LETTERS TO ANY EDITOR 7250: ALBERT VAN ZETTEN

Tuesday, 12 April 2022

ALBERT VAN ZETTEN _ FLOODING IN LAUNCESTON

GLANCING at an article titled "Flooding a Fact of Life" (The Examiner, August 8, 2020), some interesting comments were made by Launceston mayor Albert van Zetten and I quote: "Even with the improved protection afforded by the levees, it was impossible to defend against flood events".

He further said "it is important for Launceston residents to be aware that the levees are not a guarantee against flood.

Given the ground conditions in Invermay, there is a risk of failure, the adequacy of the system cannot be guaranteed. In a one in a 200-year event under our current climate conditions, buildings in the area stretching from Newstead College across Invermay, all the way to the Star Theatre could be unsafe and vulnerable to structural damage. Our mayor and his councillors have allowed large building projects to go ahead and may shortly be asked for a cultural centre and auditorium to also be built on this flood plain.

In defence of this, may Cr van Zetten encouraged residents in low-lying areas to have a flood plan? Would number one on that list be to buy a small boat?

Ron Baines, Kings Meadows.

No comments:

Post a Comment

WELCOLME

For quite some time 'Letters To The Editor' at Launceston's Examiner Newspaper has been an element of the publication around which quite a bit of debate and speculation has been going on. At times it has been contentious and sometimes even letter writers have been outraged at the way their letter have been edited, truncated, ignored and manipulated.

There is no NEWS in any of this and arguably the LETTERS TO THE EDITOR section is the primary reason people have bought the paper. After all these letters are germane to local issues in the main and what's more their local perspective is what readers are looking for it seems.

Thus 'letter writers' are CITIZENjournalist very important to the publication's raison d'etre and credibility. If HARDcopy publications are to persist, this is likely to remain so given that these letters have become an important part of a community's CULTURALreality.

As time passes and so-called NEW technologies impact upon newspapers and the transmission of the 'news' new conventions come into play. Likewise, 'letter writers' have new and more 'democratic' ways of sharing news and opinion to expanding audiences ... many times audiences newspapers cannot reach.

So against this background it is hard to imagine just why it is that newspaper editors and sub-editors think that they can fiddle with contributors' letters. Yet it happens and it seemingly goes on in secret. WHY?

Quite apart from anything else LAWS HAVE CHANGED and many newspapers seem to be oblivious to that. However ignorance of the/a law is NO defence .... it never has been.

In Australia today there are legal obligations to attribute creators and treat their work with respect. These creators’ rights are known as ‘moral rights’.The Copyright Act 1968 was amended in 2000 to incorporate moral rights and bring Australian copyright law into line with international norms.

They mean you must: attribute (give credit to) the creator; not say a person is a creator of a work when they’re not; not do something with a work (such as change or add to it) that would have a negative impact on the creator’s reputation

These obligations do not apply if you have the creator’s consent, or if you act reasonably (as set out in the legislation; industry practice can be relevant).

Creators have moral rights even if they do not own copyright in their work. They cannot sell or completely waive their rights, but they can can give consent for certain things that may otherwise breach their moral rights.

It's time to look at how local newspapers deal with Letters To The Editor in a 21st C context.

Pages

Tuesday, 12 April 2022

ALBERT VAN ZETTEN _ FLOODING IN LAUNCESTON

No comments:

Post a Comment