Europe and the Media: Building a New Kind of Europe : Is Mass Media the Key?

The book is a joint effort of eight academics and journalists, Europe specialists from six countries (Australia, Germany, Poland, Slovenia, the United Kingdom and the United States). They give sometimes divergent views on the future of the so-called “European Project”, for building a common European economy and society, but agree that cultural changes, especially changes experienced through mass media, are rapidly taking place. One of the central interests of the book is the operation of the large media centre located at the European Commission in Brussels – the world’s largest gallery of permanently accredited correspondents. Jacket notes: The Lisbon Treaty of December 2009 is the latest success of the European Union’s drive to restructure and expand; yet questions persist about how democratic this new Europe might be. Will Brussels’ promotion of the “European idea” produce a common European culture and society? The authors consider it might, as a culture of everyday shared experience, though old ways are cherished, citizens forever thinking twice about committing to an uncertain future. The book focuses on mass media , as a prime agent of change, sometimes used deliberately to promote a “European project”; sometimes acting more naturally as a medium for new agendas. It looks at proposed media models for Europe, ranging from not very successful pan-European television, to the potentials of media systems based on national markets, and new media based on digital formats. It also studies the Brussels media service, the centre operated by the European Commission, which is the world’s largest concentration of journalists; and ways that dominant national media may come to serve the interests of communities now extending across frontiers. Europe and the Media notes change especially as encountered by new EU member countries of central and eastern Europe

Leonardo Bruni, the Medici, and the Florentine Histories

Others, like the prominent humanist and anti-Medicean agitator Francesco Filelfo, would soon join the first wave of exiles.4 Bruni was not only linked to such men by ties of patronage and friendship; he had also for many years acted as the chief ideologue of the preMedicean oligarchy.5 One might logically expect that he too would become a victim of Medici vengeance in 1434, or soon thereafter. Other scholars have stressed that Bruni-despite the occasional flamboyance of his civic rhetoric-was always an advocate of restricted government.8 While the power struggle between the Medici and their adversaries was real enough, the system Cosimo and his associates introduced after 1434 differed from its predecessor only in the consistency with which it was applied

Windschuttle at War: The Politics of Historiography in Australia

Keith Windschuttle unleashed a storm of controversy with the publication of The Fabrication of Aboriginal History: Volume One, Van Diemen’s Land, 1803-1847 (2002; reprinted with corrections 2003). In a series of events unusual for works of this kind, Windschuttle’s book received considerable media exposure: almost immediately it became the focal point of impassioned debate. The debate moreover continues and promises to be with us for some time. The Fabrication is in fact the first of a projected series of volumes in which the author proposes to reexamine the early history of relations between White settlers and the indigenous populations of Australia (Windschuttle, 2003c: 3-4). The title Windschuttle chose for the book says a great deal about its contents. While purporting to rewrite a chapter of early Australian history, Windschuttle is in fact more concerned with examining recent Australian historiography. The Fabrication derives its power from being an act of accusation. Windschuttle’s real intent is to expose what he sees as gross malpractice within the Australian historical profession. His chief accusation is that a number of leading academic historians—including Lyndall Ryan and Henry Reynolds—have falsified the picture of race relations in early Australia. They have, according to Windschuttle, unduly over-emphasized conflict and violence as their main themes in discussing relations between Whites and Blacks. Windschuttle criticizes Ryan for using the term genocide to describe settler behavior towards the indigenous Tasmanians (Windschuttle, 2003c: 4, 13; Ryan, 1996: 255). He chastises Reynolds for depicting the Tasmanian Aborigines as engaged in a guerrilla war to defend their lands against the White invaders. He deplores the way both historians stress that British settlement of Tasmania proceeded through a process of physical elimination of the native populations

Re-Thinking Biography

Should biography have a place within a conference like the present one? Does biography have a legitimate role to play in humanities and social science research as conceived and practiced today, in the twenty-first century? Or is biography, as Bourdieu (1986: 69) once claimed, a cheat: “one of those common sense notions that have somehow managed to sneak their way into scientific discourse‿

Fahrenheit 420: Burning the humanities at QUT

I faced a dilemma when invited to participate in this seminar. What contribution could I make? What insights could I offer? There were several dangers I wanted to avoid. One was to preach to the converted. We are all strong believers in the value of the arts, humanities, and social science disciplines. There does not seem to be much point in trotting out long-winded justifications. Similarly I wanted to avoid addressing broad issues on which I am insufficiently informed. I am not a trade unionist, even though I have been a card-carrying, dues-paying member of my union for nearly thirty years. I am not an educationalist, even though I have been teaching in tertiary institutions on three continents for thirty-five years. Who then am I and what can I say of relevance to a seminar of this kind? The best way for me to answer these questions is I think to tell my story. If nothing else my testimony can offer yet another perspective on the plight of arts and humanities in Australian universities