potentioreststilusgladio-blog - Tumblr blog

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Last Days

Today marks my final 2 weeks of my undergraduate degree. I have a handful of assignments and exams to go and then the last three and a half years of study will finally come to a close. It has been an enormously long road full of highs and lows, countless jars of instant coffee, late night cramming sessions (which for the record don't really work) and a level of dedication and hard work I perhaps thought I had forgotten the minute I walked out of high school. I watch the first years so young and full of energy talk about their days in school as if it were just yesterday, because for them, it practically was. I took 4 years off after high school, working full time and trying to find what I really wanted to do with myself, so this notion is sometimes strange to me, but I would not have done it any other way. High school for me was the kind of hell that eats away at your soul until there is nothing left but skin and bones and an exhaustion that takes several months to sleep off. The pressure placed on so many students with 'potential' is inconceivable for some, but it was a heavy reality for myself. Some vague level of PTSD lingered with me after school and the fear of loosing myself once again prevented me from starting uni or returning to study. Each year I would drive to the Uni's induction day, have a small panic attack in the car-park and drive straight back home. It's heartbreaking to think that it took me that long to regain my confidence, but in 2011 (after some considerable talking to by a TAFE teacher) I finally took the plunge with absolutely no idea what I wanted to study. My first semester was hard but encouraging. I pushed myself to do well but not to breaking point and my grades were quite good. University was such a different environment to what I had expected and so completely different to high-school. I was treated as an adult (and as a mature-age student this was particularly important) who's opinions mattered. We were encouraged to develop ideas and perspectives in an environment where you were never 'wrong' but rather slightly left of centre of where the main concept was residing. My first real love emerged with Archeology; my second was with History, and so both quickly became my major areas. My partner was certainly sick of hearing about all of the archaeology and history techniques I had been learning, and promptly forced me to watch all of the Indiana Jones movies in an attempt to shut me up. I have since decided I exude more of a Lara Croft vibe but I fear that Ben fails to see this (his loss). After the stress of high school I had never thought that education and study would be a path I would ever find myself along again, but Uni has proved to be a kind of healing for me. I am a more confident person because of it. I have learned above anything that there are alternative conclusions about almost everything, there is no one right answer in my line of work, and I will never again let anyone make me feel useless or stupid simply because the concept rolling around in my head is different to theirs. I have learned that to be physically active helps you to sleep and to study. I have learned that to eat properly keeps your brain active and your mind sharp. And I am slowly learning how to balance my life; friends and family will be there long after you have retired so make time for them now, not later. I still have no idea what work I will fall into with my degree, but at the end of the day my Uni journey has been more about finding myself and pushing my brain to achieve things I never thought were possible. If that was what I set out to achieve I have certainly reached far above that goal. I have high hopes (crazy as they are) to continue my studies. I want to reach the pinnacle of where my mind can be taken before I start to settle down and make a family of my own. So heres to counting down the last days, and for those of you in the same position, best of luck- get out there and take on the world!

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Last Class Blog post (Political economy and conclusion). This is the last class subject blog for JN1001. Hope you enjoy :)

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Investigative Journalism- A Lost Art?

(Image source: http://www.fjmc.eu/system/files/pics/ij.jpg)

Investigative journalism is arguably the last bastion of ‘real’ journalism though there are some controversies over what actually constitutes investigative journalism. Modern technology has allowed ‘citizen journalism’ to take over in many instances and the lack of accuracy and validity within these types of stories has provoked negative comment on the role of the media.

Investigative journalism involves contacting and researching numerous sources for various comments, and opinions, as well as to determine if given sources are indeed accurate and reliable. Furthermore, the subject/s of investigative journalism MUST be of public interests value- that is a ‘need to know’ story in which it would benefit the public to know this information or it would hinder the public by not knowing. From this perspective, an ‘investigative piece’ run on a current affair regarding which pizza has the most topping for value hardly constitutes ‘investigation’, though sadly this is the majority of ‘investigative journalism’ society is exposed to today.

(Image source: http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/img/2011/05pizza.jpg)

In a similar vain, snooping into which celebrities are sleeping with who is also not the subject of ‘investigative journalism’, unless, as we discussed in class, it involves a high level politician (such as the Bill Clinton scandal) and in which case the public may have a right to know that they are being deceived.

As for media outlets that publish ‘leaked’ information exposing secret government information, well these also do not really constitute investigative journalism. Unless, that is, the journalist has undertaken significant research into the validity of their source, the documents and any all of the agencies involved in the specific leak. Simply publishing secret documents is not enough- there has to be a news angle, and an interpretation on behalf of the journalist that is thought provoking and engaging.

(Above: Daniel Ellsberg the leaker of the Pentagon Papers. Did this constitute investigative journalism? Source: http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/213254/the-best-answers-from-pentagon-papers-leaker-daniel-ellsbergs-reddit-ama/)

Media organizations such as Wikileaks have come under fire in recent years for doing just this- publishing just the information without a follow up story. But this for me is where I struggle with the concept of investigative journalism.

Journalism has for me lost an enormous amount of credibility as the fourth estate. There is little reporting these days that actually serves the common good and the few stories that attempt to, push an agenda so far that the story looses its intent. Its all well and good to say that investigative journalism needs some interpretation and further research, and that this information should be published alongside such stories, but I fear this leaves room for media corruption, propaganda and media persuasion. Publishing a document in its original context (perhaps with links to other sources where readers can verity this information) means that readers are able to make up their own mind. But I suppose at the end of the day in such a capitalist society, this is not the role of the media. The role of the media is to sell audiences to advertisers to generate profit.

As a final comment we discussed that one of the great myths of Investigative Journalism was that it is ok for them to behave like detectives. Journalists in this sense are certainly not detectives and they are still subject to the same ethical standards that all news agencies are. Hidden cameras and microphones to catch people out could lead to enormous legal and ethical situations and journalists need to be careful.

(Above: http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/DtP-9Cbzi1U/0.jpg)

Investigative journalism, when done correctly, is the only aspect of current media that keeps this idea of the fourth estate alive. Someone has to keep the bastard honest as they say.

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Austria Casts Five O’clock Shadow Over Eurovision

The 59th Eurovision ‘happiest song contest on earth’ became a hotbed for controversy as Austria’s entrant, transvestite Conchita Wurst, blazoned the stage and televisions worldwide to become the 2014 Eurovision winner. 290 points cemented Conchita’s solid win for her song “Rise Like phoenix”, despite earlier criticisms and complaints from numerous European countries including Russia, Armenia and Belarus, that the openly homosexual contestant had sodomized the entire competition.

Russia was particularly vocal about opposition to Austria’s entrant, and threatened to withdraw from the competition if Eurovision organizers permitted Conchita to perform as a woman. Nationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovosky told Rossiya-1 State Television, “There’s no limit to our outrage. It’s the end of Europe. It has turned wild. They don’t have men and women any more. They have ‘it’,”.

Russia’s harsh claims follow a strong anti-gay culture, which has been present within the political structure of Russia since last year’s introduction of bold anti-gay policies. Laws included the banning of homosexual publicity and ‘propaganda’ to youths, and the prevention of adoption of Russian children by foreign gay couples, among other discriminatory policies (http://www.sbs.com.au/news/storystream/eurovision-2014-austrias-win-sparks-anti-gay-anger-russia). Vitaly Milonov, a deputy in St. Petersburg’s legislative assembly stated “The participation of the clear transvestite and hermaphrodite Conchita Wurst on the same stage as Russian performers on live television is obvious propaganda for homosexuality and moral decay.” Political activists all over the world have heavily criticized Russia’s political criminalization of homosexuality. This was perhaps most obvious at the recent Olympics, when openly gay competitors were concerned for their own safety. The politics observed during Eurovision over the weekend are simply an indication that these policies are still causing international scandal.

Yet despite the barrage of homophobic and cruel condemnation Conchita received in the lead up to Eurovision, Europe’s votes proved clear support for gender equality, and perhaps even condemnation of Russia’s behavior towards the Cleary talented performer. As the votes came in, the Russian singers, Anastasiya and Maria Tolmacheva who took out seventh place, were booed by the crowd on several occasions.

Conchita is a strong believer of personal independence and claims that her beard is a symbol that people can achieve anything they want despite the fact that they are different. “You know, I have a very thick skin. It’s just strange that a little facial hair causes that much excitement,” She said. “I’m just a singer in a fabulous dress, with great hair and a beard,” she said.

Over 1 million Australian viewers, who tuned into the SBS’s record high coverage of this year’s Eurovision, could not have agreed more. Conchita will undeniably become a symbol for all that Eurovision stands for- cultural tolerance and acceptance.

References: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/eurovision-song-contest-2014-conchita-wurst-wins-austria-1448037?fb_action_ids=10152007014747522&fb_action_types=og.likes

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/storystream/eurovision-2014-austrias-win-sparks-anti-gay-anger-russia http://www.themoscowtimes.com/art_n_ideas/article/amid-controversy-over-gay-rights-and-ukraine-austrian-drag-queen-wins-eurovision-2014/499889.html

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Sophie Collombet (AKA. little red riding hood) becomes fourth casualty to Brisbane Wolf Attacks.

Once upon a time there lived a young French woman named Sophie Collombet (see image above), who desired nothing more than to learn the ways of the world. She had traveled far and wide, across land and sea before she finally came to a large city called Brisbane in the realm of Australia where Sophie could be taught at Griffith University by some of the best weary-eyed scholars in all of the lands.

  Sophie took up residence at a little cottage nestled in the urban jungle on the far side of a dark wood called Kurilpa Park, near the William Jolly Bridge. Every day she would walk to the University through the woods, and every evening she would return the exact same way.

  One evening on March 28th late after a class, Sophie received a phone call from her mother saying that her grandmother had fallen ill and that Sophie must rush home so that they could organize her return to France. So Sophie pulled her red jumper close around her face and headed off into the dark forest immediately.

But as she was going through the wood a wolf stopped her. The wolf licked his lips and gnashed his teeth as Sophie tried to back away.

“What big teeth you have” Sophie gasped.

“All the better to eat you with” the wolf replied, and with these words the wolf attacked Sophie, dragging her into the dark woods, bashing her head brutally against a rock and ripping her clothes apart before she could even scream.

When morning came Detective Inspector Rod Kemp and police found Sophie’s body near a rotunda in the dark forest of Kurilpa Park. Brisbane mourned the beautiful young woman’s death; she was the fourth international visitor to have been taken by the wolves since November.

A candlelight vigil was held in Sophie’s honor days later. The light from more than 2000 candles illuminated the dark forest and residents were hopeful that the wolf would one day very soon be caught and tried for his horrific deeds, and Brisbane would once again return to a peaceful city.

(Original story: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/11/thousands-march-to-mourn-sophie-collombet)

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Pulitzer Prize Photography: A collection of some of the best photographs taken in journalism and media. Which do you think would fall into the same category as Kevin Carters image (As discussed in my previous blog)? Which do you think may have ethical issues attached to them?

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Photojournalism Ethics: Do ends justify means?

In 1993, renowned photographer Kevin Carter captured an image that would shock the world. Published in the New York Times under the heading “Metaphor for Africa’s Despair” the photograph often referred to as ‘Sudanese girl’, depicted a vulture preying on a sickly, malnourished African girl visibly in pain and suffering. Carter had hoped that the image would convey to the western world the suffering experienced in southern Sudan, and by doing so, generate public support for UN assistance in the region. However public reaction to the photograph was quite the opposite. Despite winning a Pulitzer Prize for the shot, Carter came under heavy criticism for not having helped the child. Many arguments were made that Carter had an ethical responsibility as a human being to have helped the dying girl and his decision to leave her there (despite clear instruction that he was not to touch or interfere with any child or individual) was simply unacceptable and cruel.

  Carter later admitted to waiting for at least 20 minutes at the scene of the photograph hoping that the vulture would spread its wings for an even more powerful photograph. He came under fire from humanists saying that it was unethical to have waited so long for a ‘good shot’ and he would have had ample time to take the child to a UN aide camp within that space of time. One critique even stated:

“The man adjusting his lens to take just the right frame of her suffering might just as well be a predator, another vulture on the scene” (http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/vulture-stalking-a-child/ )

When taking the photograph Carter faced three key ethical issues: the minimum standard of subject treatment (subjects must be treated fairly and ethically), staging photographs and manipulating or altering photographs in an unethical and misleading manner, and finally the issue of compassion fatigue, where the overrepresentation of violent images produces loss of public sensitivity. Carter, at least in the eyes of the public, failed to treat his subject ethically and fairly and he attempted to stage the photograph, which in and of itself could have resulted in compassion fatigue.

  Carter committed suicide three months after the publication of this iconic photograph. He simply could not handle the public condemnation thrust upon him and the guilt of not knowing what had become of the poor African girl.

  The image raises some very crucial questions about photojournalism ethics. At what point do you stop being a journalist/photographer and interfere/assist? How acceptable is it to manipulate an image to convey the ‘right’ meaning? And most importantly do ends justify means? Chiefly I want to address this last issue as it provoked heated debate amongst many class members.

  At what point does a journalist or photographer decide that deontological ethics (that is deciding if an action taken is ethical based on the overall outcome and duty of something such as public interest) outweighs the outcome of a given action. That is to say, at what point does a journalist decide that behaving unethically (such as Carter taking the above mentioned photograph) justifies a perceived ethical outcome (public interest, need to now and generating public support to remedy the situation).

  From a Machiavellian perspective one could simply claim “ends justify means” and that it is acceptable to behave unethically in order to produce an ethical outcome that will benefit the most. But the big question is how does one decide which is more valuable or significant? This I fear is an impossible question to answer and only one that can be concluded from experience. Every individual holds their own level of ethical acceptance and when put into specific situations, will behave according to those socially ingrained and personal norms. Some people are perhaps better suited at removing emotional pain from traumatic situations and can see past pain to an outcome that ethically trumps a potentially unethical action, others however cannot.

  But the issue sadly does not end there. Our capitalist society has added further pressure to accepted norms about people, appearance and visual appeal. An image does not have to arise from a politically unstable situation such as the crisis in Sudan in order to generate public outrage. Recent photo manipulation of subjects, especially the female body has come under much scrutiny. The below images of Kate Middleton on her wedding day, and later images of her son Prince George (who’s eyes and cheeks were digitally altered) are just the very surface of a deep well of poor photo manipulation publications.  While I think it is an exaggeration to claim that the photo editing of baby Prince George was a “gross ethical dilemma” I cannot disagree with Twitter comments that “'You know magazine airbrushing has gone too far when they airbrush a baby.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2613138/Just-nine-months-old-Photoshopped-Us-Weekly-accused-airbrushing-baby-Prince-George-rosier-cheeks-greener-eyes.html).

  Is it really necessary to make one of the most beautiful women skinnier? What is this telling young women if the only images they are exposed to are simply unrealistic and unachievable?

In summary, unless editing an image improves its quality (and by this I simply mean that it is clearer or sharper) I really feel that it should not be tampered with. Comparing Carters controversial photograph with that of a photo shopped royal baby will never express the same level of ethical abuse however it does emphasize that ethical issues facing photojournalists is widespread and not restricted simply to controversial, political and traumatic subject matters.

  References:

http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/vulture-stalking-a-child/

  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2613138/Just-nine-months-old-Photoshopped-Us-Weekly-accused-airbrushing-baby-Prince-George-rosier-cheeks-greener-eyes.html

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Reporting for War, Disaster and Trauma

Since 9/11 and the war on terror, society has arguably become enormously desensitized to images of terror and violence, however this was not always the case (Taylor, 2003: 63). Prior to the 1960’s war reports had been predominantly patriotic, most probably due to the military censorship enforced on journalists (see ‘The Importance of the Media in the Creation of the Anzac Legend’ for an Australian example) and the media had been employed to garner positive public support for various military campaigns. That is not to say that negative stories were not published. Indeed, media reports on Australia’s involvement in the Boer War from 1899-1902 were often very critical. For example there were various reports of the court martial of two Australian volunteer soldiers, Lieutenant ‘Breaker’ Morant and Lieutenant Handcock, for the murder of twelve Boer prisoners in 1902 (Australian War memorial; Australian Government). Despite this however, it could be argued that it was the Vietnam War from 1962-1975 that transformed the way the media reported on war. For the first time, TV camera crews, photographers and journalists were at the forefront of many military operations in Vietnam and the footage that was published all around the world was shocking and confronting (Taylor, 2003:72).

(Above: Malcolm Browne's Photo of Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist Monk Immolating Himself -June 11, 1963. Image source http://ows.edb.utexas.edu/site/reimagining-vietnam-war/media-coverage-vietnam-war)

(Above: Nick Ut's Pulitzer Prize Winning Photo of Trang Bang after Napalm Attack-June 8, 1972. Image Source http://ows.edb.utexas.edu/site/reimagining-vietnam-war/media-coverage-vietnam-war)

Journalists at this time struggled to come to terms with balancing publishing information that audiences had the right to know and that which was acceptable to be published (Taylor, 2003: 72). Extreme violence, blood and gore had not been previously displayed in this nature and audiences found it often hard to digest and accept, not to mention the ethical issues many of the images raised- how can a photographer stand by while a man is shot in the head at point blank range and do nothing but take a photograph?

(Above: Eddie Adams' "General Nguyen Ngoc Loan Executing a Viet Cong Prisoner in Saigon" -February 1, 1968. Image source: http://ows.edb.utexas.edu/site/reimagining-vietnam-war/media-coverage-vietnam-war)

Some scholars have even argued that the brutality shown in many media publications was the cause of failing public support for the Vietnam War, (although it is important to acknowledge opposition to the War was strong before journalist intervention). If this was the type of effect war journalism was having on audiences around the world, one can only imagine the types of horrors the journalists themselves had to face.

Jon Swain, a prominent journalist who reported in Vietnam expressed the types of stresses he faced during the war and following it.

“I was always very emotional about it,” he said, “I’d get upset about those places and people I knew. I used to have nightmares…I know probably 11, maybe more, journalists, photographers, cameramen from Vietnam and Cambodia who committed suicide…No one can be unaffected by war”. (Tumber & Webster, 2006: Chapter 11, page 3)

Coming full circle back to contemporary times, very little has changed at least from the perspective of the journalist. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is exceptionally common for journalists involved in war, trauma and disaster events. Media organizations need to pay particular attention to provide their journalists with adequate experience, training, planning and support prior, during and after traumatic events. Likewise, being able to recognize PTSD and having adequate ways of dealing with it in a way that does not stigmatize affected journalists is vital. Simply drinking pain away as historically has been the case is not a productive response for any journalist, and they themselves have a responsibility to seek help (Tumber and Webster, 2006: Chapter 11).

As a final remark, it was discussed in class today the need to learn to distance ones self from the emotional side of journalism especially in cases dealing with war, trauma and disaster. This is certainly not something an individual can learn overnight. For myself however as an archaeology major, I draw similarities with the traits and behaviors required of journalists with that of forensic disaster archaeologists. Being able to operate without becoming attached and emotional is vital, though extremely difficult. Regardless, simply being aware of how one should act does not dictate how one will act.

References:

Australian Government, The Boer War, http://australia.gov.au/about-australia/australian-story/boer-war, last updated 8 January 2008 (accessed 9 may 2014).

Australian War Memorial, War History, ‘Battle of Fromelles’, http://www.awm.gov.au/units/event_159.asp, date unknown (accessed 9 May 2014).

Tumber, H. & Webster, F. (2006), Journalists under fire: information, war and journalist practices. London: Sage Publications.

Taylor, P.M. (2003). Chapter 4, Journalism Under Fire: The Reporting of War and International Crisis, in Cottle, S. (ed) News, Public Relations and Power.  London: Sage publications.

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Stepping Back In Time

Townsville residents will soon be able to take a peek at what the city was like during the early days of European settlement as the West End Cemetery is brought back to life for a day of heritage fun. Vintage car displays, antique appraisals and guided tours of Townsville’s oldest known historic cemetery are just a few of the activities locals can expect to enjoy at next weeks annual Heritage Day, presented by the Townsville City Council. Organizers praised last year’s high attendance level and are hoping that this years attractions will draw even bigger crowds than ever.

Jane Ryder has been taking guided tours of the cemetery for Heritage Day for the past three years and says “from an historical perspective it’s really valuable for locals to understand the history of their town, and it’s a great free community event that gets people out and about”.

Above: Jane Ryder will be taking guided tours at this years Heritage Day.

“Townsville has a lot of heritage to offer residents and events such as this one really get the community involved”, she said.

“People learn what life was really like in the early days of Townsville’s settlement and also about some of the famous people that helped found the city, many of which are buried here.”

“We have had really positive feedback. Everyone really enjoys the event, especially the period costumes and horse drawn cart”.

The Townsville City Council’s Heritage Day will this year be held on Sunday the 18th May from 10am-2pm. It is a free event for all ages, where locals can enjoy live entertainment, food court and other free activities.

Address: West End Cemetery, Cnr Church and Ingham Road

Time: 10am-2pm Cost: FREE For more details visit www.townsville.qld.gov.au

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

The Importance of the Media in the Creation of the Anzac Legend

The birth of the Australian national identity has often been attributed to the Australian landing at Gallipoli on the 25th of April 1915. Although today it is acknowledged that the events at Gallipoli were a complete military failure and disaster, few Australians today would dispute the significance of the Anzac legend in the development of Australia’s nationhood, nor its pervasive role within contemporary society.

  As Anzac Day approaches for another year, we are reminded yet again of the sacrifices Australian troops made for this great country, as well as the various reasons why the Anzac legend specifically became Australia’s most significant and enduring national narrative. This is particularly interesting to note when it was not a successful battle in the conventional sense; Australia by no means ‘won’. Some scholars have argued to this end that it was the effective use of the media at the time of the Gallipoli campaign that played a central role in the positive positioning of the Anzacs. Government control and military censorship of these media outlets, issues that are still observed today within military and war journalism, further contributed to this representation of the Anzacs.

  Popular media became useful for disseminating pro-war propaganda during the First World War, and the Australian government became highly efficient at utilising various veins of the media for its own cause (Williams, 1999, p. 6). With a higher population of literate Australians, combined with faster media and communication technologies such as the telegraph, and a distinctly Australian reporting style, media outlets were producing material that was easily consumed by the general public (Williams, 1999, p. 6). Newspapers became the principle tool for information dissemination during the War, and popular journalists and war historians such as C.E.W Bean were household names for their columns and reports (Williams, 1999, p. 1, 3). Bean was arguably the heaviest promoter of the Anzac legend, and much of his writings during the war painted a heroic picture of the great ‘Aussie battler’ and the Anzac spirit, which, in his opinion, was alive in every man (Bean 1907, in Macintyre, 2009, p. 160). Bean’s articles were highly published, not simply because they gave hope to Australians at home, but also because his opinions served the agenda of the Australian Government.

It was most noticeable during the War that truth was the first casualty. Government censorship of information prevented negative opinions of the war being expressed and journalists of the war period often became frustrated with the lack of information they were allowed to share (Williams, 1999, pp. 2, 5).  John Williams of the University of New South Wales commented that:

“The mass media had no choice but to collaborate with government and the military in the implementation of a system of information dissemination which inflated minor successes, concealed disasters, incited hatreds and disguised the nature of the battlefield experience” (Williams, 1999, p. 1).

So while it is well known today that the landing at Gallipoli was an absolute military failure, this fact was not to be expressed at the time, and consequently the first reports back to Australia regarding the Gallipoli campaign claimed, “there has been no finer feat in this war” (Macintyre, 2009, p. 159). This pattern continued throughout the War, with later reports from the Western Front claiming Australian victories even when Australians had practically been slaughtered, and outright defeated (Williams, 1999, pp. 2, 3).

................................................................................................................

IMAGE ABOVE: An article from the Daily Mirror, published 25th July 1916, reporting on the successful role of Anzacs near Pozieres. Despite the heavy fatality rates experienced by British and Australian troops, the article simply states that the “Enemy suffers heavy losses…Anzacs’ haul off prisoners”. The second part of the article omits any mention of Australian dead or wounded, instead focusing on the acquisition of sections of the town. Overall it makes little impression on the reader that the battle of Pozieres was of any significance (source: after Williams, 1991, p. 128).

IMAGE ABOVE: An article from the Daily Mirror, published 27th July 1916, reporting on the ‘victory’ of Pozieres (source: after Williams, 129). Military events such as Pozieres were heavily ‘glossed over’ and censored by the government and the military. Death tolls and military failures were concealed so as to reduce negativity towards the war effort. While today Pozieres is considered one of the darkest events of Australian military history, at the time it was reported on only briefly, and where it was recorded, it was described as a victory with limited casualties (Williams, 1999, p. 130).

................................................................................................................

Gallipoli was the first time that the Australian government took control over the media (Williams, 1999, pp. 1, 6, 8). Prior to this, media reports on battles still undeniably played a crucial role in the positioning of public opinion, however without the manipulation of the government, there was no enforcement of positive reporting, and the outcome was very different. The Gallipoli campaign undeniably produced the most enduring national character and hero Australia has ever seen: the Anzac.  As Bean famously stated:

“What these men did nothing now can alter. The good and the bad, the greatness and the smallness of their story will stand. Whatever of glory it contains nothing now can lessen. It rises, as it will always rise, above the mists of ages, a monument to great-hearted men; and for their nation, a possession forever” (C.E.W. Bean in Pedersen and Roberts, 2012).           

To a far greater extent than any other battle Australian forces have participated in, Gallipoli holds an iconic place as the true birth of the Australian nation, and arguably thanks to the effective use of printed media (Bill Gammage in Gare and Ritter, 2008, p. 293; Donoghue and Tranter). 

  References:

Donoghue, J. and Tranter, B, ‘The Anzac Legend: a foundation myth’, School of Sociology and Social Work, University of Tasmania,  http://www.tasa.org.au/uploads/2011/05/Donoghue-Jed-Session-13.pdf date unknown (accessed 23 April 2014).

Gare, D. and Ritter D. (eds.). Making Australian History: Perspectives on the past since 1788. Melbourne: Cengage learning, 2008.

Macintyre, S.  A Concise History of Australia, 3rd ed. Sydney: Cambridge University Press, 2009

Williams J. F.  ANZACS, the media and the Great War. Sydney: University of New South Wales, 1999.  

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Lecture recess personal blog post What did you do over Easter?

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

If a picture tells a thousand words, what does this one say?

What is the story behind this photo?

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

JN1001 Photo gallery (C) Fiddleback J.Ryder

What does this gallery say?

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Julian Assange, Wikileaks and Contemporary Media: High-Tech Terrorists, Whistleblowers or Simply Good Journalists?

A critical exploration of the role of the press, specifically Julian Assange and Wikileaks, as Cyber-Terrorists.

(Image Source: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_-BFn09ebLQA/TMl43VQxowI/AAAAAAAAABo/YEsj6KRu5E8/s1600/wikileaks-3.jpg)

In the wake of the technological age government legislation has been unable to keep up with electronic advancements. This is a great security concern, as there are fears that terrorists will take advantage of this weakness. Following the 9/11 attacks on the United States of America (USA), the US Government has been particularly proactive taking measures to guard against terrorism, arguably at the expense of individual freedoms and rights. Unfortunately there is enormous confusion surrounding what constitutes individual acts of terrorism. Misleading claims of ‘cyber-terrorism’ have prompted an explosion of terrorist accusations against individuals and organisations that routinely implement technological platforms for tools of information dissemination. In particularly those associated with media and news outlets, such as the controversial Julian Assange and his website Wikileaks have been targeted. Consequently, the rights of the press to freedom of speech under the first amendment have come under threat as the label ‘terrorist’ is applied to almost anyone who opposes the legitimacy of the government. So what is cyber-terrorism, and how does cyber-terrorism differ from traditional forms of terrorism? I hope to answer this with a critical analysis of the recent accusations of Julian Assange and Wikileaks as ‘high-tech terrorists as well as highlighting the role of the press in aiding terrorism. Finally, reasons for the US Government’s labeling of individuals and organisations as cyber-terrorists will be explored, as well as the negative implications this labelling may also produce.

Terrorism itself is not new; in fact it has occurred in numerous forms arguably since the emergence of human civilisation . However, because the weapons, methods, and goals of terrorism have changed over time, the way in which terrorism is defined and perceived has transformed accordingly . At present, no universally accepted definition of terrorism exists. In the USA alone, there are over six official and highly varied definitions of terrorism that encapsulate varying degrees of violent intent, danger to human life, and civilian intimidation. Though for the purpose of this blog terrorism involves: Acts or threats of violence carried out by non-state groups to advance a political, religious or ideological cause, with the aim of terrorism being to instil general public fear and even panic amongst its target populations, and/or to force government or governments to accede to terrorist demands .

Just as there is controversy regarding the definition of terrorism, so too is there contention regarding the definition of cyber-terrorism. Some scholars have argued that terrorists who implement any computer technologies to their advantage are regarded as cyber-terrorists, while others argue that the general destruction of crucial computer systems that are vital to the smooth running of a country are acts of cyber-terrorism . This blog defines cyber-terrorism as outlined by Berni Dwan: Cyber terrorism is the use of computer resources for the purpose of intimidating, coercing, harming or propagating misinformation that decidedly aids these nefarious deeds…Its goal can be mass destruction or personal downfall, propagation of hate, lies or downright dangerous information to everyone, or to select groups who will use it cleverly” .

In many ways cyber-terrorism is ‘not dissimilar to traditional methods of terrorist information propagation’ such as pamphlet delivery, however it does differ in one key area: violence. Unlike traditional forms of terrorism where violence has played a crucial role in gaining public media attention, cyber-terrorism does not exhibit direct violence . Rather it aims to produce ‘psychological terror and disruption’ through the impact of the information it circulates, and the public fear surrounding how such individuals or organisations were able to obtain given information, as well as how this information may be used. As the FBI’s National Infrastructure Protection Centre states in its explanation of cyber terrorism: “Such actions result in confusion and uncertainty about a governments ability to protect citizens and as such [citizens] are vulnerable to the influence of others” .

The passive and often subversive nature of cyber-terrorism challenges the public perception of terrorism as extravagant acts of violence, such as blowing up buildings, hijacking planes, or coordinating high profile assassinations. Because cyber-terrorism lacks violence, it is harder for governments and the general populace to indentify and label individual acts of cyber-terrorism. Consequently, acts of cyber-terrorism may be dismissed, while acts of information dissemination that lack the intent of terrorism, such as certain veins of the media, may be mislabelled as forms of terrorism, with unpleasant and far-reaching consequences. Ultimately, in cases of accused cyber-terrorists, it is the intent that that is often debated even though the intent or lack thereof can be exceptionally difficult to prove.

The media has always had an interesting relationship with terrorism . Acts of terrorism are designed to provoke public responses, and media coverage is essential to this end . The more ‘theatrically impressive’ a terrorist attack is, the more media coverage it will receive, thus allowing for immense public exposure known as propaganda of the deed . However, in contemporary times, with technology and social networking at our fingertips, terrorism’s relationship with the media has begun to shift. Terrorists no longer have to rely exclusively on newspapers or television programs to air their actions. Instead, they are now able to utilise the media via the internet for their own means, developing ‘quasi-journalist websites to convey their messages’ , reaching far greater audiences than ever before and blurring the lines between the media which spreads terrorist propaganda, and the terrorists themselves.

The line between legitimate media organisations and cyber terrorists is further distorted by the shared forum of information dissemination – the internet. In the USA, the media has held a longstanding responsibility to report on government and international affairs so as to keep its public informed and to prevent ‘any part of the government from deceiving the people’ . In order for the press to effectively do this, legislation under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution grants the press freedom of expression through publication and dissemination without interference by government censorship . It also protects media organisations against prosecution when accepting information from a ‘leaker’ or whistleblower, as long as the media organisation did not aid or endorse the acquisition of sensitive information . Therefore, the media are essentially able to expose national secrets without prosecution or reproach. This raises the question as to whether or not terrorist organisations who hide behind the facade of legitimate press organisations would be able to invoke the same rights. Journalist organisations devout on ‘exposing the truth’ have been accused of doing this in the USA. The most hotly debated case is that of Wikileaks and its controversial founder and Australian journalist, Julian Assange.

(Image source: http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/2367828-3x2-940x627.jpg)

Since it was established in 2007, Wikileaks has released countless classified documents exposing financial crimes, suppressions of freedoms, and corruption within governments and military forces . However it was the release of US Apache helicopter footage in 2010, labelled ‘Collateral Murder’, that cemented Wikileaks’ position as a revolutionary journalist organisation . The footage, now considered some of the most controversial material Wikileaks has ever released, showed US helicopter pilots firing on, and killing, a group of Iraqi civilians and journalists, including two children . This video evidence directly contradicted US military reports that several Iraqi insurgents had been involved in a battle with US soldiers, resulting in several deaths. Public uproar ensued as a result of the leak, and US citizens began to questions America’s role in the war, not to mention what other government deceptions were in place. Later that same year, Wikileaks began to publish more than 250,000 classified documents from various US embassies all around the globe onto its public access website . The publications, collectively known as Cablegate, provided further evidence of US conspiracy, and were supplied to Wikileaks and various other media organisations by whistleblower Bradley Manning . It was the biggest single leak in history , and it was made available to anyone and everyone via the Internet. The publication provoked US uproar. Numerous US Government officials attempted to frame Wikileaks and its founder Julian Assange as dangerous criminals, accusing Assange of being a terrorist . Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini stated that Cablegate was the equivalent to “the 9/11 of world diplomacy” , while US Senator Joe Liberman claimed Wikileaks had “violated the Espionage Act” . US Representative Pete King called for Wikileaks to be declared a “foreign terrorist organisation” because it “posed a clear and present danger to the national security of the US” and US Vice President Joe Baiden went so far as to accuse Julian Assange of being “a high-tech terrorist” . However one of the harshest claims came from US politician Sarah Palin, who stated: “Assange is anti-American operative with blood on his hands who should be hunted down with the same urgency used to pursue AL-Qaeda and Taliban leaders… Assange is not a ‘journalist’ any more than the editor of AL-Qaeda's new English magazine ‘Inspire’ is a ‘journalist’…His past postings of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban” . Accusations against Assange and Wikileaks additionally inferred these dangerous publications had been made with the intent of aiding and abetting anti-American terrorist organisations . When considering the definition of cyber-terrorism accepted by this essay, government accusations were inferring and insinuating that Assange and Wikileaks had employed computer resources in order to propagate ‘downright dangerous information’ to everyone, from which, select groups would use that information incorrectly, causing harm to US citizens, thus effectively labeling Assange and Wikileaks cyber-terrorists. However, there are arguments for the contrary.

Firstly, there are many reports that suggest that Wikileaks withheld much of the material supplied to them by Manning on that grounds that it could have potentially assisted dangerous organisations in an attack against the USA. Of more than 700,000 documents supplied to Wikileaks, only around 250,000 files were published . This would suggest that Wikileaks exercised restraint, taking into account the potential negative consequences of publishing such data, and consequently it would seem that Wikileaks did not intended for this confidential information to be used by terrorist organisations . Secondly, if Wikileaks was indeed a terrorist organisation, it would have clearly stated its goals to take down the USA and other government bodies on its website, however instead, Wikileaks claims to contribute to the responsibilities of journalistic media in reporting on government injustices so as to keep government and those in power honest: “Publishing improves transparency, and this transparency creates a better society for all people. Better scrutiny leads to reduced corruption and stronger democracies in all societies institutions, including government, corporations and other organisations. A healthy, vibrant and inquisitive journalistic media plays a vital role in achieving these goals. We are part of that media.” By this account, Wikileaks is undeniably engaging in activism against governments who attempt to censor or control information, however activism alone does not constitute terrorism. Finally, Wikileaks has not committed illegality, or at least not any more so than any other media organisation operating today. Wikileaks claims to operate under the broad principles of freedom of speech and expression, as outlined by the US constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights : “The broader principles in which our work is based are [derived]…from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In particular article 19…It states that everyone has a right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Attorney Daniel Klau, a First Amendment expert indicated that while the actions of Assange via Wikileaks may have overstepped ‘moral grounds’ in many people’s opinions, unless it can be proven that Wikileaks was involved with the acquisition of sensitive material, Wikileaks would be protected by the constitution under the freedom of press expression clause . The actions of Wikileaks are not dissimilar to renowned newspapers, such as the New York Times, who accept packets of information from unknown whistleblowers, and who publish this material in print and online. If Wikileaks were to be prosecuted for criminal activity, then so too should other news organisations, such as the New York Times, which also received and published the same sensitive information Wikileaks published . Despite this, these ‘traditional’ media outlets have never been subject to accusations of terrorism.

The closest historical example to the Wikileaks case is that of the Pentagon Papers, where the source of the leaks, Daniel Ellsberg, was charged for his actions, just as Manning was, but the terms terrorist and terrorism never entered the debated . In 1969 Daniel Ellsberg, a US strategic analyst for the Defence Department and the White House, released a 7,000 page confidential document to 19 American Newspapers, including the New York Times and the Washington Post . The leaked documents, later known as the Pentagon Papers, contained information relating to American involvement in the Vietnam War. This included several reports urging US military to retract its support from an ‘unwinnable’ war, and proof that the American people had been mislead by American involvement in the Vietnam war, as well as confirmation that several attacks on Cambodia and Vietnam had been conducted without public knowledge . Ellsberg was quickly labelled “the most dangerous man in America”. The growing antiwar movement came to Ellsberg’s defence with public marches and protests, and there was much public support for Ellsberg’s actions in ousting the American Governments lies. Ellsberg was placed on trial under twelve felony accounts, including espionage, however the case was dismissed after it was found that information against Ellsberg had been illegally obtained . It is important to remember however in all of this it was Ellsberg as an individual whistleblower who was labelled a criminal and not the newspapers that published his information. Yet without the newspapers, Ellsberg would not have succeeded in exposing government truths. No labels of terrorism were invoked upon Ellsberg or the media organisations that assisted him. In fact there has never been an instance throughout history in the USA, in which a media organisation has been accused of, or prosecuted for terrorist activity up until now. The distinction between terrorism and journalism was previously very clear; they were completely unrelated. So why then have media organisations suddenly come under fire? The change is arguably partially due to the political response of the US Government post 9/11, and the political expediency of labeling individuals as terrorists.

Following the devastating attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon in 2009, public perceptions and concerns of terrorism reached an all-time high with a growing sense of existential fear- anyone and everyone could pose a terrorist threat . As a result America underwent enormous social and political transformations resulting in a government ‘crack-down’ on terrorism to assure the public that every action was being taken to curtail future terrorist attacks on US soil . This crackdown included the establishment of several new government agencies whose sole purpose was the identification and control of terrorist threats . A general heightened sense of caution swept over the nation as security checks were increased, and restrictions were enforced on travel . The American Government used the media to promote themselves as protectors of the people, and guardians of the American way of life – the new restrictions of individual freedoms were consequently depicted as evidence that positive steps were being taken to control the threat of terrorism . It was politically expedient to act against terrorism, and the favourable public response was no doubt encouraging, but the unanticipated release of classified documents and video clips via Wikileaks brought the legitimacy of the US Government into question. As already mentioned there were concerns regarding how the documents were sourced, the content of the information released, and the contradictory nature of reports given by the American Governments. The US Government was consequently compelled to act to protect their reputation, and their sense of legitimacy and control. Even though the controversial documents had been released through a variety of sources, including the New York Times, the American Government chose to target the weakest link - Wikileaks and Assange. This may be because, unlike the New York Times, Assange is a little-known outsider, who is therefore easier to label a terrorist, and vilify as a national enemy. Furthermore, while the American Government needs to maintain a positive relationship with well known media agencies such as the New York Times in order to promote their own governmental agendas, there is no perceived need for the US Government to keep assumed minority players on side. This represents a double standard in Government practice.

It is important to bear in mind that the perpetual labeling of groups and individuals who oppose the legitimacy of the American Government has the potential to be counterproductive. Whilst acts of espionage, activism, and negative journalism may not necessarily be productive in the eyes of the US Government, they are not the same as terrorism. Existential fear is increased as the public perception of terrorist’s changes from that of masked men with guns, to young adults with internet access. If this new schema for terrorism is applied, terrorists may be perceived to be everywhere, resulting in over-acknowledgement and hyper vigilance. This growing sense of anxiety may be further enforced by government attempts to control terrorism, as the presence of restrictions and safety precautions suggest an implicit and ubiquitous threat . The anxiety, fear, and over-vigilance of the American population, coupled with the restrictive actions of the US Government, is precisely what the true terrorist organisations sought to achieve, and thus in and of itself is counterproductive to the US Governments proclaimed desire to protect its people . Another potential flow-on effect of government restrictions is that, if used excessively, the populace may respond negatively, viewing the government in a negative light and, in the worst-case scenario, spurring a large-scale revolt, causing great trouble for the US Government, and once again fulfilling the wishes of terrorist organisations. Arguably the most counterproductive element of mislabeling individuals as terrorists is that the real issue of terrorism is swept under the rug. When individuals such as Assange are being pursued, valuable resources that should be used to target real terrorists are wasted. Finally, in the eyes of people who believe that Assange is not a terrorist, the American Government looks weak for appearing to scapegoat the issue of terrorism. Furthermore, the more frequently the term terrorist is used, the less impact it has – as opposed to being a bold statement about a real and serious threat, the term is being applied to anyone who threatens the legitimacy of the American Government, so much so that the use of the word terrorism is akin now to the term “communist” during the Cold War years.

Terrorism is an age-old threat that has haunted humanity since its earliest origins. Following the 9/11 attacks the American Government has been particularly proactive in its attempts to guard against terrorism, often at the expense of individual freedoms and rights. Attempts to address the issue of terrorism have been compromised by the changing relationship between the media and terrorist organisations, the lack of clarity regarding what constitutes an act of terrorism, and how cyber-terrorism is different from the traditional, violent forms of terrorism. The politically expedient nature of labeling individuals and organisations as terrorists further clouds the issue of terrorism, and has had many negative implications, arguably including the wrongful scape-goating of the journalist and alleged ‘high-tech terrorist’, Julian Assange. Greater clarity regarding what does and does not constitute an act of terrorism, along with what defines a cyber-terrorist is greatly needed, both to reduce public concern and properly guard against acts of terrorism. It is also important to acknowledge the enormous role that the media plays, both in maintaining the transparency of the political system, and in potentially assisting terrorists through information dissemination. Cyber-terrorism will undeniable feature heavily in future international conflicts, only transparency, education, and planning can manage the threat posed – scapegoats and half truths only serve to further the goals of terrorist organisations.

Bibliography:

ABC News. ‘Bradley Manning sentenced to 35 years jail for WikiLeaks data breach’. Published August 21, 2013 (accessed 1 May, 2014)

Blatchford, Clive. ‘Hacking: Myth or Menace, Part I’. Computer Fraud & Security, 2 (1998): 16-18.

Blatchford, Clive. ‘Hacking: Myth or Menace, Part II’. Computer Fraud & Security, 3 (1998): 16-18.

Brunst, Phillip. W. “Use of the Internet by Terrorists: A threat Analysis.” In Responses to Cyber-Terrorism by Centre of Excellence Defence Against Terrorism, 34-60. Amsterdam: IOS Publishers, 2008 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Calabresi, Massimo. “Wikileaks’ War on Secrecy: Truth’s Consequences”. Time Magazine. Published December 2, 2010 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Castronovo, Russ. State Secrets: Ben Franklin and WikiLeaks, Critical Inquiry, 39 (2013):425-450.

Cornell University Law School. Legal Information Institute. “First Amendment, An Overview.” Published August 19, 2010 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Dwan, Berni. ‘Cyber-terrorism- Virtual for Who?’. Computer Fraud & Security. 11, 30 (2001): 12-14.

Dyk, Timothy. B. “Newsgathering, Press Access and the First Amendment.” Stanford Law Review, 44 (1992): 927-960. Ellsberg, Daniel. “Daniel Ellsberg’s Website” (accessed 1 May, 2014)

Ellsberg Daniel, “Daniel Ellsberg’s Website” (accessed 1 May, 2014)

Ellsberg, Daniel. “Edward Snowden: saving us from the United States of America” The Guardian. Published June 10, 2013 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Ellsberg, Daniel. “Why the Pentagon papers matter now” The Guardian. Published June 14, 2011 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Ellsberg, Daniel. “This shameful abuse of Bradley Manning” The Guardian. Published March 12, 2011 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Encyclopaedia Britannica. ‘First Amendment’. Last updated 2013 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Fowler, Andrew. The Most Dangerous Man in the World: The inside story on Julian Assange and the WikiLeaks secrets. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 2011.

Funrell, S.M and Warren, M.J. “Computer Hacking and Cyber-Terrorism: the Real Threats in the New Millenium?”. Computers & Security, 18 (1999) 28-34.

Hiddlestone, Janine, 2013. HI3334 History of Terrorism. Week 1 lecture notes. James Cook University, Townsville.

Hinde, Stephen. ‘Cyber-terrorism in context’. Computers & Security, 22, 3 (2003): 188-192.

Kennedy, Helen. “WikiLeaks should be designated a ‘foreign terrorist organization,’ Rep. Pete King fumes”. Daily News. Published November 28, 2010 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Law, Randall, D. Terrorism: A History. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press, 2009.

Liptak, Adam. “Court Rulings Blur the Line Between a Spy and a Leaker”. New York Times. Published August 2, 2013 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

MacAskill, Ewan. “Julian Assange like a hi-tech terrorist, says Joe Biden” The Guardian, Monday 20 December 2010 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Moore, M. “Why I’m posting bail money to Julian Assange”, Michael Moore Blog, December 14 2010 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

O’Leary, Mary, E. “Liberman draws fine with Times remark on Wikileaks”. Middletown Press News. Published October 12, 2010 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Shepard, Jason. M. “Chapter 3: National Security Leaks and the Valerie Plame Case.” In Law and Society: Privileging the Press: Confidential Sources, Journalism, Ethics and the First Amendment by Jason M. Shepard, 73-104. Texas USA: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2011 (accessed 1 May, 2014).

Shockwavewriter. ‘Is it Cyber-Terrorism, Techno-Terrorism, or None of the Above?” Computer Fraud & Security, 7 (2000): 18-20.

Verton, Dan. Black Ice: The Invisible Threat of Cyber-Terrorism. California, U.S.A: McGraw Hill, 2003.

WikiLeaks, (last accessed 1 May, 2014).

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Photography In My Experience...

I have always had a keen interest in photography and design. Ever since high school I have been taking photos and improving my skills in a range of areas including portraiture, landscape and media among others. I studied photography wherever possible though it was mostly for personal interest, and I began to shoot family sittings and weddings for practice just after I graduated form high school.

In 2008 I was given an opportunity to experience the life of a news photographer though a weeks worth of work experience at the Townsville Bulletin. I worked alongside some very talented photographers, learning new skills, new programs and new equipment. It was an exceptionally exciting week that just so happened to coincide with the 2008 Davis Cup tournament, which was held in Townsville that year. I had never been interested in sports photography but I could not help but be swept up in all of the hype.

Following my work experience week I was offered a short-term casual contract as a freelance photographer with the bulletin working for the then advertising department. I photographed all kinds of stills for advertising purposes from cars for the cars guide to food products for catalogues, and fashion items for glossy leaflets. I would also often attend functions or openings of businesses to capture photographs for advertising campaigns. However my favorite job was career profiling for Career-one.

Every week in Saturdays paper the bulletin would print, as part of the Career Guide, a local profile for an enormous range of occupations. I visited people from all kinds of backgrounds including medical, construction, hospitality, fashion and retail and I had to capture and convey both their personality and occupation in a single photograph. One of my most memorable career profiles was of a cinematic technician at the old BCC cinemas in the city. I spoke with the young man briefly about what his job entailed and he invited me ‘backstage’ to show me how the equipment operated. The published image depicted a young enthusiastic man with a projector and a series of film reels in a dark room with high levels of contrast.

The photograph I enjoyed taking the most however was of a gentleman named Hayden King, a barista at Coffee Dominion in the CBD. It was within walking distance from the bulletin offices and I remember being relieved to get out of the office. Days working to fast changing deadlines had a tendency to drag on and on but in a way that was exciting- you never knew what they were going to ask you to photograph next. While I was setting my gear up I watched as customers came in and out of the shop and how Hayden greeted them each personally, some regular customers others new- I noticed how he paid particular attention to each and every one of them, chatting as he finished their orders and simultaneously starting others. He exuded extreme confidence in both his ability and in his personality. After chatting to Hayden he explained that being a barista was about being a performer, as much as it was about making great coffee. So the photograph I chose to capture that I felt best illustrated Hayden and his passion for coffee was form the perspective of the customer, where all of Hayden’s confidence and ability would shine through. The photo was subsequently used in advertising for the Career guide on TV commercials and large posters.

(Above: My published photo of Hayden King in 2008 as it appeared on the front page of Careerone and in its original format, as well as the image that appeared with the story)

I was later transferred to the Media Department, still working as a freelance photographer. This was a whole new challenge in itself but not one that I necessarily found enjoyable at the end of the day. There were certainly aspects of it that I lived for- especially the positive stories, and I was given an enormous amount of creativity in how I chose to take photos from a whole variety of angles and perspectives. Where I struggled was with controversial cases such as criminal hearings and car accidents- one of which was a fatality that involved a high school friend. I found that these affected me deeply and it became difficult for me to cope with these aspects of my job.

(Above: an Image I took while working in Media)

Perhaps it was because I was young and inexperienced. I would like to think if it were ever something I had the opportunity to do again I would cope better, but at the end of the day it allowed me to identify areas of photography that made me passionate, and those that did not.

Today I work for myself as a freelance photographer. These days I photograph families, weddings and children, and while they can sometimes be stressful (weddings require you to change your plans and think just as quickly as media photography does) I have always found the outcome to be much more rewarding.

(Below: Examples of my recent freelance work (c) Jane Ryder Fiddleback Photography)

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

A better example of online audio/visual production. Last year as part of the BA3000 subject at JCU I was required to create a "talking head clip" about my experiences as a BA student and the skills I had gained form my studies. I did all of the filming myself using my iPad and put it together with an Imagine Dragons song. Hope you guys find it useful :)

[potentioreststilusgladio-blog]

Part 2 of the completed clip (See week 6 blog for more details)