Dick Smith Renegs on Journalism Award
Join Date: May 2008
Location: australia
Age: 71
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was an Australian Journo I would be asking the hard questions too.
(1) "Mr opposition leader your public popularity is very low are you
going to resign"
(2) "Mr Primeminister can you give me a scoup with the date of the
next election"
(1) "Mr opposition leader your public popularity is very low are you
going to resign"
(2) "Mr Primeminister can you give me a scoup with the date of the
next election"
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was an Australian Journo I would be asking the hard questions too.
(1) "Mr opposition leader your public popularity is very low are you
going to resign"
(2) "Mr Primeminister can you give me a scoup with the date of the
next election"
(1) "Mr opposition leader your public popularity is very low are you
going to resign"
(2) "Mr Primeminister can you give me a scoup with the date of the
next election"
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bush
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"the jury is out on Tiger ARH and MRH-90"
Legend, I think you will find that the jury has already delivered the verdict on these two as well.
Tiger: because of cost overruns and ongoing delays and developmental issues, the ADF could have bought US Army spec Apache Longbow for less and had them in service 5 years ago. They could have been operating in Afghanistan in support of the grunts today. Instead, many years of work ahead and many more dollars to be spent before they will be ready to do anything operational.
MRH-90: on-going delays and developmental issues as well but the main problem is that it will never be able to replace Blackhawk as a battlefield helo. NEVER. We bought a ferrari prototype to do the job of a hilux ute. Go figure.
Plenty more ammo here for some journo willing to expose the bungling procurement process used/inflicted by/upon the ADF. But to be fair, the politicians are responsible for much of the mess by going against the expert recommendations of their soldiers, sailors and airmen/women who are left trying valently to turn a turd into a flower and are not allowed to speak up in their own defence.
Legend, I think you will find that the jury has already delivered the verdict on these two as well.
Tiger: because of cost overruns and ongoing delays and developmental issues, the ADF could have bought US Army spec Apache Longbow for less and had them in service 5 years ago. They could have been operating in Afghanistan in support of the grunts today. Instead, many years of work ahead and many more dollars to be spent before they will be ready to do anything operational.
MRH-90: on-going delays and developmental issues as well but the main problem is that it will never be able to replace Blackhawk as a battlefield helo. NEVER. We bought a ferrari prototype to do the job of a hilux ute. Go figure.
Plenty more ammo here for some journo willing to expose the bungling procurement process used/inflicted by/upon the ADF. But to be fair, the politicians are responsible for much of the mess by going against the expert recommendations of their soldiers, sailors and airmen/women who are left trying valently to turn a turd into a flower and are not allowed to speak up in their own defence.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AFGAN
"the jury is out on Tiger ARH and MRH-90"
Legend, I think you will find that the jury has already delivered the verdict on these two as well.
Tiger: because of cost overruns and ongoing delays and developmental issues, the ADF could have bought US Army spec Apache Longbow for less and had them in service 5 years ago. They could have been operating in Afghanistan in support of the grunts today. Instead, many years of work ahead and many more dollars to be spent before they will be ready to do anything operational.
MRH-90: on-going delays and developmental issues as well but the main problem is that it will never be able to replace Blackhawk as a battlefield helo. NEVER. We bought a ferrari prototype to do the job of a hilux ute. Go figure.
Plenty more ammo here for some journo willing to expose the bungling procurement process used/inflicted by/upon the ADF. But to be fair, the politicians are responsible for much of the mess by going against the expert recommendations of their soldiers, sailors and airmen/women who are left trying valently to turn a turd into a flower and are not allowed to speak up in their own defence.
Legend, I think you will find that the jury has already delivered the verdict on these two as well.
Tiger: because of cost overruns and ongoing delays and developmental issues, the ADF could have bought US Army spec Apache Longbow for less and had them in service 5 years ago. They could have been operating in Afghanistan in support of the grunts today. Instead, many years of work ahead and many more dollars to be spent before they will be ready to do anything operational.
MRH-90: on-going delays and developmental issues as well but the main problem is that it will never be able to replace Blackhawk as a battlefield helo. NEVER. We bought a ferrari prototype to do the job of a hilux ute. Go figure.
Plenty more ammo here for some journo willing to expose the bungling procurement process used/inflicted by/upon the ADF. But to be fair, the politicians are responsible for much of the mess by going against the expert recommendations of their soldiers, sailors and airmen/women who are left trying valently to turn a turd into a flower and are not allowed to speak up in their own defence.
Re the Seasprite 'fiasco', maybe no Aussie journo managed to write the story to Dick's judges' satisfaction because Dick had made it very clear that he wanted names.
The reasons the Seasprite project went pear shaped are carved in stone for all to see and have been done to death by several well-reputed aviation/defence journos already. People in Defence will talk to those they can trust, but that's the only way an outsider will get the inside gouge from within the DMO, and it's very rare if ever they'll get the names of those responsible for the cockups...
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: australia
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, if your judges reasoning was that the standard of journalism wasnt up to scratch, then a BIG good on ya Dick! And good on ya anyway for supporting a very good cause! I'm not one of your usual supporters, but credit where it is due!
Australian journalists are mostly pretentious, lazy, self centred, uneducated prats! The standard of writing is woeful, the accuracy of stories is amazingly poor, the drive to achieve balance and fairness is non existant, and finally, they publish articles ONLY if it suits them.
I'm guessing that it will be unlikely that any Aussie journalist will publish my remarks above!
Secondly, from what I have heard about the Tiger, it could be a very capable aircraft, but it's implementation into Australian service has been a debacle, and many Army pilots have left it in disgust. From what I have heard (and please correct me if I'm wrong) it still can't be flown in IFR!
Now there's an issue worth investigating, Dick. The sea sprite is so over. Try the latest ADF joke!
Australian journalists are mostly pretentious, lazy, self centred, uneducated prats! The standard of writing is woeful, the accuracy of stories is amazingly poor, the drive to achieve balance and fairness is non existant, and finally, they publish articles ONLY if it suits them.
I'm guessing that it will be unlikely that any Aussie journalist will publish my remarks above!
Secondly, from what I have heard about the Tiger, it could be a very capable aircraft, but it's implementation into Australian service has been a debacle, and many Army pilots have left it in disgust. From what I have heard (and please correct me if I'm wrong) it still can't be flown in IFR!
Now there's an issue worth investigating, Dick. The sea sprite is so over. Try the latest ADF joke!
Deja vu
It is not the first time that Mr Smith has pulled this stunt. When he was Chair of (then) Civil Aviation Authority he offered a Chairman's prize, at his own expense, for papers by CAA staff on cost benefit analyses. Presumeably he hoped that these would bolster his advocacy of "Affordable Safety", though he did specifically invite adverse or controversial views.
As in the present case none of the submissions satisfied Mr Smith, and so he suggested giving the prize to charity. Those of us who had entered objected; at least he should divide the prize between us so that we could give it and get the tax deduction. That happened.
I gave my share to Fred Hollows because I thought him to be a much more worthy Australian of the Year!!
As in the present case none of the submissions satisfied Mr Smith, and so he suggested giving the prize to charity. Those of us who had entered objected; at least he should divide the prize between us so that we could give it and get the tax deduction. That happened.
I gave my share to Fred Hollows because I thought him to be a much more worthy Australian of the Year!!
the death of the Seasprite comes from a convenient view that it could not be fixed. My sources tell me that it effectively was. Certain elements in Navy and Defence were lining up the MRH-90 to replace the Seahawk and the Seasprite's death moves the ADF forward on this ill-conceived multi-role one platform scenario.
Army did not recommend the Tiger or MRH-90. The Navy would have been very pleased with the Romeo/Sierra option of the SH-60 [same as USN]..
The real villians are in DMO..
Army did not recommend the Tiger or MRH-90. The Navy would have been very pleased with the Romeo/Sierra option of the SH-60 [same as USN]..
The real villians are in DMO..
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so.... can WE read the articles and form our own opinion?
That might satisfy all the oundits involved.
ie: Journalists are obviously keen to have their work read. Dick would like the topic kept in the public eye, and we would be able to uudge if DS did the right thing or not.
no loser here I can think of ..... unless of course, WE judge that a journo DID actually deserve to win, OR we judge that the ALL the journo's pieces are cr@p and they lose even more dignity.
That might satisfy all the oundits involved.
ie: Journalists are obviously keen to have their work read. Dick would like the topic kept in the public eye, and we would be able to uudge if DS did the right thing or not.
no loser here I can think of ..... unless of course, WE judge that a journo DID actually deserve to win, OR we judge that the ALL the journo's pieces are cr@p and they lose even more dignity.
To put it simply, the judges don’t want to be named. Here is an example of an email I have received from one.
Needless to say, the judges are all experienced journalists in the transport field, with a total of over 60 years of journalism experience.
I will, however, quote from one of the judges in his decision.
When I get time I will put the 7 submissions on my dicksmithflyer.com.au website. Unfortunately some have been faxed and are in different formats, so there is a bit of work involved.
The main point is that none of the articles actually added further information in relation to why this terrible error was made, and how it could be prevented in the future.
I wish to remain anonymous and do not believe that any correspondence about the judges decision should be entered into. I am also of the view that the involvement of journalists in the judging panel should not be disclosed as it will simply lead to a fox hunt and could cause at least two of us serious trouble.
I will, however, quote from one of the judges in his decision.
I have read and analysed, in some detail, all the submissions you sent to me and the other two judges. Whilst they make for interesting reading, unfortunately not one of them really addresses the issues/questions that you outlined in your Media Release dated 20 June 2008. I am referring, in particular, to paragraphs 5 through 10. Accordingly, I would recommend that the money be offered to the Royal Flying Doctor service.
The main point is that none of the articles actually added further information in relation to why this terrible error was made, and how it could be prevented in the future.
Thread Starter
The main point is that none of the articles actually added further information in relation to why this terrible error was made, and how it could be prevented in the future.
This, of course, implies that there IS further information that HASN'T been already covered and CAN be ethically reported.
The Seasprite issue has been very widley reported for several years. In spite of your attempt to provide a large financial inducement, no journalist could find the extra information you obviously believe is still to be revealed. I would suggest that is because none exists, and denying the entrants the prise for not magically coming up with facts that don't appear to be present would hardly seem fair.
I maintain that offering large cash prizes to induce journalists to write the article YOU want written, then deny it when they can't, is ethically questionable.
How would you react to someone offering a large cash prize for the best, most tittilating expose', tell-all article about you or your family?
Evertonian
So, donating $50k to the RFDS is a sneaky ploy to get a tax deduction? Wouldn't keeping the $50k be a better option for Dick?
Oh, the humanity!!! 
Those of us who had entered objected; at least he should divide the prize between us so that we could give it and get the tax deduction.
Oh, the humanity!!!
Thread Starter
Buster,
No one objects to Dick or anyone donating to the RFDS.
My objection is that it has been done as part of an ethically questionable, publicity seeking stunt. Dick would seem to be of the opinion that some dark secrets are being held by some Government conspiracy, to do with one of the most exstensivley reported debarcles in Defense history!
If Dick wants to donate to the RFDS, then great. To do so by offering, then withdrawing a prize that has NOTHING to do with the RFDS is questionable to say the least.
No one objects to Dick or anyone donating to the RFDS.
My objection is that it has been done as part of an ethically questionable, publicity seeking stunt. Dick would seem to be of the opinion that some dark secrets are being held by some Government conspiracy, to do with one of the most exstensivley reported debarcles in Defense history!
If Dick wants to donate to the RFDS, then great. To do so by offering, then withdrawing a prize that has NOTHING to do with the RFDS is questionable to say the least.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: ADELAIDE
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done to Mr Smith for giving it a go. Well done to the journos for giving it a go.
Fifty thousand is still fifty thousand and a generous donation in anyone's language.
I'm not a defence insider. I don't know if the various parties involved in this process have really done this to death and have learnt everything to learn.
All I know is that a billion dollars was spent on a capability that has been binned. Missiles purchased are sitting in stockpile without a platform to fire them. A class of warship is currently operational without the use of a platform that was to make up a significant portion of its over the horizon war fighting ability (penguin) missile.
I would of thought that a quick decision to acquire a batch of Seahawks that can fire penguin missiles would of been probably the best way to demonstrate that the system had learnt. After all navy allready operate this type don't they.
Finally Mr Smith made it quite clear on his web site what would happen if his judging panel recommended no one would win the prize. The money would go to charity. Thats whats happened. Hopefully Mr Smith will shortly post the entries on his web site so we all can have a read and make our own minds up.
Fifty thousand is still fifty thousand and a generous donation in anyone's language.
I'm not a defence insider. I don't know if the various parties involved in this process have really done this to death and have learnt everything to learn.
All I know is that a billion dollars was spent on a capability that has been binned. Missiles purchased are sitting in stockpile without a platform to fire them. A class of warship is currently operational without the use of a platform that was to make up a significant portion of its over the horizon war fighting ability (penguin) missile.
I would of thought that a quick decision to acquire a batch of Seahawks that can fire penguin missiles would of been probably the best way to demonstrate that the system had learnt. After all navy allready operate this type don't they.
Finally Mr Smith made it quite clear on his web site what would happen if his judging panel recommended no one would win the prize. The money would go to charity. Thats whats happened. Hopefully Mr Smith will shortly post the entries on his web site so we all can have a read and make our own minds up.
Wizofoz, it is sad that you have such a chip on your shoulder and that you judge others on how you would act in similar circumstances. My offer was totally genuine. It was to try to encourage journalists to seek out the extra information and put in the hard work so a similar error will not be made in the future.
The information is available, I can assure you. One day, I believe a journalist will cover the full story. One is already thinking of writing a book on the fiasco. This will be excellent.
I made it very clear that if the judges did not decide that the terms were covered by the entrants, that the money would go to the Royal Flying Doctor Service. That is exactly what happened.
You are quite wrong in stating
Fortunately, plenty of posters on this site understand what I was on about.
The information is available, I can assure you. One day, I believe a journalist will cover the full story. One is already thinking of writing a book on the fiasco. This will be excellent.
I made it very clear that if the judges did not decide that the terms were covered by the entrants, that the money would go to the Royal Flying Doctor Service. That is exactly what happened.
You are quite wrong in stating
Dick Smith renegs on journalism award.
Thread Starter
Wizofoz, it is sad that you have such a chip on your shoulder and that you judge others on how you would act in similar circumstances.
The information is available, I can assure you.
I made it very clear that if the judges did not decide that the terms were covered by the entrants,
Fortunately, plenty of posters on this site understand what I was on about.
Will you be basing your future views and actions on the majority opinion of PPRUNE posters, even on issues where they overwhelmingly DON'T agree with you?
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: International
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And he gave 50 big ones to a very deserving charity, rather than some journos retirement fund!
He didn't get the information or story the judges wanted - but still paid out!
He didn't get the information or story the judges wanted - but still paid out!
Thread Starter
faheel,
Dick knows who I am as we have corresponded privately.
I don't dis-like Dick, but at times find his methods and practices questionable.
The idea of rich men incentivising journalists to write articles slanted in the direction THEY want is NOT a direction a free society should encourage. Have a look at the blatant bias in the British press, or FOX network in the states to see why journos should be left to call them as they see them, NOT as the paymaster wants them too.
AA,
As I said, I'm pleased the RFDS get the 50K, but I don't like the charade that preceded it, for the reasons quoted above.
Dick knows who I am as we have corresponded privately.
I don't dis-like Dick, but at times find his methods and practices questionable.
The idea of rich men incentivising journalists to write articles slanted in the direction THEY want is NOT a direction a free society should encourage. Have a look at the blatant bias in the British press, or FOX network in the states to see why journos should be left to call them as they see them, NOT as the paymaster wants them too.
AA,
As I said, I'm pleased the RFDS get the 50K, but I don't like the charade that preceded it, for the reasons quoted above.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We really should be asking ourselves why the RFDS should have to depend on handouts from the public.
Our authorities do not provide the medical services the outback needs, so an air medical service is a requirement. It should be paid for by our taxes.
Our authorities do not provide the medical services the outback needs, so an air medical service is a requirement. It should be paid for by our taxes.
Interesting you should say we need to be careful our news is not influenced by commercial interests...
On the Gruen Transfer last night, one of the advertising experts said that almost all of what we see on the news is there because of someones commercial interests (or lack of). I would imagine that's true, look at the handling of the Emirates accident v. QF problems in the media. How much of editorial is really not advertising? (anyone pick the irony that I am using a reference from the media)
I think we have sunk well past that already, so it doesn't matter that Dick didn't finance these journos because some other rich bussiness man is
In regards to the RFDS, bushy, it is a real disgrace!
On the Gruen Transfer last night, one of the advertising experts said that almost all of what we see on the news is there because of someones commercial interests (or lack of). I would imagine that's true, look at the handling of the Emirates accident v. QF problems in the media. How much of editorial is really not advertising? (anyone pick the irony that I am using a reference from the media)
I think we have sunk well past that already, so it doesn't matter that Dick didn't finance these journos because some other rich bussiness man is
In regards to the RFDS, bushy, it is a real disgrace!