Sorry Saga - “It’s actually quite funny people thinking they know more than they actually do”


#6791

Pffft.


#6792

I had to laugh. I’d determined to do a @theDJR and give a running commentary. My stupid swipe phone and my ridiculous finger work left me mostly floundering. I have a renewed admiration for your VFL work!


#6793

I wonder if the players find it interestinv that Evans has refused to make any public comment to date ?Further , its intere


#6794

Thanks sweatyman for your notes, great stuff. Interesting that you have to submit questions in writing which can be vetted later.

Your suggestion that ASADA’s role was touchy subject matter might provide a focus for future evenings. Perhaps ask the question if they are still under a NDA regarding the saga.

I’m going to the SandringhamFC next Tuesday with a few mates. Not sure I can be as diligent as Sweatyman in preparing notes.


#6795

Hmm, cut off after mentioning Evans - Illuminati confirmed!


#6796

Thanks very much for the reports. Greatly appreciated.


#6797

Ha. Just on that. Can you please interpret this please?


#6798

“Lloyd said easy to play injured”. Fletch said he only ever had 2 complaints about Hird, both of which I think were about refusing to play Fletch injured. Fletch had conferred with Lloyd who assured Fletch there was no problem playing injured and he had done it plenty of times.


#6799

I wonder if Daniher was talking to Lloyd last year?


#6800

Thanks sweaty man, just lke being there.i


#6801

Yes Lloydy went to Fletcher when he was not 100% for a game and told him that it was easy to play injured and effectively to ‘suck it up’


#6802

because Matthew played so well when injured!! said no one ever!!


#6803

Hmmm… given any difficult questions about the AFL can be avoided, I will need to revise my questions for the Sandringham event.


#6804

Where was Judith Neilson when we needed her most. Great initiative though …

Why I’m spending $100 million on ‘the pursuit of truth’, 3 December 2018

If I had any doubt that my investment in an institute to support “evidence-based journalism and the pursuit of truth” was a worthy ambition it has been swept away by the overwhelming positive response to the announcement.

I expected journalists, and the media industry generally, to welcome the initiative. But more heartening has been the reaction of the wider community. People from around Australia, and the world, have inundated my office with messages of thanks and support.

Billionaire Judith Neilson has pledged $100 million to further the cause of journalism.Janie Barrett

That tells us a lot about the state of the world at the moment. Many of us are concerned about the quality of our governance, the state of our media, and how we as citizens can make sense of an increasingly complicated world and communicate with each other in meaningful ways.

The original idea for a journalism institute grew out of conversations I had with friends and advisers about what might be done to enrich our civic life – its institutions and the quality of public discourse.

Journalism has many critics; I believe journalism also needs its champions.

Initially, I was focused on the Australian market. But it soon became clear that any venture of this sort must be global in outlook and ambition. News and social media is global. Any Australian project must be global too.

I am not an expert. I would never pretend to have all the answers. But like everyone else I consume the news and I sense that we are at a moment in time, perhaps at a tipping point, where some very fundamental principles about truth and democracy are up for grabs.

That sounds high-minded. I don’t mean it to be. I know that news has always been subsidised to varying degrees by business. The “rivers of gold” that flowed from advertising revenue for established media companies have run dry and new ways of monetising journalism must be found. To those looking for new sources of revenue, I say: more strength to your arm.

In the meantime, those of us with the means can do something.

The so-called public square has been rapidly transformed. Debates are conducted in “echo chambers” which have no space for alternative points of view or calm and rational debate. Anyone with a Twitter account can derail an otherwise sensible discussion. The very concept of “truth” is now routinely challenged.

I hope that the institute I am establishing can do something to push back against this trend. I want it to sit right in the middle of the public square. From time to time it will be involved in controversy: so be it. It will be a forum for ideas, but an advocate of none.

The institute will be independent, non-partisan and open to all who want to take up the challenge of contemporary journalism with goodwill and in good faith.

This is why I will play no role in its governance. I have no political or ideological agenda, and I will rely on experienced and respected journalists, practitioners and scholars to guide the institute’s work.

From now, it is up to those entrusted with its mission to realise my ambition.

Thank you to all those who have wished it well.

Judith Neilson is a Sydney-based billionaire, art gallery owner and philanthropist.


#6805

pity she wasn’t spending her $100 million chasing down the AFL


#6806

Thank god it needs to happen. Just using our big four banks and all levels of Government
as an example. We need the see-saw back to being somewhere in the middle.

Please make a start in education from the primary school level right through high school - the importance of morals, honesty, compassion and the value of ethical integrity.


#6807

All very well to produce honest journos, but who is going to give them a job ?


#6808

Certainly not many of the media mongrels of the moment.

But we can dream it will get better at some point.


#6809

It’s not going to happen in the foreseeable future. We are junkies, hopelessly addicted.


#6810

there are just some things one must never give up pursuing