The problem with the very question is that increasingly, there isn't a line.
A lot of blogs and other websites I visit and use have advertising or a paypal button etc., that at partially compensates for the effort made. While the contributors to these sites would certainly be ill advised to to quit their day jobs, they are being paid for their content. PA itself is an example of this.
For me the real question is, is user generated partially remunerated content (for which contributors receive less than market rates) going to take enough mindshare to seriously harm journalists and other paid contributors?
Nice. It reminds me of the time when I was 9, in the early 90s, and my dad took me to a Winston First political rally, with similarly civic education in mind. I was entranced by the spectacle.It's great to have parents who will show you the weird and the wonderful, and entertain an inquiring mind.
whoops, excuse the spelling in that...
The police are already making excuses about how hard it would be to investigate without a complainant. Well tough, that is their job.
Perpatretors often attempt to coerce a victim from making a complaint, be it through threats, further violence, or bribery. These are all situations where the perpetrator has considerable power over the victim, and is continuing that power relationship.
Where a victim feels they cannot complain, the police should not withdraw, they should double their efforts.
Ah, reply got stuck in the tubes...
The law outlawed the use of violence against children. It was, after all, the repeal of section 59 act.
Smacking is a subset of violence against children. At a pretty minor level in most cases, and at a more serious level in some. What the opponents of the bill were able to do was to conflate the two concepts (violence - smacking), so that it was only the "anti-smacking bill". And that was the abuse of language.
Programme: Sensing Murder Series 2 Extension
Duration: 5 x 1.5 hour
Production Company: Ninox Television
$ Committed: $1,000,000
As much as I'm loathe to have Governments interfere in the media, that is a million dollars of "waste" that any Government could trim with my utmost approval.
I should also mention that Australia's second public television network, the SBS, has gone downhill in the last few years. Most of the documentaries seem to be about sex or Nazis (not that there is anything wrong with either, in moderation). A number of serious journalists have left, citing irreconcilable differences with the management. And guess who is running the channel, and has just had his contract extended? A former TVNZ executive. Says it all really.
I'd like some media outlets to engage in some honest self-examination about exactly what 'public interest' considerations were really involved here.
Indeed. Am I the only one who wishes for the gory details to be reported after a conviction, or otherwise not at all?
There's evidence that green consumerism is often actually counterproductive to environmental goals. People take small steps, the sense of need to change is blunted, and people are content again.
Cleaning the bathroom and kitchen: use bleach instead of commercial brands. I've found diluted bleach is faster, easier, and much much cheaper. Of course, you want to turn on the fan and open the window when you do this, as chlorine fumes are somewhat harmful.
The anti-smacking bill should be scrapped, and replaced with the repeal of section 59 act .