This article considers the question of whether creative workers demonstrate a preference for inner cities or suburbs, drawing upon research findings from the ‘Creative Suburbia’ project undertaken by a team of Australian researchers over 2008–2010 in selected suburban areas of Brisbane and Melbourne. Locating this question in wider debates about the relationship of the suburbs to the city, as well as the development of new suburban forms such as master-planned communities, the article finds that the number of creative industries workers located in the suburbs is significant, and those creative workforce members living and working in suburban areas are generally happy with this experience, locating in the suburbs out of personal choice rather than economic necessity. It is noted that this runs counter to received wisdom on creative cities, which emphasize cultural amenity in inner city areas as a primary driver of location decisions for the ‘creative class’. The article draws out some implications of the findings for urban cultural policy, arguing that the focus on developing inner urban cultural amenity has been overplayed, and that more attention should be given to how to better enable distributed knowledge systems through high-speed broadband infrastructure.

The Introduction to the special issue, co-authored with Mark Gibson, Christy Collis and Emma Felton, can also be accessed here.

ABSTRACT

This paper draws upon quantitative and qualitative research into Australian cities to question the assumption that creative industries workers inherently seek to cluster in inner-urban areas. It challenges this foundational assumption by combining a critical application of the location quotient analysis of major Australian cities with qualitative research drawn from interviews with creative workers based in suburban Melbourne and Brisbane. The findings provide analyses as to why many creative industries workers prefer to locate themselves in outer suburban places. There is also discussion of the implications of these findings for future work on the cultural geography and policies of creative industries.

Please note that these are my personal notes; they are not reflective of any views I may hold as Chair of the ALRC Review of the National Classification Scheme.

Glen Boreham, keynote presentation to CPRF 2011

Convergence Review

* no longer clear who media rules apply to in context of convergence – legislation of 20 years ago is now out of date e.g Internet viewing of video from TVs

* legislation of 1990s was designed to achieve “silo-ed” public policy objectives e.g. Broadcasting Services Act saw TV as uniquely powerful in shaping culture and society

* switch to digital-only TV and Rollout of NBN have further implications

* problem of continually updating existing legislation to changes – BSA was 100 pages in 1992 – now 1000 pages

* Australian content in convergent environment – differs across platforms – do these differences continue to be relevant

* Main Challenges (“big rocks”)

- media diversity – cross-media/competition rules
- local content in multi-platform environment
- community standards incl. advertising, accuracy in news

* bottom-up rebuild of BSA required – new legislation – may focus on layers rather. Than industry-specific rules

* regulatory parity: like services regulated in a like way – “content is content” regardless of platform

* there may be cases where some platforms should be treated differently e.g. TV time zones

* community expectations continue to have a role – higher restrictions for Tv as compared to other platforms

* need for adaptable legislation – new regimes may need to be effective into the 2030s

* transparency: addressing political compromises that now create deep inefficiencies – discriminatory treatment needs to be visible and transparent

* Final Report
- media diversity, competition and market structure
- spectrum allocation and management
- community standards
- Australian and local content
- layering, licensing and regulation

* independent Media Inquiry reporting in Feb 2012 – Convergence Review in March 2012

* there has not yet been an equivalent inquiry in another country

* draft review in Dec 2011

LP120100627
Approved
Project Title
Social media in times of crisis: learning from recent natural disasters to improve future
strategies
Bruns, A/Prof Axel; Burgess, Dr Jean E; Crawford, A/Prof Kate J; Flew, Prof Terry

2012 $57,000.00
2013 $57,000.00
2014 $74,000.00
Total $188,000.00

Primary FoR 2001 COMMUNICATION AND MEDIA STUDIES

Partner Organisation(s)
Eidos Institute Ltd , Queensland Department of Community Safety, Sociomantic Labs

Administering Organisation Queensland University of Technology

Project Summary
This project will analyse and evaluate how social media was used by emergency authorities, media organisations and citizens during recent natural disasters, including the January 2011 Queensland floods and Tropical Cyclone Yasi. The project will develop a framework for longer-term strategies for public communication during emergencies.

The full submission can be downloaded here. As it is based on an Online Submission Form, I have used the required sub-headings, which may make it a bit odd to read as a paper.

Some fo the flavour of the submission can be gauged from the excerpt below:

Do you support the development of a National Cultural Policy, and why?

In general terms, yes. Such exercises, as last occurred in Australia with the Keating Government’s 1994 Creative Nation cultural policy statement, can be of value in three key respects.

First, by raising the question of ‘culture’ in a way that takes us out of silo-ised thinking based upon sectors, industries or government portfolios (the arts, the media, digital technologies, the Internet industry etc.), they enable a more holistic perspective to be developed on the policy implications of technological convergence and other contemporary cultural dynamics, such as the rise of user-led innovation and user-generated content – what Charles Leadbeater and Paul Miller (2004) termed the ‘Pro-Am Revolution’.

Second, they offer the opportunity for wide community engagement and consultation in policy development. The extent of engagement with the National Cultural Policy process since the initial call for submissions is testament to the considerable community interest in such questions. This range of contributions should in turn enable policy makers to develop new and more innovative approaches to supporting Australia cultural activity, as they are able to ‘crowdsource’ ideas from a wider range of individuals and groups than the familiar stakeholders in these policy domains.

Third, the resulting policy documents themselves have value in marking out new directions for policy over and above the specific recommendations that result. Thinking back to the Creative Nation statement, it is the case that long after specific budgetary allocations have disappeared into history, its innovative approach to rethinking the relationship between culture and industry in the context of digital convergence remains relevant. For instance, it had considerable influence on thinking about creative industries policy in the United Kingdom, and uptakes of such ideas in other countries.

That said, there are three attendant risks in the process.

First, a cultural policy may simply become an occasion for highly generalized ‘feel good’ statements about the value of the arts and culture, combined with some incremental increases in funding to some established organisations for new initiatives. They are rarely the places where hard questions are asked about how the existing funds are allocated, and can indeed run the risk of shutting down such conversations. While such an outcome from this National Cultural Policy initiative would not be harmful, it would be a missed opportunity for more medium-term thinking.

Second, the discussion may become an occasion for people in the arts sector to proclaim themselves to be underappreciated and to present Australian culture as beleaguered and under threat. National cultural policies that are premised upon a defensive cultural nationalism are not particularly useful or forward looking, and it would be hoped that those involved with this policy would – as the drafters of Creative Nation did – avoid a defensive and backward looking standpoint.

Third, there is the risk of isolating ‘culture’ from other areas of policy. In the current context, the work being undertaken by the DBCDE’s Convergence Review has major cultural policy implications – around issues such as local content rules for commercial television, to take one example – that should not be arbitrarily bracketed off from a cultural policy process being driven from the arts-related portfolio areas. Policy reviews such as the ALRC’s National Classification Scheme Review (which I am heading) and the forthcoming review of Copyright Law are also policy reviews with significant cultural policy implications, as is the development of a National Broadband Network.

One concern with the Discussion Paper, which I will elaborate upon later, is the manner in which it demarcates between the ‘core arts’ and the ‘creative industries’. The risks of producing a cultural policy statement that is defensive, backward looking, and isolated from other areas of policy are enhanced considerably if those responsible for the policy hold to this distinction.

Abstract:

The global release of 250,000 US Embassy diplomatic cables to selected media sites worldwide through the WikiLeaks website, was arguably the major global media event of 2010. As well as the implications of the content of the cables for international politics and diplomacy, the actions of WikiLeaks and its controversial editor-in-chief, the Australian Julian Assange, bring together a range of arguments about how the media, news and journalism are being transformed in the 21st century.

This paper will focus on the reactions of Australian online news media sites to the release of the diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks, including both the online sites of established news outlets such as The Australian, Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, the ABC’s The Drum site, and online-only sites such as Crikey, New Matilda and On Line Opinion.

The study focuses on opinion and commentary rather than straight news reportage, and analysis is framed around three issues: WikiLeaks and international diplomacy; implications of WikiLeaks for journalism; and WikiLeaks and democracy, including debates about the organisation and the ethics of its own practice. It also whether a “WikiLeaks Effect” has wider implications for how journalism is conducted in the future, particularly the method of ‘redaction’ of large amounts of computational data.

Congratulations to Hart Cohen, Antonio Castillo, Lisa Kaufman and the team at the University of Western Sydney School of Communicastion Arts for getting out such a great, timely publication.