Anderson, Germaine Greer, John Gaden and Paul Thom.

    The revue Jump featured Paul Thom and John Gaden (left), as well as Colin Anderson and Germaine Greer (right).
    University of Sydney

    The Union Repertory Theatre Company was short-lived, collapsing within 12 months of its launch in 1961.

    Also, ironically, the Footbridge was too expensive for students to hire often. Nonetheless, it was still a launching pad for those involved in student theatre, including Henry Szeps (who later acted in the 1984–94 series Mother and Son), Jack Thompson, who played Claudius in a production of Hamlet (1969), and Neil Armfield in Much Ado About Nothing (1974).

    Fellow student actor and director David Marr would later acknowledge Armfield’s genius as a director, while diplomatically adding “acting was not his strength”.

    A poster designed by Martin Sharp for the 1965 revue First, No Pinky.
    University of Sydney

    What’s in a name?

    The Union Theatre was a venue for hire throughout the 1970s, with student theatre, concerts, music theatre, French language theatre and other genres sporadically staged. In 1981, it was renamed the Footbridge Theatre (after a footbridge that was constructed over Parramatta Road in 1972).

    For two decades from the mid-1980s, the Gordon Frost Organisation leased the theatre to present a number of popular commercial productions.

    It also rented the theatre to other companies, including Bell Shakespeare, the Sydney Theatre Company, Ensemble Theatre and Sydney Festival, which programmed outstanding international works such as the Irish Druid Theatre’s 1998 production of The Leenane Trilogy.

    The 1990s also saw students back onstage in annual faculty revues.

    The next act begins

    A squeeze on space at the university led to Footbridge’s conversion to a lecture theatre in 2006. Following extensive renovations, the now 300-seat theatre is opening once again, with Stephen Sondheim’s Into the Woods.

    The university’s Dramatic Society first produced Into the Woods in the early 2000s (starring Virginia Gay). The Sydney University Musical Theatre Ensemble (MUSE) staged it again in 2011.

    This time around the production is showcasing the talents of the inaugural cohort of music theatre students from the university’s Conservatorium of Music.

    Just as it was for the “Johns” (Bell and Gaden) who, in the early 1960s, took their first steps as student actors into their future careers – and are still going strong six decades later – campus theatres remain vitally important for students finding their feet as the artists of the future.

    Now, in a new decade and with a new generation of students, it’s time to go into the woods again.

    Laura Ginters and Robyn Dalton co-authored a history of drama activities at the University of Sydney, The Ripples Before The New Wave 1957-1963 (2018). The authors interviewed many of the student actors mentioned here for that book.

    – ref. Sydney’s beloved Footbridge Theatre launched some of our biggest stars. After nearly 20 years, it’s making a grand return – https://theconversation.com/sydneys-beloved-footbridge-theatre-launched-some-of-our-biggest-stars-after-nearly-20-years-its-making-a-grand-return-241561

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: PM defends Fiji’s UN ‘ambush’ vote – challenged by human rights advocate

    Pacific Media Watch

    Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has “cleared the air” with the Fijian diaspora in Samoa over Fiji’s vote against the United Nations resolution on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and People.

    He denied that Fiji — the only country to vote against the resolution — had “pressed the wrong button”.

    And he described last week’s vote as an “ambush resolution”, claiming it was not the one they had agreed on during the voting of the UN Special Committee of Decolonisation, reports The Fiji Times.

    However, a prominent Fiji civil society and human rights advocate condemned his statement and also Fiji’s UN voting.

    Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) coordinator Shamima Ali said she was “ashamed” of Fiji’s stance over genocide in Palestine, its vote against ceasefire and “not wanting decolonisation”.

    In Apia, Rabuka, who leaves for Kanaky New Caledonia on Sunday to take part in the Pacific Islands Forum’s “Troika Plus” talks on the French Pacific’s territory amid indigenous demands for independence, told The Fiji Times:

    “We will not tell them we pressed the wrong button. We will tell them that the resolution was an ambush resolution, it is not something that we have been talking about.”

    ‘Serious student of colonisation’
    The Prime Minister said he had been a “serious student of colonisation and decolonisation”.

    Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka . . . “We will not tell them we pressed the wrong button.” Image: Fiji Times

    “They started with the C-12, but now it’s C-24 members of the [UN] committee that talks about decolonisation.

    “I was wondering if anyone would complain about my going [to Kanaky New Caledonia] next week because C-24 met last week and there was a vote on decolonisation.”

    According to an RNZ Pacific interview, Rabuka had told the Kanak independence movement:”Don’t slap the hand that has fed you.”

    Fiji was the only country that voted against the UN resolution while 99 voted for the resolution and 61 countries, including colonisers such as France, United Kingdom and the United States, abstained.

    Another coloniser, Indonesia (West Papua), voted for it.

    “I thought the [indigenous] people of the Kanaky of New Caledonia would object to my coming, so far we have not heard anything from them.

    “So, I am hoping that no one will bring that up, but if they do bring it up, we have a perfect answer.”

    Fiji human rights advocate Shamima Ali . . . “We are ashamed of having a government that supports an occupation.” Image: FWCC/FB

    Human rights advocate Shamima Ali said in a statement on social media it was “unbelievable” that Prime Minister Rabuka claimed to be “a serious student of colonisation and decolonisation” while leading a government that had been “blatantly complicit in the genocide of innocent Palestinians”.

    “No amount of public statements and explanations will save this Coalition government from the mess it has created on the international stage, especially at the United Nations.

    “We are ashamed of having a government that supports an occupation, votes against a ceasefire and does not want decolonisation in the world.

    “Trust between the Fijian people and their government is being eroded, especially on matters of global significance that reflect on the entire nation.”

    According to the government, Fiji is one of two Pacific countries which are members of the Special Committee on Decolonisation or C-24 and have been a consistent voice in addressing the issue of decolonisation.

    Through the C-24 and the Fourth Committee, Fiji aligns with the positions undertaken by the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), in its support for the annual resolution on decolonisation entitled “Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”.

    Government reiterated its support of the regional position of the Forum, and the MSG on decolonisation and self-determination, as enshrined in the UN Charter.

    The Fiji Permanent Mission in New York, led by Filipo Tarakinikini, is working with the Forum Secretariat to clarify the matter within its process.

    Rabuka is currently in Samoa for the 2024 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), which is being held in the Pacific for the first time.

    The UN decolonisation declaration vote on 17 October 2024 . . . Fiji was the only country that voted against it. Image: UN

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Murdoch to Musk: how global media power has shifted from the moguls to the big tech bros

    ANALYSIS: By Matthew Ricketson, Deakin University and Andrew Dodd, The University of Melbourne

    Until recently, Elon Musk was just a wildly successful electric car tycoon and space pioneer. Sure, he was erratic and outspoken, but his global influence was contained and seemingly under control.

    But add the ownership of just one media platform, in the form of Twitter — now X — and the maverick has become a mogul, and the baton of the world’s biggest media bully has passed to a new player.

    What we can gauge from watching Musk’s stewardship of X is that he’s unlike former media moguls, making him potentially even more dangerous. He operates under his own rules, often beyond the reach of regulators. He has demonstrated he has no regard for those who try to rein him in.

    Under the old regime, press barons, from William Randolph Hearst to Rupert Murdoch, at least pretended they were committed to truth-telling journalism. Never mind that they were simultaneously deploying intimidation and bullying to achieve their commercial and political ends.

    Musk has no need, or desire, for such pretence because he’s not required to cloak anything he says in even a wafer-thin veil of journalism. Instead, his driving rationale is free speech, which is often code for don’t dare get in my way.

    This means we are in new territory, but it doesn’t mean what went before it is irrelevant.

    A big bucket of the proverbial
     If you want a comprehensive, up-to-date primer on the behaviour of media moguls over the past century-plus, Eric Beecher has just provided it in his book The Men Who Killed the News.

    Alongside accounts of people like Hearst in the United States and Lord Northcliffe in the United Kingdom, Beecher quotes the notorious example of what happened to John Major, the UK prime minister between 1990 and 1997, who baulked at following Murdoch’s resistance to strengthening ties with the European Union.

    In a conversation between Major and Kelvin MacKenzie, editor of Murdoch’s best-selling English tabloid newspaper, The Sun, the prime minister was bluntly told: “Well John, let me put it this way. I’ve got a large bucket of shit lying on my desk and tomorrow morning I’m going to pour it all over your head.”

    MacKenzie might have thought he was speaking truth to power, but in reality he was doing Murdoch’s bidding, and actually using his master’s voice, as Beecher confirms by recounting an anecdote from early in Murdoch’s career in Australia.

    In the 1960s, when Murdoch owned The Sunday Times in Perth, he met Lang Hancock (father of Gina Rinehart) to discuss potentially buying some mineral prospects together in Western Australia. The state government was opposed to the planned deal.

    Beecher cites Hancock’s biographer, Robert Duffield, who claimed Murdoch asked the mining magnate, “If I can get a certain politician to negotiate, will you sell me a piece of the cake?” Hancock said yes.

    Later that night, Murdoch called again to say the deal had been done. How, asked an incredulous Hancock. Murdoch replied: “Simple [. . . ] I told him: look you can have a headline a day or a bucket of shit every day. What’s it to be?”

    Between Murdoch in the 1960s and MacKenzie in the 1990s came Mario Puzo’s The Godfather with Don Corleone, aided by Luca Brasi holding a gun to a rival’s head, saying “either his brains or his signature would be on the contract”.

    Changing the rules of the game
     Media moguls use metaphorical bullets. Those relatively few people who do resist them, like Major, get the proverbial poured over their government. Headlines in The Sun following the Conservatives’ win in the 1992 election included: “Pigmy PM”, “Not up to the job” and “1001 reasons why you are such a plonker John”.

    If media moguls since Hearst and Northcliffe have tap-danced between producing journalism and pursuing their commercial and political aims, they have at least done the former, and some of it has been very good.

    The leaders of the social media behemoths, by contrast, don’t claim any Fourth Estate role. If anything, they seem to hold journalism with tongs as far from their face as possible.

    They do possess enormous wealth though. Apple, Microsoft, Google and Meta, formerly known as Facebook, are in the top 10 companies globally by market capitalisation. By comparison, News Corporation’s market capitalisation now ranks at 1173 in the world.

    Regulating the online environment may be difficult, as Australia discovered this year when it tried, and failed, to stop X hosting footage of the Wakeley Church stabbing attacks. But limiting transnational media platforms can be done, according to Robert Reich, a former Secretary of Labor in Bill Clinton’s government.

    Despite some early wins through Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code, big tech companies habitually resist regulation. They have used their substantial influence to stymie it wherever and whenever nation-states have sought to introduce it.

    Meta’s founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has been known to go rogue, as he demonstrated in February 2021 when he protested against the bargaining code by unilaterally closing Facebook sites that carried news. Generally, though, his strategy has been to deploy standard public relations and lobbying methods.

    But his rival Musk uses his social media platform, X, like a wrecking ball.

    Musk is just about the first thing the average X user sees in their feed, whether they want to or not. He gives everyone the benefit of his thoughts, not to mention his thought bubbles. He proclaims himself a free-speech absolutist, but most of his pronouncements lean hard to the right, providing little space for alternative views.

    Some of his tweets have been inflammatory, such as him linking to an article promoting a conspiracy theory about the savage attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of the former US Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, or his tweet that “Civil war is inevitable” following riots that erupted recently in the UK.

    As the BBC reported, the riots occurred after the fatal stabbing of three girls in Southport. “The subsequent unrest in towns and cities across England and in parts of Northern Ireland has been fuelled by misinformation online, the far-right and anti-immigration sentiment”.

    Nor does Musk bother with niceties when people disagree with him. Late last year, advertisers considered boycotting X because they believed some of Musk’s posts were anti-Semitic. He told them during a live interview to “Go fuck yourself”.

    He has welcomed Donald Trump, the Republican Party’s presidential nominee, back onto X after Trump’s account was frozen over his comments surrounding the January 6, 2021, attack on the capitol. Since then both men have floated the idea of governing together if Trump wins a second term.

    Is the world better off with tech bros like Musk who demand unlimited freedom and assert their influence brazenly, or old-style media moguls who spin fine-sounding rhetoric about freedom of the press and exert influence under the cover of journalism?

    That’s a question for our times that we should probably begin grappling with.

    Dr Matthew Ricketson is professor of communication, Deakin University and Dr Andrew Dodd is director of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: RSF tackles Taiwan’s media freedom ‘Achilles heel’, boosts Asia Pacific monitoring action

    SPECIAL REPORT: By David Robie in Taipei

    It was a heady week for the Paris-based global media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) — celebration of seven years of its Taipei office, presenting a raft of proposals to the Taiwan government, and hosting its Asia-Pacific network of correspondents.

    Director general Thibaut Bruttin and the Taipei bureau chief Cedric Alviani primed the Taipei media scene before last week’s RSF initiatives with an op-ed in the Taiwan Times by acknowledging the country’s media freedom advances in the face of Chinese propaganda.

    Taiwan rose eight places to 27th in the RSF World Press Freedom Index this year — second only to Timor-Leste in the Asia-Pacific region.

    But the co-authors also warned over the credibility damage caused by media “too often neglect[ing] journalistic ethics for political or commercial reasons”.

    As a result, only three in 10 Taiwanese said they trusted the news media, according to a Reuters Institute survey conducted in 2022, one of the lowest percentages among democracies.

    “This climate of distrust gives disproportionate influence to platforms, in particular Facebook and Line, despite them being a major vector of false or biased information,” Bruttin and Alviani wrote.

    “This credibility deficit for traditional media, a real Achilles heel of Taiwanese democracy, puts it at risk of being exploited for malicious purposes, with potentially dramatic consequences.”

    Press freedom programme
    At a meeting with Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te and senior foreign affairs officials, Bruttin and his colleagues presented RSF’s innovative programme for improving press freedom, including the Journalism Trust Initiative (JTI), the first ISO-certified media quality standard; the Paris Charter on Artificial Intelligence and Journalism; and the Propaganda Monitor, a project aimed at combating propaganda and disinformation worldwide.

    RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin speaking at the reception celebrating seven years of Taipei’s Asia Pacific office. Image: Pacific Media Watch

    The week also highlighted concerns over the export of the China’s “New World Media Order”, which is making inroads in some parts of the Asia-Pacific region, including the Pacific.

    At the opening session of the Asia-Pacific correspondents’ seminar, delegates referenced the Chinese disinformation and assaults on media freedom strategies that have been characterised as the “great leap backwards for journalism” in China.

    “Disinformation — the deliberate spreading of false or biased news to manipulate minds — is gaining ground around the world,” Bruttin and Alviani warned in their article.

    “As China and Russia sink into authoritarianism and export their methods of censorship and media control, democracies find themselves overwhelmed by an incessant flow of propaganda that threatens the integrity of their institutions.”

    Both Bruttin and Alviani spoke of these issues too at the celebration of the seventh anniversary of the Asia-Pacific office in Taipei.

    Why Taipei? Hongkong had been an “likely choice, but not safe legally”, admitted Bruttin when they were choosing their location, so the RSF team are happy with the choice of Taiwan.

    Hub for human rights activists
    “I think we were among the first NGOs to have established a presence here. We kind of made a bet that Taipei would be a hub for human rights activists, and we were right.”

    About 200 journalists, media workers and press freedom and human rights advocates attended the birthday bash in the iconic Grand Hotel’s Yuanshan Club. So it wasn’t surprising that there was a lot of media coverage raising the issues.

    RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin (centre) with correspondents Dr David Robie and Dr Joseph Fernandez in Taipei. Image: Pacific Media Watch

    In an interview with Voice of America’s Joyce Huang, Bruttin was more specific about the “insane” political propaganda threats from China faced by Taiwan.

    However, Taiwan “has demonstrated resilience and has rich experience in resisting cyber information attacks, which can be used as a reference for the world”.

    Referencing China as the world’s “biggest jailer of journalists”, Bruttin said: “We’re very worried, obviously.” He added about some specific cases: “We’ve had very troublesome reports about the situation of Zhang Zhan, for example, who was the laureate of the RSF’s [2021 press freedom] awards [in the courage category] and had been just released from jail, now is sent back to jail.

    “We know the lack of treatment if you have a medical condition in the Chinese prisons.

    “Another example is Jimmy Lai, the Hongkong press freedom mogul, he’s very likely to die in jail if nothing happens. He’s over 70.

    “And there is very little reason to believe that, despite his dual citizenship, the British government will be able to get him a safe passage to Europe.”

    Problem for Chinese public
    Bruttin also expressed concern about the problem for the general public, especially in China where he said a lot of people had been deprived of the right to information “worthy of that name”.

    “And we’re talking about hundreds of millions of people. And it’s totally scandalous to see how bad information is treated in the People’s Republic of China.”

    Seventeen countries in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in the network seminar.

    Representatives of Australia, Cambodia, Hongkog, Indonesia, Japan, Myanmar, Mongolia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, South Korea, Tibet, Thailand and Vietnam were present. However, three correspondents (Malaysia, Singapore and Timor-Leste) were unable to be personally present.

    Discussion and workshop topics included the RSF Global Strategy; the Asia-Pacific network and the challenges being faced; best practice as correspondents; “innovative solutions” against disinformation; public advocacy (for authoritarian regimes; emerging democracies, and “leading” democracies); “psychological support” – one of the best sessions; and the RSF Crisis Response.

    RSF Oceania colleagues Dr David Robie (left) and Dr Joseph Fernandez . . . mounting challenges. Image: Pacific Media Watch

    What about Oceania (including Australia and New Zealand) and its issues? Fortunately, the countries being represented have correspondents who can speak our publicly, unlike some in the region facing authoritarian responses.

    Australia
    Australian correspondent Dr Joseph M Fernandez, visiting associate professor at Curtin University and author of the book Journalists and Confidential Sources: Colliding Public Interests in the Age of the Leak, notes that Australia sits at 39th in the RSF World Press Freedom Index — a drop of 12 places from the previous year.

    “While this puts Australia in the top one quarter globally, it does not reflect well on a country that supposedly espouses democratic values. It ranks behind New Zealand, Taiwan, Timor-Leste and Bhutan,” he says.

    “Australia’s press freedom challenges are manifold and include deep-seated factors, including the influence of oligarchs whose own interests often collide with that of citizens.

    “While in opposition the current Australian federal government promised reforms that would have improved the conditions for press freedom, but it has failed to deliver while in government.

    “Much needs to be done in clawing back the over-reach of national security laws, and in freeing up information flow, for example, through improved whistleblower law, FOI law, source protection law, and defamation law.”

    Dr Fernandez criticises the government’s continuing culture of secrecy and says there has been little progress towards improving transparency and accountability.

    “The media’s attacks upon itself are not helping either given the constant moves by some media and their backers to undermine the efforts of some journalists and some media organisations, directly or indirectly.”

    A proposal for a “journalist register” has also stirred controversy.

    Dr Fernandez also says the war on Gaza has “highlighted the near paralysis” of many governments of the so-called established democracies in “bringing the full weight of their influence to end the loss of lives and human suffering”.

    “They have also failed to demonstrate strong support for journalists’ ability to tell important stories.”


    An English-language version of this tribute to the late RSF director-general Christophe Deloire, who died from cancer on 8 June 2024, was screened at the RSF Taipei reception. He was 53. Video: RSF

    Aotearoa New Zealand
    In New Zealand (19th in the RSF Index), although journalists work in an environment free from violence and intimidation, they have increasingly faced online harassment. Working conditions became tougher in early 2022 when, during protests against covid-19 vaccinations and restrictions and a month-long “siege” of Parliament, journalists were subjected to violence, insults and death threats, which are otherwise extremely rare in the country.

    Research published in December 2023 revealed that high rates of abuse and threats directed at journalists put the country at risk of “mob censorship” – citizen vigilantism seeking to “discipline” journalism. Women journalists bore the brunt of the online abuse with one respondent describing her inbox as a “festering heap of toxicity”.

    While New Zealand society is wholeheartedly multicultural, with mutual recognition between the Māori and European populations enshrined in the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, this balance is under threat from a draft Treaty Principles Bill.

    The nation’s bicultural dimension is not entirely reflected in the media, still dominated by the English-language press. A rebalancing is taking place, as seen in the success of the Māori Television network and many Māori-language programmes in mass media, such as Te Karere, The Hui and Te Ao Māori News.

    Media plurality and democracy is under growing threat with massive media industry cuts this year.

    New Zealand media also play an important role as a regional communications centre for other South Pacific nations, via Tagata Pasifika, Pacific Media Network and others.

    Papua New Guinea’s Belinda Kora (left) with RSF colleagues . . . “collaborating in our Pacific efforts in seeking the truth”. Image: Belinda Kora

    Papua New Guinea
    The Papua New Guinea correspondent, Belinda Kora, who is secretary of the revised PNG Media Council and an ABC correspondent in Port Moresby, succeeded former South Pacific Post Ltd chief executive Bob Howarth, the indefatigable media freedom defender of both PNG and Timor-Leste.

    Currently PNG (91st in the RSF Index) is locked in a debate over a controversial draft government media policy – now in its fifth version – that critics regard as a potential tool to crack down on media freedom. But Kora is optimistic about RSF’s role.

    “I am excited about what RSF is able and willing to bring to a young Pacific region — full of challenges against the press,” she says.

    “But more importantly, I guess, is that the biggest threat in PNG would be itself, if it continues to go down the path of not being able to adhere to simple media ethics and guidelines.

    “It must hold itself accountable before it is able to hold others in the same way.

    “We have a small number of media houses in PNG but if we are able to stand together as one and speak with one voice against the threats of ownership and influence, we can achieve better things in future for this industry.

    “We need to protect our reporters if they are to speak for themselves and their experiences as well. We need to better provide for their everyday needs before we can write the stories that need to be told.

    “And this lies with each media house.

    The biggest threat for the Pacific as a whole? “I guess the most obvious one would be being able to remain self-regulated BUT not being accountable for breaching our individual code of ethics.

    “Building public trust remains vital if we are to move forward. The lack of media awareness also contributes to the lack of ensuring media is given the attention it deserves in performing its role — no matter how big or small our islands are,” Kora says.

    “The press should remain free from government influence, which is a huge challenge for many island industries, despite state ownership.

    Kora believes that although Pacific countries are “scattered in the region”, they are able to help each other more, to better enhance capacity building and learning from their mistakes with collaboration.

    “By collaborating in our efforts in seeking the truth behind many of our big stories that is affecting our people. This I believe will enable us to improve our performance and accountability.”

    Example to the region
    Meanwhile, back in Taiwan on the day that RSF’s Thibaut Bruttin flew out, he gave a final breakfast interview to China News Agency (CNA) reporter Teng Pei-ju who wrote about the country building up its free press model as an example to the region.

    “Taiwan really is one of the test cases for the robustness of journalism in the world,” added Bruttin, reflecting on the country’s transformation from an authoritarian regime that censored information into a vibrant democracy that fights disinformation.

    Dr David Robie, convenor of the Asia Pacific Media Network’s Pacific Media Watch project and author of several media and politics books, including Don’t Spoil My Beautiful Face: Media, Mayhem and Human Rights in the Pacific, has been an RSF correspondent since 1996.

    RSF Asia Pacific correspondents and staff pictured at the Grand Hotel’s Yuanshan Club. Image: RSF

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why do kids cheat? Is it normal, or should I be worried?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Penny Van Bergen, Head of School of Education and Professor of Educational Psychology, University of Wollongong

    Basilco Stock Studio/ Shutterstock

    Everyone knows a kid who cheats at Monopoly or backyard cricket. Perhaps they have even cheated on a test at school.

    If your notice your own child is doing this, you may worry they are headed for a life of crime.

    But in developmental terms, cheating is not usually a cause for concern for kids.

    What is cheating?

    Cheating occurs when a child behaves dishonestly to gain an unfair advantage. They might pretend to roll a six, peek at others’ cards, score a sports game incorrectly, or use video game modifications to skip levels.

    Despite parents’ and teachers’ best efforts, cheating is remarkably common. In one experiment, five-year-olds were asked not to peek inside a box while the experimenter left the room. Almost all peeked and most then denied having done so.

    A sign of development

    The capacity to deceive can signal the emergence of new skills, including an understanding of others peoples’ minds.

    To cheat effectively, we have to think about what someone else is thinking. We then need to trick them into believing a different reality. These cognitive skills only emerge in preschool, and it is not until the primary years that children can successfully maintain a false story over time.

    Research shows it is very common for children to cheat.
    spass/Shutterstock

    Cheating at school

    As children get older, they can get more cautious about cheating in general, but also start cheating at school.

    In a US study, more than three in four high school students reported cheating at school at least once over the past year.

    Common techniques included sharing their work with others, getting test answers ahead of time, plagiarising from the internet, and collaborating when they weren’t supposed to.

    Students were more likely to see cheating as acceptable when helping a peer, or when they could rationalise the behaviour in a pro-social way (for example, they ran out of time and needed to cheat because they were caring for a family member).

    Temptation matters

    Like adults, children are more likely to cheat when the temptation is greater. In one study, children aged seven to ten were more likely to cheat at a die-rolling game if they could win a bigger prize.

    Children and adolescents also report being more likely to cheat to avoid negative consequences. As far back as 1932, US school principal M.A. Steiner wrote how too much work encourages students to cheat. In a 2008 study, students themselves reported cheating at school because they were uninterested in the material or under pressure to perform.

    While temptation encourages cheating, the risk of being caught can encourage honesty. Children must weigh up the benefits of cheating against the risks of being caught.

    As they get older, children may also consider how cheating impacts their sense of self. For example, “being a good person is important to me – so I won’t cheat”.

    Do boys cheat more than girls?

    Some children are more likely to cheat than others. For example, in a 2019 study in which children’s rolls of six dice could win them prizes, boys cheated more than girls. Boys and girls also approached cheating differently: girls were more likely to cheat to avoid losses, while boys were equally motivated by losses and gains.

    Social skills also make a difference. A 2003 US study showed second grade children who have been rejected by their peers are more likely to cheat at board games – even when playing with new children they have never met before. It is possible such children are not as good at regulating their emotions and behaviours.

    Adolescents with lower self-restraint and greater tolerance for breaking rules are more likely to accept academic cheating, as are those who misbehave in class.

    On study suggested boys are more likely to cheat than girls.
    Jacob Lund/Shutterstock

    How can adults discourage cheating?

    Although cheating is common, it can pose increasing problems for children and teens as the stakes become higher. Research with Chinese students in the eighth grade showed those who cheated when scoring their own test were less likely to have learned the correct answer later on.

    Here are four things parents and teachers can do to help discourage cheating.

    1. Have open conversations: talk openly and compassionately about why cheating is not a good idea (for example, “it ruins the fun for your friends”). Research shows children and adolescents who made a promise to experimenters not to cheat at a game were less likely to do so. But children who fear getting in trouble are less likely to tell the truth.

    2. Don’t put too much pressure on results: when talking about school, use language related to learning rather than performance (“just try your best, that’s all you can do”). Studies show highly competitive academic environments make cheating more likely, because the benefits of success and risks of failure are heightened.

    3. Be positive about your child’s character: in one study, preschoolers were allocated to one of two groups. In the “good reputation” group, children were told “I know kids in your class and they told me you were a good kid”. In another group, children were not told anything. All children were then asked not to peek at a tempting toy while the experimenter left the room. Those in the good reputation group were less likely to cheat (60%) than those in other group (90%).

    4. Show kids how it’s done: if adults are being honest and open, children are more likely to do the same. In one study, children were told there was a big bowl of candy in the next room. When this turned out to be a lie, children themselves were more likely to cheat in a game and to lie about it.

    Penny Van Bergen receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the NSW Department of Education.

    – ref. Why do kids cheat? Is it normal, or should I be worried? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-kids-cheat-is-it-normal-or-should-i-be-worried-242022

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Want genuine progress towards restoring nature? Follow these 4 steps

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yi Fei Chung, PhD candidate in Environmental Policy, The University of Queensland

    Black Dingo/Shutterstock

    “Nature positive” is seemingly everywhere. Two weeks ago, Australia hosted the first Global Nature Positive Summit. This week, nations are meeting in Colombia for a global biodiversity summit to discuss progress on nature positive commitments.

    Nature positive has a simple meaning: ensuring more nature in future than there is now. Making it a reality is the hard part.

    It’s necessary because nature is in trouble. Once common species are becoming threatened and threatened species are going extinct. Humans, too, will be severely impacted. When ecosystems are healthy, they provide vital benefits. Insects pollinate crops, trees slow floodwaters, earthworms, fungi and soil critters make healthy soil and natural vistas improve our mental wellbeing.

    While Australia’s government is working to embed nature positive ideas in environmental reform efforts, we may see lip service rather than real change. The government’s Nature Positive Plan faces opposition from businesses and politicians ahead of a looming election. And the plan itself doesn’t fully align with true nature positive outcomes.

    In our article published today in Science, we lay out four vital steps to ensure nature positive policies are actually positive for nature.

    Step 1: Ensure biodiversity increases are absolute

    At present, Australia’s planned nature positive reforms would only require developers removing habitat to achieve a relative net gain for nature compared to business as usual.

    We have argued this approach won’t work – it should be an absolute net gain.

    It might sound abstract – but it makes all the difference. For instance, consider a population of endangered koalas living on the site of a new mine. Any negative impact to koalas would have to be offset with a benefit to the species elsewhere, usually on a separate site.

    If Australia had absolute net gain in effect, the company would have to ensure there are more koalas overall. If the mine site and an offset site had a combined population of 100 koalas before the development, this combined population would need to be more than 100 koalas after the development – even though some will be lost.

    But let’s say these 100 koalas over two sites were expected to fall to 80, even if the mine didn’t happen. In this case, a relative net gain could be achieved if the mine and offset site had 90 koalas. The population fell, but less than it would have otherwise.

    Most state and national conservation laws use relative net gain in their biodiversity offsets. It slows the biodiversity decline – but it’s still a decline.

    By contrast, England brought in a net gain approach in February of this year, with developers now required to provide a 10% net gain in biodiversity.

    Importantly, the vast majority of developments affecting threatened species habitat never require any offset at all. Plugging this major gap is also key.



    Read more:
    Developers in England will be forced to create habitats for wildlife – here’s how it works

    For nature positive to work properly, any damage done to a species by a development has to be offset by net gain. Pictured: Peak Hill gold mine in NSW.
    Phillip Wittke/Shutterstock

    Step 2: Avoid conservation payments in risky situations

    The Australian government plans to introduce conservation payments, where developers can pay into a government-managed fund rather than providing direct offsets.

    If developers were to cut down trees used by the critically endangered Leadbeater’s possum, for example, they could choose either to improve habitat elsewhere to offset the damage – or they could pay into the fund instead.

    This is a risky plan. For one, it’s often almost impossible or extremely expensive to find suitable habitat for critically endangered species because they have very little habitat remaining.

    It’s far better to avoid all further habitat removal. For developers, this would mean avoiding damage to rare habitat in the first place.

    Even where offsetting is possible, payments are often inadequate to cover the cost of purchasing and managing an offset site.



    Read more:
    Developers aren’t paying enough to offset impacts on koalas and other endangered species

    Then there’s the time lag. The fund might take years to buy or restore habitat sites, adding to already-long delays between damage and any benefit. And worse, under the government’s proposal, the money could be used for different, potentially less threatened species.

    Under Queensland’s scheme, most developers choose to pay into a fund rather than create their own offset sites. Very little of these offset funds have been spent.

    Meanwhile, the latest independent assessment of the New South Wales biodiversity offset payment scheme recommended the fund be completely phased out.

    Step 3: Go beyond compensation

    Compensating for new damage is important. But it’s not nearly enough. Over the last century, we have done huge damage to the natural world. Australia’s southern seas were once ringed with oyster reefs, for instance, but these were nearly all fished out.

    We need to begin to recover what was lost by restoring ecosystems, managing weeds and reducing risk of diseases.

    Nature-positive laws should include funding and actions designed to produce absolute gains in biodiversity over and above any required compensation.

    The world has long seriously underfunded conservation, including threatened species recovery, ecosystem restoration and protected area management. Australia alone needs a roughly 20-fold increase in funding to actually bring back threatened species.

    While this sounds large, it’s off an extraordinarily low base – just A$122 million in 2019. By contrast, we spend over $100 billion on human health each year.

    Two years ago, the government passed the first of its nature-positive reforms to create a nature repair market aimed at drawing more funds into nature restoration. But as the market will rely on voluntary private sector investment, we don’t know how much funding will flow or whether it will focus on threatened species recovery.

    Step 4: Effectively implement nature positive laws

    Ensuring compliance with new nature-positive laws requires transparent and effective enforcement, such as through the independent national environment protection authority with extra powers proposed in Australia.

    Its independence and powers may be less than required, due to proposed call-in powers allowing the minister to overrule decisions. True independence and adequate resources are crucial.

    If governments do pass environmental reforms, we need to collect adequate and robust data on species to know if they are actually working to boost nature recovery. At present, many Australian threatened species remain unmonitored.

    Is nature positive within reach?

    It’s not easy to create a future with more nature than we have now. Australia’s current government took office vowing to embrace nature positive. To date, their reforms are not yet likely to make that a reality.



    Read more:
    Australia desperately needs a strong federal environmental protection agency. Our chances aren’t looking good

    But the task will only get more urgent. Meaningful nature-positive policy means ensuring targets of absolute net gain for threatened species, ensuring strict compensation for any nature loss, independently resourcing and financing other recovery efforts and implementing these laws effectively.

    With a course correction, Australia can still act as a leading example for other nations as they reform their own policies to meet nature-positive ambitions. Now is the time for real and decisive action.

    We acknowledge our research coauthors, Brooke Williams (Queensland University of Technology), Martine Maron (University of Queensland), Jonathan Rhodes (Queensland University of Technology), Jeremy Simmonds (2rog), and Michelle Ward (Griffith University).

    Yi Fei Chung has received funding from UQ Research Training Scholarship. He is also involving in a Australian Research Council Linkage Project with financial and in-kind support from the NSW Department of Planning and Environment, the Biodiversity Conservation Trust, Tweed Shire Council, and the NSW Koala Strategy.

    Hannah Thomas has received funding from WWF-Australia and an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. She is an early-career leader with the Biodiversity Council.

    – ref. Want genuine progress towards restoring nature? Follow these 4 steps – https://theconversation.com/want-genuine-progress-towards-restoring-nature-follow-these-4-steps-240569

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: For type 2 diabetes, focusing on when you eat – not what – can help control blood sugar

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evelyn Parr, Research Fellow in Exercise Metabolism and Nutrition, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University

    Lizardflms/Shutterstock

    Type 2 diabetes affects 1.2 million Australians and accounts for 85-90% of all diabetes cases. This chronic condition is characterised by high blood glucose (sugar) levels, which carry serious health risks. Complications include heart disease, kidney failure and vision problems.

    Diet is an important way people living with type 2 diabetes manage blood glucose, alongside exercise and medication. But while we know individualised, professional dietary advice improves blood glucose, it can be complex and is not always accessible.

    Our new study looked at the impact of time-restricted eating – focusing on when you eat, rather than what or how much – on blood glucose levels.

    We found it had similar results to individualised advice from an accredited practising dietitian. But there were added benefits, because it was simple, achievable, easy to stick to – and motivated people to make other positive changes.

    What is time-restricted eating?

    Time-restricted eating, also known as the 16:8 diet, became popular for weight loss around 2015. Studies have since shown it is also an effective way for people with type 2 diabetes to manage blood glucose.

    Time-restricted eating involves limiting when you eat each day, rather than focusing on what you eat. You restrict eating to a window during daylight hours, for example between 11am and 7pm, and then fast for the remaining hours. This can sometimes naturally lead to also eating less.

    Participants in our study could still share meals with family, as long as it was within a nine-hour window finishing at 7pm.
    Kitreel/Shutterstock

    Giving your body a break from constantly digesting food in this way helps align eating with natural circadian rhythms. This can help regulate metabolism and improve overall health.

    For people with type 2 diabetes, there may be specific benefits. They often have their highest blood glucose reading in the morning. Delaying breakfast to mid-morning means there is time for physical activity to occur to help reduce glucose levels and prepare the body for the first meal.

    How we got here

    We ran an initial study in 2018 to see whether following time-restricted eating was achievable for people with type 2 diabetes. We found participants could easily stick to this eating pattern over four weeks, for an average of five days a week.

    Importantly, they also had improvements in blood glucose, spending less time with high levels. Our previous research suggests the reduced time between meals may play a role in how the hormone insulin is able to reduce glucose concentrations.

    Other studies have confirmed these findings, which have also shown notable improvements in HbA1c. This is a marker in the blood that represents concentrations of blood glucose over an average of three months. It is the primary clinical tool used for diabetes.

    However, these studies provided intensive support to participants through weekly or fortnightly meetings with researchers.

    While we know this level of support increases how likely people are to stick to the plan and improves outcomes, it is not readily available to everyday Australians living with type 2 diabetes.

    What we did

    In our new study, we compared time-restricted eating directly with advice from an accredited practising dietitian, to test whether results were similar across six months.

    We recruited 52 people with type 2 diabetes who were currently managing their diabetes with up to two oral medications. There were 22 women and 30 men, aged between 35 and 65.

    Participants were randomly divided into two groups: diet and time-restricted eating. In both groups, participants received four consultations across the first four months. During the next two months they managed diet alone, without consultation, and we continued to measure the impact on blood glucose.

    In the diet group, consultations focused on changing their diet to control blood glucose, including improving diet quality (for example, eating more vegetables and limiting alcohol).

    In the time-restricted eating group, advice focused on how to limit eating to a nine-hour window between 10am and 7pm.

    Over six months, we measured each participant’s blood glucose levels every two months using the HbA1c test. Each fortnight, we also asked participants about their experience of making dietary changes (to what or when they ate).

    Continuous glucose monitoring measures the levels of glucose in the blood.
    Halfpoint/Shutterstock

    What we found

    We found time-restricted eating was as effective as the diet intervention.

    Both groups had reduced blood glucose levels, with the greatest improvements occurring after the first two months. Although it wasn’t an objective of the study, some participants in each group also lost weight (5-10kg).

    When surveyed, participants in the time-restricted eating group said they had adjusted well and were able to follow the restricted eating window. Many told us they had family support and enjoyed earlier mealtimes together. Some also found they slept better.

    After two months, people in the time-restricted group were looking for more dietary advice to further improve their health.

    Those in the diet group were less likely to stick to their plan. Despite similar health outcomes, time-restricted eating seems to be a simpler initial approach than making complex dietary changes.

    Is time-restricted eating achievable?

    The main barriers to following time-restricted eating are social occasions, caring for others and work schedules. These factors may prevent people eating within the window.

    However, there are many benefits. The message is simple, focusing on when to eat as the main diet change. This may make time-restricted eating more translatable to people from a wider variety of socio-cultural backgrounds, as the types of foods they eat don’t need to change, just the timing.

    Many people don’t have access to more individualised support from a dietitian, and receive nutrition advice from their GP. This makes time-restricted eating an alternative – and equally effective – strategy for people with type 2 diabetes.

    People should still try to stick to dietary guidelines and prioritise vegetables, fruit, wholegrains, lean meat and healthy fats.

    But our study showed time-restricted eating may also serve as stepping stone for people with type 2 diabetes to take control of their health, as people became more interested in making diet and other positive changes.

    Time-restricted eating might not be appropriate for everyone, especially people on medications which don’t recommend fasting. Before trying this dietary change, it’s best speak to the healthcare professional who helps you manage diabetes.

    Evelyn Parr receives funding from Diabetes Australia and Australian Catholic University.

    Brooke Devlin received funding from Diabetes Australia.

    – ref. For type 2 diabetes, focusing on when you eat – not what – can help control blood sugar – https://theconversation.com/for-type-2-diabetes-focusing-on-when-you-eat-not-what-can-help-control-blood-sugar-241472

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What is stereotactic radiation therapy for prostate cancer? How does it compare to other treatments?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sathana Dushyanthen, Academic Specialist & Senior Lecturer in Cancer Sciences & Digital Health| Superstar of STEM| Science Communicator, The University of Melbourne

    Nenad Cavoski/Shutterstock

    Prostate cancer is Australia’s most commonly diagnosed cancer. One in six men will be diagnosed by the time they turn 85.

    Cancers are abnormal groups of cells that grow uncontrollably and start invading neighbouring sites. They can also spread to other organs in the body. This is known as metastases.

    Treatment of early disease, when cancer is confined to the original site, is focused on that single area, most often with surgery or radiation therapy. Treatment of advanced disease, when it has spread, often relies on treatments that can travel all around the body such as chemotherapy or immunotherapy.

    A more advanced form of radiation therapy, called stereotactic ablative radiotherapy, may be able to treat both early and advanced cancers. So how does it work? And how does it compare to existing therapies?

    It delivers a higher dose to a smaller target

    Stereotactic radiotherapy uses high doses of radiation to target and kill cancer cells. It uses newer machines that can deliver very focused radiation beams. Combined with advances in imaging and radiation planning software this allows clinicians to “track” and target cancers.

    This results in such high precision – with a targeting accuracy less than 1mm – that cancers can be safely treated with minimal risk of damaging surrounding healthy organs.

    Having a higher dose means radiotherapy can be delivered in fewer treatments (one to five sessions over one to two weeks) where it previously would have been divided into many small doses (20 to 40), delivered over weeks or even months.

    Stereotactic radiotherapy has increasingly been used to treat cancer in the brain and lungs. But new data has shown it can also effectively treat prostate cancer.

    What did the new study find?

    A study published this month in the New England Journal of Medicine compared two groups of patients with early prostate cancer with a median age of 69.8 years. Half (433 participants) received five sessions of stereotactic radiation therapy, the other half (431 participants) received standard radiation therapy consisting of at least 20 sessions.

    The researchers found no long-term difference in outcomes between the groups, with 95% of patients showing no evidence of disease five years after treatment. These cure rates are equivalent to patients who had their prostates surgically removed.

    Early evidence suggests that stereotactic radiation therapy appears to be as effective, less onerous and less invasive than currently available treatment options.

    The new therapy appears as effective as standard therapy but with fewer side effects.
    PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock

    Prostate cancer that has spread beyond its original site is, unfortunately, incurable in most circumstances. Treatments for this stage of disease are aimed at suppressing or controlling the cancer for as long as possible.

    However, studies have shown stereotactic radiation therapy can be used to target disease that has spread to distant sites in patients who have advanced prostate cancer.
    Researchers found stereotactic radiation therapy could render patients free of clinically evident disease for eight to 13 months, delaying the need for hormone therapy or chemotherapy.

    How do the side effects compare to other cancer treatments?

    Stereotactic radiation therapy is delivered daily, with painless radiation beams. In the weeks following delivery it is common to notice soreness and/or inflammation at the treated site. This reaches a level requiring medication in one-third of cases.

    Erectile function is frequently impacted during prostate cancer treatment, as the nerves and blood vessels responsible for erections are often damaged.

    Another recent study comparing stereotactic radiation therapy to surgery found 48% of patients treated with stereotactic radiation therapy had difficulties with their sexual function two years after treatment compared to 75% of patients who had surgery.

    Comparison of differences between traditional radiotherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy.
    Precision Radiation Oncology

    What are the costs? And who can access it?

    Newer and more advanced radiation treatment machines can deliver more precise treatments, but these are much more expensive than standard machines. They also have more complex maintenance and operational requirements.

    However, traditional radiotherapy machines can also be upgraded to provide stereotactic precision.

    While the initial investment costs can be high, cost-benefit analyses show stereotactic radiation therapy for lung cancer costs the health system less than other cancer treatments and conventional radiotherapy. This is in part because treatment is completed far more quickly. Formal cost-benefit analyses have not been completed for prostate cancer but are likely to be similar.

    Stereotactic radiation therapy is now widely available at most major Australian public hospitals for many cancer types, including selected lung cancers, kidney cancers, advanced brain cancers and bone cancers. This has no out-of-pocket costs for patients. It is also provided in many private centres.

    However, even when a centre can deliver stereotactic radiation therapy, there is still significant variation in the devices used to deliver the therapy.

    In addition, the actual planning and delivery of radiation therapy is a complex skill. Studies have shown that patients treated by clinicians with higher caseloads have better outcomes, due to their greater familiarity with these specialised techniques.

    Radiotherapy departments throughout the world have rapidly upgraded their capability over the past few years to provide stereotactic radiotherapy. After the recent clinical trial findings, it’s likely prostate cancer will be added to the list of cancers treated this way.

    David Kok has a clinical appointment at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre which provides prostate cancer treatments including stereotactic radiotherapy, conventional radiotherapy and surgery.

    Sathana Dushyanthen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. What is stereotactic radiation therapy for prostate cancer? How does it compare to other treatments? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-stereotactic-radiation-therapy-for-prostate-cancer-how-does-it-compare-to-other-treatments-241467

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Most Republican states have made voting harder since 2020. Our research shows how successful they’ve been

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathryn Schumaker, Senior Lecturer in American Studies, University of Sydney

    In late September, the governor of the state of Oklahoma, Kevin Stitt, boasted that election officials had removed 453,000 people from the state’s voter rolls since 2021. In a state with only 2.3 million registered voters, it appears that roughly one in six registered voters had been purged.

    While some of these people were dead or disfranchised owing to felony convictions, nearly 200,000 of them were removed for being “inactive voters”. This means they likely failed to respond to a postcard sent to their mailing address.

    Voters can re-register if they were incorrectly removed, but this “voter list maintenance” process still creates a barrier to democratic participation.

    Unsurprisingly, Oklahoma historically has one of the lowest voter turnout rates in the United States.

    This bucks the national trend. Overall, across the United States, electoral turnout has increased in presidential and midterm elections since 2018. Americans feel, now more than ever, that elections have high stakes.

    And some states have made it easier to vote. Minnesota, for example, allows voters to register online or at the polls on Election Day.

    In states like Oklahoma, however, voters are discouraged or demoralised by policies and laws meant to make voting difficult and time consuming. Legislatures in these states have been emboldened over the past decade by a series of Supreme Court rulings voiding key parts of the Voting Rights Act.

    These states are now the new fronts in the unfinished battle to secure one of the fundamental elements of democracy – the right to vote. We’ve analysed data on voter turnout and voting accessibility across the US and found states restricting access the most are overwhelmingly led by Republican legislatures.

    A long history of voter disenfranchisement

    US elections have always been the domain of the states. And state legislatures have long wielded this power to discriminate against marginalised groups.

    Prior to the Civil War, most states restricted the right to vote to white men. Then, in 1870, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, which forbade states from restricting the right to vote on the basis of “race, color or previous condition of servitude”

    In practice, however, this didn’t change things in all states. In the South, where Jim Crow laws maintained segregation in many facets of public life, lawmakers found other ways to disenfranchise Black voters.

    These methods included poll taxes, literacy tests, and grandfather clauses. In some Southern states, Democrats also held all-white primaries to prohibit Black voters from participating. They claimed that political parties were private organisations and not subject to the 15th Amendment.

    When other methods failed, white people used violence and intimidation to discourage Black voters from showing up at the polls.

    Women made gains state by state in the decades following the Civil War, though Black women in the South were disenfranchised alongside Black men. This made white women the primary beneficiaries of the 19th Amendment, ratified in 1920. This dictated that states could not withhold voting rights “on account of sex”.

    It was not until the ratification of the 24th Amendment in 1964, which prohibited the use of the poll tax, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which outlawed the literacy tests, that American democracy could begin to live up to its name.

    How states are erecting more barriers

    However, even these landmark developments have not ensured that voting is easy or universally accessible to all Americans.

    In fact, many states have accelerated efforts to police voting rolls and enact hurdles to civic engagement in the wake of then-President Donald Trump’s false claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election. Republican-dominated states like Oklahoma have been particularly keen to adopt restrictive policies.

    According to the Center for Public Integrity, 26 states have made voting less accessible since 2020. These barriers include many tactics:

    Partisan redistricting also discourages members of minority parties from turning out on Election Day. By drawing district lines that clearly favour one party over another, such practices can make people feel it is pointless to vote.

    What our research found

    According to our calculations, out of the states that have made voting less accessible since 2020, most are located in the South (43%) or Midwest (31%). The data reveal the most significant losses in voting access have occurred in southern states with large populations of Black voters.

    And the most restrictive lawmaking has been spearheaded by Republican-dominated state legislatures, with 86% of such states passing inequitable voting barriers. In contrast, only 5% of Democratic-led states have made voting harder.

    In addition, according to our research, high barriers to voting are directly related to lower voter turnout rates.

    When all states are analysed, “high barrier” states had an average turnout rate of 45.8% compared to 49% for “low barrier” states in the 2022 election, a statistically significant difference. The average turnout rate across all US states in 2022 was 46.2%.

    In the South, most states (11 of 16) made voting more difficult after the 2020 election – and nearly all had voter turnout rates well below the national average in 2022. (Mississippi was the lowest at 32.5%.)

    High-barrier southern states with Republican-led legislatures had an average turnout rate of 40.6%, compared to 46.2% in high-barrier, Republican-led states in other regions.

    Three states in low-barrier states, meanwhile, had turnout rates above 60% – Oregon, Maine and Minnesota. All had Democratic-majority legislatures, or in the case of Minnesota, a divided legislature and Democratic governor.

    States should motivate voters, not demoralise them

    These policies to restrict voting accessibility, draped in the cloak of “election security”, will no doubt affect turnout in certain states in the upcoming November elections, as well.

    Research shows Americans choose to vote because they think it is their civic duty or they believe the outcome of an election matters for their community, nation or self.

    Yet, staying home on Election Day is also a rational behaviour since the chances of being the pivotal voter that decides an election is estimated at one in one million in a battleground state and much less in a noncompetitive state.

    With national voter turnout already low compared to other democracies, state legislatures should be doing what they can to motivate voters and make it easier for them to cast a ballot – not making it more difficult for them to do so.

    Kathryn Schumaker has received funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

    Allyson Shortle is affiliated with the Public Religion Research Institute.

    – ref. Most Republican states have made voting harder since 2020. Our research shows how successful they’ve been – https://theconversation.com/most-republican-states-have-made-voting-harder-since-2020-our-research-shows-how-successful-theyve-been-240667

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Astronomers just found complex carbon molecules in space – a step closer to deciphering the origins of life

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maria Cunningham, Honorary Senior Lecturer, School of Physics, UNSW Sydney

    Part of the Taurus molecular cloud. ESA, CC BY-SA

    A team led by researchers at MIT in the United States has discovered large molecules containing carbon in a distant interstellar cloud of gas and dust.

    This is exciting for those of us who keep lists of known interstellar molecules in the hope that we might work out how life arose in the universe.

    But it’s more than just another molecule for the collection. The result, reported today in the journal Science, shows that complex organic molecules (with carbon and hydrogen) likely existed in the cold, dark gas cloud that gave rise to our Solar System.

    Furthermore, the molecules held together until after the formation of Earth. This is important for our understanding of the early origins of life on our planet.

    Difficult to destroy, hard to detect

    The molecule in question is called pyrene, a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon or PAH for short. The complicated-sounding name tells us these molecules are made of rings of carbon atoms.

    Carbon chemistry is the backbone of life on Earth. PAHs have long been known to be abundant in the interstellar medium, so they feature prominently in theories of how carbon-based life on Earth came to be.

    A pyrene molecule, consisting of carbon atoms (black) and hydrogen atoms (white).
    Jynto/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    We know there are many large PAHs in space because astrophysicists have detected signs of them in visible and infrared light. But we didn’t know which PAHs they might be in particular.

    Pyrene is now the largest PAH detected in space, although it’s what is known as a “small” or simple PAH, with 26 atoms. It was long thought such molecules could not survive the harsh environment of star formation when everything is bathed in radiation from the newborn suns, destroying complex molecules.

    In fact, it was once thought molecules of more than two atoms could not exist in space for this reason, until they were actually found.
    Also, chemical models show pyrene is very difficult to destroy once formed.

    Last year, scientists reported they found large amounts of pyrene in samples from the asteroid Ryugu in our own Solar System. They argued at least some of it must have come from the cold interstellar cloud that predated our Solar System.

    So why not look at another cold interstellar cloud to find some? The problem for astrophysicists is that we don’t have the tools to detect pyrene directly – it’s invisible to radio telescopes.

    Using a tracer

    The molecule the team has detected is called 1-cyanopyrene, what we call a “tracer” for pyrene. It is formed from pyrene interacting with cyanide, which is common in interstellar space.

    The researchers used the Green Bank Telescope in West Virginia to look at the Taurus molecular cloud or TMC-1, in the Taurus constellation. Unlike pyrene itself, 1-cyanopyrene can be detected by radio telescopes. This is because 1-cyanopyrene molecules act as small radio-wave emitters – tiny versions of earthly radio stations.

    As scientists know the proportions of 1-cyanopyrene compared to pyrene, they can then estimate the amount of pyrene in the interstellar cloud.

    The amount of pyrene they found was significant. Importantly, this discovery in the Taurus molecular cloud suggests a lot of pyrene exists in the cold, dark molecular clouds that go on to form stars and solar systems.

    A wide-field view of part of the Taurus molecular cloud ~450 light-years from Earth. Its relative closeness makes it an ideal place to study the formation of stars. Many dark clouds of obscuring dust are clearly visible against the background stars.
    ESO/Digitized Sky Survey 2. Acknowledgement: Davide De Martin.

    The complex birth of life

    We are gradually building a picture of how life on Earth evolved. This picture tells us that life came from space – well, at least the complex organic, pre-biological molecules needed to form life did.

    That pyrene survives the harsh conditions associated with the birth of stars, as shown by the findings from Ryugu, is an important part of this story.

    Simple life – consisting of a single cell – appeared in Earth’s fossil record almost immediately (in geological and astronomical terms) after the planet’s surface had cooled enough to not vaporise complex molecules. This happened more than 3.7 billion years ago in Earth’s approximately 4.5 billion history.

    For simple organisms to then appear so quickly in the fossil record, there’s just not enough time for chemistry to start with mere simple molecules of two or three atoms.

    The new discovery of 1-cyanopyrene in the Taurus molecular cloud shows complex molecules could indeed survive the harsh conditions of our Solar System’s formation. As a result, pyrene was available to form the backbone of carbon-based life when it emerged on the early Earth some 3.7 billion years ago.

    This discovery also links to another important finding of the last decade – the first chiral molecule in the interstellar medium, propylene oxide. We need chiral molecules to make the evolution of simple lifeforms work on the surface of the early Earth.

    So far, our theories that molecules for early life on Earth came from space are looking good.

    Maria Cunningham has received funding from The Australian Research Council. In the past she has collaborated with Anthony Remijan, one of the co-authors on the Science paper discussed in this publication. Their last co-authored paper was in 2015.

    – ref. Astronomers just found complex carbon molecules in space – a step closer to deciphering the origins of life – https://theconversation.com/astronomers-just-found-complex-carbon-molecules-in-space-a-step-closer-to-deciphering-the-origins-of-life-241889

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Stoneflies change colour in response to deforestation, suggesting humans can alter evolution – new research

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Waters, Professor of Zoology, University of Otago

    Author provided, CC BY-SA

    As we continue to change the planet, scientists are worried we might also be altering the evolutionary trajectories of the species that live alongside us, perhaps even including some irreversible shifts.

    Certainly, the evidence for change is everywhere. As the planet warms, species’ ranges are shifting and their life cycles are changing. As we harvest the largest fish in the ocean, the species affected are now maturing at smaller sizes.

    But are these shifts we observe in wild populations underpinned by genetic changes (mutations in the DNA) or are they simply flexible responses to environmental change? If the changes are genetic, how are they happening?

    So far, researchers have observed fewer clear-cut examples of human-induced evolution in the wild than one might imagine. But our new study may provide a new “textbook” case of human-driven evolution in wild insects.

    Our findings are centred on an intriguing case of “mimicry” from New Zealand, in which a harmless insect has evolved to mimic the warning colours of a highly toxic species.

    Forest removal drives colour shift

    Convincingly demonstrating “evolution in action” involves finding the agents of natural selection (environmental factors driving the change) and discovering the genetic mechanism.

    Until now, the peppered moth was the “classic” example of human-driven evolution. Dark-coloured specimens of the moth suddenly appeared during the 19th century. It was a likely response to industrial pollution which meant light-coloured individuals were no longer blending in to the increasingly sooty British environment. Despite its broad appeal, some aspects of even this famous case have been criticised as unclear and anecdotal.

    We worked on stoneflies and the impact of deforestation.

    The black stonefly Austroperla lives in forests. It produces cyanide to deter potential predators, and to advertise its toxicity this species has high-contrast black, white and yellow markings, reminiscent of wasp colouration.

    The non-toxic Zelandoperla stonefly has evolved astonishingly similar warning colouration, apparently to trick predators (forest birds) into assuming that it, too, is toxic. The intricate and unique ecological interactions between these insects and their predators have apparently evolved together over millions of years.

    Dark coloured Zelandoperla stoneflies (middle) mimic the poisonous Austroperla (top), which are abundant in forests. Recent forest clearance has eliminated Austroperla from many regions of New Zealand. In response, Zelandoperla populations have quickly evolved lighter colouration (bottom).
    Graham McCulloch, Jon Waters, CC BY-SA

    Where do humans come into this story? Aotearoa New Zealand was the last major landmass to be colonised by people. In many places the human impacts on its ecosystems have been devastating.

    In addition to species extinctions, New Zealand has lost much of its original native forest cover in just a few centuries. This deforestation has wiped out countless populations of forest birds, along with the poisonous, forest-dependent Austroperla.

    Our study reveals this widespread deforestation has also proven a game changer for the stonefly “mimic”. As its predators and the poisonous species it mimics have vanished from many regions, there is no longer much point in displaying warning colouration.

    In an astonishing about-turn, Zelandoperla populations from deforested habitats have quickly lost their spectacular “mimic” colouration. It turns out that the production of this intricate colouration was costly, and when no longer essential, evolution rapidly removed it – in a case of “use it or lose it”.

    Human-driven deforestation in New Zealand has altered species interactions in a mimicry system, leading to rapid evolution of insect colour.
    Graham McCulloch, Jon Waters, CC BY-SA

    Genetic change

    In our study, we compared insect populations across several parts of the South Island. We found a remarkably consistent picture. The removal of forest has driven similar colour shifts across different deforested regions.

    The finding that evolutionary change can be “predictable” offers hope that scientists can use evolutionary theory to predict future biodiversity shifts.

    Stonefly models helped to reveal the role of birds.
    Author provided, CC BY-SA

    How do we know birds have played a key role in this rapid colour change? By placing stonefly models of different colours in a variety of habitats, we were able to demonstrate that birds only avoid attacking stoneflies with the “warning” colouration when they are in forests.

    Another challenge was to show that this colour change represents evolution at the DNA level rather than a flexible response to environmental change. We looked at genetic variation across the Zelandoperla genome and found that just a single gene – ebony – is almost completely responsible for this colour evolution.

    Our study also reveals the pace of evolutionary change. By comparing regions deforested soon after human arrival (for example Central Otago, which was deforested around 600 to 700 years ago) with those cleared much more recently (Otago Peninsula, 150 years ago), we show that evolution has proceeded steadily yet inexorably over this human timeframe.

    On the positive side, the finding that at least some of our native species can adapt in the face of rapid environmental change suggests ongoing resilience of our native biodiversity. However, our results also highlight how quickly the intricate interactions that have evolved among native species over millennia can be lost from disturbed ecosystems.

    These new findings raise tantalising questions about the potential to reverse the negative impacts of deforestation on our native biodiversity. In particular, our increasing focus on reforestation and ecological restoration provides hope for restoring the complex ecosystems we have inherited.

    Jonathan Waters receives funding from the RSNZ Marsden Fund.

    Graham McCulloch receives funding from the RSNZ Marsden Fund

    – ref. Stoneflies change colour in response to deforestation, suggesting humans can alter evolution – new research – https://theconversation.com/stoneflies-change-colour-in-response-to-deforestation-suggesting-humans-can-alter-evolution-new-research-242008

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –