Search

"Felt like a criminal": Mother and disabled son "kicked out" of Pink concert

A distraught mother has taken to social media to recall the moment her and her seven-year-old son, who has Down syndrome, were asked to leave a concert venue. Vanessa Vasey, 48, spent over $1,000 to take her son Jesse to see Pink in London during her UK stadium tour, but when the pair arrived at the venue, things took a turn. Jesse struggled to stay still in his seat and was soon surrounded by "six security guards" who ordered the disabled boy to sit down, otherwise they would have to leave. She said she tried to explain her son’s condition to the guards but they ended up being “escorted from the premises” just as Pink took to the stage. On Facebook, Vasey wrote in detail about what happened, saying her son had been “robbed” of a special experience. “Music is his life and Pink is one of his absolute favourites,” she wrote. “We successfully saw her perform at BST Hyde Park last year and were thrilled to learn of her return again this year.” Vasey said she purchased more expensive “hospitality tickets” allowing people to move between bars and food outlets during the night “so that Jesse wouldn’t be pressured into remaining in one seat all night, as he gets overwhelmed in busy environments and finds it hard to sit still.” “We spent some time in the bar leading up to the main act, and Jesse was having a wonderful time, until about 45 minutes before Pink was due to come on, they suddenly shut all the blinds, obstructing us from seeing anything,” she wrote. “I tried to consult with the hospitality managers over this, and explained Jesse’s needs, but they wouldn’t budge on it. So not wanting Jesse to stare at a blind all night, we attempted to go into the seating zone." “We couldn’t get him to sit in his seat, but he was happy dancing and singing at the front railings, and even interacting with some of the other guests." “Doing no harm to anyone, or obstructing anyone’s view. This seemed OK for about half an hour or so. Then ... just as Pink dropped from the sky in her opening number, we had six security guards come into the zone and ask us to leave or sit in our seats.” Vasey said the security guards were “abrupt, intimidating and unpleasant”, as they "tried to force us to take Jesse to a sensory room which was soundproof, and watch Pink on a screen.” <div> </div> “Something we could do at home, robbing us of the whole experience, as if my son was some sort of inconvenience, and better off shut in a room out of sight.” When Vasey complained to venue staff, she claims that more security guards appeared and they had no choice but to leave. “We were escorted out of the building like criminals and saw no more of the Pink show. Jesse was utterly devastated, and they showed absolutely zero care or understanding." “Shame on you Tottenham Stadium,” she concluded. “My poor boy deserved so much better than this!” After UK media picked up Vasey's story, Tottenham Stadium released a statement explaining their actions. “Following further investigation, we can confirm that Ms Vasey was offered assistance by our Safeguarding and Welfare teams throughout the night to provide Jesse with a comfortable viewing experience, including access to our dedicated Sensory Room,” the statement read. “The offers of assistance were declined by Ms Vasey and the party chose to leave the event.” Vasey was soon set upon by online trolls who condemned her choice to take Jesse to the concert in the first place, to which she issues a lengthy statement about inclusivity and not singling people out for their disabilities. “Why do we take them [to events]? Because, as parents, we have the same dreams and aspirations for our children as any other parent,” she wrote. “We have the same desires to see our children’s faces light up, as any other parent would. Our children are exposed to the same world as other children, and they enjoy the same things." “They have the same likes and desires. The only thing that’s different is their needs, their abilities and their way of accessing their dreams." “Why should these things deny them of fulfilling these dreams and passions? This is meant to be a world of inclusion. So let’s start including!" “That means adapting, understanding, supporting and most importantly; changing the way we deliver these privileges so that they are privileges for all of us, and not just some of us.” Image credits: Facebook/Richard Isaac/Shutterstock Editorial <div class="hide-print ad-no-notice css-qyun7f-StyledAdUnitWrapper ezkyf1c0" style="box-sizing: border-box; caret-color: #292a33; color: #292a33; font-family: HeyWow, Montserrat, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px;"> </div>

Caring

John Farnham steps out at son's wedding for first time since jaw surgery

Beloved Aussie rock legend John Farnham exuded pride and joy as he stepped out in style at his son Robert's wedding on the weekend. After enduring extensive surgery due to oral cancer, Farnham, now cancer-free, appeared in high spirits at the intimate wedding of his oldest son and his new wife, Melissa. The 74-year-old icon looked remarkably well and largely unchanged since his challenging surgery in August 2022. In the heartwarming photos shared on Instagram, John posed alongside his son, both beaming with happiness. John looked dapper in a black suit with a bronze tie and matching pocket square, while Rob opted for a stylish white tux with black accents. The joyous occasion was beautifully captured in a series of family photos, including John's wife, Jill, and other close family members. Fans flooded the comments with heartfelt messages, celebrating the happy family and John's remarkable recovery. "Such a beautiful father and son pic," one fan wrote, while another added, "Congratulations to you both. It's so nice to see your Dad, he looks fantastic! Love to you all." The bride, Melissa, looked stunning in an off-the-shoulder ivory gown, posing for romantic photos with her new husband against the lush backdrop of their wedding venue. Rob's touching caption on Instagram encapsulated the joy of the day: "Shared the happiest moment with my favourite person in the universe and she said I do. Melissa, my life is forever better that you’re apart of it. You looked radiant, beautiful and elegant. I can’t wait to see what the future has in store for us and I’m truly honoured to have you by my side as my wife for life❤️." The couple had announced their engagement in November 2022, with Rob expressing his excitement about their future together: "My best friend and love of my life said yes to marrying me. I can't wait to spend the rest of my life with you." John Farnham's presence at the wedding was particularly special, as it marked a year since his successful battle against cancer. In August 2023, Farnham revealed he was cancer-free, a triumph after numerous surgeries and a challenging recovery process. In a heartfelt statement, he shared his gratitude: "It's been a year since my first surgery and to be honest, I've lost count as to how many other procedures there have been since then. But, I'm home now and I'm a very grateful and happy man. I'm sitting here in my living room lapping up the attention from my beautiful wife, Jill, my boys Rob and James, and my mini Schnauzer, Edmund." Throughout his recovery, John's family provided updates on his progress. His son Robert shared that his father was "doing fantastic" after a 12-hour surgery for throat cancer and was even dancing a little and walking his dog regularly. "He's really, really happy. He's doing really good, he's super positive," Robert said in an interview. While it is unlikely that John will perform again after his extensive surgery, the love and joy he shared at his son's wedding are a beautiful reminder of life's precious moments. Images: Instagram

Relationships

Uber driver makes pensioner fork out thousands after minor accident

In a distressing incident, 80-year-old pensioner Judy Libby has claimed that she was coerced into handing over $2,500 to an Uber driver following a minor car accident in Melbourne's CBD. Judy recounted her ordeal on Melbourne's 3AW Radio on Friday morning, describing the alarming sequence of events that unfolded after she accidentally hit the back of the Uber driver's car. <a href="https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/an-absolute-nightmare-uber-drivers-sickening-act-to-80yo-pensioner/news-story/f77aa3e46c41532268a712cfc4764877" target="_blank" rel="noopener">According to News.com.au</a>, Judy explained that the driver was stationary when the accident occurred, causing a dent in the boot of his vehicle. The driver, claiming the damage had rendered him unable to work and support his family, demanded compensation. "He said, 'I’m an Uber driver, you’ve ruined the back of my car. I’ve got a wife and child to support; now I can’t work,'" Judy told the radio station. Initially, the driver demanded $4,000, allegedly stating he had obtained a quote from a friend who was a panel beater. When Judy expressed her inability to pay such a sum, the driver proposed a reduced amount of $2,500. They arranged to meet at her local bank, but when the teller grew suspicious and refused the transaction, the Uber driver reportedly drove her to another bank where she was made to withdraw the money. Judy described the driver's demeanour as very angry and the experience as a "nightmare". The situation took a further turn for the worse when she later received a legal letter demanding an additional $8,800 for the damage, with no mention of the $2,500 she had already handed over. Concerned and distressed, Judy informed her daughter, who then reported the incident to the police. The case is now being investigated by the fraud squad. "I wasn’t travelling at a speed to do huge damage. I had no damage on my car, just a few scratches," Judy said. "And he had an older car too, so $8,800; no. I didn’t write it off, I just hit his boot." 3AW host Russel Howcroft condemned the incident as "disgraceful", particularly criticising the driver's actions of taking Judy to a bank against her will. "Fancy putting someone in their car and driving them to a bank branch," he remarked. The investigation by the fraud squad will hopefully bring clarity and justice to Judy Libby's troubling experience. Image: Lutsenko Oleksandr / Shutterstock

Legal

"Love is love": Vietnam veteran reveals lifelong secret in obituary

A Vietnam veteran has kept a heartbreaking secret from his loved ones his entire life, and only revealed the truth in his obituary. Col. Edward Thomas Ryan died at the age of 85 in his home in Albany, New York, after serving as a firefighter in the city of Rensselaer for most of his life. In a final message to the world that he penned before succumbing to cancer, Ryan shared that he had always known he was gay, but was was “afraid of being ostracized" by his loved ones. "I must tell you one more thing. I was Gay all my life: thru grade school, thru High School, thru College, thru Life," he wrote in his obituary, published by the Albany Times Union. "I was in a loving and caring relationship with Paul Cavagnaro of North Greenbush," he confessed. "He was the love of my life. We had 25 great years together. Paul died in 1994 from a medical Procedure gone wrong. I'll be buried next to Paul." The former soldier, who served with the Army's 10th Brigade and received several military awards, including the National Defense Service Medal and the Defense of Liberty Medal "for participation to the State" following 9/11, explained that he had never revealed his secret out of fear of being disowned. "I'm sorry for not having the courage to come out as Gay. I was afraid of being ostracized: by Family, Friends, and Co-Workers," he recalled. "Seeing how people like me were treated, I just could not do it. Now that my secret is known, I'll forever Rest in Peace." Aside from serving in the war and being a firefighter, he was also one of the founders and owners of the local Albany radio station WGY-FM. Additionally, he was a chef at the East Greenbush, American Legion Post, and a lifelong member of the Vietnam Veterans of America. Ryan is survived by his 14 nieces and nephews who call him "Uncle Ed". His obituary has since gone viral and many have paid tribute to the Vietnam veteran on his obituary. "Col. Ryan. you lived your life with such bravery and carry it with you in the afterlife. I don't know if we will ever truly feel free. As a gay woman over 60, I struggle with this still. Half out and half in. Thank you for showing us the way to leave this life with dignity while being true to ourselves. The world needs more men like you. True hero," wrote one commenter. "Rest in Power Ed. Thank you for your service to your country. Thank you for the example of how much work we still need to do to honour and respect our brothers and sisters like you," added another. "Love is love. Glad you are finally reunited with yours and you are both resting in peace," wrote a third. "May you rest peacefully in the arms of your forever love. I'm so sorry that you never felt safe to be your authentic self. Your bravery followed you beyond death," added a fourth. "I hope Edward and Paul are reunited now, in love for eternity. Nobody should have to spend a lifetime hiding who they are and who they love," another commenter wrote. Image: Legacy.com

Relationships

Air travel exposes you to radiation – how much health risk comes with it?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/timothy-j-jorgensen-239253">Timothy J. Jorgensen</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/georgetown-university-1239">Georgetown University</a> In 2017, <a href="http://www.independent.ie/business/world/18-million-miles-and-counting-the-globes-top-business-traveller-35666790.html">business traveler Tom Stuker</a> was hailed as the world’s most frequent flyer, logging 18,000,000 miles of air travel on United Airlines over 14 years. That’s a lot of time up in the air. If Stuker’s traveling behaviors are typical of other business flyers, he may have eaten 6,500 <a href="http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=689041">inflight meals</a>, drunk 5,250 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8305.2009.00339.x">alcoholic beverages</a>, watched thousands of <a href="http://www.iata.org/publications/store/Pages/global-passenger-survey.aspx">inflight movies</a> and made around 10,000 visits to <a href="http://blog.thetravelinsider.info/2012/11/how-many-restrooms-are-enough-on-a-plane.html">airplane toilets</a>. He would also have accumulated a radiation dose equivalent to about 1,000 <a href="https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=safety-xray">chest x-rays</a>. But what kind of health risk does all that radiation actually pose? <h2>Cosmic rays coming at you</h2> You might guess that a frequent flyer’s radiation dose is coming from the airport security checkpoints, with their whole-body scanners and baggage x-ray machines, but you’d be wrong. The <a href="http://www.aapm.org/publicgeneral/AirportScannersPressRelease.asp">radiation doses to passengers from these security procedures</a> are trivial. The major source of radiation exposure from air travel comes from the flight itself. This is because at high altitude the <a href="http://www.altitude.org/why_less_oxygen.php">air gets thinner</a>. The farther you go from the Earth’s surface, the fewer molecules of gas there are per volume of space. Thinner air thus means fewer molecules to deflect incoming <a href="http://www.space.com/32644-cosmic-rays.html">cosmic rays</a> – radiation from outer space. With less <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/earth/atmosphere_and_climate/atmosphere">atmospheric shielding</a>, there is more exposure to radiation. The most extreme situation is for astronauts who travel entirely outside of the Earth’s atmosphere and enjoy none of its protective shielding. Consequently, they receive high radiation doses. In fact, it is the accumulation of radiation dose that is the limiting factor for the maximum length of manned space flights. Too long in space and <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/hrp/bodyinspace">astronauts risk cataracts, cancer and potential heart ailments</a> when they get back home. Indeed, it’s the radiation dose problem that is a major spoiler for <a href="http://www.space.com/34210-elon-musk-unveils-spacex-mars-colony-ship.html">Elon Musk’s goal of inhabiting Mars</a>. An extended stay on Mars, with its <a href="http://www.space.com/16903-mars-atmosphere-climate-weather.html">extremely thin atmosphere</a>, would be lethal due to the high radiation doses, notwithstanding Matt Damon’s successful Mars colonization in the movie <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej3ioOneTy8">“The Martian</a>.” <h2>Radiation risks of ultra frequent flying</h2> What would be Stuker’s cumulative radiation dose and what are his health risks? It depends entirely on how much time he has spent in the air. Assuming an <a href="http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JobyJosekutty.shtml">average flight speed</a> (550 mph), Stuker’s 18,000,000 miles would translate into 32,727 hours (3.7 years) of flight time. The radiation dose rate at typical <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/why-do-planes-fly-so-high-feet/">commercial airline flight altitude</a> (35,000 feet) is about <a href="https://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/commercialflights.html">0.003 millisieverts per hour</a>. (As I explain in my book <a href="http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10691.html">“Strange Glow: The Story of Radiation</a>,” a millisievert or mSv is a unit of radiation dose that can be used to estimate cancer risk.) By multiplying the dose rate by the hours of flight time, we can see that Stuker has earned himself about 100 mSv of radiation dose, in addition to a lot of free airline tickets. But what does that mean for his health? The primary health threat at this dose level is an increased risk of some type of cancer later in life. Studies of atomic bomb victims, nuclear workers and medical radiation patients have <a href="https://doi.org/10.17226/11340">allowed scientists to estimate the cancer risk</a> for any particular radiation dose. All else being equal and assuming that low doses have risk levels proportionate to high doses, then an overall cancer risk rate of <a href="http://www.imagewisely.org/imaging-modalities/computed-tomography/medical-physicists/articles/how-to-understand-and-communicate-radiation-risk">0.005 percent per mSv</a> is a reasonable and commonly used estimate. Thus, Stuker’s 100-mSv dose would increase his lifetime risk of contracting a potentially fatal cancer by about 0.5 percent. <h2>Contextualizing the risk</h2> The question then becomes whether that’s a high level of risk. Your own feeling might depend on how you see your background cancer risk. Most people <a href="http://www.who.int/whr/2002/chapter3/en/index4.html">underestimate their personal risk of dying from cancer</a>. Although the exact number is debatable, it’s fair to say that <a href="https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-basics/lifetime-probability-of-developing-or-dying-from-cancer.html">about 25 percent of men ultimately contract a potentially fatal cancer</a>. Stuker’s 0.5 percent cancer risk from radiation should be added to his baseline risk – so it would go from 25 percent to 25.5 percent. A cancer risk increase of that size is too small to actually measure in any scientific way, so it must remain a theoretical increase in risk. A 0.5 percent increase in risk is the same as one chance in 200 of getting cancer. In other words, if 200 male travelers logged 18,000,000 miles of air travel, like Stuker did, we might expect just one of them to contract a cancer thanks to his flight time. The other 199 travelers would suffer no health effects. So the chances that Stuker is the specific 18-million-mile traveler who would be so unlucky is quite small. Stuker was logging more air hours per year (greater than 2,000) than most pilots typically log (<a href="http://work.chron.com/duty-limitations-faa-pilot-17646.html">under 1,000</a>). So these airline workers would have risk levels proportionately lower than Stuker’s. But what about you? If you want to know your personal cancer risk from flying, estimate all of your commercial airline miles over the years. Assuming that the values and parameters for speed, radiation dose and risk stated above for Stuker are also true for you, dividing your total miles by 3,700,000,000 will give your approximate odds of getting cancer from your flying time. For example, let’s pretend that you have a mathematically convenient 370,000 total flying miles. That would mean 370,000 miles divided by 3,700,000,000, which comes out to be 1/10,000 odds of contracting cancer (or a 0.01 percent increase in risk). Most people do not fly 370,000 miles (equal to 150 flights from Los Angeles to New York) within their lifetimes. So for the average flyer, the increased risk is far less than 0.01 percent. To make your exercise complete, make a list of all the benefits that you’ve derived from your air travel over your lifetime (job opportunities, vacation travel, family visits and so on) and go back and look at your increased cancer risk again. If you think your benefits have been meager compared to your elevated cancer risk, maybe its time to rethink flying. But for many people today, flying is a necessity of life, and the small elevated cancer risk is worth the price.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78790/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/timothy-j-jorgensen-239253">Timothy J. Jorgensen</a>, Director of the Health Physics and Radiation Protection Graduate Program and Professor of Radiation Medicine, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/georgetown-university-1239">Georgetown University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/air-travel-exposes-you-to-radiation-how-much-health-risk-comes-with-it-78790">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Trouble

Where did money come from?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steven-hail-1302961">Steven Hail</a>, <a href="https://www.torrens.edu.au/">Torrens University Australia</a> For the most part, economists continue to believe a story of money told to generations of students by a series of textbooks over the past 150 years. This story asks us to imagine a pre-monetary barter economy, where people bought goods and services by trading them for other goods and services. Eventually a suitable commodity – perhaps gold or silver – emerged as both an acceptable means of exchange for conducting trade and a convenient unit of account for expressing value. Later, coins were issued – eventually to be monopolised by governments – and later still paper money, credit, and banking systems. The problem with this story is that there is no historical evidence to support it. As was <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2802221?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">noted</a> by prominent anthropologist Caroline Humphreys: <blockquote> No example of a barter economy, pure and simple, has ever been described, let alone the emergence from it of money … all available ethnography suggests that there has never been such a thing. </blockquote> So where did money come from exactly? One difficulty we face is that writing about money – what gives it value, and how monetary systems work – is not something young economists are generally encouraged to do. As a consequence, among the best articles ever written about money are two now more than 100 years old by British economist Alfred Mitchell-Innes, entitled “<a href="https://www.community-exchange.org/docs/what%20is%20money.htm">What is Money</a>?” and “<a href="https://cooperative-individualism.org/innes-a-mitchell_credit-theory-of-money-1914-dec-jan.pdf">The Credit Theory of Money</a>”. These papers, until recently almost completely ignored by the economics profession, tell a different story, rejecting the idea that money evolved naturally from barter. We can now be confident this version is closer to the truth. And it has big implications for how we think about the role of governments within monetary systems, and what gives money value. Acknowledging the true story of money would force a paradigm shift among economists – no wonder a lot of them don’t want to think about it. <h2>Actually, early governments invented money</h2> The truth is that money predates markets. <a href="https://youtu.be/7cLDFjTt4Bs?si=fDTafcZD_u1S23kD">Governments invented money</a> – it did not emerge independently from pre-existing barter systems. Market economies simply could not develop until money existed. For much of history, the currency tokens people regarded as money had little or no intrinsic value, taking the form of clay tablets, hazelwood tally sticks, base metals, shells or paper. The earliest forms of what Keynes called “modern money” – to distinguish it from gift tokens used for ceremonial purposes in communal groups – go back to the origins of taxation, accounting, and even literacy and numeracy. These early currencies were units of account used to assess the tributes that had to be paid to early governmental institutions in the Middle East. The word shekel is still used as a currency unit, but dates to ancient Babylon and the emergence of money itself, over 5,000 years ago. The idea that the need to pay taxes is what creates a demand for a currency was well understood by colonial governments. They knew how to introduce their currencies into countries they had invaded. To force locals to supply labour or goods to the government, they imposed a tax liability – often, a hut tax. This tax could only be paid using the currency of the colony. Locals had to either work for the colonial government or supply goods to others who did, else they wouldn’t have the specific currency needed to pay taxes. This created a demand for the colonial power’s currency, which the government could then spend. If such a government spent more overall than it withdrew in taxation – running a budget deficit – the community could add the remaining currency to its savings. Taxation and the legal system created a demand for the government’s money and provided the impetus for the development of a monetary economy. Even today, it’s the tax system that drives the monetary system. Demand for a government’s money is guaranteed because people need it to pay federal taxes. <h2>But banks create money too</h2> Actual physical cash makes up a tiny proportion of the money in circulation. Most of what we regard as money is held in our bank deposits, effectively a bunch of numbers on a ledger. Most of these bank deposits are created by banks when they make loans to us, and this is not government money at all – it is private money, created by the banks themselves. When a bank makes a loan to you, that loan becomes an asset for the bank, because you have to pay it back with interest. But at the same time, the loan appears as a deposit of funds in your account, which is a liability for the bank. Technically, you both owe each other. On paper, this means there’s now money in the system that wasn’t there before. The bank hasn’t actually lent you someone else’s money, the loan deposited in your account represents the bank’s IOU to you. Both the loan and the deposit are created by the bank, using nothing more than a computer keyboard. The bank has promised to use its holdings of government money to make payments on your behalf, including tax payments to the government, or to provide you with government money in the form of physical cash. As economist Hyman Minsky once said, “anyone can create money – the problem lies in getting it accepted”. Obviously, private banks don’t issue government currency. The Commonwealth government and its agent, the Reserve Bank of Australia, sit at the top of our own monetary system. Government-issued currency will always have value because it’s the unit of account needed to assess and pay our taxes. How much value the currency holds depends on how much the economy produces, how difficult it is to obtain the currency and on how much tax we have to pay. Here is some food for thought. If we accept that money and markets did not emerge naturally but had to be created by governmental institutions and legal systems, this means that there is no such thing as a genuinely free market, no such thing as a natural rate of unemployment, and no such thing as a natural distribution of income and wealth. The theory that money emerged naturally in the private sector encourages people to believe that free markets are natural systems in which governments only interfere. But in truth, early governments invented the very institutions of money and markets, and the regulatory frameworks that determined how those markets work and in whose interests. Exchange economies have always depended on systems of law and they always will. The more pertinent question concerns who writes those laws – and in whose interests those regulations are applied. <hr /> Correction: This article has been amended to reflect that a loan deposit represents a bank’s IOU to the customer, not to a bank’s other customers, as originally reported.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/229481/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <hr /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steven-hail-1302961">Steven Hail</a>, Associate Professor, <a href="https://www.torrens.edu.au/">Torrens University Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/where-did-money-come-from-229481">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

"I am so lost without you": Sam Rubin's son speaks out

Sam Rubin’s son has delivered an emotional on-air tribute to his late dad just days after his <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/health/caring/legendary-today-show-reporter-dies-unexpectedly" target="_blank" rel="noopener">passing</a>. The entertainment reporter died unexpectedly at the age of 64, after reportedly suffering a heart attack in his Los Angeles home last Friday. He worked for LA TV station KTLA as their entertainment reporter, and was a regular guest on Aussie programs like Today and Today Extra. Colby Rubin, the youngest of the reporter's four children, joined KTLA 5 Morning News on Monday to reflect on his father's death. “Hi dad. I wrote this under the desk in your cubicle – only you weren’t there to wake me up this time. Dad, I can’t believe you’re gone,” the 16-year-old began. “I love you so much. On the day you died, I hope you heard me say that. You were the kindest soul, the light in every room. I can’t imagine my life without you... You were always there.” He said he idolised his father calling him his hero, and said: “I never got to tell you that, and I’m so sorry dad.” Colby then shared some of their private texts showing how encouraging his father was when he was unsure of himself, telling him: "You can do this,” and "you have every gift. Respect your own talent." At this point, Colby was overwhelmed with emotion, with the hosts telling him he could take a break but the teen powered on. “I can’t believe I’ve lost you. I had more of a father in 16 years than some people get in their entire lives, and I’m so grateful. "You are a beautiful human and you will never be forgotten. Dad I love you. I am so lost without you, I’ll miss you every day. I hope you know how loved you are.” Colby's tribute left his father's colleagues in tears with one co-host telling him simply: “He knew.” “He would be so proud of you. All of us are parents, we all can say – that is the most beautiful thing I’ve ever heard,” another said as she fought back tears. Viewers praised Colby for his “strength and composure” in delivering such an emotional tribute just days after losing his father. “Amazing how Colby was able to do this with such grace, strength, and composure. You can tell Sam was an amazing father through Colby’s tribute,” TV anchor Stephanie Myers wrote on X. Sam is survived by his wife Leslie and four children: Perry, 28, Rory, 23, Darcy, 18, and Colby. Image: KTLA/ X

Family & Pets

Dodgy tactic to keep driver's licence growing "out of control"

A criminal lawyer has exposed an alarming trend, which has caused more and more people to seek legal advice. Over the past year, there has been an increase in the number of drivers off-loading their demerit points to strangers in exchange for cash, as Aussies desperately try to keep their licences. The illegal tactic is often advertised on social media, where users attract those looking for someone to falsely nominate and palm off their demerit points to. The price of one demerit point can go for $30-$150, and criminal lawyer Jahan Kalantar revealed that more people are seeking legal advice after getting involved in the trend. "This used to be a very tiny part of my practice, I do about eight to nine consultations a week on this," he told 7News Sunrise. "This is becoming really out of control." <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/dodgy-drivers-licence-tactic-used-by-millions-growing-out-of-control-044254123.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Yahoo Australia </a>shared a screenshot of a chat obtained from Facebook, which showed a person responding to an ad someone put up about selling their demerit points. "What fine is it?" the person advertising asked. "Speeding," the person replied. "Yeah I can sort it out for you," they said. When asked how it would work the advertiser replied: "If it's under 5 points it's $80 a point". There are tough penalties for those who choose to falsely nominate another driver, and for those who trade their demerit points for cash. In Victoria, offenders face fines of $9,000, while those in NSW and Queensland cop a maximum penalty of $11,000. In addition to hefty fines, imprisonment is also a risk, with one high-profile incident in 2006 landing former federal court judge Marcus Einfeld in prison after he was caught falsely declaring another driver for his speeding fine. Images: 7NEWS/ Facebook

Legal

Terminal lucidity: why do loved ones with dementia sometimes ‘come back’ before death?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yen-ying-lim-355185">Yen Ying Lim</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/diny-thomson-1519736">Diny Thomson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> Dementia is often described as “the long goodbye”. Although the person is still alive, dementia slowly and irreversibly chips away at their memories and the qualities that make someone “them”. Dementia eventually takes away the person’s ability to communicate, eat and drink on their own, understand where they are, and recognise family members. Since as early as the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21764150/">19th century</a>, stories from loved ones, caregivers and health-care workers have described some people with dementia suddenly becoming lucid. They have described the person engaging in meaningful conversation, sharing memories that were assumed to have been lost, making jokes, and even requesting meals. It is estimated <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20010032/">43% of people</a> who experience this brief lucidity die within 24 hours, and 84% within a week. Why does this happen? <h2>Terminal lucidity or paradoxical lucidity?</h2> In 2009, researchers Michael Nahm and Bruce Greyson coined the term “<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21764150/">terminal lucidity</a>”, since these lucid episodes often occurred shortly before death. But not all lucid episodes indicate death is imminent. <a href="https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.13667">One study</a> found many people with advanced dementia will show brief glimmers of their old selves more than six months before death. Lucidity has also been <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167494311001865?via%3Dihub">reported</a> in other conditions that affect the brain or thinking skills, such as meningitis, schizophrenia, and in people with brain tumours or who have sustained a brain injury. Moments of lucidity that do not necessarily indicate death are sometimes called <a href="https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.12579">paradoxical lucidity</a>. It is considered paradoxical as it defies the expected course of neurodegenerative diseases such as dementia. But it’s important to note these episodes of lucidity are temporary and sadly do not represent a reversal of neurodegenerative disease. <h2>Why does terminal lucidity happen?</h2> Scientists have struggled to explain why terminal lucidity happens. Some episodes of lucidity have been reported to occur in the presence of loved ones. Others have reported that <a href="https://psywb.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13612-014-0024-5">music can sometimes improve lucidity</a>. But many episodes of lucidity do not have a distinct trigger. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300957223002162">A research team from New York University</a> speculated that changes in brain activity before death may cause terminal lucidity. But this doesn’t fully explain why people suddenly recover abilities that were assumed to be lost. Paradoxical and terminal lucidity are also very difficult to study. Not everyone with advanced dementia will experience episodes of lucidity before death. Lucid episodes are also unpredictable and typically occur without a particular trigger. And as terminal lucidity can be a joyous time for those who witness the episode, it would be unethical for scientists to use that time to conduct their research. At the time of death, it’s also difficult for scientists to interview caregivers about any lucid moments that may have occurred. Explanations for terminal lucidity extend beyond science. These moments of mental clarity may be a way for the dying person to say final goodbyes, gain closure before death, and reconnect with family and friends. Some believe episodes of terminal lucidity are representative of the person connecting with an afterlife. <h2>Why is it important to know about terminal lucidity?</h2> People can have a variety of reactions to seeing terminal lucidity in a person with advanced dementia. While some will experience it as being peaceful and bittersweet, others may find it deeply confusing and upsetting. There may also be an urge to modify care plans and request lifesaving measures for the dying person. Being aware of terminal lucidity can help loved ones understand it is part of the dying process, acknowledge the person with dementia will not recover, and allow them to make the most of the time they have with the lucid person. For those who witness it, terminal lucidity can be a final, precious opportunity to reconnect with the person that existed before dementia took hold and the “long goodbye” began.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202342/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yen-ying-lim-355185">Yen Ying Lim</a>, Associate Professor, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/diny-thomson-1519736">Diny Thomson</a>, PhD (Clinical Neuropsychology) Candidate and Provisional Psychologist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/terminal-lucidity-why-do-loved-ones-with-dementia-sometimes-come-back-before-death-202342">original article</a>. </div>

Mind

"An insult to human dignity": Mother of Bondi stabbing victim hits out at the media

The mother of Bondi stabbing victim Jade Young has hit out at how social media and major news outlets reported on her daughter's death. Jade Young, 47, was one of six people fatally stabbed by Joel Cauchi during his violent rampage at Bondi Junction Westfield on April 13th. Following the tragedy, graphic videos and images of the attacks were circulated online. Now, Jade's mother Elizabeth Young, writing in the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/my-daughter-was-killed-in-the-bondi-junction-attack-how-my-family-found-out-is-shameful-20240429-p5fnbw.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sydney Morning Herald</a> on Wednesday, said it was “shameful” how her family found out about Jade’s death. “Members of my family recognised Jade and her husband Noel in uncensored vision being played on a mainstream TV news feed, with vision of Jade lying on the ground at the shopping centre, receiving CPR,” she wrote. “The vision, shared on social media and picked up — and used by — multiple news media programs shared my daughter’s final moments with millions. Finding out that a loved one has been murdered is a horror that I do not wish on anyone. But seeing the vision of their last moments and knowing it has been broadcast to millions of people is an appalling breach of privacy and an insult to human dignity.” Ms Young went on to say how some of the major media organisations that shared violent images of the Bondi stabbing “approached our family within hours of the attack, offering their condolences … and the opportunity to share our family’s story”. “These same media organisations reported the failure of a certain popular social media platform to take down videos, without acknowledging their own complicity,” she said. “I am not surprised at their hypocrisy, but I am angry.” “Sharing violent images or personal material from the lives of victims of crime is not free speech — it is enormously profitable for some but it’s speech with a steep price for the victims,” she said. “Those who run social media platforms are remote from the pain inflicted by their uploads and the dystopia they have helped create. It is the victims who bear the cost.” Last week, hundreds of mourners attended a public memorial for Ms Young, an acclaimed architect and mother-of-two, where mourners were encouraged to wear colourful clothing “in memory of Jade”. Image credits: Getty Images / Facebook

Family & Pets

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-garvin-1453835">Nick Garvin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> If just one state of Australia, New South Wales, scrapped its stamp duty on real-estate transactions, about 100,000 more Australians would move homes each year, according to our <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stamp-duty-effects-on-purchases-and-moves.pdf">best estimates</a>. Stamp duty is an unquestioned part of buying a home in Australia – you put your details in an online mortgage calculator, and stamp duty is automatically deducted from the amount you have to contribute. It’s easy to overlook how much more affordable a home would be without it. That means it’s also easy to overlook how much more Australians would buy and move if stamp duty wasn’t there. The 2010 Henry Tax Review found stamp duty was <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/afts_final_report_part_2_vol_1_consolidated.pdf">inequitable</a>. It taxes most the people who most need to or want to move. The review reported: "Ideally, there would be no role for any stamp duties, including conveyancing stamp duties, in a modern Australian tax system. Recognising the revenue needs of the States, the removal of stamp duty should be achieved through a switch to more efficient taxes, such as those levied on broad consumption or land bases." But does stamp duty actually stop anyone moving? It’s a claim more often made than assessed, which is what our team at the <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stamp-duty-effects-on-purchases-and-moves.pdf">e61 Institute</a> set out to do. We used real-estate transaction data and a natural experiment. <h2>What happened when Queensland hiked stamp duty</h2> In 2011, Queensland hiked stamp duty for most buyers by removing some concessions for owner-occupiers at short notice. For owner-occupiers it increased stamp duty by about one percentage point, lifting the average rate from 1.26% of the purchase price to 2.27%. What we found gives us the best estimate to date of what stamp duty does to home purchases. A one percentage point increase in stamp duty causes the number of home purchases to decline by 7.2%. The number of moves (changes of address) falls by about as much. The effect appears to be indiscriminate. Purchases of houses fell about as much as purchases of apartments, and purchases in cities fell about as much as purchases in regions. Moves between suburbs and moves interstate dropped by similar rates. With NSW stamp duty currently averaging about <a href="https://conveyancing.com.au/need-to-know/stamp-duty-nsw">3.5%</a> of the purchase price, our estimates suggest there would be about 25% more purchases and moves by home owners if it were scrapped completely. That’s 100,000 moves. Victoria’s higher rate of stamp duty, about <a href="https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/rates-taxes-duties-and-levies/general-land-transfer-duty-property-current-rates">4.2%</a>, means if it was scrapped there would be about 30% more purchases. That’s another 90,000 moves. <h2>Even low headline rates have big effects</h2> The big effect from small-looking headline rates ought not to be surprising. When someone buys a home, they typically front up much less cash than the purchase price. While stamp duty seems low as a percentage of the purchase price, it is high as a percentage of the cash the buyer needs to find. Here’s an example. If stamp duty is 4% of the purchase price, and a purchaser pays $800,000 for a property with a mortgage deposit of $160,000, the $32,000 stamp duty adds 20%, not 4%, to what’s needed. If the deposit takes five years to save, stamp duty makes it six. A similar thing happens when an owner-occupier changes address. If the buyer sells a fully owned home for $700,000 and buys a new home for $800,000, the upgrade ought to cost them $100,000. A 4% stamp duty lifts that to $132,000. Averaged across all Australian cities, stamp duty costs about <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stepped-on-by-Stamp-Duty.pdf">five months</a> of after-tax earnings. In Sydney and Melbourne, it’s six. <h2>Stamp duty has bracket creep</h2> This cost has steadily climbed from around <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stepped-on-by-Stamp-Duty.pdf">six weeks</a> of total earnings in the 1990s. It has happened because home prices have climbed faster than incomes and because stamp duty has brackets, meaning more buyers have been pushed into higher ones. Replacing the stamp duty revenue that states have come to rely on would not be easy, but a switch would almost certainly help the economy function better. The more that people are able to move, the more they will move to jobs to which they are better suited, boosting productivity. The more that people downsize when they want to, the more housing will be made available for others. Our findings suggest the costs are far from trivial, making a switch away from stamp duty worthwhile, even if it is disruptive and takes time.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225773/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-garvin-1453835">Nick Garvin</a>, Adjunct Fellow, Department of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stamp-duty-is-holding-us-back-from-moving-homes-weve-worked-out-how-much-225773">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Insider spills on Robert Irwin's plans for I'm a Celeb

Robert Irwin received rave reviews for his co-hosting skills alongside Julia Morris on this year's I'm a Celebrity...Get Me Out of Here, but an insider has claimed that he won't be returning for another season. "His easygoing and faultless live TV skills have won over the nation. But his career at Ten will only be short-lived, and he is heading back to Seven," a source told Woman's Day. The negotiation is believed to have been orchestrated by the ultimate "mumager" Terri Irwin. "The Irwins are very smart when it comes to negotiations," the insider added. The source also claimed that Robert's decision to join I'm a Celebrity was seen as a one-off opportunity to elevate his television profile - which he has achieved after bringing fresh energy into the show. Channel Seven is reportedly keen to welcome Robert back with a massive deal, according to the source. "Seven want Robert back and have thrown a king's ransom at him," they said. If the deal goes through, Julia Morris will have to find a new partner to head to the jungle with. Many fans have praised Robert for bringing some fun into the jungle. "I have not ever been keen on watching this show but Robert you have brought some class and good honest fun to the jungle. Thank you," one fan wrote under a clip of the show's grand finale that Robert posted on his Instagram. "How awesome was Robert? This gig was like it was made for him. What a natural," another added. "Best year of I'm a Celebrity, and it was because you added something to the show as Co-Host. Brilliant job for somebody with no experience but with a lot to give," commented a third. Images: Instagram

"I'm shocked": Queen of the jungle crowned in I'm a Celeb finale

The 2024 season of I’m A Celebrity … Get Me Out Of Here! has concluded with the coronation of a new monarch. No, it’s not some royal lineage we’re talking about; it’s the queen of reality TV herself, Skye Wheatley. After weeks of enduring the culinary horrors of the jungle and the occasional emotional breakdown, Australia has spoken and Skye is officially their jungle royalty. Her reign over the camp was nothing short of spectacular, featuring riveting moments such as her triumph over creepy crawlies, her dramatic monologues about missing Wi-Fi, and of course, her unforgettable friendship with that one tree that seemed oddly supportive. In an “incredibly close” result that had us all on the edge of our seats (or couches, let’s be real), Skye managed to outshine her fellow campmates and secure the coveted title of Jungle Queen. But it wasn’t just about the glory; it was about the charity, too. Skye walked away with $100,000 for Bully Zero, proving once and for all that you can battle both bullies and bugs and emerge victorious. In her post-victory interview, Skye expressed her shock at the win, saying, “I’m shocked.” Truly, her eloquence knows no bounds. “I feel absolutely blessed to have had this opportunity, and to go through the things I went through with these boys.” But behind those eloquent words lies the heart of a true champion, one who faced her fears head-on and emerged triumphant, all while looking fabulous in a khaki jumpsuit. Before her jungle adventure, Skye confessed that she thought the public expected her to “fall flat on my face”. Well, Skye, the joke’s on them because you soared like a majestic eagle, or at least like a slightly disoriented possum. And let’s not forget the emotional rollercoaster that was the finale. Tears flowed like the Brisbane River as the top three reunited with their loved ones. It was a moment of pure emotion, a stark contrast to the usual scenes of celebrities eating bugs for our entertainment. As we bid farewell to another season of jungle shenanigans, we can’t help but reflect on the memories created, the friendships forged, and the questionable food choices made. Here’s to Skye Wheatley, the queen of our hearts and the jungle alike. Long may she reign, or at least until the next season starts. And to all the celebrities who braved the jungle, whether voluntarily or not, we salute you. May your next adventure be slightly less bug-infested and involve significantly more room service. New host Robert Irwin had the last word to longtime host Julia Morris: “From the bottom of my heart, I have loved this so much," he said. "It’s been so much fun.” Images: Network Ten

Judge finds Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins and dismisses Network 10 defamation case. How did it play out?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/brendan-clift-715691">Brendan Clift</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Bruce Lehrmann has lost his defamation suit against Channel Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson after the media defendants proved, on the balance of probabilities, that Lehrmann raped his colleague Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019. After a trial lasting around a month, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee – an experienced defamation judge – concluded that both Lehrmann and Higgins had credibility issues, but ultimately <a href="https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2024/2024fca0369">he was persuaded</a> that Lehrmann raped Higgins, as she’d alleged and he’d denied. <h2>Criminal trials by proxy</h2> Ordinarily, charges like rape would be resolved through the criminal courts, but Lehrmann’s criminal trial was <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/jury-discharged-in-trial-of-bruce-lehrmann-brittany-higgins/101583486">aborted</a> in October 2022 after juror misconduct. The charges against him were soon <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/bruce-lehrmann-sexual-assault-charge-dropped-dpp-confirms/news-story/3f82dd388d2cfa38680f7d4f4ceb1c5e">dropped</a>, nominally over concerns for Higgins’ mental health. Higgins, however, foresaw civil proceedings and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/05/brittany-higgins-volunteered-to-be-defamation-trial-witness-as-she-would-not-let-rapist-become-a-millionaire-ntwnfb">offered to testify</a> should they arise. That they did, as Lehrmann, free from the burden of any proven crime, sued several media outlets for defamation over their reporting into the allegations (<a href="https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services/access-to-files-and-transcripts/online-files/lehrmann">the ABC</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/06/abc-agrees-to-pay-bruce-lehrmann-150000-to-settle-defamation-claim-court-documents-reveal">News Corp</a> both settled out of court). <iframe class="flourish-embed-iframe" style="width: 100%; height: 550px;" title="Interactive or visual content" src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/17195035/embed" width="100%" height="400" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe> <div style="width: 100%!; margin-top: 4px!important; text-align: right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/17195035/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/17195035" target="_top"><img src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg" alt="Made with Flourish" /></a></div> Like Ben Roberts-Smith’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/dismissed-legal-experts-explain-the-judgment-in-the-ben-roberts-smith-defamation-case-191503">recent defamation suit</a> against the former Fairfax papers, this became another case of civil proceedings testing grave allegations in the absence of a criminal law outcome. The form of proceedings made for some key differences with the aborted criminal trial. In criminal cases, prosecutors are ethically bound to act with moderation in pursuing a conviction, which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, while defendants have the right to silence. By contrast, this trial featured detailed accounts from both sides as each sought to convince, in essence, that their contentions were likely to be correct. Also like the Roberts-Smith case, live streaming of the trial generated very high levels of public engagement. Today’s stream reached audiences of more than 45,000 people. It gave us the chance to assess who and what we believe, and to scrutinise the parties’ claims and the media’s reporting. The Federal Court doesn’t have juries, but we, the public, acted as a de facto panel of peers. We saw accusations and denials, revealing <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-23/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-trial-network-ten-lisa-wilkinson-ends/103260752">cross-examination</a> of the protagonists, witness testimony from colleagues, CCTV footage from nightclubs to Parliament House complete with lip-reading, expert testimony on alcohol consumption and consent, and lawyers constructing timelines which supported or poked holes in competing versions of events. The complexity of high-stakes legal proceedings was on display, with Justice Lee issuing many interim decisions on questions of procedure and evidence. Whenever transparency was at stake, it won. The preference for full disclosure led to the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/apr/02/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-trial-network-10-fresh-evidence-bid-lisa-wilkinson-brittany-higgins-delay-ntwnfb">case being re-opened</a> at the eleventh hour to call former Channel 7 producer Taylor Auerbach as a witness, providing a denouement that the judge called “sordid”, but which had little relevance to the final result. <h2>An argument over the truth</h2> Lehrmann had the burden of proving that the defendants published matter harmful to his reputation. That matter was Wilkinson’s interview with Higgins on Channel Ten’s The Project in which the allegations were made. A statement is only defamatory if it’s untrue, but in Australian law, the publisher bears the burden of proving truth, should they opt for that defence. And more serious allegations usually require more compelling proof, as the law views them as inherently more unlikely. This can be onerous for a defamation defendant, but it also involves risk for the plaintiff, should the defendant embark on an odyssey of truth-telling yet more damaging to the plaintiff’s image. That happened to <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-65717684">Ben Roberts-Smith</a> and it happened to Lehrmann here. On the other hand, if the media hasn’t done their homework, as in <a href="https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2023/2023fca1223">Heston Russell’s case</a> against the ABC (also presided over by Justice Lee), the complainant can be vindicated. This case was a manifestation of Lehrmann’s professed desire to “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/26/how-bruce-lehrmanns-media-interviews-cost-him-his-anonymity-in-toowoomba-case">light some fires</a>”. Few players in this extended saga have emerged without scars, and here he burned his own fingers, badly. As Justice Lee put it, Lehrmann, “having escaped the lion’s den [of criminal prosecution], made the mistake of coming back to get his hat”. <h2>How was the case decided?</h2> Lehrmann denied having sex with Higgins, whereas Higgins alleged there had been non-consensual sex. The defamatory nature of the publication centred on the claim of rape, so that was what the media defendants sought to prove. This left open the curious possibility that consensual sex might have taken place: if so, Lehrmann would have brought his case on a false premise (there had been no sex), but the media would have failed to defend it (by not proving a lack of consent), resulting in a Lehrmann win. That awkward scenario did not arise. The court found sex did in fact take place, Higgins in her heavily-inebriated and barely-conscious state did not give consent, and Lehrmann was so intent on his gratification that he ignored the requirement of consent. Justice Lee found Lehrmann to be a persistent, self-interested liar, whereas Higgin’s credibility issues were of lesser degree, some symptomatic of a person piecing together a part-remembered trauma. The judge drew strongly on the evidence of certain neutral parties who could testify to incidents or words spoken in close proximity to the events. <h2>Defamation laws favour the aggrieved</h2> Australian defamation law has historically favoured plaintiffs and, despite recent <a href="https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/civil/defamation/2021-law-reform/">rebalancing attempts</a>, it remains a favoured legal weapon for those with the resources to use it. This includes our political class, who sue their critics for defamation with unhealthy frequency for a democracy. In the United States, public figures don’t have it so easy: to win they must prove their critics were lying. In Australia, the media sometimes succeeds in proving truth, but contesting defamation proceedings comes at great financial cost and takes an emotional toll on the journalists involved. Nor can a true claim always be proven to a court’s satisfaction, given the rules of evidence and the fact that sources may be reluctant to testify or protected by a reporter’s guarantee of confidentiality. But this case demonstrates that publishers with an appetite for the legal fight can come out on top.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225891/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/brendan-clift-715691">Brendan Clift</a>, Lecturer of law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/judge-finds-bruce-lehrmann-raped-brittany-higgins-and-dismisses-network-10-defamation-case-how-did-it-play-out-225891">original article</a>.

Legal

"I believe he is alive": Father of young man who jumped off cruise ship speaks out

The father of the young man who jumped off a cruise ship on its way to Florida has spoken out, saying he believes his son is still alive. While the Liberty of the Seas was travelling back from the Dominican Republic on its way to Florida, 20-year-old Levion Parker <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/health/caring/young-man-who-jumped-off-cruise-ship-identified" target="_blank" rel="noopener">jumped overboard</a>. The ship was reportedly about 90km off the southern most island of the Bahamas when the young man, who was allegedly under the influence of alcohol, jumped overboard in the early hours of the morning. Witnesses recounted the harrowing scene, describing how a young man took a spontaneous plunge from one of the ship's decks, despite the desperate pleas and helplessness of his father and brother who stood witness to the impulsive act. After days of searching, the US coast guard called off their search for the young man. Now, Legion's father Francel said he believes his son is still alive. “As soon as he went off the side, I prayed over him. I was confident the prayers I said over my son were heard. I stand on the word of God. I believe he is alive,” Mr Parker told local Florida paper, the <a href="https://www.yoursun.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daily Sun, </a>on Wednesday. Francel went open to say that he threw six life rings off the ship in hopes of saving his son before the vessel was able to come to a stop about 20 minutes later. When news broke onboard of the tragedy, travellers reported that many people came out of their cabins to stare at the sea, hoping to be able to spot the young man in the water. Levion was reportedly “drunk” on the night of the incident, although details around this are unclear as the minimum age to consume alcohol on Royal Caribbean ships on voyages from North America or the Caribbean is 21. “We don’t drink,” Levion’s father Francel said. “I’d like to know how my son was served so much alcohol.” Francel, who owns an air-conditioning business, was invited, together with his family, aboard the ship as guests of Florida-based air-conditioning wholesalers Tropic Supply to mark the company’s 50th anniversary. Image credits: Facebook

Travel Trouble

No, taking drugs like Ozempic isn’t ‘cheating’ at weight loss or the ‘easy way out’

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clare-collins-7316">Clare Collins</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-newcastle-1060">University of Newcastle</a> Obesity medication that is effective has been a long time coming. Enter semaglutide (sold as Ozempic and Wegovy), which is helping people improve weight-related health, including <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37952131/">lowering the risk</a> of a having a heart attack or stroke, while also silencing “<a href="https://theconversation.com/some-ozempic-users-say-it-silences-food-noise-but-there-are-drug-free-ways-to-stop-thinking-about-food-so-much-208467">food noise</a>”. As demand for semaglutide increases, so are <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/health-and-wellness/in-a-fat-phobic-world-ozempic-is-hardly-the-easy-way-out-20240401-p5fgjd.html">claims</a> that taking it is “cheating” at weight loss or the “easy way out”. We don’t tell people who need statin medication to treat high cholesterol or drugs to manage high blood pressure they’re cheating or taking the easy way out. Nor should we shame people taking semaglutide. It’s a drug used to treat diabetes and obesity which needs to be taken long term and comes with risks and side effects, as well as benefits. When prescribed for obesity, it’s given alongside advice about diet and exercise. <h2>How does it work?</h2> Semaglutide is a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLP-1_receptor_agonist">glucagon-like peptide-1</a> receptor agonist (GLP-1RA). This means it makes your body’s own glucagon-like peptide-1 hormone, called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucagon-like_peptide-1">GLP-1</a> for short, work better. GLP-1 gets secreted by cells in your gut when it <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38218319/">detects increased nutrient levels</a> after eating. This stimulates insulin production, which lowers blood sugars. GLP-1 also slows gastric emptying, which makes you feel full, and reduces hunger and feelings of reward after eating. <iframe id="tc-infographic-1031" class="tc-infographic" style="border: none;" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/1031/c11b606581d4bc58a71f066492d7f740b52c04e1/site/index.html" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) medications like Ozempic help the body’s own GLP-1 work better by mimicking and extending its action. Some studies have found less GLP-1 gets released after meals in <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38218319/">adults with obesity or type 2 diabetes mellitus</a> compared to adults with normal glucose tolerance. So having less GLP-1 circulating in your blood means you don’t feel as full after eating and get hungry again sooner compared to people who produce more. GLP-1 has a very short half-life of about <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28443255/">two minutes</a>. So GLP-1RA medications were designed to have a very long half-life of about <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33567185/">seven days</a>. That’s why semaglutide is given as a weekly injection. <h2>What can users expect? What does the research say?</h2> Higher doses of semaglutide are prescribed to treat obesity compared to type 2 diabetes management (up to 2.4mg versus 2.0mg weekly). A large group of <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36691309/">randomised controlled trials</a>, called STEP trials, all tested weekly 2.4mg semaglutide injections versus different interventions or placebo drugs. Trials lasting 1.3–2 years consistently found weekly 2.4 mg semaglutide injections <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36691309/">led to 6–12% greater weight loss</a> compared to placebo or alternative interventions. The average weight change depended on how long medication treatment lasted and length of follow-up. Weight reduction due to semaglutide also leads to a <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36769420/">reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure</a> of about 4.8 mmHg and 2.5 mmHg respectively, a reduction in <a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/triglycerides">triglyceride levels</a> (a type of blood fat) and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38041774/">improved physical function</a>. Another recent trial in adults with pre-existing heart disease and obesity, but without type 2 diabetes, found adults receiving weekly 2.4mg semaglutide injections had a <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37952131/">20% lower risk</a> of specific cardiovascular events, including having a non-fatal heart attack, a stroke or dying from cardiovascular disease, after three years follow-up. <h2>Who is eligible for semaglutide?</h2> Australia’s regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), has <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/safety/shortages/information-about-major-medicine-shortages/about-ozempic-semaglutide-shortage-2022-and-2023">approved</a> semaglutide, sold as Ozempic, for treating type 2 diabetes. However, due to shortages, the TGA had advised doctors not to start new Ozempic prescriptions for “off-label use” such as obesity treatment and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme doesn’t currently subsidise off-label use. The TGA has <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/resources/prescription-medicines-registrations/wegovy-novo-nordisk-pharmaceuticals-pty-ltd">approved Wegovy to treat obesity</a> but it’s not currently available in Australia. When it’s available, doctors will be able to prescribe <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36934408/">semaglutide to treat obesity</a> in conjunction with lifestyle interventions (including diet, physical activity and psychological support) in adults with obesity (a BMI of 30 or above) or those with a BMI of 27 or above who also have weight-related medical complications. <h2>What else do you need to do during Ozempic treatment?</h2> Checking details of the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36691309/">STEP trial intervention components</a>, it’s clear participants invested a lot of time and effort. In addition to taking medication, people had brief lifestyle counselling sessions with dietitians or other health professionals every four weeks as a minimum in most trials. Support sessions were designed to help people stick with consuming 2,000 kilojoules (500 calories) less daily compared to their energy needs, and performing 150 minutes of <a href="https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/tips-for-getting-active">moderate-to-vigorous physical activity</a>, like brisk walking, dancing and gardening each week. STEP trials varied in other components, with follow-up time periods varying from 68 to 104 weeks. The aim of these trials was to show the effect of adding the medication on top of other lifestyle counselling. A <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38041774/">review of obesity medication trials</a> found people reported they needed less <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28652832/">cognitive behaviour training</a> to help them stick with the reduced energy intake. This is one aspect where drug treatment may make adherence a little easier. Not feeling as hungry and having environmental food cues “switched off” may mean less support is required for goal-setting, self-monitoring food intake and <a href="https://theconversation.com/9-ways-wont-power-is-better-than-willpower-for-resisting-temptation-and-helping-you-eat-better-71267">avoiding things that trigger eating</a>. <h2>But what are the side effects?</h2> Semaglutide’s side-effects <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38041774/">include</a> nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, constipation, indigestion and abdominal pain. In one study these <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33567185/">led to</a> discontinuation of medication in 6% of people, but interestingly also in 3% of people taking placebos. More severe side-effects included gallbladder disease, acute pancreatitis, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney disease and injection site reactions. To reduce risk or severity of side-effects, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36934408/">medication doses are increased very slowly</a> over months. Once the full dose and response are achieved, research indicates you need to take it long term. Given this long-term commitment, and associated <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/topics/private-health-insurance/what-private-health-insurance-covers/out-of-pocket-costs#:%7E:text=An%20out%20of%20pocket%20cost,called%20gap%20or%20patient%20payments">high out-of-pocket cost of medication</a>, when it comes to taking semaglutide to treat obesity, there is no way it can be considered “cheating”. <hr /> Read the other articles in The Conversation’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/ozempic-series-154673">Ozempic series</a> here.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/219116/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clare-collins-7316">Clare Collins</a>, Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-newcastle-1060">University of Newcastle</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-taking-drugs-like-ozempic-isnt-cheating-at-weight-loss-or-the-easy-way-out-219116">original article</a>.

Body

Viewers stunned after Denise Drysdale booted from I'm a Celeb

The first celebrity has been voted out of this year's I'm A Celebrity...Get Me Out Of Here! Aussie TV legend Denis Drysdale became the first shock elimination of the 2024 series after arriving late in the jungle. While fans and campmates were shocked when Robert Irwin announced the star's name, she was more than happy to return to civilisation. “Oh, it was more than what I expected,” she told the show's hosts, Irwin and Julia Morris. When asked if she felt "bittersweet" about being the first celebrity booted out of the show, she admitted: “Can I say not so bitter?! It’s sweet! I’m sorry, I have to be – I have to be completely honest!” “It is s**t in there!” she continued. “It is s**t, it’s unbelievable! The dunnies, the dirt! Now I’m a clean person – there’s dirt upon dirt upon dirt upon dirt.” “But I’m so glad that I’ve done it. I’ve done it and I’m proud of myself. So I must say thank you to the Celebrity people for giving me the opportunity to prove to myself I can go in there and do it," she added. A few fans took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to express their shock at the decision. “What on earth?!” wrote one. “People saved Callum over DENISE??” added another. Images: Network Ten

"Out-of-touch" Project stars slammed over clash with renter advocate

Social media users have slammed The Project hosts, following their recent interview with a renter advocate who encourages Aussies struggling with the housing crisis to squat in empty homes. Jordan van den Berg, founder of the S*** Rentals website shared a video over the weekend outside a rundown house in Chadstone, Melbourne, saying: “Are you sick of rich people hoarding empty houses during a housing crisis? I know I am." “Here’s how you can do something about it.” He then encouraged people to submit information on empty homes in their suburbs via a form on his website, which he plans to promote on his socials so those struggling to find a home could squat in them. “Fun fact – squatting in Australia is not necessarily illegal, which is the best type of legal, especially if the front door doesn’t actually lock," he said. On Monday, he appeared on The Project to talk about his controversial plans, and was grilled by the show's hosts. “I know we’re in a pretty serious housing crisis, but do you really think encouraging people to squat in private properties is the way to fix it?" asked co-host Sarah Harris. “Let me answer your question by asking you a question. Do you think it’s right we have thousands of vacant, abandoned homes while we have people living on the street?” van de Berg replied. Harris said she didn’t and asked whether the solving the housing crisis should be focused on policy instead. Later in the interview, panellist Steve Price casted his doubts on whether there actually were a lot of vacant homes, but van de Berg replied that he'd received over 300 submissions from Aussies about empty homes in their suburbs. van de Berg also said that desperate people are even squatting in abandoned properties, and added: “If someone needs a house, they can reach out to me and I’ll send them [details about] an empty home." Harris was shocked that people would “basically camp out in abandoned houses with no power" which van den Berg argued that “camping out inside” was likely better than sleeping on the streets or in a park. Co-host Waleed Aly then asked whether van de Berg was encouraging people to break the law, but he pointed out that squatting – done properly – isn’t technically illegal. The interview has been slammed on social media, with Writer and comedian John Delmenico posting on X: “Watching the rich out-of-touch panel on the Project realise in real time that not everyone is rich is so bizarre. "Especially the part where Pingers has to explain that being in a house is safer than sleeping on the street. How do they host the news with no connection to reality?” Others agreed mocking the panellists’ shock that “shelter without electricity is better than no shelter with no electricity”. “She was laughing at the fact that ppl would camp out in abandoned houses with no power/water, until he put her in her place by reminding her they’re better off camping under shelter than outside. Mic drop moment," one wrote. “Homelessness exists … it’s quite a big problem actually," another added. However, a few others agreed with the Project hosts. “Encouraging people to squat, who does he think he is?" one wrote. “He thinks he’s doing a good thing, but he’s given absolutely no critical thought to the implications of encouraging people to take over ‘empty homes’," another added. Leo Patterson Ross, chief executive of the Tenants Union of NSW, said that van den Berg was “drawing attention to issues that government should be acting on”. “In the middle of a housing crisis with growing levels of homelessness, we should be looking to ensure homes are not left vacant,” Patterson Ross said. “If a person leaves a property unattended and empty for 12 years, then I think many of us would agree it seems fair that the community can reclaim usage to provide a home, whether that be individuals or government.” Image: The Project

Legal

Kochie called out over "disgusting" remarks

Port Adelaide president David Koch has come under fire over remarks he made while discussing Jeremy Finlayson's homophobic slur towards another player. Finlayson is under AFL investigation after he admitted to aiming a homophobic slur at an Essendon player on Friday’s game at Adelaide Oval. The player Finlayson directed the comment towards is not yet known, but on Saturday night, Port Adelaide confirmed that a “contrite Finlayson made the club aware during the three-quarter time break” of the incident “and apologised to the victim on the field after the final siren last night”. On Sunday morning, Koch appeared on ABC’s Offsiders to discuss the incident with host Kelli Underwood, veteran journalist Caroline Wilson and AFL footy boss Laura Kane. “There’s no excuse for it. Jeremy was incredibly remorseful, actually told the coaches at three-quarter time that it was inexcusable, went and apologised to the player after the game,” Koch said. “That’s no excuse whatsoever. It’s in the heat of the battle, should not have done it and we’ll wait for the AFL to go through its process.” When discussing what sort of punishment the league could hand down to Finlayson, footy boss Kane questioned whether it may be similar to Taylor Walker's six-week ban after he used a racial slur. But Kochie wasn't on board with linking the two incidents, and said that the the league had set a precedent with the ruling it handed down to North Melbourne coach Alastair Clarkson. “Not ruling it out (an internal investigation), but, umm, you know, if you look at comparisons and benchmarks that have been set,” Koch said. “With a 55-year-old coach premeditated, target the player, walk up to them is very different to a player in the heat of battle when there was a lot of niggle in the game, the pressure again - absolutely no excuse, not condoning it whatever, and should not be part of the game, but if you’re going to look at a comparison, that would be the benchmark there.” ABC’s Offsiders host Underwood pressed further and asked him: “If I put it to you, it’s in the same category as Taylor Walker’s racial slur, what would your response to that be?” Koch responded: “I don’t think that’s realistic. I think the benchmark has been set in terms of...” Wilson interjected: “With Alistair Clarkson which I thought was too light." But Koch insisted: “OK. But the benchmark has been set.” The comments from the former Sunrise presenter was slammed on social media. “This is pretty disgusting from Koch," wrote Columnist Greg Jericho. “Yeah nah @kochie_online. A slur is a slur is a slur. You say you don’t condone a player using a homophobic slur on the field and that there’s no excuse but in the same sentence practically excuse it by saying it occurred ‘in the heat of battle’ and a ‘niggle’. So disappointing," another user wrote. “Terrible take from Koch. We are benchmarking abuse now. Not making excuses but … homophobia and racism have no place in the game," a third added. “@kochie_online as a leader of our football club this statement is beyond disappointing. A slur against a marginalised group is exactly the same the nature of it is irrelevant. You need to do better!” a fourth commented. Images: Getty/ ABC

Legal

Announcing Kate Middleton’s cancer diagnosis should have been simple. But the palace let it get out of hand

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/victoria-fielding-236389">Victoria Fielding</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/saira-ali-1522239">Saira Ali</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a> The British royal family is famous for its carefully curated media image. That’s why it was a surprise to see them lose control of the narrative in the wake of what we now know is a serious health crisis befalling Catherine, Princess of Wales (or Kate Middleton as she’s popularly known). It is clear the nearly 1,000-year-old institution of the monarchy and its tradition of “<a href="https://news.northeastern.edu/2024/03/14/kate-middleton-photo-pr-crisis/">never complain, never explain</a>” is being tested by social media and its power to spread rumours and misinformation. The palace’s public relations team has underestimated how difficult it is to manage relationships with social media audiences. Their reactive attempts to rein in speculation has turned Catherine’s health challenge into a PR disaster. Social media, with its lax regulations and freer environment, offers a more open forum for users to say whatever they like about the royals. It’s served as a hotbed for Catherine conspiracies, particularly on TikTok. These theories are as wild as they are ridiculous, from Catherine being a prisoner in the palace to her hiding in <a href="https://www.prdaily.com/kate-middleton-stanley-alabama-retail/">Taylor Swift’s London home</a>. What should have been a simple announcement to a sympathetic public about a popular royal having cancer turned into a spider’s web of competing conspiracy theories across social media. How did it all go so terribly wrong? <h2>I’ve lost track, what happened?</h2> All was well with the Prince and Princess of Wales when they were filmed attending church on Christmas Day. As usual when royals are out in public, the scene was picture perfect with everyone dutifully smiling for the cameras in “<a href="https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a46227698/kate-middleton-royal-blue-christmas-day-church-service-prince-william-kids/">co-ordinated</a>” outfits. Two weeks later, Kensington Palace announced Catherine had undergone planned abdominal surgery, with <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/princess-kate-hospitalized-after-planned-abdominal-surgery-palace/story?id=106441561">palace sources</a> telling media the surgery had been “successful” and she would need two weeks to recover. On January 29, the palace announced Catherine had returned home to recuperate. <a href="https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a46569739/king-charles-discharged-from-hospital/">Unlike King Charles</a> when he released news of his cancer diagnosis on February 5, Catherine was not photographed leaving hospital. This was the first PR misstep. She had appeared outside hospital soon after giving birth to her three children, but this time she remained uncharacteristically out of the public eye. Almost a month later, when Prince William <a href="https://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/prince-william-pulls-memorial-godfather-211406977.html?amp;guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAG6tOzuXsqZXP6G2nLLd-lnWzZhYKHVJ5TJ-w5XCCfgMjerRrR8v1R8unjtcoQTbvPDsVt3mtTcZ_g0os6zwOuEFfMKCh0kfEExvz-dB2FG0uqcy6-GoryjvG99TEhMli66hNZLjLENmMhq1mwoV7GmM0AYezMDsZtZVtONH9C1b&guccounter=2">unexpectedly withdrew</a> from his godfather’s memorial citing “personal reasons”, social media users started asking “Where is Princess Kate?”. Used to a steady stream of content about the royal family, the public were unsurprisingly questioning if there was more to Catherine’s abdominal surgery than they were being told. In a rare reactive move, the palace tried to quell questions about Catherine’s whereabouts by releasing a <a href="https://people.com/palace-responds-kate-middleton-conspiracy-theories-online-surgery-recovery-rare-statement-8602191">statement</a> reiterating that she would not be returning to public duties until Easter. On March 4, US outlet <a href="https://www.tmz.com/2024/03/04/kate-middleton-seen-spotted-public-first-time-mystery-hospitalization/">TMZ published</a> a paparazzi photo of Catherine driving with her mother. Social media audiences asked if it really was Catherine. Over the next week, conspiracy theories about Catherine’s absence reached frenzied levels. To show everything was fine, Kensington Palace released a <a href="https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/1766750995445387393?s=20">Mother’s Day photo</a> of Catherine and her children on their social media accounts. Social media users spotted apparently edited flaws and global news agencies announced “<a href="https://apnews.com/article/kate-princess-photo-surgery-ca91acf667c87c6c70a7838347d6d4fb">kill orders</a>”, saying the image had been manipulated. The next day, Catherine <a href="https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/1767135566645092616">apologised</a> on social media for editing the photo. Although royals have been <a href="https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a60191061/royal-photoshop-history/">editing their pictures</a> for centuries, it seems particularly digitally naive of the palace’s PR team to release such an obviously edited image into an already cynical social media environment, creating fodder for more conspiracy theories. Mainstream news outlets then joined social media users in asking questions about Catherine’s absence. Although this media attention did not legitimise wild conspiracies, in some ways it fuelled them. Days later, TMZ <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erWJNmbrECs">published footage</a> of Catherine and William shopping. At this point in the media chaos, many social media users claimed it was fake. This intense public speculation finally ended on March 23, when Catherine <a href="https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/1771235267837321694?s=20">released a video</a> explaining her extended absence after abdominal surgery was caused by the surgeons discovering cancer. During a crisis, the public crave transparency, authenticity, honesty and reassurance. These elements were missing in the royal PR team’s carefully worded statements made directly to mainstream media along with reactive, overly curated social media posts. By providing scant details, the palace seemed to believe they could control public perception. But public image is increasingly difficult to control. <h2>The double-edged sword of social media</h2> After Princess Diana’s death in a paparazzi-chase car accident, privacy laws and <a href="https://time.com/4914324/princess-diana-anniversary-paparazzi-tabloid-media/">media regulations</a> forbade the most invasive breaches of the royal family’s privacy, particularly for her children, princes William and Harry. However, tabloid appetite for uncontrolled access soon returned once the princes became adults. Recently, Harry and his wife Meghan have been involved in <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/prince-harry-his-many-lawsuits-against-press-2023-12-15/">several lawsuits</a> against media companies over breaches of privacy, including phone hacking. The rise of social media has typically been viewed as a tool that gives royals more control over their image through the curation of their own personal content. Previously, the fact Catherine was the one <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kate-middleton-cutest-family-photos-2018-5">taking photos</a> of her children was seen as a sign of authenticity and being down to earth (as much as a princess could be). Yet, social media is both a blessing and a curse for the management of public reputations. The perpetuation of contested facts and theories on social media in the wake of Princess Catherine’s unexplained absence shows how difficult it is to curate a controlled image using social media. Lack of verified information in mainstream media helps fuel speculative flames. While <a href="https://www.thedrum.com/news/2024/03/22/where-the-palace-lost-the-plot-and-what-we-can-learn-about-pr-and-empathy-kategate">PR experts</a> believe it is understandable and appropriate for Catherine and her family to have privacy during this time, more timely, direct and honest communication would have gone a long way to prevent relentless gossip. Once rumours and conspiracies gained momentum, the palace perhaps thought the less information provided, the better. However, silence during a crisis just fuels more speculation because the lack of information makes it look like there is something to hide. Catherine’s personal video announcing her cancer diagnosis helped end the social media frenzy. This shows a simple, clear statement posted by Kensington Palace to social media weeks ago would likely have avoided the PR disaster and provided Catherine the privacy she so clearly needs. The palace is now <a href="https://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/2986509/kate-middleton-cancer-pr-disaster/">being criticised</a> for complicating a situation that was relatively simple in retrospect. Many social media users are also upset Catherine took public blame for the photoshopping incident. Any organisation that deals with the media to maintain positive reputations, including the British monarchy, has no choice but to adapt to all kinds of media, including social media. The long-time practice of keeping calm and carrying on amid controversy and the 24-hour gossip cycle doesn’t work in the era of TikTok, X and YouTube. In the absence of trusted information, social media will do what it does best: take mostly innocuous online chatter and amplify it until it goes viral.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226490/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/victoria-fielding-236389">Victoria Fielding</a>, Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/saira-ali-1522239">Saira Ali</a>, Senior Lecturer in Media, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/announcing-kate-middletons-cancer-diagnosis-should-have-been-simple-but-the-palace-let-it-get-out-of-hand-226490">original article</a>.

Caring

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

"Felt like a criminal": Mother and disabled son "kicked out" of Pink concert

John Farnham steps out at son's wedding for first time since jaw surgery

Uber driver makes pensioner fork out thousands after minor accident

"Love is love": Vietnam veteran reveals lifelong secret in obituary

Air travel exposes you to radiation – how much health risk comes with it?

Where did money come from?

"I am so lost without you": Sam Rubin's son speaks out

Dodgy tactic to keep driver's licence growing "out of control"

Terminal lucidity: why do loved ones with dementia sometimes ‘come back’ before death?

"An insult to human dignity": Mother of Bondi stabbing victim hits out at the media

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

Insider spills on Robert Irwin's plans for I'm a Celeb

"I'm shocked": Queen of the jungle crowned in I'm a Celeb finale

Judge finds Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins and dismisses Network 10 defamation case. How did it play out?

"I believe he is alive": Father of young man who jumped off cruise ship speaks out

No, taking drugs like Ozempic isn’t ‘cheating’ at weight loss or the ‘easy way out’

Viewers stunned after Denise Drysdale booted from I'm a Celeb

"Out-of-touch" Project stars slammed over clash with renter advocate

Kochie called out over "disgusting" remarks

Announcing Kate Middleton’s cancer diagnosis should have been simple. But the palace let it get out of hand

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

"Felt like a criminal": Mother and disabled son "kicked out" of Pink concert

John Farnham steps out at son's wedding for first time since jaw surgery

Uber driver makes pensioner fork out thousands after minor accident

"Love is love": Vietnam veteran reveals lifelong secret in obituary

Air travel exposes you to radiation – how much health risk comes with it?

Where did money come from?

"I am so lost without you": Sam Rubin's son speaks out

Dodgy tactic to keep driver's licence growing "out of control"

Terminal lucidity: why do loved ones with dementia sometimes ‘come back’ before death?

"An insult to human dignity": Mother of Bondi stabbing victim hits out at the media

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

Insider spills on Robert Irwin's plans for I'm a Celeb

"I'm shocked": Queen of the jungle crowned in I'm a Celeb finale

Judge finds Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins and dismisses Network 10 defamation case. How did it play out?

"I believe he is alive": Father of young man who jumped off cruise ship speaks out

No, taking drugs like Ozempic isn’t ‘cheating’ at weight loss or the ‘easy way out’

Viewers stunned after Denise Drysdale booted from I'm a Celeb

"Out-of-touch" Project stars slammed over clash with renter advocate

Kochie called out over "disgusting" remarks

Announcing Kate Middleton’s cancer diagnosis should have been simple. But the palace let it get out of hand

Our Partners

Join Over60