Search

The Princess of Wales wants to stay cancer-free. What does this mean?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amali-cooray-1482458">Amali Cooray</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-eddie-la-marca-1503690">John (Eddie) La Marca</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-diepstraten-1495268">Sarah Diepstraten</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a> Catherine, Princess of Wales, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/09/princess-of-wales-cancer-free-after-completing-chemotherapy">has announced</a> she has now completed a course of preventive chemotherapy. The news comes nine months after the princess first <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68641441">revealed</a> she was being treated for an unspecified form of cancer. In the new <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSrDEq8QFkc">video message</a> released by Kensington Palace, Princess Catherine says she’s focused on doing what she can to stay “cancer-free”. She acknowledges her cancer journey is not over and the “path to recovery and healing is long”. While we don’t know the details of the princess’s cancer or treatment, it raises some questions about how we declare someone fully clear of the disease. So what does being – and staying – “cancer-free” mean? <h2>What’s the difference between being cancer-free and in remission?</h2> Medically, “cancer-free” <a href="https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/remission--cancer-free--no-evidence-of-disease--what-is-the-difference-when-talking-about-cancer-treatment-effectiveness-and-results.h00-159460845.html">means</a> two things. First, it means no cancer cells are able to be detected in a patient’s body using the available testing methods. Second, there is no cancer left in the patient. These might sound basically the same. But this second aspect of “cancer-free” can be complicated, as it’s essentially impossible to be sure no cancer cells have survived a treatment. It only takes a few surviving cells for the cancer to <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-does-cancer-spread-to-other-parts-of-the-body-219616">grow back</a>. But these cells may not be detectable via testing, and can lie dormant for some time. The possibility of some cells still surviving means it is more accurate to say a patient is “in remission”, rather than “cancer-free”. Remission means there is no detectable cancer left. Once a patient has been in remission for a certain period of time, they are often considered to be fully “cancer-free”. Princess Catherine was not necessarily speaking in the strict medical sense. Nonetheless, she is clearly signalling a promising step in her recovery. <h2>What happens during remission?</h2> During remission, patients will usually undergo surveillance testing to make sure their cancer hasn’t returned. Detection tests can vary greatly depending on both the patient and their cancer type. Many <a href="https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/screening/screening-tests">tests</a> involve simply looking at different organs to see if there are cancer cells present, but at varying levels of complexity. Some cancers can be detected with the naked eye, such as skin cancers. In other cases, technology is needed: colonoscopies for colorectal cancers, X-ray mammograms for breast cancers, or CT scans for lung cancers. There are also molecular tests, which test for the presence of cancer cells using protein or DNA from blood or tissue samples. For most patients, testing will continue for years at regular intervals. Surveillance testing ensures any returning cancer is caught early, giving patients the best chance of successful treatment. Remaining in remission for five years can be a huge milestone in a patient’s cancer journey. For most types of cancer, the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31231898/">chances of cancer returning</a> drop significantly after five years of remission. After this point, surveillance testing may be performed less frequently, as the patients might be deemed to be at a lower risk of their cancer returning. <h2>Measuring survival rates</h2> Because it is very difficult to tell when a cancer is “cured”, clinicians may instead refer to a “five-year survival rate”. This measures how likely a cancer patient is to be alive five years after their diagnosis. For example, data shows the <a href="https://ncci.canceraustralia.gov.au/outcomes/relative-survival-rate/5-year-relative-survival-diagnosis">five-year survival rate</a> for <a href="https://cancer.org.au/cancer-information/types-of-cancer/bowel-cancer">bowel cancer</a> among Australian women (of all ages) is around 70%. That means if you had 100 patients with bowel cancer, after five years you would expect 70 to still be alive and 30 to have succumbed to the disease. These statistics can’t tell us much about individual cases. But comparing five-year survival rates between large groups of patients after different cancer treatments can help clinicians make the often complex decisions about how best to treat their patients. The likelihood of cancer coming back, or recurring, is influenced by many factors which can vary over time. For instance, approximately 30% of people with lung cancer <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7061059/">develop a recurrent disease</a>, even after treatment. On the other hand, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4933127/">breast cancer recurrence</a> within two years of the initial diagnosis is approximately 15%. Within five years it drops to 10%. After ten, it falls below 2%. These are generalisations though – recurrence rates can vary greatly depending on things such as what kind of cancer the patient has, how advanced it is, and whether it has spread. <h2>Staying cancer-free</h2> Princess Catherine <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/09/princess-of-wales-cancer-free-after-completing-chemotherapy">says</a> her focus now is to “stay cancer-free”. What might this involve? How a cancer develops and whether it recurs can be <a href="https://nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05467-z">influenced</a> by things we can’t control, such as age, ethnicity, gender, genetics and hormones. However, there are sometimes <a href="https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances">environmental factors</a> we can control. That includes things like exposure to UV radiation from the sun, or inhaling carcinogens like tobacco. Lifestyle factors also play a role. Poor diet and nutrition, a lack of exercise and excessive alcohol consumption can all <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10925935">contribute to cancer development</a>. Research estimates more than half of all cancers could <a href="https://www.canceraustralia.gov.au/resources/position-statements/lifestyle-risk-factors-and-primary-prevention-cancer/recommendations">potentially be prevented</a> through <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/topics/cancer/screening-for-cancer">regular screening</a> and maintaining a healthy lifestyle (not to mention preventing other chronic conditions such as heart disease and diabetes). Recommendations to reduce cancer risk are the same for everyone, not just those who’ve had treatment like Princess Catherine. They include not smoking, eating a nutritious and balanced diet, exercising regularly, cutting down on alcohol and staying sun smart.<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/238681/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amali-cooray-1482458">Amali Cooray</a>, PhD Candidate in Genetic Engineering and Cancer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-eddie-la-marca-1503690">John (Eddie) La Marca</a>, Senior Research Officer, Blood Cells and Blood Cancer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-diepstraten-1495268">Sarah Diepstraten</a>, Senior Research Officer, Blood Cells and Blood Cancer Division, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research)</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/the-princess-of-wales-wants-to-stay-cancer-free-what-does-this-mean-238681">original article</a>. </div>

Caring

Why is it so hard to cancel subscriptions or end ‘free’ trials? Report shows how companies trap you into paying

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/katharine-kemp-402096">Katharine Kemp</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> Many businesses are trapping Australian consumers in paid subscriptions by making them hard to cancel, hiding important details and offering “free” trials that auto-renew with hefty charges. We need law reform to tackle this continuing problem. <a href="https://cprc.org.au/report/let-me-out">A new report</a> shows 75% of Australian consumers have had negative experiences when trying to cancel a subscription, according to the Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC). It shows businesses use “<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-spot-avoid-dark-patterns/">dark patterns</a>”, which are designs that hinder consumers who try to act in their own best interests. Subscription traps are often called “<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2022/11/checking-out-ftcs-100-million-settlement-vonage">Hotel California</a>” techniques, referring to The Eagles’ famous lyric: “you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave”. In some of these cases, consumers may have remedies under our existing consumer law, including for misleading conduct. But we need law reform to capture other <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/consultation/c2023-430458">unfair practices</a>. In the meantime, the CPRC’s research also gives examples of businesses with fair, consumer-friendly subscription practices. These also benefit the business. <h2>Examples of unfair subscription traps</h2> <a href="https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesbusinessdevelopmentcouncil/2022/09/12/the-evolution-of-the-subscription-model-and-whats-on-the-horizon/">Subscription business models</a> have become common – many products are now provided in the form of software, an app or access to a website. Some of these would once have been a physical book, newspaper, CD or exercise class. Most people who use online services have experienced the frustration of finding a credit card charge for an unwanted, unused subscription or spending excessive time trying to cancel a subscription. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=643&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=643&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=643&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=808&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=808&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615486/original/file-20240826-16-fp57es.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=808&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Infographic with a few statistics from the report." /></a><figcaption><a class="source" href="https://cprc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/CPRC_LetMeOut_SubsTraps_Report_FINAL.pdf">CPRC, Let me out – Subscription trap practices in Australia, August 2024</a></figcaption></figure> Businesses can make it difficult for consumers to stop paying for unwanted subscriptions. Some do this by allowing consumers to start a subscription with a single click, but creating multiple obstacles if you want to end the subscription. This can include obscuring cancellation options in the app, requiring consumers to phone during business hours or making them navigate through multiple steps and offers before terminating. The report points out many of the last-ditch discounts offered in this process are only short term. One survey respondent said: <blockquote> I wasn’t able to cancel without having to call up and speak to someone. Their business hours meant I had to call up during my work day and it took some time to action. </blockquote> Other businesses badger consumers with frequent emails or messages after they cancel. One respondent said a business made “the cancellation process impossible by making you call and then judging your reason for cancellation”. <h2>What does consumer law say?</h2> Some subscription traps already fall foul of the Australian Consumer Law and warrant investigation by the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-warns-consumers-to-beware-of-subscription-traps">Australian Competition & Consumer Commission</a> (ACCC). Consumers may have remedies where the business has engaged in misleading conduct or imposes an unfair contract term. For example, the ACCC is <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-court-action-against-eharmony-for-alleged-misleading-online-dating-membership-statements#:%7E:text=The%20ACCC%20has%20today%20commenced%20proceedings%20in%20the,the%20pricing%2C%20renewal%20and%20duration%20of%20its%20memberships.">suing dating site eHarmony</a> for its allegedly misleading subscription practices. In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/06/ftc-takes-action-against-adobe-executives-hiding-fees-preventing-consumers-easily-cancelling">has filed a complaint against software company Adobe</a> for allegedly using dark patterns in its subscription practices. The Federal Trade Commission has alleged that “Adobe pushed consumers toward the ‘annual paid monthly’ subscription without adequately disclosing that cancelling the plan in the first year could cost hundreds of dollars”. Adobe <a href="https://news.adobe.com/news/news-details/2024/Adobes-Recent-Statement-Regarding-Updated-Federal-Trade-Commission-Complaint-/default.aspx">issued a statement</a> arguing the commission’s complaint “mischaracterises” its business. The litigation is ongoing. <h2>We need an unfair practices prohibition</h2> Some subscription traps would fall outside the existing consumer law. This is because they don’t meet the test for misleading conduct or unfair contract terms, but make it practically very difficult to cancel. The <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-welcomes-consultation-on-possible-unfair-trading-practices-regulatory-reforms">ACCC has advocated</a> for Australia to follow other countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States to enact an unfair practices prohibition to capture conduct like this. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=769&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=769&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=769&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=966&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=966&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/615487/original/file-20240826-16-2j23h7.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=966&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption>The shift businesses can make today. <a class="source" href="https://cprc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/CPRC_LetMeOut_SubsTraps_Report_FINAL.pdf">CPRC, Let me out – Subscription trap practices in Australia, August 2024</a></figcaption></figure> <h2>Better practices benefit businesses too</h2> The CPRC report also revealed that 90% of Australians would likely purchase from the same organisation if cancelling a subscription process was quick and simple. Businesses focused on a short-sighted cash grab fail to realise that consumers might cancel but later return if treated well. The CPRC highlights businesses that are doing a good job. For instance, the habit change app Atoms (based on James Clear’s book Atomic Habits) has a genuinely free trial. It doesn’t require credit card details, doesn’t auto-renew, and lets consumers know how many trial days remain. The CPRC says the charity World Vision doesn’t auto-renew annual sponsorships, but reminds supporters about when the sponsorship will lapse. Importantly, some businesses – such as Netflix – use their data for good in this context. They notice when users are paying for the service without using it and help them unsubscribe. These practices should be applauded. But we need an unfair practices prohibition for businesses who don’t follow suit and recognise the long-term benefits of treating customers fairly.<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/237236/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/katharine-kemp-402096">Katharine Kemp</a>, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law & Justice; Lead, UNSW Public Interest Law & Tech Initiative, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</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/why-is-it-so-hard-to-cancel-subscriptions-or-end-free-trials-report-shows-how-companies-trap-you-into-paying-237236">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Does free-to-air TV really need gambling ads to survive?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-hughes-2728">Andrew Hughes</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> If anything is a sure bet right now, it’s corporate Australia’s willingness to use some variation of the “for society’s good” argument. The most recent example of this is the claim being made, including by federal minister <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/aug/13/gambling-ad-ban-labor-bill-shorten-tv-media-advertising-revenue">Bill Shorten</a>, that an outright ban on gambling advertising would be disastrous for free-to-air TV. To be clear, Labor still supports new restrictions on gambling advertisements, including hourly caps and bans during kids’ TV and during and around sports broadcasts. But it has rejected the idea of a total ban, prompting a <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-mps-say-total-ban-is-the-only-way-on-gambling-ads-20240812-p5k1q0.html">backlash</a> extending as far as some of its own backbench MPs. Speaking on ABC’s Q&A on Monday night, Shorten said Australia’s free-to-air TV broadcasters were in “diabolical trouble”, with many needing gambling ad revenue “in order just to stay afloat”. “I’m not convinced that complete prohibition works,” he said. So would our commercial TV networks really fall over tomorrow without gambling ad revenue? Or is something else at play? <h2>Who is buying ads in Australia?</h2> Let’s start by building a bigger picture of where advertising spend more broadly comes from in Australia. Global analytics firm Nielsen regularly compiles <a href="https://www.nielsen.com/news-center/2024/top-20-categories-by-ad-spend-for-2023-revealed-in-latest-nielsen-ad-intel-report/#:%7E:text=Retail%20topped%20the%20list%20with,significant%20investment%20of%20%24596m.">top 20</a> lists of both the categories and individual companies spending the most on ads here. In 2023 the top category, retail, accounted for A$2.56 billion in advertising spend. Gambling and gaming, in contrast, represented just $239 million, less than a tenth of this figure. Harvey Norman topped the list of <a href="https://www.nielsen.com/news-center/2024/australias-top-20-highest-spending-advertisers-of-2023-revealed-in-latest-nielsen-ad-intel-report/">individual companies</a> in 2023. The first we see of any gambling brand is Sportsbet, which came in at 16th. For gambling companies, it’s fair to assume the lion’s share of this goes to TV. <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/publications/2023-10/report/gambling-advertising-australia-placement-and-spending">Research</a> by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) found 68% of gambling companies’ ad spend went to free-to-air TV markets. As for the remainder, 9% went to radio, 15% to social media and 8% to other online platforms. <h2>How much is actually getting spent?</h2> But how do we estimate the gambling industry’s total annual advertising spend? There are certainly a lot of numbers getting thrown around. One <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/media-and-marketing/tv-networks-to-demand-fee-relief-as-40m-wagering-hole-opens-up-20240804-p5jzav">source</a> put it at $300.5 million for 2022. More recently, ACMA published detailed figures for the period between May 2022 and April 2023 which put it at just over <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/publications/2023-10/report/gambling-advertising-australia-placement-and-spending">$238 million</a>, with $162 million of this going to free-to-air TV networks. But the way advertising is classified – what defines an advertisement – can sometimes differ between agencies. Then there is the <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/check-if-gambling-operator-legal#register-licensed-gambling">number of brands operating</a>, which is constantly changing. In a market with so many competitors, any new entrant needs to spend big on advertising just to capture enough market share to be viable. This is why I argue that the actual figure for financial year 2023 may be slightly higher than ACMA’s widely quoted figure, accounting for the big ad spend of new entrants that may have fallen outside the time window assessed. Based on average company ad spend as a percentage of revenue and the size of the gambling industry, I estimate it could be higher, in the ballpark of $275 million. <h2>How much is that to the networks?</h2> This exercise is all about putting these figures in context. Channel Seven, for example, brought in <a href="https://www.sevenwestmedia.com.au/assets/Uploads/Final-2023-Annual-Report.pdf">$1.5 billion in revenue in 2023</a>. Even if it had received the gambling industry’s entire ad spend at my higher estimate of $275 million, this would still only account for less than 20% of its annual turnover. If that money all went to TV ads, Channel Seven’s stated 38.5% share of television advertising revenue would put its revenue from the estimated sports betting advertising at about $106 million in this example, around 7% of its total annual revenue. Losing most of that would hurt, but wouldn’t mortally threaten the business. A total ban would most likely be <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-13/peta-murphy-left-online-gambling-legacy-why-isn-t-labor-adopting/104217328">phased in</a> over a number of years, not enacted overnight. Australia’s free-to-air networks would adapt, restrategise, and find and develop new markets to replace that revenue. Their management teams are far too smart to just shrug their shoulders and take a revenue hit on the corporate chin. <h2>Networks have had plenty of time to adapt</h2> Just a refresher. LinkedIn is now more than 20 years old. Facebook is 20. YouTube is 19. X (formerly known as Twitter) is 18. TikTok is seven. If free-to-air TV’s business model is so glacial it can’t function in the digital age, it probably doesn’t deserve to be operating in the big leagues. Digital is here and has been for a while now. The media industry has borne the brunt of this change, but has also had the most time to adapt to the disruptors, who are now more established oligopolies and duopolies than “cool start-ups” out of Silicon Valley. The argument that we need to protect sports gambling ads to protect the big media brands – has little to no basis. It’s a worn out argument we’ve seen time and time again – <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-push-to-end-tobacco-advertising-in-the-1970s-could-be-used-to-curb-gambling-ads-today-200915">big tobacco</a>, I’m looking at you. Protecting the interests of corporate Australia at the cost of society itself is a gamble none of us should be prepared to take.<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/236686/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-hughes-2728">Andrew Hughes</a>, Lecturer, Research School of Management, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National 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/does-free-to-air-tv-really-need-gambling-ads-to-survive-236686">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Why Greg Lynn could walk free from prison

Greg Lynn has applied to be freed from jail until his sentencing hearing over the murder of Carol Clay. The former Jetstar pilot, who was found guilty of murdering the 73-year-old while she was camping with her secret partner Russell Hill in March 2020, is appealing the guilty verdict which the jury came to after a weeks-long trial in June. The 57-year old appeared in the Supreme Court of Victoria on Friday where Justice Michael Croucher heard the convicted killer had been the victim of prison attacks during his six-week trial. The court heard Lynn's barrister Dermot Dann KC is in the process of compiling submissions calling on Justice Croucher to hold of on sentencing his client until an appeal over his conviction can be heard by the Court of Appeal. If granted, the "stay" of sentence could allow Lynn to apply for bail while his appeal goes through the court. The court also heard that Lynn had been placed in isolation within the Metropolitan Remand Prison for his own safety since the guilty verdict was read, but now fears he will be targeted by inmates at whatever prison he ultimately ends up in. Mr Dann said a successful appeal could result in Lynn being set free altogether without the possibility of a re-trial, due to doubts over whether he could obtain a fair trial because of the significant publicity surrounding the case and the murder conviction. "The chances of a fair re-trial are non-existent," Mr Dann said. The experienced barrister said any potential jurors would have been "polluted or poisoned" by the "inadmissible evidence" that has "flooded" news sites since the guilty verdict was delivered. The court heard Mr Dann believed his client had multiple reasons to push for an appeal over his verdict, including the "unfair" way in which he claimed the Office of Public Prosecutions carried out the trial. Mr Dann reiterated to the court that his client has always maintained his innocence, saying, "He maintains that he's never killed any person at any time, at any place, anywhere, ever." <div data-component="EmphasisedText"> "The long-term future of that guilty verdict must be seen as being in grave doubt." The case was adjourned until a pre-sentence hearing on September 12th. Image credits: Facebook </div>

Legal

Optus giving away 20,000 free phones to vulnerable customers

Optus will be giving away 20,000 mobile phones to vulnerable customers ahead of the 3G network shut down. Following the footsteps of Telstra, who gave out <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/money-banking/telstra-giving-free-phones-to-elderly-and-remote" target="_blank" rel="noopener">12,000 mobile phones</a> to their most vulnerable remote and elderly customers last month, Optus will offer thousands of free mobile phones to customers enduring financial hardship and vulnerable customers finding it difficult to replace their current phones. “We know that many impacted customers are actually using a 4G handset that reverts to 3G for calls, so it’s vital these customers understand the importance of upgrading their handsets when notified,” Optus’ head of new products Harvey Wright said. Messages have been sent to eligible customers, and the telco giant has also rolled out special deals encouraging Australian's to upgrade. The move to switch off 3G means that soon certain mobile devices will no longer be able to send texts, make calls, or contact triple-0 in an emergency. A few older 4G handsets will also be affected. Telstra will turn off their 3G network on August 31, while Optus will turn it off on September 1. TPG Telecom and Vodafone have already turned it off. Australia's mobile network operators say that the move will help boost the capacity, speed and reliability of the newer 4G and 5G networks. The Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) have also urged customers to take action to ensure that they stay connected. “Whether it’s your day-to-day mobile or one you keep in the drawer for an emergency, we encourage you to check all of your devices to ensure they will be supported once Australia’s 3G networks are switched off,” AMTA chief executive Louise Hyland said. The AMTA suggests that concerned customers should visit their <a href="https://amta.org.au/3g-closure/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">website</a> to find out if their devices will be supported. “It is important to note that while 3G networks are still in operation, those affected mobile devices will continue to connect to any available 3G network while in coverage, to make emergency calls to triple-0,” Hyland said. “However, once the 3G networks are fully closed, these phones will not be able to make emergency calls. “It is crucial to act now if you know you have an older mobile device and you haven’t already upgraded.” Image: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Plastic Free July is a waste of time if the onus is only on consumers

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bhavna-middha-1061611">Bhavna Middha</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ralph-horne-160543">Ralph Horne</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Every year, the <a href="https://www.plasticfreejuly.org/">Plastic Free July</a> campaign asks us to refuse single-use plastic. The idea is that making a small change in our daily lives will collectively make a big difference. And hopefully, better behaviour will stick and become a habit. The intent is good, but consumers shouldn’t have to bear full responsibility for plastic pollution. Individual sacrifices – particularly temporary ones – <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421509004728">won’t make a significant difference</a>. Governments, manufacturers and retailers need to get serious about tackling this problem. If Plastic Free July put pressure on the supply side of the equation, rather than demand, it could be more successful. Our research spans food packaging including plastics, waste, sustainable consumption and social practices. We know consumer demand is only one part of the picture. Eliminating plastic waste requires broader systemic changes. <h2>The cabbage dilemma</h2> Research shows consumers generally want to do the <a href="https://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/news/news-articles/the-conversation-on-sustainability-has-changed">right thing by the environment</a> but find it <a href="https://theconversation.com/households-find-low-waste-living-challenging-heres-what-needs-to-change-197022">challenging</a>. Coming out of a supermarket with no packaging is difficult. There are few unpackaged food items and even when there is a choice, the unpackaged item may be more <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/want-your-fruit-and-veg-without-the-plastic-you-ll-have-to-pay-more-20231107-p5eib4.html">expensive</a>. Have you ever been stuck in the supermarket, choosing between the large head of cabbage you know you won’t finish before it goes bad, or the plastic-wrapped half-cabbage you really need? Consumers should not be forced to choose between food waste (another huge problem) or plastic waste. Maybe there’s another way. For example, why not sell cabbages of different sizes? Why do we need to grow such large heads of cabbage anyway? Both plastic consumption and food waste can be addressed by changing how we produce and distribute certain foods. <h2>Governments, manufacturers and retailers must drive change</h2> The onus for reducing plastic consumption and waste should be placed firmly on those who make plastic and profit from selling their products, as well as those who make and sell products wrapped in plastic packaging. Research has shown just <a href="https://www.csiro.au/en/news/All/News/2024/April/Global-study-finds-more-than-half-of-branded-plastic-pollution-linked-to-56-companies?utm_source=pocket_shared">56 companies</a> globally are responsible for more than half of the branded plastic pollution that ends up in the environment. Companies profit from using plastics because it is cheaper to use than changing to alternatives, such as cardboard or compostable materials, or using less packaging. This means companies choosing to avoid using plastics face unfair competition. It’s a tough habit to kick. Industry-led <a href="https://productstewardship.us/what-is-epr/#:%7E:text=Stewardship%20can%20be%20either%20voluntary,product%20stewardship%20required%20by%20law">voluntary schemes</a> are <a href="https://www.insidewaste.com.au/91038-2-product-stewardship-schemes/">limited in terms of both participation and outcomes</a>. Many companies are failing to meet their own <a href="https://www.asyousow.org/report-page/2024-plastic-promises-scorecard">plastic reduction goals</a>. Governments need to step in and force companies to take responsibility for the plastic and packaging they manufacture. In practice, this could involve similar schemes to the container deposit scheme for beverage containers, or returning plastics to stores. Replacing voluntary schemes with mandatory regulations and increased producer responsibility means companies will have to <a href="https://www.insidewaste.com.au/91038-2-product-stewardship-schemes/">invest in long-term changes designed with care</a>. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UnXVU-06ciI?wmode=transparent&start=1" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><figcaption>What’s Plastic Free July?</figcaption></figure> <h2>Cities are built around plastic</h2> Our previous research has shown plastic performs an essential role in some, <a href="https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geoj.12457">constrained circumstances</a>. We found vulnerable householders often rely on plastic to make life manageable, such as using plastics to cover belongings on the balcony, or using plastic cutlery and plates in student apartments with minimal kitchen space. This includes people with accessibility needs, people relying on public transport to shop for groceries, or people who are financially constrained or living in small high-rise <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-keep-putting-apartment-residents-waste-in-the-too-hard-basket-200545">apartments</a>. Unsustainable lifestyles are not so much a choice as a product of poorly planned cities, housing and regulations. It is all very well if you are mobile and well-located, but if you live in a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-08/food-deserts-have-serious-consequences-for-residents-experts/6605230">poorly serviced</a> distant suburb and <a href="https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2023/01/are-you-living-in-a-food-desert--these-maps-suggest-it-can-reall">transport groceries or takeaway food</a> or buy things on the go, then plastic is perhaps the only current affordable way to make it work. So campaigns and solutions that do not consider how <a href="https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geoj.12457">everyday lives and economy</a> are intertwined with plastics can <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00149-w">exclude people and spaces</a> who can’t access the alternatives. For example, there are ways to make <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-5871.12464">convenience eating more sustainable</a> in education settings. We have shown how <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-5871.12390">canteens and microwaves</a> in shared spaces can enable people to access affordable food with their friends, as in <a href="https://www.charlesabroad.cz/post/german-university-canteens-why-do-they-beat-the-czech-ones">University Mensa in Germany</a>. Our <a href="https://cur.org.au/project/tackling-food-related-single-use-plastics-in-diverse-consumption-contexts/">new research</a> will explore how single-use food-related plastics and packaging form an integral part of our daily lives, including shopping, work, cooking and storage. Sometimes new policies inadvertently disadvantage certain groups and communities, such as the aged, less mobile, people living in apartments, or low socio-economic groups. Before we roll out new policies and regulations, we need to understand the roles these materials play and the kinds of services and value they provide. We aim to develop a framework to inform policies and strategies that enable a just and inclusive transition to reduced plastic use. <h2>What about after July?</h2> Plastic Free July and similar campaigns are based on idea that making a temporary change will lead to more permanent lifestyle changes. But research shows temporary shifts are <a href="http://www.demand.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/DEMAND2016_Full_paper_42-Shove.pdf">very different</a> to <a href="https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/32468813/FULL_TEXT.PDF">structural, permanent shifts</a> in <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315816494-1/introduction-social-practices-intervention-sustainability-beyond-behaviour-change-yolande-strengers-cecily-maller?context=ubx&refId=d608abad-39f9-4bb2-8754-56e9e2000c5e">practices</a>. Supermarkets will still wrap items in plastic and sell single-use plastic, even if we try to buy less during Plastic Free July. Ultimately, the focus should be on designing effective infrastructure and policy solutions for lasting results, considering how demand for plastic is produced in the first place. Some of these changes will require a shift in community expectations and food culture. Rather than pointing the finger at consumers, let’s get to work on redesigning our cities. We need to rethink how everyday practices, manufacturing and distribution systems are structured to eliminate plastic waste.<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/233436/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bhavna-middha-1061611">Bhavna Middha</a>, ARC DECRA and Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ralph-horne-160543">Ralph Horne</a>, Associate Deputy Vice Chancellor, Research & Innovation, College of Design & Social Context, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT 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/plastic-free-july-is-a-waste-of-time-if-the-onus-is-only-on-consumers-233436">original article</a>. </div>

Home & Garden

Cafe providing free meals to families faces shutdown

Kirsty Parkes spends a lot of her time providing food and clothes to those in need amid the cost-of-living crisis by running a community cafe. But now, her beloved cafe may close if she doesn't receive urgent financial help. "We need to pay our bills in order to keep this going and if we don't pay our bills, people don't eat," Parkes, who has a big family of her own, told A Current Affair. Community Cafe in Sydney's south-west became a safe haven for dozens of men, women and children, with over 100 people showing up every day. The cafe is a place where people can get food, clothes and toiletries for free, as well as connect with others. "We want to help people restore their value and restore their dignity," Parkes said. "Our currency is just a little bit different. So instead of using money, we use manners. Because manners and kindness are free." However, with an increase in costs and a lack of donations, the beloved cafe may soon be forced to close. "Whether there's a rate rise, whether there's a petrol hike, all of these little things affect us tremendously and affect the numbers here," she said. "We need to come up with some funds really desperately before then just to keep us open," she added. She said that at this stage they require "around about $20,000. Our electricity bill alone is almost $10,000." She added that Cabravale Diggers, who have been paying the cafe's rent, and Liverpool City Council, who have also been providing financial assistance, can't continue to hold responsibility for all of the bills. "We've had fantastic sponsorship, we have fantastic people that back us ... but they can't carry the burden of this," Parkes said. "This is something that the whole community needs to get behind and support." The cafe provides invaluable support for customers like Ted and Lola, who find it hard to find a similar community. "I go to church. Not even a church will help me," Lola said. "These people - I don't even know them and out of nowhere they're taking rich and poor, whoever turns up." "It's hard living on a pension. It's very hard," Ted added. Parkes added that as things are starting to run out, she has had to impose rations, which has been difficult for her. "We've had to then turn around and say 'look today, sorry we can only give you two loaves of bread because we just don't have enough for everyone that's going to come through the door'," Parkes said. "That stuff breaks my heart. It absolutely kills me because people are hungry." From Friday, customers may have to be turned away. "It's terrible. How can we close? We see over 120 people a day. It's terrible," one of the volunteers at the community cafe said. "The community needs it. We can't close. We absolutely cannot close." Those who would like to help the cafe stay open have been encouraged to visit their <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Communitycafe.inc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook page</a>. Image: A Current Affair

Caring

Telstra giving free phones to elderly and remote

With the 3G network set to shut down completely on August 31, Telstra announced that it will be giving 12,000 mobile phones away for free in a bid to help the most vulnerable customers switch to 4G. Starting from Tuesday, the telecommunications company will be issuing complimentary phones to customers who are elderly, live rurally or are facing difficult situations. These include those facing financial issues, recovering from natural disasters, or those who have a life-threatening medical condition and therefore rely on a working phone. Telstra have also identified those who live regionally or are over 80 years old and may require extra transition support, as they may have difficulty accessing a physical store to make the switch. Those who are flagged as eligible will be contacted by the telco company, and they are encouraging customers who receive the message to follow the instructions given to make the switch. Major Brendan Nottle from The Salvation Army has praised this initiative for helping the "most vulnerable members of our community." “Connection is one of the most important things to maintain in our society, whether it is with friends and family or with housing and support services,” he said. “Ensuring that every Australian, from any background or level of income, can take part in our modern digital society is crucial. “A phone can be a gateway to social inclusion, community connection and support, and with the upcoming closure of 3G networks in Australia it is important for us to reach out and ensure that this can continue for everyone.” Customers who are yet to upgrade are also told to make the switch sooner than later. Other devices that will be affected by the shutdown include certain smart watches, tablets, medical alarms, EFTPOS terminals and security monitors. Images: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Worrying pattern of cancellations shows Australian TV's grim future

As the future of free-to-air Australian television continues to be more and more "uncertain", a worrying pattern of dozens of cancelled programs show how the industry has been in trouble for quite some time. In recent years, dozens of seemingly popular shows have been axed across three major networks with thousands of people across the industry preparing themselves for further cancellations, pay cuts, job losses and career changes. According to <a href="https://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/exclusive-34-axed-aussie-shows-revealed-as-future-of-free-to-air-tv-uncertain-224725084.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Yahoo Lifestyle</a>, 34 shows across Seven, Nine and Ten have either been axed, put on an indefinite hiatus, or quietly removed from TV schedules with no mention of it again over the last five years. Many Aussie TV staples such as Millionaire Hot Seat, The Bachelor, and Australian Ninja Warrior, which were all once the highest rated shows on television, have been binned due to declining viewership and dwindling ratings. Channel Ten's The Masked Singer has also become a casualty in the TV wars, as host Dave Hughes <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/entertainment/tv/hughesy-spills-the-beans-on-major-shows-set-to-be-axed" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shared</a> that he simply hadn't received a production schedule for the new season of the show, only to discover it had been shelved. In an attempt to breathe new life into the channels, newer shows like Shaynna Blaze’s Country Home Rescue or Kate Langbroek’s My Mum, Your Dad premiered, but have only survived for single seasons after failing to grab an audience. Even revived classics like Big Brother, Celebrity Apprentice and <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/entertainment/tv/channel-10-axes-another-show-amid-ratings-crisis" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gladiators</a> haven’t been able to survive as they now face growing competition from streaming giants like Netflix and Stan. As the list of cancelled shows continues to grow, one seasoned lighting director, who asked to remain anonymous, told Yahoo Lifestyle that job insecurity for casts and crews is a major concern. They said, “Every year the breaks between jobs are getting longer and longer to the point a lot of us (crew) are now leaving the industry. Ten years ago we’d be booked consistently with jobs locked in 12 months in advance for all of the networks, now everyone’s scrambling to try to get on a three-day pilot shoot. Everything is so uncertain.” Below are all of the free-to-air shows from the last five years that haven’t been renewed. Channel Seven Big Brother (2001-2008, 2012-2014, 2020-2023) SAS Australia (2020-2023) This Is Your Life (1975-1980, 1995-2005, 2008, 2011, 2022-2023) Blow Up (2023) Million Dollar Island (2023) We Interrupt This Broadcast (2023) The Voice: Generations (2022) Big Brother VIP (2021) Holey Moley (2021) Ultimate Tag (2021) Wife Swap Australia (2012, 2021) House Rules (2013-2020) Plate of Origin (2020) Pooch Perfect (2020) Channel Nine Millionaire Hot Seat (2009–2023) My Mum, Your Dad (2022-2023) The Beach House Escape (2023) Rush (2023) Snackmasters (2021-2022) Australian Ninja Warrior (2017-2022) Beauty and the Geek (2009-2014, 2021-2022) Celebrity Apprentice (2011-2015, 2021-2022) Country Homes Rescue (2022) This Time Next Year (2017-2019) Australia’s Most Identical Channel Ten Gladiators (1995-1996, 2008, 2024) The Bachelor (2013-2023) Studio 10 (2013-2023) The Masked Singer (2019-2023) The Traitors (2022-2023) Would I Lie To You? Australia (2022-2023) The Real Love Boat (2022) The Bachelorette (2015-2021) Bachelor In Paradise (2018-2020) Image credits: Ten / Seven

Boomers vs millennials? Free yourself from the phoney generation wars

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bobby-duffy-98570">Bobby Duffy</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/kings-college-london-1196">King's College London</a> Generational thinking is a big idea that’s been horribly corrupted and devalued by endless myths and stereotypes. These clichés have fuelled fake battles between “snowflake” millennials and “selfish” baby boomers, with younger generations facing a “war on woke” and older generations accused of “stealing” the future from the young. As I argue in my book, <a href="https://atlantic-books.co.uk/book/generations/">Generations</a>, this is a real shame. A more careful understanding of what’s really different between generations is one of the best tools we have to understand change – and predict the future. Some of the great names in sociology and philosophy saw understanding generational change as central to understanding society overall. <a href="http://dhspriory.org/kenny/PhilTexts/Comte/Philosophy2.pdf">Auguste Comte</a>, for example, identified the generation as a key factor in “the basic speed of human development”. He argued that “we should not hide the fact that our social progress rests essentially upon death; which is to say that the successive steps of humanity necessarily require a continuous renovation … from one generation to the next”. We humans get set in our ways once we’re past our formative years, and we need the constant injection of new participants to keep society moving forward. Understanding whether, and how, generations are different is vital to understanding society. The balance between generations is constantly shifting, as older cohorts die out and are replaced by new entrants. If younger generations truly do have different attitudes or behaviours to older generations, this will reshape society, and we can, to some extent, predict how it will develop if we can identify those differences. But in place of this big thinking, today we get clickbait headlines and bad research on millennials “<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-hate-napkins-2016-3?r=US&IR=T">killing the napkin industry</a>” or on how baby boomers have “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/boomers-are-blame-aging-america/592336/">ruined everything</a>”. We’ve fallen a long way. <h2>Myth busting</h2> To see the true value of generational thinking, we need to identify and discard the many myths. For example, as I outline in the book, gen Z and millennials are not lazy at work or disloyal to their employers. They’re also no more materialistic than previous generations of young: a focus on being rich is something we tend to grow out of. Old people are not uncaring or unwilling to act on climate change: in fact, they are more likely than young people to boycott products for social purpose reasons. And our current generation of young are not a particularly unusual group of “culture warriors”. Young people are always at the leading edge of change in cultural norms, around race, immigration, sexuality and gender equality. The issues have changed, but the gap between young and old is not greater now than in the past. Meanwhile, there are real, and vitally important, generational differences hidden in this mess. To see them, we need to separate the three effects that explain all change in societies. Some patterns are simple “lifecycle effects”, where attitudes and behaviours are to do with our age, not which generation we are born into. Some are “period effects” – where everyone is affected, such as in a war, economic crisis or a pandemic. And finally, there are “cohort effects”, which is where a new generation is different from others at the same age, and they stay different. It’s impossible to entirely separate these distinct forces, but we can often get some way towards it – and when we do, we can predict the future in a much more meaningful way. There are many real generational differences, in vitally important areas of life. For example, the probability of you owning your own home is hugely affected by when you were born. Millennials are around half as likely to be a homeowner than generations born only a couple of decades earlier. There is also a real cohort effect in experience of mental health disorders, particularly among recent generations of young women. Our relationship with alcohol and likelihood of smoking is also tied to our cohort, with huge generational declines in very regular drinking and smoking. Each of these point to different futures, from increased strain on mental health services to declining alcohol sales. But lifecycle and period effects are vitally important too. For example, there is truth in the idea that we grow more conservative as we age. One analysis suggests that this ageing effect is worth around <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379413000875">0.35% to the Conservatives each year</a>, which may not sound like a lot, but is very valuable over the course of a political lifetime. And, of course, the pandemic provides a very powerful example of how period effects can dramatically change things for us all. <h2>Reaching beyond the avocado</h2> When there is such richness in the realities, why are there so many myths? It’s partly down to bad marketing and workplace research – that is, people jumping on the generation bandwagon to get media coverage for their products or to sell consultancy to businesses on how to engage young employees. This has become its own mini-industry. In 2015, US companies spent up to US$70 million (£51 million) on this sort of “advice” <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/helping-bosses-decode-millennialsfor-20-000-an-hour-1463505666">according to the Wall Street Journal</a>, with some experts making as much as US$20,000 an hour. Over 400 LinkedIn users now describe themselves solely as a “millennial expert” or “millennial consultant”. Campaigners and politicians also play to these imagined differences. Our increasing focus on “<a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/culture-wars-in-the-uk.pdf">culture wars</a>” often involves picking out particular incidents in universities, such as the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-45717841">banning of clapping</a> at events or the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-57409743">removal of a portrait of the Queen</a> to exaggerate how culturally different young people today are. Maybe less obviously, politicians such as former US President Barack Obama repeatedly lionise coming generations as more focused on equality, when the evidence shows they’re often not that different. These assertions are not only wrong, but create false expectations and divides. Some have had enough, calling on the Pew Research Center in the US, which has been a champion of generational groups, to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/07/generation-labels-mean-nothing-retire-them/&data=04%257C01%257C">stop conducting this type of analysis</a>. I think that misses the point: it’s how it’s applied rather than the idea of generations that’s wrong. We should defend the big idea and call out the myths, not abandon the field to the “millennial consultants”.<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/167138/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bobby-duffy-98570">Bobby Duffy</a>, Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Policy Institute, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/kings-college-london-1196">King's College London</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/boomers-vs-millennials-free-yourself-from-the-phoney-generation-wars-167138">original article</a>. </div>

Mind

Man books 58 flights for free

A Jetstar passenger has become locked in a legal battle with the Aussie airline after exploiting a promotion to get 58 flights for free. Lawyer Tyrone Barugh was one of many travellers who made use of Jetstar’s promotion that offered people a free return fare. Barugh booked a flight from Auckland to Sydney for $260 and received the free return, although he soon cancelled the outbound flight and was given credit with the airline. However, he did not cancel the return trip. Mr Barugh then used the credit to book another flight, before doing the same thing a further 57 times. The would-be passenger told n<a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/travel/man-locked-in-tribunal-battle-with-jetstar-after-booking-58-free-flights/news-story/1e3f67324c952ce232f3a583575d7ddc">ews.com.au</a> that he had not planned to board any of the flights, and has taken Jetstar to the Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand, claiming he is entitled to approximately $4,500 in taxes owed on the flights. “They’re [Jetstar] not out here with the most saintly of intentions,” he said. “They have terms and conditions that are designed to potentially avoid having to do the right thing by a lot of their customers and limit their liability to their customers, and they’re pretty happy to pull those out when it suits them.” He claims he is owed the money as he has paid the Passenger Movement Charge, which is a $60 fee the Australian Government collects when a person leaves the country. Mr Barugh says he would accept a settlement of a “small flight credit and a toy plane”. “There is a spirit of larrikinism,” he said. A spokesman for Jetstar declined to comment on the case, saying, “As this is a matter before the Tribunal, we won’t be making any comment.” Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

Quiet beach town offering $450k job with free house and car

A picturesque beach town in Western Australia has found a creative way to bring jobs to the area: by offering a range of enticing bonuses. The town of Bremer Bay, south-east of Perth, is desperate for healthcare providers to join the small town and have offered a range of persuasive perks to a doctor who would be willing to leave a big city for the job in the regional location. Bremer Bay is next to the Fitzgerald River National Park and nearly 40 minutes away from the closest town. Currently, they only have one temporary doctor; the next permanent GP is in Albany, almost 200 kilometres away, and the town is looking for the "Swiss army knife of doctors" to step up. According to the job listing on Seek, the successful applicant will be granted a rent-free five-bedroom house and a four-wheel drive, on top of a salary of up to $450,000 a year. "Live rent-free in a scenic location, experiencing the true essence of rural Australia," the advertisement reads. "We offer a competitive 70 per cent of Billings or a generous Salary, based on your preference. In addition, you'll enjoy the convenience of a beautiful new 5-bedroom home and 4X4." Applicants must be registered with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and be willing to train as a rural generalist. According to the <a title="Australian Institute of Health and Welfare" href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/rural-remote-australians/rural-and-remote-health" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Australian Institute of Health and Welfare</a>, people living in rural and remote areas have higher rates of hospitalisations, deaths and injury compared to city-dwellers, while also having poorer access to primary health care services. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-breadon-1348098">Peter Breadon</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jessica-geraghty-1530733">Jessica Geraghty</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> Sugary drinks cause weight gain and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41574-021-00627-6">increase the risk</a> of a range of diseases, including diabetes. The <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2792842">evidence shows</a> that well-designed taxes can reduce sugary drink sales, cause people to choose healthier options and get manufacturers to reduce the sugar in their drinks. And although these taxes haven’t been around long, there are already signs that they are making people healthier. It’s time for Australia to catch up to the rest of the world and introduce a tax on sugary drinks. As our new Grattan Institute <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/sickly-sweet/">report</a> shows, doing so could mean the average Australian drinks almost 700 grams less sugar each year. <h2>Sugary drinks are making us sick</h2> The share of adults in Australia who are obese has tripled since 1980, from <a href="https://theconversation.com/mapping-australias-collective-weight-gain-7816">10%</a> to more than <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/waist-circumference-and-bmi/latest-release">30%</a>, and diabetes is our <a href="https://www.diabetesaustralia.com.au/about-diabetes/diabetes-in-australia/">fastest-growing</a> chronic condition. The costs for the health system and economy are measured in the billions of dollars each year. But the biggest costs are borne by individuals and their families in the form of illness, suffering and early death. Sugary drinks are a big part of the problem. The more of them we drink, the greater our risk of <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41574-021-00627-6">gaining weight</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2963518/">developing type 2 diabetes</a>, and suffering <a href="https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/31/1/122/5896049?login=false">poor oral health</a>. These drinks have no real nutrients, but they do have a lot of sugar. The average Australian consumes <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/apparent-consumption-selected-foodstuffs-australia/latest-release">1.3</a> times the maximum recommended amount of sugar each day. Sugary drinks are responsible for more than one-quarter of our daily sugar intake, more than any other major type of food. You might be shocked by how much sugar you’re drinking. Many 375ml cans of soft drink contain eight to 12 teaspoons of sugar, nearly the entire daily recommended limit for an adult. Many 600ml bottles blow our entire daily sugar budget, and then some. The picture is even worse for disadvantaged Australians, who are more likely to have <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/diabetes/latest-release">diabetes</a> and <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/waist-circumference-and-bmi/latest-release">obesity</a>, and who also consume the most sugary drinks. <h2>Sugary drink taxes work</h2> Fortunately, there’s a proven way to reduce the damage sugary drinks cause. More than <a href="https://ssbtax.worldbank.org/">100 countries</a> have a sugary drinks tax, covering most of the world’s population. <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2792842">Research</a> shows these taxes lead to higher prices and fewer purchases. Some taxes are specifically designed to encourage manufacturers to change their recipes and cut the sugar in their drinks. Under these “tiered taxes”, there is no tax on drinks with a small amount of sugar, but the tax steps up two or three times as the amount of sugar rises. That gives manufacturers a strong incentive to add less sugar, so they reduce their exposure to the tax or avoid paying it altogether. This is the best result from a sugary drinks tax. It means drinks get healthier, while the tax is kept to a minimum. In countries with tiered taxes, manufacturers have slashed the sugar in their drinks. In the United Kingdom, the share of products above the tax threshold <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003025">decreased dramatically</a>. In 2015, more than half (52%) of products in the UK were above the tax threshold of 5 grams of sugar per 100ml. Four years later, when the tax was in place, that share had plunged to 15%. The number of products with the most sugar – more than 8 grams per 100ml – declined the most, falling from 38% to just 7%. The Australian drinks market today looks similar to the UK’s before the tax was introduced. Health benefits take longer to appear, but there are already promising signs that the taxes are working. Obesity among primary school-age girls has fallen in <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004160">the UK</a> and <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2786784">Mexico</a>. Oral health has also improved, with studies reporting fewer children going to hospital to get their teeth removed in <a href="https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/6/2/243">the UK</a>, and reduced dental decay <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33853058/">in Mexico</a> and <a href="https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(23)00069-7/abstract">Philadelphia</a>. One <a href="https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(23)00158-7/fulltext">study from the United States</a> found big reductions in gestational diabetes in cities with a sugary drinks tax. <h2>The tax Australia should introduce</h2> Like successful taxes overseas, Australia should introduce a sugary drink tax that targets drinks with the most sugar: <ul> <li>drinks with 8 grams or more of sugar per 100ml should face a $0.60 per litre tax</li> <li>drinks with 5–8 grams should be taxed at $0.40 per litre</li> <li>drinks with less than 5 grams of sugar should be tax-free.</li> </ul> This means a 250ml Coke, which has nearly 11 grams of sugar per 100ml, would cost $0.15 more. But of course consumers could avoid the tax by choosing a sugar-free soft drink, or a bottle of water. Grattan Institute <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/sickly-sweet/">modelling</a> shows that under this tiered tax, Australians would drink about 275 million litres fewer sugary drinks each year, or the volume of 110 Olympic swimming pools. The tax is about health, but government budgets also benefit. If it was introduced today, it would raise about half a billion dollars in the first year. Vested interests such as the beverages industry have fiercely resisted sugary drink taxes around the world, issuing disingenuous warnings about the risks to poor people, the sugar industry and drinks manufacturers. But our new report shows sugary drink taxes have been introduced smoothly overseas, and none of these concerns should hold Australia back. We certainly can’t rely on industry pledges to voluntarily reduce sugar. They have been <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/public-health-nutrition/article/trends-in-sugar-content-of-nonalcoholic-beverages-in-australia-between-2015-and-2019-during-the-operation-of-a-voluntary-industry-pledge-to-reduce-sugar-content/EE662DE7552670ED532F6650C9D56939">weak</a> and misleading, and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/10/sugar-increase-in-fanta-and-sprite-prompts-calls-for-new-tax-on-australia-food-and-drinks-industry">failed to stick</a>. It will take many policies and interventions to turn back the tide of obesity and chronic disease in Australia, but a sugary drinks tax should be part of the solution. It’s a policy that works, it’s easy to implement, and most Australians <a href="https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/6/e027962">support it</a>. The federal government should show it’s serious about tackling Australia’s biggest health problems and take this small step towards a healthier future.<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/228906/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-breadon-1348098">Peter Breadon</a>, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jessica-geraghty-1530733">Jessica Geraghty</a>, Senior Associate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</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/a-tax-on-sugary-drinks-can-make-us-healthier-its-time-for-australia-to-introduce-one-228906">original article</a>. </div>

Food & Wine

Jetstar celebrates 20th birthday with "return for free" flights

Jetstar is celebrating its 20th birthday with massive sales and “return for free” flights across Australia and the world. The budget airline is offering over 200,000 “return for free” flights to 64 domestic and 33 international destinations, including popular holiday spots like Japan and Thailand. “Since launching in 2004, Jetstar has enabled hundreds of millions of Australian passengers to travel to more places, more often for less,” Jetstar Group CEO, Stephanie Tully, said. The 20th birthday sale will run for 48 hours, starting at 12.00am AEST on Wednesday, May 1, and end at 11.59pm AEST Thursday 2 May. The travel dates will vary according to the route, but for domestic flights dates include mid-January to late March 2025 and mid-June 2024 to late March 2025 for international services. Club Jetstar members will have 12 hours of exclusive early access from midday Tuesday. A few of the destinations included in the offer can be seen below: Domestic: <ul> <li>Sydney to Ballina Byron from $86</li> <li>Melbourne (Tullamarine) to Launceston from $87</li> <li>Sydney to Gold Coast from $99</li> <li>Newcastle to Melbourne (Tullamarine) from $124</li> <li>Gold Coast to Melbourne (Tullamarine) from $125</li> <li>Perth to Gold Coast from $262</li> </ul> International: <ul> <li>Gold Coast to Wellington from $243</li> <li>Brisbane to Auckland from $266</li> <li>Perth to Bangkok from $309</li> <li>Perth to Phuket from $329</li> <li>Adelaide to Bali (Denpasar) from $349</li> <li>Melbourne (Tullamarine) to Singapore from $399</li> <li>Sydney to Honolulu from $449</li> <li>Brisbane to Seoul (Incheon) from $479</li> <li>Sydney to Osaka from $548</li> </ul> A complete list of all the destinations and details can be found on the <a href="https://www.jetstar.com/au/en/deals?pid=mainnav%3Adeals&flight-type=2&adults=1&origin=SYD#deals-content" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jetstar website</a>. Image: Getty

Domestic Travel

If you squat in a vacant property, does the law give you the house for free? Well, sort of

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/cathy-sherry-466">Cathy Sherry</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Nothing excites law students like the idea of a free house. Or alternatively, enrages them. It depends on their politics. As a result, academics condemned to teaching property law find it hard to resist the “<a href="https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/2011/28.html">doctrine of adverse possession</a>”. The fact that a person can change the locks on someone else’s house, wait 12 years, and claim it as their own, makes students light up in a way that the Strata Schemes Management Act never will. The idea of “squatters’ rights” has received a lot of media attention recently amid the grim reality of the Australian housing market. It fuels commentators such as Jordan van den Berg, who <a href="https://www.instagram.com/purplepingers/">critiques bad landlords</a> on social media. Casting back to his days as a law student, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed/article/jordan-was-fed-up-with-australias-empty-houses-his-proposal-has-led-to-death-threats/stx6rv6fl">he’s promoting</a> the doctrine of adverse possession as a way of making use of vacant properties. As interesting as the doctrine is, it has little relevance in modern Australia. While it is necessary to limit the time someone has to bring legal proceedings to recover land – typically 12 or 15 years, depending on which state you’re in – most people don’t need that long to notice someone else is living in their house. If a family member is occupying a home that someone else has inherited or a tenant refuses to vacate at the end of a lease, owners tend to bring actions to recover their land pronto. So where did this doctrine come from, and what has it meant in practice? <h2>Free house fetching millions</h2> In unusual circumstances, people can lose track of their own land. Just before the second world war, Henry Downie moved out of his house in the Sydney suburb of Ashbury. Downie died a decade later, but his will was never administered. At the time of his death, a Mrs Grimes rented the house and did so for a further 50 years. Downie’s next of kin did not realise they had inherited the house or that they were Grimes’s landlord. Grimes died in 1998 and Bill Gertos, a property developer, saw the house was vacant. He changed the locks, did some repairs, then leased the house and paid the rates for the next 17 years. He then made an application under <a href="https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/rpa1900178/s45d.html">NSW property laws</a> to become the registered proprietor. At this point, Downie’s next of kin became aware they may have been entitled to the property and disputed Gertos’s claim. The <a href="https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2018/1629.html">court held</a> Gertos had been “in possession” of the property since the late 1990s. The next of kin had a legal right to eject him, but they had failed to do so within the statutory time limit of 12 years. Gertos had the best claim to the house. He <a href="https://www.domain.com.au/6-malleny-street-ashbury-nsw-2193-2015821514">promptly sold it</a> for A$1.4 million. Outrageous as this may seem, the law encourages caring for land. If you fail to take responsibility for your land, and someone else does, you can lose it. <h2>An old English tradition</h2> Gertos’s jackpot was unusual, and adverse possession has always been more relevant in a country like England. First, for much of English history, many people did not have documentary title (deeds) to their land. People were illiterate, parchment was expensive, and documents could disappear in a puff of smoke in a house fire. The law often had to rely on people’s physical possession of land as proof of ownership. Second, as a result of feudalism, vast swathes of England were owned by the aristocracy. They and their 20th-century successors in title, often local councils, had a habit of forgetting they owned five suburbs in London. In the post second world war housing crisis, thousands of families, and later young people and students, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b017cfv4">squatted in vacant houses</a> owned by public and private landlords who lacked the means or motivation to maintain them. <h2>A sign of the times</h2> In contrast, in Australia, for most of our settler history, governments of all political persuasions actively prevented the emergence of a landed class. But now, courtesy of tax policies that <a href="https://www.quarterlyessay.com.au/essay/2023/11/the-great-divide">encourage investment</a> in residential real estate, we have a landlord class of Baby Boomer and Gen X investors. That has caused housing market stress as younger people cannot make the natural transition from being renters to homeowners. They are outbid by older, wealthier buyers whose tax benefits from negative gearing increase with every dollar they borrow to buy an investment property. Money flowing into the market then means that landlords’ greatest benefit is capital gain rather than income, and thanks to John Howard, investors pay <a href="https://theconversation.com/stranger-than-fiction-who-labors-capital-gains-tax-changes-will-really-hurt-109657">no tax</a> on half of that gain. Finally, an almost exclusive reliance by government on the <a href="https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/for-more-affordable-housing-we-need-more-public-housing/">private sector</a> to provide new homes – which it will only do if it is making a profit – has left many people in deep housing stress. While squatters in Australia are likely to find themselves swiftly subject to court orders for ejection, van den Berg’s rallying cry indicates just how inequitable the housing market has become. Baby Boomers and Gen X should be on notice – young people want their housing back. <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/227556/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/cathy-sherry-466">Cathy Sherry</a>, Professor in Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie 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/if-you-squat-in-a-vacant-property-does-the-law-give-you-the-house-for-free-well-sort-of-227556">original article</a>.

Legal

Flight attendant reveals how to score a free upgrade

A flight attendant has shared her number one trick for securing an upgrade on your next plane journey. American flight attendant Cierra Mistt revealed the one question you should ask at check-in to score an upgrade to first class, with the hack working almost every time. Mistt started her now-viral video by saying her hack to get a free upgrade was top secret. “Let’s look at the big picture. Everyone is flying right now, and no one is more excited about that than commercial airlines,” she said. “The majority of airlines are overbooking every single flight they have.” “It comes from the last month of me trying to get home and not even being able to get on standby because every single flight has been oversold,” she said. “I am not talking about one or two seats. I am talking about 10-30 seats that have been oversold.” Mistt said this overselling of flights presents an opportunity to travellers. “If everyone does show up, including the extra passengers that were oversold their tickets, the airlines have no choice but to financially compensate,” she said. The flight attendant shared that airlines “normally start off with vouchers for $500 or something”. “Normally they say a voucher but you can ask for it in cash,” she said. “Depending on the flight and how desperate they are, they will go up to, like three, four, five thousand dollars.” “This is where the free upgrades come in.” Mistt said not only could you ask for a free upgrade in such circumstances, but you could “also ask for other incentives”. “For example, drinks, dinners, breakfast, even a hotel if you have to stay overnight until the next flight,” she said. “And, yes, you can also ask to be upgraded to first class.” Her video received more than a million views, with people praising the hack and sharing how it has worked for them. “I got upgraded to first class by doing this,” said one person. Image credits: TikTok / Getty Images

Travel Tips

How much sport will you be able to watch for free under proposed new Australian broadcast rules?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hunter-fujak-290599">Hunter Fujak</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-rowe-16403">David Rowe</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Watching sport on television and other screens is integral to the <a href="https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws%3A57259">cultural lives of many Australians</a>. This is why, in 1995, the anti-siphoning scheme was introduced to ensure sport “<a href="http://www.tandfebooks.com/isbn/9780203758397">events of national importance and cultural significance</a>” would not be captured exclusively by pay TV at the expense of free-to-air coverage. There have been enormous <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780429402265-5/television-tony-bennett-modesto-gayo-david-rowe-graeme-turner">changes in television</a> since and this analogue-era legislation is increasingly out of step with the modern digital media landscape. Critically, under current definitions, streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon fall outside a scheme restricting subscription broadcasters like Foxtel. The federal government <a href="https://anthonyalbanese.com.au/media-centre/labor-will-support-local-tv-free-sport-in-the-streaming-age">promised</a> before its election in 2022 to review the anti-siphoning scheme. Its subsequent <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7132">Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023</a> is designed to close the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/streaming-platforms-will-soon-be-required-to-invest-more-in-australian-tv-and-films-which-could-be-good-news-for-our-screen-sector-198757">regulatory gap</a>” that has emerged within media law since Netflix’s launch in Australia in 2015. The Senate referred the bill to its Environment and Communications Legislation Committee. Its report has just been released and will help shape Australians’ access to sport media content. <h2>The importance of prominence</h2> “Prominence” refers to the discoverability of individual media applications, such as Netflix or 9Now, on the user homepage of smart televisions. The federal government is troubled by overseas services like YouTube and Amazon being immediately visible on smart televisions through commercial licensing agreements, effectively “burying” Australian free-to-air TV. Public service broadcaster SBS, for example, <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/anti-siphoning-prominence-laws-australia-free-to-air-tv-channels/87bc8ddd-4120-4542-864e-2c84a781411e">claimed</a> during Senate hearings that one television manufacturer demanded both a placement fee and a 15% share of revenue to feature on the television’s homepage. Prominence is crucial in sport because anti-siphoning legislation is based on the principle that, although in <a href="https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/finance/finance-news/2023/03/06/tv-habits-australia">general decline</a>, free-to-air TV is still the most effective, <a href="https://accan.org.au/files/Reports/ACCAN%20Research%20Snapshot%20How%20Australians%20Watch%20TV.pdf">low-cost, readily-accessed</a> vehicle for delivering premium sport to a majority of Australian households. <h2>Anti-siphoning</h2> While often criticised by <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/anti-siphoning-scheme-review">subscription media companies and many sports</a> as anti-competitive, anti-siphoning legislation is significantly responsible for the continued abundance of free major sport on our televisions. In a portent of the risks ahead, <a href="https://www.cricket.com.au/news/3807634/amazon-prime-video-secures-icc-broadcast-rights-in-australia-t20-odi-world-cup-world-test-championship-2024-27">International Cricket Council</a> World Cups will disappear from free-to-air television between 2024 and 2027, after the world governing body signed an exclusive four-year deal with streaming platform Amazon. The <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-boss-flies-to-us-for-talks-with-media-companies-20220425-p5ag16.html">AFL</a> also reportedly met Amazon in 2022 as part of its media rights negotiations. <a href="https://theconversation.com/regardless-of-the-rules-sport-is-fleeing-free-tv-for-pay-and-it-might-be-an-avalanche-154640">Loopholes</a> in the scheme are also being increasingly exploited. This problem was exposed in 2018 when <a href="https://www.cricket.com.au/news/3296093/tvs-antisiphon-list-and-cricket-explained">Australian one-day international cricket matches</a> went behind a paywall, despite being listed as free-to-air events. As <a href="https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/streaming/nrl-calls-for-technologically-neutral-overhaul-to-sport-broadcasting/news-story/31fc06ab986e12c7e6f720df33d23ad1">Foxtel</a> told the Senate hearing, both Nine (Stan) and Ten (Paramount+) are now hybrid networks, able to move acquired sports from free-to-air broadcast to behind a streaming paywall. At present, free-to-air networks cannot be compelled to acquire the rights to any sport, broadcast them if they do, or refrain from on-selling them to a pay platform. <h2>What are the implications for sport and other viewers?</h2> The majority Senate report broadly supported the federal government’s existing <a href="https://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/rowland/media-release/exposure-draft-prominence-regulations-released">exposure draft</a>. Regarding prominence, this means free-to-air channel “tiles” will be highly visible when you turn on a new smart TV. A 12-month phased implementation of a prominence framework was recommended by the committee – and would only apply to new televisions. The committee also broadly accepted the draft bill’s anti-siphoning provisions, which will affect what and where sport is viewed by fans. First, the listed events will be expanded by 30% and incorporate more women’s and parasports. They include the AFLW and NRLW finals, NRLW State of Origin, and the Summer Paralympic Games. To provide counterbalancing benefits to subscription broadcasters, sport events not acquired by a free-to-air broadcaster will become more quickly available to subscription platforms (12 months before an event starts, rather than six months before). This provides subscription platforms with greater lead-in times to plan, organise and promote their content schedules. The most controversial recommendation related to the scope of anti-siphoning laws, affecting how Australian viewers can access sport in the medium term. It supported the government’s position, on grounds of excessive competitive advantage, that anti-siphoning should only apply to terrestrial broadcasting. This excludes digital rights for live streaming through broadcast video on demand apps such as 9Now, Seven+, iView and SBS On Demand. Commercial free-to-air broadcasters called this a “<a href="https://www.mediaweek.com.au/industry-reacts-to-prominence-and-anti-siphoning-findings/">nightmare scenario</a>”, as they <a href="https://www.freetv.com.au/access-to-local-tv-services-and-free-sport-under-threat-unless-laws-are-strengthened/">estimate</a> 50% of households will be watching TV online by 2027. For viewers without televisions connected to aerials, this could make major sport events on free-to-air TV unavailable. Although terrestrial TV is still the most <a href="https://intellectdiscover.com/content/journals/10.1386/jdmp_00098_1">universally available screen sport vehicle</a>, aerials are no longer routinely installed in new housing developments. Research by the <a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/television-research">Australian Communications and Media Authority</a>, though, indicates that free-to-air network claims about disappearing TV aerials are somewhat exaggerated. Nonetheless, as modernisation was a central justification for the anti-siphoning reforms, the strategic compromise over broadcast video on demand apps will inevitably be scrutinised. Notably, in a dissenting minority report, the Greens were unhappy the bill did not go far enough in either prominence or anti-siphoning. They reserved their right to reject it unless suitably amended to guarantee global corporations could not capture Australian sports rights. <h2>What happens next?</h2> The amended bill must pass through Parliament to become law, and its final shape and the fate of any amendments are as yet unknown. While it is widely, though not universally, acknowledged action is needed to protect free screen sport viewing, intense disagreement remains among competing interest groups over what is to be done now and in the future. To safeguard their viewing interests, Australian sport fans will need to watch these formidably technical debates as closely as their favourite sport contests.<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/226499/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hunter-fujak-290599">Hunter Fujak</a>, Senior Lecturer in Sport Management, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-rowe-16403">David Rowe</a>, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Research, Institute for Culture and Society, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney 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/how-much-sport-will-you-be-able-to-watch-for-free-under-proposed-new-australian-broadcast-rules-226499">original article</a>.

Do parolees really ‘walk free’? Busting common myths about parole

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/monique-moffa-1380936">Monique Moffa</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alyssa-sigamoney-1375881">Alyssa Sigamoney</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/greg-stratton-161122">Greg Stratton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jarryd-bartle-441602">Jarryd Bartle</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michele-ruyters-18446">Michele Ruyters</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Parole is a hot topic in politics and in the media at the moment, fuelled by several high-profile parole applications. Recently, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/no-parole-for-convicted-baby-killer-keli-lane/xoykrtvxe?cid=testtwitter">Keli Lane’s</a> attempt to be released on parole after years in jail for the murder of her baby daughter was unsuccessful. <a href="https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/how-frankston-serial-killer-paul-denyer-will-apply-for-bail/news-story/4613d1b3fced1f4aeaa9c4e08e8b81e0">Paul Denyer</a>, known as the “Frankston Serial Killer” for murdering three women in the 90s was also denied parole. Meanwhile, Snowtown accomplice <a href="https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-sa/bodies-in-the-barrels-helper-mark-haydon-released-on-parole/news-story/fdfbbbe7b59267d8009c6910249de585">Mark Haydon</a> was granted parole with strict conditions, but is <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-01/snowtown-accomplice-mark-haydon-still-in-custody-after-parole/103653934">yet to be</a> released. Some media coverage of such well-known cases is littered with myths about what parole is, how it’s granted and what it looks like. Here’s what the evidence says about three of the most common misconceptions. <h2>Myth 1: people on parole walk free</h2> Parole is the conditional release of an incarcerated person (parolee) by a parole board authority, after they have served their non-parole period (minimum sentence) in jail. This isn’t always reflected in headlines. <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/snowtown-murders-bodies-in-barrels-murders-mark-haydon-release-south-australia/f4b62a72-ec3d-4238-94d2-64697fbcdef3">Some coverage</a> suggests people on parole are released early and “walk free” without conditions. This is not true. According to the <a href="https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/what-parole/purpose-and-benefits">Adult Parole Board of Victoria</a>: "Parole provides incarcerated people with a structured, supported and supervised transition so that they can adjust from prison back into the community, rather than returning straight to the community at the end of their sentence without supervision or support." Parole comes with strict conditions and requirements, such as curfews, drug and alcohol testing, electronic monitoring, program participation, to name a few. People with experience of parole highlight its punitivism and continued extension of surveillance. <h2>Myth 2: most parolees reoffend</h2> Another myth is that the likelihood all parolees reoffend is high. Research over a number of years has consistently found parole reduces reoffending. For example, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0004865815585393?journalCode=anja">a 2016 study in New South Wales</a> found at the 12 month mark, a group of parolees reoffended 22% less than an unsupervised cohort. A <a href="https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Publications/CJB/2022-Report-Effect-of-parole-supervision-on-recidivism-CJB245.pdf">2022 study</a> by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research found parole was especially successful in reducing serious recidivism rates among incarcerated people considered to be at a high risk of reoffending. More recently in Victoria, <a href="https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/system/files/inline-files/Adult%20Parole%20Board%20Annual%20Report%202022-23_0.pdf">the Adult Parole Board</a> found over 2022–23, no parolees were convicted of committing serious offences while on parole. In contrast, unstructured and unconditional release increases the risk of returning to prison. <h2>Myth 3: parole is easy to get</h2> While the number of parolees reoffending has dropped, so too has the total number of people who are exiting prison on parole. Over a decade ago, Victoria underwent significant parole reforms, largely prompted by high-profile incidents and campaigns. In just five years following Jill Meagher’s tragic death in 2012, the Victorian government passed <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10345329.2018.1556285">13 laws reshaping parole</a>. The result is the number of people on parole in Victoria has halved since 2012, despite incarceration numbers remaining steady. <iframe id="maNRy" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/maNRy/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> These reforms have made it more difficult for people convicted of serious offences to get parole, as well as preventing individuals or specific groups from being eligible for parole (such as police killers, <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-body-no-parole-laws-could-be-disastrous-for-the-wrongfully-convicted-191083">“no body, no parole” prisoners</a>, and certain high-profile murderers). Similar laws can be found in other states. For example, no body, no parole was introduced in all other Australian states and territories, except for Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. As a consequence, more people are being released at the end of their full sentence. This can be detrimental not only for the incarcerated person but the wider community, because they are not receiving the reintegration support parole provides. Aside from restricted access due to political intervention, parole is facing a new crisis, which has nothing to do with eligibility or suitability. Last year, 40% of Victorian parole applications were denied, often due to reasons <a href="https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/system/files/inline-files/Adult%20Parole%20Board%20Annual%20Report%202022-23_0.pdf">unrelated to suitability</a>. Housing scarcity played a significant role, with 59% of rejections (or 235 applications) citing a lack of suitable accommodation as one of the reasons parole was denied. This is playing out <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-11/women-on-bail-parole-increased-risk-of-homelessness-qld/102717002">across the country</a>. Parole is vulnerable to community and media hype, and political knee-jerk reactions in response to high profile incidents involving a person on parole. Because of the actions of a few, parole as a process has been restricted for many. While the wider community are active in advocacy efforts to restrict parole from certain people or groups (for example, this petition for <a href="https://www.change.org/p/lyns-law-no-body-no-parole">Lyn’s Law in NSW</a>), public efforts to restrict parole seem at odds with its purposes. Despite this, research suggests when the public are educated about the purposes and intent of parole, they are more likely to be <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3125829">supportive of it</a>. The susceptibility of parole to media and community influence results in frequent, impactful changes affecting individuals inside and outside prisons. Headlines such as “walking free” have the potential to mislead the public on the purpose and structure of parole. Coverage should portray parole beyond mere early termination of a sentence by accurately reflecting its purpose and impact.<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/226607/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/monique-moffa-1380936">Monique Moffa</a>, Lecturer, Criminology & Justice, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alyssa-sigamoney-1375881">Alyssa Sigamoney</a>, Associate Lecturer in Criminology and Justice Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/greg-stratton-161122">Greg Stratton</a>, Lecturer - Criminology and Justice Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jarryd-bartle-441602">Jarryd Bartle</a>, Associate Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michele-ruyters-18446">Michele Ruyters</a>, Associate Dean, Criminology and Justice Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT 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/do-parolees-really-walk-free-busting-common-myths-about-parole-226607">original article</a>.

Legal

Might we see child-free zones on flights?

Ah, the joys of air travel. The excitement of jetting off to exotic locales, the thrill of new adventures, and of course, the endless possibilities for unexpected entertainment. And what's more exhilarating than finding yourself seated next to a rowdy toddler or an inconsolable infant? It's the stuff of dreams, truly. Picture this: you're settling into your seat, envisioning a serene journey ahead, perhaps catching up on your favourite Netflix series or finally finishing that novel you've been meaning to read. But wait, what's this? A couple with a baby approaching your row. You can already hear the distant wails of despair echoing through the cabin. Your heart sinks as you realise that your peaceful flight just took a nosedive before it even began. Yes, it's the age-old dilemma of child-free travellers everywhere. Whether it's the cacophony of a crying baby or the rhythmic drumming of tiny feet on the back of your seat, flying with children nearby can be an experience like no other. And let's not forget the classic game of "Will they or won't they?" as you anxiously await to see if the parents will be able to tame their pint-sized companions or if chaos will reign supreme at 30,000 feet. But fear not, dear passengers, for there may be a solution on the horizon. Could child-free zones be the answer to our airborne woes? According to a <a href="https://travel.nine.com.au/latest/planes-should-there-be-child-free-zones/d463b299-5258-418f-831c-f5fb218f1d77" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recent poll conducted by Nine News</a>, a whopping 73 per cent of respondents were in favour of such a proposition. Finally, a sanctuary where one can escape the unpredictable antics of tiny humans and bask in the tranquility of uninterrupted inflight bliss. Of course, implementing such a scheme may prove to be a tad challenging. After all, how does we go about segregating the child-rearing masses from the child-free elite without inciting a riot at the boarding gate? It's a logistical nightmare that even the most seasoned airline execs would hesitate to tackle. So, for now, it seems we child-free flyers will have to make do with our trusty noise-cancelling headphones, our steadfast eye masks, and a healthy dose of empathy for our fellow passengers. After all, parenting is no easy feat, especially at 35,000 feet. Image: Getty

Travel Trouble

Pilot pitches in to free passenger stuck in plane bathroom

A pilot has been forced to abandon his post at the cockpit to rescue a passenger trapped in the bathroom of a plane. While onboard a Delta Airlines flight from Salt Lake City to New Orleans, a father of two named Brent became stuck in the bathroom for 35 minutes during the short domestic flight. When it was discovered that Brent was not breaking out of the bathroom by himself, the cabin crew, including the pilot, stepped in to free the 34-year-old dad. After being refused a refund by the airline's customer service, Brent's dissatisfied partner shared a video of the moment the staff all rallied to heave the door open. Recounting the tale on Reddit, the woman suggested that her husband had fled to the bathroom to have a break from his two young kids. She wrote, "After 5 minutes, I wondered what was going on. Was he using this time as a much-needed break from my children’s whiney demands and frequent tantrums? I didn’t blame him." Brent's partner went on to explain that it wasn't until she heard another passenger say the word "stuck" did she realise her husband's predicament. She turned around to see two members of the crew yanking at the door to the rear cubicle as she watched on while she kept one eye on her young kids. The flight attendants enlisted the help of a male passenger who also failed to provide the magic touch, before the pilot emerged, 20 minutes into the ordeal, to have a go. <iframe title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZWOyr4J2OBo?si=FSdSkXFv4WlClKXB" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe> <aside> "It wasn't until Brent kicked the hell out of the door while the pilot was pulling as hard as possible that Brent finally made his escape," she wrote. Finishing off the post, the woman concluded that Delta asked her not to share the footage, filmed by another passenger who was closer to the end of the plane, but after not receiving a refund for their "terrible" journey, the mother decided to post them online. The post racked up hundreds of comments, with many people actually siding with the airline for not issuing a refund, suggesting that the author's response was not proportionate to what actually happened. Image credits: Reddit </aside>

Travel Trouble

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

The Princess of Wales wants to stay cancer-free. What does this mean?

Why is it so hard to cancel subscriptions or end ‘free’ trials? Report shows how companies trap you into paying

Does free-to-air TV really need gambling ads to survive?

Why Greg Lynn could walk free from prison

Optus giving away 20,000 free phones to vulnerable customers

Plastic Free July is a waste of time if the onus is only on consumers

Cafe providing free meals to families faces shutdown

Telstra giving free phones to elderly and remote

Worrying pattern of cancellations shows Australian TV's grim future

Boomers vs millennials? Free yourself from the phoney generation wars

Man books 58 flights for free

Quiet beach town offering $450k job with free house and car

A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one

Jetstar celebrates 20th birthday with "return for free" flights

If you squat in a vacant property, does the law give you the house for free? Well, sort of

Flight attendant reveals how to score a free upgrade

How much sport will you be able to watch for free under proposed new Australian broadcast rules?

Do parolees really ‘walk free’? Busting common myths about parole

Might we see child-free zones on flights?

Pilot pitches in to free passenger stuck in plane bathroom

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

The Princess of Wales wants to stay cancer-free. What does this mean?

Why is it so hard to cancel subscriptions or end ‘free’ trials? Report shows how companies trap you into paying

Does free-to-air TV really need gambling ads to survive?

Why Greg Lynn could walk free from prison

Optus giving away 20,000 free phones to vulnerable customers

Plastic Free July is a waste of time if the onus is only on consumers

Cafe providing free meals to families faces shutdown

Telstra giving free phones to elderly and remote

Worrying pattern of cancellations shows Australian TV's grim future

Boomers vs millennials? Free yourself from the phoney generation wars

Man books 58 flights for free

Quiet beach town offering $450k job with free house and car

A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one

Jetstar celebrates 20th birthday with "return for free" flights

If you squat in a vacant property, does the law give you the house for free? Well, sort of

Flight attendant reveals how to score a free upgrade

How much sport will you be able to watch for free under proposed new Australian broadcast rules?

Do parolees really ‘walk free’? Busting common myths about parole

Might we see child-free zones on flights?

Pilot pitches in to free passenger stuck in plane bathroom

Our Partners

Join Over60