I guess this is a big deal in Christian music and Lesbian circles

Can I give some props? I think I can.

Props to Mark Moring from Christianity Today, who interviewed Christian music singer Jennifer Knapp. I remember her name from around the place back in the day. She had that guitar-driven chick soft rock style.

She quit music for seven years, moved to Australia and lived with her girlfriend. Now she's making a comeback to music and is understandably unsure about how she will be received.

Back to the props. Moring did a great job with the interview. He asked the questions his audience would like answered, didn't push it too far, but also didn't hold back. That is a tough ask in an interview where you are acutely aware of what the sensitive issues are. It's not a lot of fun asking people questions they don't really want to answer.

My tips for asking tough questions in a sensitive interview:
1) Start with a couple of warm ups to get the interviewee comfortable. Don't let this drag on too long though.
2) If a natural opportunity presents itself, ask the tough question. As you become more practiced, you will find ways of asking questions that will lead where you want them to go.
3 Even if you're nervous, don't show it. Don't ramble on. If you're going to ask the question - ask it.
4) Keep your tone neutral. Ask the question clearly and concisely and wait for the answer.
5) If the answer isn't satisfactory, ask the question again. If the interviewee gets testy, it's time to wrap it up. This is a sensitive issue and you've given them two chances to talk about it.

Anyway, that interview was a bit different to the one in gay magazine The Advocate (not the paper I used to work for, just to clear that up). The writer was clearly asking questions for a different audience. Like the commenters at AfterEllen, who are stoked with the news. And, again, a different reaction from readers at Christianity Today.

So props to Mark Moring. Sensitive interviews aren't easy, but they are necessary. They can be emotionally draining for the interviewer, just as they can be very tough for the interviewee.

Journalists getting it wrong again!!

How many times have you picked up a newspaper, read a story about an issue you are intimately familiar with, and said "That's not how the story is at all!"?

And then thrown it down in disgust and had a rant over the table?
I know I've done it. You may have too. So what is wrong with these journalists who have no idea of the story and get their facts wrong all the time?

Odds are, nothing.
I'll tell you what the odds are on that story.
Odds are:
1) The journalist knows there is more to the story. That's a given.
2) No one is willing to speak on the record about it.
3) No one is willing to speak off the record about it.
4) Knowing there is a story there, the journalist writes one with the comments and information they can print.
5) Hopefully, that will flush out people willing to change points 2) or 3).

Sometimes all a journalist can do is print what people tell them in the hope that they will look stupid when the truth comes out. A key part of journalism is "getting something on the record" - basically quoting someone to be able to hold them accountable later. I can think of countless times where I've known there is something going on, but I have to take the official line and put it in the paper, because no one else is willing to comment, and I have no other reliable information.

So you get comments like "It's not happening, as far as I'm aware", "We will not close the plant", or "His position is safe". Later on down the track, hopefully someone will have some guts and comment and the person trying to hide the truth will be revealed as a liar. We have some pretty serious legal ramifications for doing our job. There are not many other professions I can think of where you can get sent to jail for doing your job correctly.

Yes - correctly.

So we have to be careful about what we print.

Next time you read something you know isn't telling the full story, feel free to contact the journalist who wrote it and add some useful information. Don't abuse them (they get enough of that in their daily job), just say you've got some extra info that might help them. You don't have to speak on the record, but be prepared that they will probably try to convince you (it's part of what we do). It's not hard to get hold of a journo usually - just call the newspaper switchboard and ask for them by name.

Maybe you'll help people get a better understanding of the issue.

Some really great reading

Great writing expands your perspective. Here are some I really enjoyed.

The Angriest Man In Television by Marc Bowden. It's about David Simon and The Wire, and gave me a new perspective on the show. It starts as a tribute and ends as a rebuke, and it's very powerful. Written before the fifth season aired, it is a pre-emptive defence of a couple of the characters Bowden expected to see in season five. And he makes sense. He doesn't take anything away from the brilliance of the show, but does provide a tempering view that conflicts with Simon's unerringly bleak vision of reality.

George Clooney Saved My Novel by Walter Kirn. A happy story of a book that was never going to be a film until Jason Reitman and George Clooney got behind it.

Mr Murdoch Goes To War by Marc Bowden. In this one he looks at Murdoch's takeover of the Wall Street Journal. It helps if you've read The Man Who Owns The News, the profile of Murdoch, but even still you'll get an idea of the power of the man. Bowden presents a negative view of Murdoch in this piece, but I tend to think the truth is somewhat different. Anyway, good article.

Back on my grind

So I start work tomorrow. It's going to be good to be back at it after more than a year out of full time work. I managed to pick up a fair bit of freelance stuff in that time, which was good, but there's nothing quite like going to work every day and knowing you have a job!

I'm not sure what's going to happen with this blog. I'll still update it when I can, but it won't be as regularly. I've done 327 posts in just over a year. Not heaps by some standards, but more than I'd expected.

I think I've managed to keep my skills up to the point where I'm not worried about stepping straight back into a newspaper environment. It'll be good to be interviewing and breaking stories again.

Earning proper money again will be nice too! I think I want a big-ass TV. And a new computer. Oh, to consume again! It's been so long!

I'll try to get back to Hobart a lot. It will be easier than Burnie was. I might actually make it to Burnie too to visit some friends. Maybe hit Maginty's on a Friday for some nostalgia.

Anyway, thanks for reading, I hope you keep reading, and I'll try to provide interesting content.

Here are some random things:
- Drawings of Missed Connections in New York. Funny and pretty.
- "My parents were awesome" tumblr. I think everyone's parents had more of a life than we all realise.
- The Most Controversial Magazine Covers ever.

So totally employed

As of today, I signed a contract to work at The Examiner newspaper in Launceston. I'll be a senior journo, reporting on general news. It should be a lot of fun and a lot of hard work. There's a state election coming up in March, and Federal election soon too, so I'll have lots to write about.

I'll keep this blog going as much as I can, but I guess it might drop off a bit in terms of content. I started it to keep my skills up while I was working less, but now that I'll be working full time I reckon I'll go back to posting funny links, rants about sport, and pictures of Mariah Carey.

Thanks everyone for reading this past year or so, and I'll try to keep things as interesting and fun as possible!

Okay, so
A funny link:
John Mayer's Twitter can be pretty funny.
A funny video

A sports rant
UEFA are stupid and should never have banned Eduardo in the first place. They opened a massive can of worms and now they're trying to stuff them back in. Hopefully they have.
And a picture of Mariah Carey

On the cover of the Rolling Stone...

I sometimes feel like I'm the only person I know who reads magazines. Clearly this is not the case, because there are still stacks of them out there. But I get that feeling. A lot of people look online for their content, but I don't feel sated by it. I love getting a new magazine and taking my time reading through it. I read them in the bathroom, in bed, at the table, wherever. Online content, which I love and read constantly, just doesn't do it for me completely. Here's why:

- Online content is often poorly edited, minimally researched, and a 50/50 chance of being completely wrong. This offends me as an intelligent reader. I am not a stupid prole who believes everything they read unquestioningly. So, if you make a statement in an article, I expect to see evidence/quotes to back it up. Too often they are lacking in online content.

- Access to talent is severely limited in many online publications. Traditional news media outlets have traditional links with traditional agencies. Which means? The big stars talk to the print media. For several reasons. One, they've always done it; two, there is a trust and a history and a respect that goes with a printed publication; and three, there's some oversight. There's someone to sue if it hits the fan, poo-style. So if you want to hear from interesting and famous people, you're more likely to get it in a traditional media format.

- A lot of online writing lacks style and interest. It bores me. I am a voracious consumer of online content, and it bores me. This is why I like reading quality magazines. Because I am rarely (if ever) bored. I think the reason is this. Anyone can start a blog or a website, get a few hits, build a reputation, and find themselves running something that people link to. Nice work, congratulations. However it does not make them a good writer. Good writing is not valid currency on the internet. To get paid to write for a quality magazine, you have to show some skills. You have to provide something new, different, interesting. "FIRST" doesn't matter in quality writing. "Best" does. Magazines have writers who have learned a trade and built a reputation on that. Websites rarely do. And their content is boring because of it.

- If, by chance, a website gets an opportunity to interview a big star, quite often the results are anti-climactic. This is because the writer lacks interviewing skills, or knowledge of what their readers want - usually both.There is a difference between an interesting question and a question designed to get an interesting answer. No one wants to read about how smart the writer is. People want to read the subject's responses. Where online publications do stand up in this area is their often encyclopedic knowledge of their topics. For that they should be applauded (*applause*).

- I find a lot of the best online publications are those linked to a traditional media outlet. Guardian Unlimited, The Australian, NineMSN, NEWS.com.au, ABC Online, The SMH and The Age. Even my favourite magazines like FourFourTwo and XXL Worldwide have strong online sections; FourFourTwo's blog section is especially good.

With all that, said here are some of my favourite online only publications:
Cracked - constantly funny AND informative. A really good read it should definitely be one of the bookmarks you check every day.
Television Without Pity - strong content every day, on television shows you may love. It also includes interesting galleries and articles on general trends and ideas. Very funny too.
Slate - strong political and cultural analysis. However I've just discovered it's owned by The Washington Post, so I guess that disqualifies it from this list.
Pajiba - started as a film review website but now seems to review popular culture. I have to say the film reviews (fewer and further between now) are still the strongest part of the site. Although some small articles are good value.

And finally, here's an article from Slate about the death of music magazines.

I guess what I'm saying is: I like quality writing. And so far, I still get it consistently in magazines and newspapers, and have to go digging for it on the internet.

Blog history

When I first started reading blogs, the ones I read were Shiloh's, Dan's and Emi's. That seems like a long, long time ago. I don't know where Dan's might be now, and Emi's blog has gone through a few incarnations and is now a photo blog (with very nice pictures).

Shy hasn't blogged in a long time, but some of her old posts are still online. My favourites include How To Talk To Boys, the comments on Geek Eye for the Jock Guy, and this hilarious picture.

A lot of the blogs I used to read are no longer around. People read the same ones and commented across all of them. Facebook has replaced that internet community feel now. But I did enjoy reading my friends' insights.

This is actually my third blog. Weird to think. But yes. It actually worries me to think how much crap I've written onto the internet over the years! I think I would like to go back and take back a fair bit of it. Sometimes we're stupid when we're younger. And when we're older too.

Speaking of correcting things we said when we were younger, check out this awesome correction the New York Times ran on July 17, 1969, referring to an editorial it had run in 1920.
Actual link here. "The Times regrets the error." Heh heh heh.

By the way, current song I'm pumping? Rick Ross feat Kanye, T-Pain and Lil Wayne - Maybach Music 2.

The Devil Reads Pravda

I love Pravda. As a credible news source, it is atrocious. Entertainment value though is very high.

Take these recent stories:

Another human civilisation may live within Earth's hollows
Alien and human skulls found on Mars (with pictures!)
Vegetarianism proves to be perversion of nature
Soviet Union witnessed invasion of US-made UFOs in 1980s
and my favourite
Thirteen terribly weird facts about women

In fact, that post is so great that I'm going to reproduce it here entirely. Please enjoy Pravda's 'Thirteen terribly weird facts about women'.

"It is generally believed that the difference between men and women is enormous. Women and men differ in almost every imaginable aspect of human life, especially when it comes to psychology.

A woman does not have a man’s habit to scratch her noggin when she thinks of an answer to a confusing question, for example. Women doe not like to show they are confused. They never want to ruin their hairdo with that gesture either.

Women will never understand why footballers stand in a line with their hands crossed before a penalty kick during a match. In addition, women never shudder when a male character gets kicked in the groin in a movie.

When a woman yawns she covers her mouth with the palm of her hand, not with a fist.

After taking a bath, a woman grabs a towel and makes a turban on her head from it, at least for one minute. The reasons of such a weird Oriental ritual are unknown.

A woman does not get mad when her underwear gets stuck between her buttocks. Women joyfully wear those items of torture called bikinis.

Many women worry about their looks when having sex.

Women open bottles with bottle openers.

A woman feels awkward if she does not carry anything in her hands. That is why they always carry their handbags around.

Women are absolutely indifferent to their genitals; they hardly know each other. Women do not talk to them, they do not give funny nicknames to them and they never get angry with them.

Sitting down in public transportation, women keep their legs together. That is why men often prefer to sit next to a woman because in this case they can sit spread-eagle.

If a woman finds her fly unzipped in a public place, she does not seem to care too much about it.

When a woman dresses up to go out, she puts on a blouse first. Pants come second. Men work it vice versa.

Finally, when an act of love ends, women do not feel like sleeping. They feel like talking and kissing."

Damn... she thick!

If any of you ever get the chance to become a journalist, I can recommend acquiring one thing above all others. Not amazing writing ability (useful, but not necessary). Not incredibly probing interviewing skills (preferable, but you can get away without them). No, you need one thing.

A thick skin. It's very, very useful. Because people? Are mean.

My fellow blogger and cricket enthusiast Miss Field is experiencing this at the moment. To cut a long story short, Miss Field has blogged, passionately, about cricket for a long time. Cricket Australia decided to bring in a female-written blog on its site. Inevitably, they turned to... two rugby league fans (it seems New South Welshmen get selected first everywhere). Anyway, these two girls wrote an introduction about themselves, and got started blogging. Miss Field wrote a strongly-worded critique of them, their knowledge of cricket, and their suitability as cricket bloggers. The response? So far, 65 comments, ranging from support for Miss Field, to 'why can't we all get along?', to personal attacks.

Sooooo.... pretty par for the course for opinion pieces. My favourite insult so far has been the one comparing her brother to Josef Fritzl. Anonymity + strong opinion = ridiculous statements.

Like I said at the start, you need a thick skin to be a journo. Miss Field has experience in this area, and I'm sure she'll be fine. If you write your opinions, you've got to be prepared to take the flak. Usually from people who would be too scared to write their own opinion, but are happy to bag yours.

I've copped some great insults over my time. My favourites included being labelled "an oxygen theif", told I "couldn't write for s***" and the time I was called "an absolute goose" who knew nothing about sport and was outshone by my staff all year. Those ones were just over the internet and email.

There was also the time I was kicked out of one of a football changeroom after a match, the time a coach spent most of his postmatch address attacking my coverage of the buildup to a game, and the many, many times I've had abusive phone calls. Ooohh, and the time a guy told me I was about to get him sacked for quoting him in a story.

Basically, if you want to be a journo for any length of time, you have to develop a thick skin. And honestly? I'm glad I did. Because words don't affect me nearly as much as they used to. Because I realised something. People are idiots. And they don't understand the media. And they don't understand why one thing is interesting and another thing isn't. And they think that their opinion on this issue matters. And they're prepared to say some mean words if they don't get their way.

And.... and all of that doesn't affect me. If I've done the wrong thing, sure, I will apologise and do what I can to make it right. But if all I've done is expose something that someone else didn't want exposed, well... it's not my fault that you're copping flak for your actions. If you didn't want people to find out about them, why did you do it?

If you get a chance to develop a thick skin, I highly recommend it. It will help you in every area of life. You will feel less stressed, happier, and better prepared to take on anything thrown at you. Because words don't hurt. Swords hurt.

So to Miss Field, and the rugby league fans, good luck. Develop a thick skin and everything will be much, much easier.

Chapter 82.6: Rocky Mountains Crash to Earth

I've never lived in Colorado, so it doesn't affect me as much as it does the people out there, but as a journalist, I can't help but feel sad for the death of yet another newspaper. The Rocky Mountain News published its final edition today, just a few weeks short of its 150th anniversary.

I don't have personal stories to share about what that paper meant to me, but I'm sure they exist, and I'd be happy to have people share them here in comments.

Journalism remains popular with college students. I see news of new fellowships and grants for journalists all the time, and I hear from college students that they want to get into journalism. So I know the interest is out there. What isn't out there right now is a viable business model that would allow many of the old papers to continue to exist. The old model isn't working anymore.

Papers have gone online, and that's good. I suspect many of them eventually will only exist online. And that isn't as good, because not everyone has access to the Internet. That's a discussion for another time.

If nothing else, I'll reflect on the death of a grand old paper, what it means for the hundreds of people who worked there and their families, and look forward to the future of journalism, because people remain unchanged in their desire to have access to objectively presented information.

The man who owns the news

The title of this entry is also the title of a book I'm reading about Rupert Murdoch. It's actually very good. The writer had unprecedented access to Murdoch and his family, as well as his top executives. It focuses on the take over of the Dow Jones (and the Wall Street Journal) in 2007, but flashes back to important events and moments in Murdoch's evolution into the all-powerful media magnate he is now.

I heartily recommend it.

But it got me thinking. I like seeing Murdoch do well. And I think the reason is purely that he is Australian. I love seeing Australians do well on the international stage. I'm not totally sure why, but I think it has something to do with that curious Australian trait of being the little brother.

We love and hate England at the same time. We love and hate the USA at the same time. We make fun of, but also protect New Zealand (our little brother).

We, as the little brother, want to be liked. We are the youngest child, wanting to establish ourselves, go our own way, break out independently. BUT we also LOVE it when we show our older brothers that we can compete on their level. We can be a part of their world too.

I think that's why Australians, and the Australian media and governments, love it when we succeed overseas. And we really do. Ben Graham was famous in AFL circles in Australia. No one North of Albury would have cared who he was. But he snags a spot in the Superbowl and the whole country goes crazy for him.

We have a numberof successful actors working regularly in Australia over the last 40 years, but it's only when they get a big chance in Hollywood that we fawn over them.

Isla Fisher was just another Home and Away alumni who hooked up with Ali G. Then she was great in Wedding Crashers and she's all of a sudden "one of Australia's hottest women".

It's like we need our older brothers' recognition for something before we start to appreciate it ourselves.

Not all the time, mind you. And this is part of being the youngest. The "who cares, I'm doing my own thing". We're so good at sport we invented a couple of our own to take our best sportsmen out of the international arena. We went crazy for ABBA. We allow Richard Wilkins on television every morning.

So when I see Murdoch do well, see him dominate internationally, I think "well played, Rupert". Never mind that he hasn't lived here in years. He is born of Australian sensibilities, with an Aussie disregard for the establishment. The book argues that this hatred of the establishment is one of the driving forces behind Murdoch's success.

(Interesting fact: the reason we don't have Page 3 Girls in Australia is because his mum, Dame Elisabeth Murdoch, won't have it. And she is a formidable woman).

I don't know how this will affect our country going forward. I think it can only help. If Australians always have something to strive for, then we'll always have reasons to keep improving. And that's a good thing.

News of the World: Giant Balls of Steel

This is the picture that could kill Michael Phelps' sponsorship deals (and his Olympic aspirations, but hey):
Yes, it's the Boy Wonder smoking a bong. The full story is here.

The most amazing thing for me is this:

Phelps is represented by marketing giant Octagon, which works with huge brands such as Mastercard and HSBC. They admitted proven cannabis use would be “a major taint” on Phelps’ character.

Spokesman Clifford Bloxham offered us an extraordinary deal not to publish our story, saying Phelps would become our columnist for three years, host events and get his sponsors to advertise with us.

In return, he asked that we kill Phelps’ bong picture. Bloxham said: “It’s seeing if something potentially very negative for Michael could turn into something very positive for the News of the World.”

He stressed that the swimmer had taken 1,500 drug tests and never failed one.

Until now?

Wow!!! That is a pretty massive deal they've offered, so Phelps' management must be taking this very very seriously. Having a major, major star like Phelps write a column for you - for free - for the three years leading up to the London Olympics... man... that's a huge offer! And bringing sponsorship with him and hosting NOTW events?? London will be the Olympic City in 2012, so that sort of exposure could have been huge for the newspaper. Whoever made the decision to run with the pictures had to have balls of steel.

From Russia with love

I love the English version of Pravda, the official Russian news outlet.

In a report about two women doing a typical "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" PETA-style campaign, this was their comment under one of the photos:
And this one is great too:
Hee hee hee! And they're not afraid to put the boot in on their own celebrities.
I also love how the Cold War has ended, andsuspicion of the US continues...
...but not quite enough to stop you getting a scoop of Thanksgiving soup from Cindy Crawford! Those Western women are so attractive!

The free press arriving to developing, formerly authoritarian countries? Awesome.

Chapter 80.3: Interesting Endorsements

There have been some interesting newspaper endorsements and interesting op-eds as well lately. Earlier this week, the New York Times offered its endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for president. That in itself is hardly a surprise; as the Times' sidebar demonstrates, the paper hasn't endorsed a Republican for president since Dwight D. Eisenhower. But what surprised me was how it essentially stated that McCain's campaign had virtually negated the decades of good work he had accomplished in Congress. As the editorial board wrote: "Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress.

"Mr. McCain offers more of the Republican every-man-for-himself ideology, now lying in shards on Wall Street and in Americans’ bank accounts. Mr. Obama has another vision of government’s role and responsibilities."

While I would never disrespect the service Sen. McCain has given to this country, both in the Navy and in Congress, I suspect McCain has allowed his campaign to be over-run with the conservatives who helped President Bush get elected twice to the highest office in our country.

I don't believe all Republicans are like Bush or even like McCain, who I suspect is conservative but also has many of the qualities that made the Republican party strong since the days of Abraham Lincoln. But NY Times columnist David Brooks, in his op-ed, offered a qualified endorsement of McCain: "McCain would be an outstanding president. In government, he has almost always had an instinct for the right cause. He has become an experienced legislative craftsman. He is stalwart against the country’s foes and cooperative with its friends. But he never escaped the straitjacket of a party that is ailing and a conservatism that is behind the times. And that’s what makes the final weeks of this campaign so unspeakably sad."

I find it hard to disagree with Brooks. As someone who tends to vote Democratic, the only Republican candidate I thought could defeat a Democrat this year was McCain.

But there have been other interesting endorsements recently. For the first time ever, the Chicago Tribune endorsed a Democrat. This is a publication that chose Eisenhower over Illinois' own Adlai E. Stevenson — twice. So its endorsement of Obama isn't about him being a favorite son of Illinois.

The endorsement that really caught my eye, however, was the Anchorage Daily News. That's the largest circulation newspaper in Alaska, best known these days as the home state of Tina Fey impersonator Gov. Sarah Palin. They, too, have endorsed Obama. The Daily News's editorial board wrote: "Gov. Palin's nomination clearly alters the landscape for Alaskans as we survey this race for the presidency — but it does not overwhelm all other judgment. The election, after all is said and down, is not about Sarah Palin, and our sober view is that her running mate, Sen. John McCain, is the wrong choice for president at this critical time for our nation." It added: "Like picking Sen. McCain for president, putting her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time."

Of course, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who served in that role during George W. Bush's first term as president, also provided a stunning endorsement of Sen. Obama. And lately the wheels seem to be falling off for the McCain campaign.

Personally, I think all these endorsements have one thing in common other than the person they selected; they all suggest — in between the lines if not directly — that the Republican party is due for a major reassessment of who and what it represents. The party is splitting. (Added on 10/27: I found the final line of this brilliant piece of fiction quite illuminating.) Moderates and conservatives have less in common than they once did. If Sarah Palin is a serious candidate for president in 2012, I think it will be an indication that the party is still reeling and trying to find its unifying message.

But first things first. There are less than 10 days before the election. I'm excited for the future, because I believe Barack Obama can change our country's direction to a positive route.

I cannot think of a better story to sell newspapers

This story has more news values than almost any other story I've seen:

Cleric's pole dancing daughter flees home

The daughter of a radical Islamic cleric who outed herself as a topless pole dancer has fled her London home amid fears she may become a target for extremists.

Police escorted Yasmin Fostok, the daughter of cleric Omar Bakri, from her flat in the capital's south to an unknown location yesterday, the UK's Telegraph reports.

Ms Fostok, whose real first name is Youssra, last week admitted she was a pole dancer with a troupe called Ibiza Uncovered.

The 27-year-old was quoted in The Sun newspaper as saying she would perform topless "if the venue was right".

There was also a report her father — the leader of outlawed terrorist group Muhajiroun — paid $8000 for her to have a breast enlargement operation.

Reports of her activities are now believed to have angered her father so much that she may become a target for extremists.

Police refused to confirm whether Ms Fostok was in a safe house but did say she had been moved at her own request.

Her father, who praised the September 11 attacks while living in Britain, left the country for Lebanon after the July 2005 bombings.

Speaking from the war ravaged region yesterday, Mr Bakri said he believed Ms Fostok was an imposter and not his daughter.

He last week said Britain would pay "a very heavy price" after reports of his daughter's profession.

Now. Wow. That is an amazing story.
It includes: Violence (threats on her life)
Sex (she's a topless dancer in Ibiza, the hedonist paradise)
Conflict (she's a topless dancer, her father is one of Britain's most controversial Muslim clerics. Ramadan should be fun!)
Moral hypocrisy (he paid for her breast implants! Haha!!)
Local interest (for Britain)
International interest (for any country where Islamic terrorism is big news, ie, everywhere)

I mean, if this story doesn't get readers, NOTHING will. You almost couldn't ask for a better story. I mean, you could, but not within the realms of possibility. The Sun journalist who uncovered it has to be congratulated.

Sorry I missed a post yesterday - I wasn't at home much, and the internet is still slow during peak hours.

Challenge: write the perfect intro to a story from The Australian.

CORRUPT state premiers have stolen more than $3 billion meant for rebuilding Aboriginal communities, as well as dropping charges against tribal elders who were arrested for raping children.

The Oz loves a good corrupt state pollie. They will go big on them all the time. And they have rightfully taken the credit for the Aboriginal intervention announced last year. They were the ones who highlighted the appalling state of Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory and South Australia, and how the state and territory governments had failed to act on damning reports on the problems. The Oz also got stuck into the horrific and systemic sexual abuse of children in those communities, as well as how courts were letting the perpetrators get away with it. The intervention caused a lot of controversy, but attracted bi-partisan support in Parliament. It was a rare example of central planning from the Howard conservative government, which maintained the liberal commitment to market solutions for the majority of its 11 years.

Challenge: write the intro to the perfect Age story

JAIL beckons for former Prime Minister John Howard after a UN court yesterday found him guilty of causing global warming due to his refusal to sign the Kyoto protocol.

This would be the perfect vindication for the Age after years of attacking the conservative government and warning about global warming.

Challenge: write the intro to the perfect Herald Sun story

COLLINGWOOD star Alan Didak has confessed to murdering three drug dealers for underworld king pin Carl Williams - just one day before he kicked the winning goal in AFL Grand Final.
Police knew about the murders, but covered it up to allow the goalsneak to play for the Pies against Geelong.

Footy and crime - not a bad receipe. They love police corruption too. Technically it's two pars, so not really just the intro. I could have tried to sneak it all into one, but I prefer shorter, sharper sentences, rather than the "double-banger" intros.

Chapter 71.3: Changing the Ink

Anyone who loves newspapers will want to take a look at this. It's written by Paul Steiger, and it appeared on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, one of this country's greatest newspapers -- I say that even though I'm clearly not a conservative.

Steiger, who worked for many years at the Journal, writes lovingly about an industry that is struggling. He's about to embark on a new veture at the nonprofit ProPublica, which is funded primarily by Herbert and Marion Sandler, who made billions from the sale of Golden West Financial. But he also recognizes that journalism is at a transition point.

I wasn't aware of the state of the newspaper industry fifty-some years ago. He describes a moment where a newspaper photographer kept a dead bird in his car to use as a prop for photos. "The bird," he writes, "was for feature shots on holidays like Memorial Day. He'd perch it on a gravestone or tree limb in a veterans' cemetery to get the right mood. Nowadays such a trick would get him fired, but in the 1950s, this guy said, there was no time to wait for a live bird to flutter into the frame."

I spent ten years working as a reporter for a trade journal. There are times when working there resembled a scene from The Office, but I enjoyed it for the most part. The "non-most" part, however, included dealing with dwindling advertising dollars and moments when I recognized that my paycheck was supplied by advertisers that I wanted little to do with.

I encourage anyone with an interest in the newspaper industry and the communication of important information to average Americans -- and anyone, really -- to read or at least skim Steiger's article. The United States needs a strong cadre of journalists who aren't afraid that their jobs will evaporate like water on Mars. The kids coming out of college know this already. Let's do more than just hope there are readers for them when they're ready.