tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post8474703418019444388..comments2024-02-11T19:28:27.997+11:00Comments on Personal Reflections: The evils of "the Daily Telegraph" testJim Belshawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-88946493377423718872008-01-05T12:39:00.000+11:002008-01-05T12:39:00.000+11:00Thank you David and Marcellous.David, I have used ...Thank you David and Marcellous.<BR/><BR/>David, I have used your comment as a base for another post. Not attcking what you said, but amplyfing my own position. <BR/><BR/>Marcellous, I know the pressures. I am glad that you found the time for such a substantive comment.<BR/><BR/>I will add a postscript to the post.Jim Belshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075614280789984767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-41523021079522704092008-01-05T11:38:00.000+11:002008-01-05T11:38:00.000+11:00Thanks for the invitation, Jim. I saw the story ye...Thanks for the invitation, Jim. I saw the story yesterday at the offices of my instructing solicitors where I was conferring with them and a client from 10 am to 9 pm for the purpose of preparing affidavits which must be filed and served by 4 pm Monday. I have more conferences today, so don't know when I would have the energy either.<BR/><BR/>I agree that the Telegraph story was spectacularly silly. I wouldn't be surprised if the proportion of applicants with a general history wasn't pretty much in line with the proportion of the population as a whole with a such a history. After all, this would include any conviction at all, including driving offences, travelling without the right ticket,failure to lodge tax returns when required to, etc etc - in fact, anything which was not simply dealt with by an on the spot fine or infringement notice. <BR/><BR/>I wonder if journalists' figures would be very much better or different. <BR/><BR/>The only real complaint that the Tele had seemed to be that there was no document prepared or released which summarized the offences of those with general criminal histories who were not disqualified by those offences from teaching.<BR/><BR/>But then, that was just what enabled the Tele to proceed to the beat-up. A cursory reading of the disclosure requirements suggest that they extend to charges as well as convictions of any offence whose maximum penalty is more than 12 months' imprisonment, even if the applicant was acquitted or, if convicted, received a penalty which have fallen well short of that. It is also possible that a "general criminal history" therefore includes charges which did not result in any conviction, including acquittals.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-80289107746801357052008-01-05T06:32:00.000+11:002008-01-05T06:32:00.000+11:00Jim, leaving aside your delicious mis-choice of wo...Jim, leaving aside your delicious mis-choice of word, I would like to make a comment on your conclusion: "I would simply note that Telegraph readers are not going to subject the piece to critical analysis".<BR/><BR/>This strikes me as an elitist view of a fairly large proportion of the NSW population based on circulation figures? This is not your usual thoughtful stance.<BR/><BR/>Ninglun said the story is stupid but damaging. I agree - but on the other hand, it sold papers, and probably won't be remembered beyond the next large headline.<BR/><BR/>I always understood that the prime role of a newspaper editor was to make a profit, and that this is achieved largely by maintaining or increasing circulation and, hence, advertising support. Questions of truth, fairness, and accuracy are buried way down in the mission statement - if considered at all.<BR/><BR/>More to the point, I would be very interested to see the generalisations that you would attach to the other main newspapers in NSW.<BR/><BR/>And how you would support your opinion (as you more usually do) - as opposed to just baldly stating it.<BR/><BR/>DavidAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-32815814963145875132008-01-04T22:18:00.000+11:002008-01-04T22:18:00.000+11:00"inedible"?"inedible"?Lexcenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17856993035719777231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24338064.post-3231203786646670112008-01-04T20:41:00.000+11:002008-01-04T20:41:00.000+11:00Well spotted, Jim. I have responded and the link t...Well spotted, Jim. I have responded and the link to that is on my name. I saw the screaming headline just this afternoon in the corner shop, since of course I bought the real paper this morning without even looking at the Tele, as is my wont. The real paper could have been The Australian, or the Other One...<BR/><BR/>This is a really stupid story, but damaging.<BR/><BR/>I guess you'll find your typo and fix it, but in the meantime I thank you for it. ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com