> Explaining complexity with clarity should be the guiding ideal of public communication, not mistaking simplicity for intelligibility.
I'm not old enough to know how significantly this has changed over the years in journalism, but it certainly feels in politics that I'm being asked to understand less and instead simply respond to policy ideas.
Living in a state which is choosing to spend money appeasing the AFL rather than on healthcare and education, I also appreciate the dig at the bullies at the top of that tree.
Thanks for sharing. My core frustration with Australian news media is that almost every challenge is labelled a "crisis," stifling optimism and hiding the potential for opportunity.
Thanks, Grant. You’ve captured it so well: crises for clicks and the mistaking of negativity for scrutiny. Switch on the TV, open a news app or the radio in Australia, and it is a parade of "the largest workforce crisis on record," "a childcare crisis," "an aged care crisis," "a rental crisis." It feels like catastrophising has become a national sport.
Yet every genuine challenge contains seeds of opportunity. Realistic optimism asks us to see the facts clearly and ask, "What can we build from here?" Constant cries of "crisis" do not sharpen scrutiny; they stunt hope. Each of us using Substack and other media has the power to spark curiosity, fuel resilience, and create opportunities.
I share your disdain for the incorrect use of LNP. I have seen L/NP used, which is better but doesn't translate well into speech. The use of Coalition is also problematic. It should ideally be referred to as the Liberal-National coalition or the coalition of Liberal and National parties. It is quite possible the parties may merge in the future which might solve the problem.
> Explaining complexity with clarity should be the guiding ideal of public communication, not mistaking simplicity for intelligibility.
I'm not old enough to know how significantly this has changed over the years in journalism, but it certainly feels in politics that I'm being asked to understand less and instead simply respond to policy ideas.
Living in a state which is choosing to spend money appeasing the AFL rather than on healthcare and education, I also appreciate the dig at the bullies at the top of that tree.
Thanks for sharing. My core frustration with Australian news media is that almost every challenge is labelled a "crisis," stifling optimism and hiding the potential for opportunity.
Yes, I think catastrophising is a huge problem across the media. Crises for clicks! And the tendency to mistake negativity for scrutiny.
Thanks, Grant. You’ve captured it so well: crises for clicks and the mistaking of negativity for scrutiny. Switch on the TV, open a news app or the radio in Australia, and it is a parade of "the largest workforce crisis on record," "a childcare crisis," "an aged care crisis," "a rental crisis." It feels like catastrophising has become a national sport.
Yet every genuine challenge contains seeds of opportunity. Realistic optimism asks us to see the facts clearly and ask, "What can we build from here?" Constant cries of "crisis" do not sharpen scrutiny; they stunt hope. Each of us using Substack and other media has the power to spark curiosity, fuel resilience, and create opportunities.
https://www.centreforoptimism.com/blog/crisisaustralia
I share your disdain for the incorrect use of LNP. I have seen L/NP used, which is better but doesn't translate well into speech. The use of Coalition is also problematic. It should ideally be referred to as the Liberal-National coalition or the coalition of Liberal and National parties. It is quite possible the parties may merge in the future which might solve the problem.