सत्य

रेटिङ: 7.0/10

Coalition
C0507

दाबी

“नयाँ भुक्तानी अभिभावक बिदा योजना (Paid Parental Leave scheme) ल्याउने चुनावी वाचा तोडिएको छ।”
मूल स्रोत: Matthew Davis

मूल स्रोतहरू

तथ्य जाँच

**सत्य** **satya** - - टोनी ṭonī एबट ebaṭa (Tony (Tony Abbott) Abbott) को ko नेतृत्वमा netṛtvamā रहेको raheko गठबन्धन gaṭhabandhana सरकारले sarakārale आफ्नो āphno हस्ताक्षर hastākṣara भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā योजनासम्बन्धी yojanāsambandhī चुनावी cunāvī वाचा vācā तोड्यो। toḍyo| २०१३ 2013 को ko संघीय saṃghīya चुनाव cunāva अभियानको abhiyānako क्रममा, kramamā, तत्कालीन tatkālīna प्रधानमन्त्री pradhānamantrī उम्मेदवार ummedavāra टोनी ṭonī एबटले ebaṭale एउटा euṭā उदार udāra भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā (PPL) (PPL) योजना yojanā एउटा euṭā प्रमुख pramukha नीति nīti योजनाको yojanāko रूपमा rūpamā घोषणा ghoṣaṇā गरेका garekā थिए। thie| यो yo योजनाले yojanāle आमाको āmāko पूर्ण pūrṇa प्रतिस्थापन pratisthāpana तलबको talabako २६ 26 हप्ताको haptāko भुक्तान bhuktāna बिदा bidā (वार्षिक (vārṣika तलब talaba १.५ 1.5 लाख lākha अस्ट्रेलियाली asṭreliyālī डलरसम्म ḍalarasamma सीमित) sīmita) ra अतिरिक्त atirikta योगदान yogadāna (superannuation) (superannuation) समेत sameta प्रदान pradāna गर्ने garne वाचा vācā गरेको gareko थियो thiyo [1]। [1]| यो yo अवस्थित avasthita लेबर lebara सरकारको sarakārako योजनाभन्दा yojanābhandā उल्लेखनीय ullekhanīya सुधार sudhāra हुने hune ra चुनाव cunāva अभियानको abhiyānako क्रममा kramamā जोडदार joḍadāra रूपमा rūpamā प्रवर्द्धन pravarddhana गरिएको garieko थियो। thiyo| २०१५ 2015 को ko फेब्रुअरी phebruarī 2 मा, mā, राष्ट्रिय rāṣṭriya प्रेस presa क्लबमा, klabamā, प्रधानमन्त्री pradhānamantrī टोनी ṭonī एबटले ebaṭale औपचारिक aupacārika रूपमा rūpamā यो yo नीति nīti परित्याग parityāga गरिएको garieko घोषणा ghoṣaṇā गरे gare [1]। [1]| एबटले ebaṭale यो yo योजना yojanā "तहमा "tahamā राखिने" rākhine" (shelved) (shelved) ra "कप्तानको "kaptānako निर्णय" nirṇaya" (captain's (captain's call) call) भएको bhaeko बताए, batāe, जुन juna उनले unale आन्तरिक āntarika दल dala विरोधका virodhakā बावजूद bāvajūda जारी jārī राखेका rākhekā थिए। thie| यो yo निर्णय nirṇaya बढ्दो baḍhdo बजेट bajeṭa दबाब dabāba ra ठूला ṭhūlā कम्पनीहरूमा kampanīharūmā लगाइने lagāine करसम्बन्धी karasambandhī प्रस्तावित prastāvita विधेयकका vidheyakakā लागि lāgi सिनेटको sineṭako समर्थन samarthana प्राप्त prāpta गर्न garna असमर्थताको asamarthatāko परिणाम pariṇāma थियो। thiyo|
**TRUE** - The Coalition government led by Tony Abbott did break an election promise regarding its signature paid parental leave scheme.

हराइरहेको सन्दर्भ

यो yo दाबी dābī तथ्यगत tathyagata रूपमा rūpamā सत्य satya भए bhae पनि, pani, वाचा vācā किन kina तोडियो toḍiyo भन्ने bhanne बुझ्न bujhna मद्दत maddata गर्ने garne महत्त्वपूर्ण mahattvapūrṇa सन्दर्भ sandarbha समावेश samāveśa छैन: chaina: **बजेट **bajeṭa सीमाहरू sīmāharū ra वित्तीय vittīya वास्तविकता:** vāstavikatā:** गठबन्धन gaṭhabandhana सत्तामा sattāmā आएको āeko सेप्टेम्बर sepṭembara २०१३ 2013 मा, mā, सरकार sarakāra खराब kharāba हुँदो hu~do बजेट bajeṭa स्थितिको sthitiko सामना sāmanā गरिरहेको gariraheko थियो। thiyo| भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā योजना, yojanā, जसको jasako अनुमानित anumānita वार्षिक vārṣika लागत lāgata लगभग lagabhaga ५५० 550 करोड karoḍa अस्ट्रेलियाली asṭreliyālī डलर ḍalara थियो, thiyo, वित्तीय vittīya संकुचनको saṃkucanako वातावरणमा vātāvaraṇamā औचित्य aucitya देखाउन dekhāuna ज्यादै jyādai गाह्रो gāhro भइरहेको bhairaheko थियो thiyo [2]। [2]| **आन्तरिक **āntarika दल dala विरोध:** virodha:** यो yo योजनाले yojanāle गठबन्धनभित्रैबाट gaṭhabandhanabhitraibāṭa महत्त्वपूर्ण mahattvapūrṇa विरोध virodha सामना sāmanā गरेको gareko थियो, thiyo, खासगरी khāsagarī कोषाध्यक्ष koṣādhyakṣa जो jo हकी hakī (Treasurer (Treasurer Joe Joe Hockey) Hockey) ra अन्य anya वरिष्ठ variṣṭha मन्त्रीहरूबाट, mantrīharūbāṭa, जसले jasale यसलाई yasalāī वित्तीय vittīya रूपमा rūpamā अनैतिक anaitika ra राम्रोसँग rāmrosa~ga लक्षित lakṣita नभएको nabhaeko रूपमा rūpamā हेरेका herekā थिए। thie| एबटले ebaṭale यो yo आन्तरिक āntarika प्रतिरोध pratirodha स्वीकार svīkāra गरे gare जब jaba यसको yasako परित्यागको parityāgako घोषणा ghoṣaṇā गरे gare [1]। [1]| **सिनेटको **sineṭako अंकगणित:** aṃkagaṇita:** सरकारले sarakārale 5 लाख lākha अस्ट्रेलियाली asṭreliyālī डलर ḍalara भन्दा bhandā बढी baḍhī करयोग्य karayogya आम्दानी āmdānī भएका bhaekā कम्पनीहरूमा kampanīharūmā १.५% 1.5% कर kara लगाउने lagāune प्रस्तावित prastāvita विधेयक vidheyaka पारित pārita गर्न garna आवश्यक āvaśyaka सिनेट sineṭa संख्या saṃkhyā पाएको pāeko थिएन thiena [3]। [3]| **हस्ताक्षर **hastākṣara नीति nīti उल्ट्याउनु:** ulṭyāunu:** यो yo सानो sāno नीति nīti होइन hoina तर tara एबटले ebaṭale लेबरभन्दा lebarabhandā भिन्न bhinna बनाउने banāune एउटा euṭā हस्ताक्षर hastākṣara वाचा vācā थियो, thiyo, जसले jasale यसको yasako परित्यागलाई parityāgalāī राजनीतिक rājanītika रूपमा rūpamā महत्त्वपूर्ण mahattvapūrṇa बनायो। banāyo|
The claim, while factually accurate, lacks important context that helps explain why the promise was broken: **Budget constraints and fiscal reality:** When the Coalition took office in September 2013, the government faced a deteriorating budget position.

स्रोत विश्वसनीयता मूल्याङ्कन

प्रदान pradāna गरिएको garieko मौलिक maulika स्रोत srota **एबीसी **ebīsī न्युज** nyuja** (abc.net.au) (abc.net.au) [1] [1] हो, ho, जुन juna अस्ट्रेलियाको asṭreliyāko राष्ट्रिय rāṣṭriya सार्वजनिक sārvajanika प्रसारक prasāraka हो ho ra सामान्यतया sāmānyatayā विश्वसनीय, viśvasanīya, मुख्यधारको mukhyadhārako समाचार samācāra स्रोतको srotako रूपमा rūpamā मानिन्छ, mānincha, जसको jasako स्थापित sthāpita सम्पादकीय sampādakīya मापदण्ड māpadaṇḍa छ। cha| एबीसी ebīsī न्युजसँग nyujasa~ga कुनै kunai घोषित ghoṣita दलीय dalīya संरेखण saṃrekhaṇa छैन chaina ra यो yo सरकारबाट sarakārabāṭa स्वतन्त्र svatantra रूपमा rūpamā त्रिवर्षीय trivarṣīya अनुदान anudāna मार्फत mārphata सञ्चालित sañcālita हुन्छ। huncha| सामान्यतया sāmānyatayā विश्वसनीक viśvasanīka भए bhae पनि, pani, एबीसीले ebīsīle विभिन्न vibhinna समयमा samayamā दुवै duvai प्रमुख pramukha दलहरूबाट dalaharūbāṭa आलोचना ālocanā सामना sāmanā गरेको gareko छ, cha, जसले jasale यसको yasako comparative comparative स्वतन्त्रता svatantratā सङ्केत saṅketa गर्छ। garcha| यो yo विशेष viśeṣa दाबीबारे dābībāre नीति nīti घोषणाको ghoṣaṇāko प्रत्यक्ष, pratyakṣa, प्रथमहात prathamahāta समाचार samācāra कभरेज kabhareja प्रदान pradāna गर्ने garne वास्तविक vāstavika प्रेस presa सम्मेलनबारेको sammelanabāreko एबीसीको ebīsīko रिपोर्ट riporṭa छ। cha|
The original source provided is **ABC News** (abc.net.au) [1], which is Australia's national public broadcaster and is generally considered a credible, mainstream news source with established editorial standards.
⚖️

Labor तुलना

**के **ke लेबरले lebarale पनि pani यस्तै yastai गरेको gareko थियो?** thiyo?** लेबरले lebarale २०११ 2011 मा गिलार्ड gilārḍa सरकार sarakāra अन्तर्गत antargata अस्ट्रेलियाको asṭreliyāko पहिलो pahilo राष्ट्रिय rāṣṭriya भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā योजना yojanā सुरु suru गर्यो, garyo, जुन juna २०११ 2011 मै mai सञ्चालनमा sañcālanamā आयो āyo [4]। [4]| तर, tara, लेबरको lebarako योजना yojanā उल्लेखनीय ullekhanīya रूपमा rūpamā कम kama उदार udāra थियो: thiyo: - - **लेबरको **lebarako योजना:** yojanā:** राष्ट्रिय rāṣṭriya न्यूनतम nyūnatama ज्यालाको jyālāko १८ 18 हप्ता haptā (२०१५ (2015 मा लगभग lagabhaga ७४० 740 अस्ट्रेलियाली asṭreliyālī डलर ḍalara प्रति prati हप्ता) haptā) - - **एबटले **ebaṭale वाचा vācā गरेको gareko योजना:** yojanā:** पूर्ण pūrṇa प्रतिस्थापन pratisthāpana तलबको talabako २६ 26 हप्ता haptā (वार्षिक (vārṣika तलब talaba १.५ 1.5 लाख lākha अस्ट्रेलियाली asṭreliyālī डलरसम्म ḍalarasamma सीमित) sīmita) लेबरले lebarale आफ्नो āphno विनम्र vinamra योजना yojanā पूरा pūrā गरेकाले garekāle भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदासम्बन्धी bidāsambandhī वाचा vācā त्यसरी tyasarī तोडेन। toḍena| तर, tara, लेबरले lebarale अन्य anya क्षेत्रहरूमा kṣetraharūmā महत्त्वपूर्ण mahattvapūrṇa चुनावी cunāvī वाचा vācā तोडेको toḍeko छ, cha, विशेष viśeṣa गरी: garī: - - गिलार्ड gilārḍa सरकारको sarakārako कार्बन kārbana मूल्य mūlya निर्धारण nirdhāraṇa फिर्ता phirtā लिने line ("There ("There will will be be no no carbon carbon tax tax under under the the government government I I lead") lead") [5] [5] - - किटिङ kiṭiṅa सरकारको sarakārako L-A-W L-A-W कर kara कटौती kaṭautī वाचा vācā जुन juna पूरा pūrā भएन bhaena [6] [6] मुख्य mukhya भिन्नता bhinnatā के ke हो ho भने bhane एबटको ebaṭako भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā एउटा euṭā हस्ताक्षर, hastākṣara, जोडदार joḍadāra प्रवर्द्धन pravarddhana गरिएको garieko नीति nīti थियो thiyo जुन juna स्पष्ट spaṣṭa रूपमा rūpamā परित्याग parityāga गरियो, gariyo, जबकि jabaki लेबरको lebarako योजना yojanā पूरा pūrā भयो bhayo (यद्यपि (yadyapi एबटले ebaṭale वाचा vācā गरेको gareko भन्दा bhandā सीमित sīmita रूपमा)। rūpamā)|
**Did Labor do something similar?** Labor introduced Australia's first national paid parental leave scheme in 2011 under the Gillard government, which began operations in 2011 [4].
🌐

सन्तुलित दृष्टिकोण

यद्यपि yadyapi दाबी dābī तथ्यगत tathyagata रूपमा rūpamā सही sahī cha कि ki वाचा vācā तोडियो, toḍiyo, पूर्ण pūrṇa कथा kathā वैधानिक vaidhānika सन्दर्भकारक sandarbhakāraka कारकहरू kārakaharū समावेश samāveśa गर्छ: garcha: **सरकारको **sarakārako औचित्य:** aucitya:** एबट ebaṭa सरकारले sarakārale परिवर्तित parivartita वित्तीय vittīya परिस्थिति paristhiti ra बजेट bajeṭa मर्मतको marmatako आवश्यकतालाई āvaśyakatālāī योजना yojanā तहमा tahamā राख्ने rākhne प्राथमिक prāthamika कारणहरू kāraṇaharū भने। bhane| सरकारले sarakārale वाचा vācā गरिएको garieko समयमा samayamā भन्दा bhandā ठूलो ṭhūlo बजेट bajeṭa घाटाको ghāṭāko सामना sāmanā गरिरहेको gariraheko थियो thiyo [2]। [2]| **नीति **nīti गुणहरू guṇaharū बहस bahasa गरिएको:** garieko:** प्रस्तावित prastāvita योजना yojanā अर्थशास्त्रीहरू arthaśāstrīharū ra नीति nīti विशेषज्ञहरूद्वारा viśeṣajñaharūdvārā महँगो maha~go ra राम्रोसँग rāmrosa~ga लक्षित lakṣita नभएको nabhaeko रूपमा rūpamā आलोचना ālocanā गरिएको garieko थियो, thiyo, उच्च ucca आम्दानी āmdānī कमाउनेहरूलाई kamāuneharūlāī असमानुपातिक asamānupātika लाभ lābha प्रदान pradāna गर्ने। garne| अस्ट्रेलिया asṭreliyā इन्स्टिच्युट insṭicyuṭa (Australia (Australia Institute) Institute) ra अन्य anya नीति nīti संगठनहरूले saṃgaṭhanaharūle यो yo योजनाले yojanāle लागतअनुसार lāgataanusāra मूल्य mūlya प्रतिनिधित्व pratinidhitva गर्छ garcha कि ki भनेर bhanera प्रश्न praśna उठाएका uṭhāekā थिए thie [7]। [7]| **राजनीतिक **rājanītika लागत:** lāgata:** यो yo वाचा vācā तोड्नु toḍnu एबटका ebaṭakā लागि lāgi राजनीतिक rājanītika रूपमा rūpamā हानिकारक hānikāraka थियो, thiyo, विशेष viśeṣa गरी garī महिला mahilā मतदाताहरूबीच, matadātāharūbīca, ra सरकारलाई sarakāralāī अविश्वसनीय aviśvasanīya रूपमा rūpamā हेर्ने herne धारणामा dhāraṇāmā योगदान yogadāna गर्यो। garyo| "कप्तानको "kaptānako निर्णय" nirṇaya" (captain's (captain's call) call) को ko प्रयोगले prayogale एबटको ebaṭako नेतृत्व netṛtva शैलीबारे śailībāre चासनीलाई cāsanīlāī बलियो baliyo बनायो। banāyo| **लेबरको **lebarako विकल्प:** vikalpa:** सरकारले sarakārale लेबरको lebarako अवस्थित, avasthita, विनम्र vinamra भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā योजना yojanā कायम kāyama राख्यो, rākhyo, जसको jasako अर्थ artha अभिभावकहरू abhibhāvakaharū बिना binā कुनै kunai समर्थन samarthana बाँकी bā~kī रहेनन् rahenan - - तिनीहरूले tinīharūle वाचा vācā गरिएको garieko अझ ajha उदार udāra गठबन्धन gaṭhabandhana विकल्प vikalpa मात्र mātra पाएनन्। pāenan| **तुलनात्मक **tulanātmaka सन्दर्भ:** sandarbha:** जबकि jabaki तोडिएका toḍiekā वाचाहरू vācāharū कुनै kunai पनि pani सरकारको sarakārako विश्वसनीयतालाई viśvasanīyatālāī हानि hāni पुर्‍याउँछन्, pur‍yāu~chan, यो yo विशेष viśeṣa उल्टो ulṭo वित्तीय vittīya वास्तविकताप्रति vāstavikatāprati प्रतिक्रियाको pratikriyāko रूपमा rūpamā हेर्न herna सकिन्छ sakincha राजनीतिक rājanītika सुविधाको suvidhāko सट्टा। saṭṭā| सरकारले sarakārale योजनाको yojanāko खर्च kharca औचित्य aucitya देखाउन dekhāuna गाह्रो gāhro भएको bhaeko वास्तविक vāstavika बजेट bajeṭa दबावको dabāvako सामना sāmanā गरिरहेको gariraheko थियो। thiyo|
While the claim is factually correct that the promise was broken, the full story includes legitimate contextual factors: **Government justification:** The Abbott government cited changed fiscal circumstances and the need for budget repair as the primary reasons for shelving the scheme.

सत्य

7.0

/ १०

गठबन्धन gaṭhabandhana सरकारले sarakārale अझ ajha उदार udāra भुक्तानी bhuktānī अभिभावक abhibhāvaka बिदा bidā योजना yojanā ल्याउने lyāune एउटा euṭā स्पष्ट spaṣṭa चुनावी cunāvī वाचा vācā तोड्यो। toḍyo| टोनी ṭonī एबटले ebaṭale फेब्रुअरी phebruarī २०१५ 2015 मा यो yo नीति nīti परित्याग parityāga गरिने garine घोषणा ghoṣaṇā गरे, gare, कार्यभार kāryabhāra सम्हालेको samhāleko लगभग lagabhaga १८ 18 महिना mahinā पछि। pachi| यो yo एउटा euṭā प्रमुख pramukha चुनावी cunāvī प्रतिबद्धताको pratibaddhatāko स्पष्ट, spaṣṭa, असन्दिग्ध asandigdha उल्टो ulṭo थियो। thiyo|
The Coalition government did break an explicit election promise to introduce a more generous paid parental leave scheme.

📚 स्रोतहरू र उद्धरणहरू (7)

  1. 1
    Tony Abbott shelves paid parental leave scheme, describes policy as a 'captain's call'

    Tony Abbott shelves paid parental leave scheme, describes policy as a 'captain's call'

    Coalition MPs sound out frontbenchers Julie Bishop and Malcolm Turnbull as potential replacements for the PM, as Tony Abbott prepares to dump his paid parental leave scheme in a key speech.

    Abc Net
  2. 2
    archive.budget.gov.au

    2014-15 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook

    Archive Budget Gov

    Original link no longer available
  3. 3
    smh.com.au

    Coalition concedes defeat on paid parental leave levy

    Smh Com

    Original link no longer available
  4. 4
    dss.gov.au

    Paid Parental Leave scheme - Department of Social Services

    Dss Gov

  5. 5
    Julia Gillard's carbon tax promise

    Julia Gillard's carbon tax promise

    embedded pic According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a "gaffe" is a "social or diplomatic blunder, a noticeable mistake" synonymous with a "faux pas, impropriety, indiscretion or a solecism". Every presidential election campaign has its fair share of them, yet this year the number of gaffes - or at least the number being widely reported - seems to have been taken to a whole new level. And contrary to the strict definition, a gaffe no longer needs to be a mistake per se, rather just a poor choice of words which taken out of context can be used against the candidate. That being said, we have seen some doozies. The once-promising presidential candidacy of the Republican governor of Texas, Rick Perry, was largely brought down by a series of gaffes, starting with the name of his family hunting camp - Niggerhead - and culminating in the "oops" moment in a debate last November when he forgot the third government agency he planned to scrap. Another one-time frontrunner, congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, also gained a gaffe-prone reputation last year, claiming the American Revolution began in New Hampshire, rather than the actual location of Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts. Ms Bachmann also claimed the HPV vaccine caused mental retardation, and that she was born in the same small Iowa town as movie star John Wayne - when in fact she was born in the same small Iowa town where serial killer John Wayne Gacy grew up. Newt Gingrich may not have technically gaffed but certainly provoked guffaws when he told voters in Florida he'd make the Moon America's 51st state. "We will have the first permanent base on the moon and it will be American," he said. Then there was Rick Santorum's "I don't care what the unemployment rate is going to be." And Herman Cain became a one-man gaffe-machine, including this answer to a question on whether he agreed with the Obama administration's policy on Libya: "I do not agree with the way he handled it for the following reason … Nope, that's a different one… I gotta go back and see. I got all this stuff twirling around in my head. Specifically, what are you asking me that I agree or not disagree with Obama?" Oops indeed. And then there is just about everything Donald Trump has said in the past two years. With such juicy morsels on offer, little wonder the media has an enormous appetite for gaffes this election season. But have we really had an unprecedented series of gaffe-prone candidates, or is this largely the creation of the media? To be fair, reporters being on the look-out for flubs and missteps makes some sense during a primary campaign when candidates are being vetted and tested during a period where substantial policy differences are often few and far between. But is it still a fair ploy during the general election phase? Despite the glee with which campaign hacks seized on Mitt Romney’s somewhat luke-warm endorsement of London's Olympic readiness or vaguely implied criticism of Palestinians as he flattered Israel - does anyone really doubt he'd be able to be appropriately presidential on the world stage? And what about vice president Joe Biden (who has been known to be an affable blowhard for his 40 years in elected office) - does getting a bit mixed up about whether he's in Virginia or North Carolina when he’s in a border town really disqualify him for high office? And is the mere reference to people being in chains really "playing the race card"? But for both Biden and Romney, the narrative of being gaffe-prone is very hard to shake. Once established, just about any speech might contain a line that can be held up as yet another gaffe The media, media consumers and the campaigns seem to be hooked on the political sugar-fix that is the gaffe. President Obama's now-infamous "you didn't build that" comment is only a gaffe if you completely ignore the context and pretend he was saying something he wasn't – yet it, too, is now "a gaffe" – one that’s become a slogan for the Romney campaign. My co-host on Planet America Chas Licciadello has an interesting theory, which I am more than happy to steal: Chas reckons as news organisations cut back on senior staff we are seeing more junior reporters with less experience and less context covering the campaign. And those reporters lack the knowledge to cover policy in any depth, but they can easily write a story based on a gaffe or flub. I certainly suspect there's something in that, but I think there is more to it as well. Back in 1972, a reporter from Rolling Stone magazine named Tim Crouse wrote a classic of the campaign book genre that has tended to be overshadowed by the likes of Teddy White, Hunter S. Thompson and Richard Ben Cramer. As the press bus followed the likes of George McGovern, Ed Muskie and Hubert Humphrey around Iowa and New Hampshire, Crouse turned his focus on the members of the press. The result was The Boys on the Bus – and yes, in 1972 they were almost all boys, or partially-inebriated, chain-smoking men at least. Crouse found that there were some powerful forces leading to a kind of groupthink - certain influential reporters who could effectively determine the news of the day. Journalists with secondary newspapers or TV or radio stations would look to see what the likes of Johnny Apple of the The New York Times or David Broder of The Washington Post were filing from the campaign trail and follow suit. The reason was simple. Journalists had to answer to editors back at head office, who would be displeased if their reporter had missed the angle being covered on page one of the Times or the Post. That, Crouse concluded, was just one of the ways a "pack" of journalists was formed. And like any pack, from time to time they like to single out a weak opponent and bring them down – often by writing about seemingly trivial things like gaffes. Another reason Crouse noted that reporters tend to focus on mistakes is that they represent something new and different. Campaign reporters following a candidate for weeks on end from one town to another will tend to hear the same stump speech time and time again. The same jokes, the same attacks, the same vague policies, five, six times a day. The reporters stop taking notes when they hear it all again and there's no "news" to report – but if then suddenly if candidate gets heckled, says something dumb or trips over on the stairs getting onto a stage – then that becomes news. In 1972 it was Ed Muskie shedding tears (or not) before the New Hampshire primary that became a huge story, so did Hillary Clinton’s tears before New Hampshire voted in early 2008. In 2012, as there was in 2008, there is a new element: Twitter. And this is where the Licciadello Thesis can become useful. Most campaign reporters, certainly just about all under 45, are tweeting all the time this year, reducing debates and speeches to 140 characters or less. Not a lot of room for context or nuance in a tweet. The 24-hour news cycle has become the 24/7 news cycle, never starting or ending but just rolling from a tweet onto a news website, then a panel of pundits on cable news, and from there into a print edition or onto radio talk show – forcing candidates and their campaigns to immediate comment, refute, rephrase or react. Unlike in Tim Crouse's time, today's reporters can simply keep track of each other's tweets to know what the "pack leaders" are thinking and writing about, and the best tweeters are fast becoming the new leaders of that pack. The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza (@ryanlizza), Buzzfeed's Ben Smith (@buzzfeedben), Politico's Maggie Haberman (@maggiepolitico), The Atlantic's Molly Ball (@mollyesque), and Erin McPike (@erinmcpike) from Real Clear Politics are the Apples and Broders of 2012. That's not to say campaign veterans like Joe Klein, George Will or David Brooks now lack influence, or that the younger journalists and tweeters are by definition attracted to trivia, but it seems to me there is something in the speed and economy of the new media as it feeds into the old, stressed, cash-strapped, time-poor established media that may be fuelling a growing hunger for the superficially clickable - the gaffe.

    Abc Net
  6. 6
    The history of 'the recession we had to have'

    The history of 'the recession we had to have'

    It's a new term that has jumped into our lexicon this week with tragic fatalities in Victoria: Thunderstorm asthma. What is this anyway? Find out from an expert.

    ABC Sydney
  7. 7
    australiainstitute.org.au

    Paid Parental Leave: An expensive way to help affluent women

    Australiainstitute Org

    Original link no longer available

मूल्याङ्कन स्केल कार्यप्रणाली

1-3: गलत

तथ्यात्मक रूपमा गलत वा दुर्भावनापूर्ण बनावटी।

4-6: आंशिक

केही सत्य तर सन्दर्भ हराइरहेको वा विकृत छ।

7-9: प्रायः सत्य

सानो प्राविधिक विवरण वा शब्दावली मुद्दाहरू।

10: सटीक

पूर्ण रूपमा प्रमाणित र सन्दर्भमा उचित।

विधि: मूल्याङ्कनहरू आधिकारिक सरकारी अभिलेख, स्वतन्त्र तथ्य-जाँच संगठनहरू र प्राथमिक स्रोत कागजातहरूको क्रस-रेफरेन्सिङ मार्फत निर्धारित गरिन्छ।