Saturday, 22 September 2012

Hi guys, I wrote this short story a little while ago, and figured this would be a great platform to hear what you guys think! Its called "His Jawless Smile" enjoy!



A once complacent woman sits motionless by the phone, rigorously rehearsing the chastising, and
scolding she’ll unleash on her tardy son. She silently seethes, spiting out the words in her head
“You’ve left me worried” or “Not a single call,” to end dramatically with the pounding down of the
phone, which parallels the pounding of her heart as she waits.

Negative thoughts seem to immobilize her further. She’s alone. Left. Worrying. She reflects on
how their irrational love hate relationship has fuelled her reactions. The scheduled phone calls seize
to continue, and as days turn to weeks she regrets the previous calls, the nagging, the        
bickering, for they are now nothing but seemingly distant words and inerasable memories.

In her eyes this was all her fault, if only her earlier complaints of his unemployment stayed a hushed
whisper in her head. She reminisces. Her biggest pet hate, now a very much welcomed sight to see,
she yearns to walk into the lounge and find his body sprawled lazily across the family furniture.
Unfortunately life is no fairytale and like the hollow promise of regular phone calls, her wish is left
unanswered.

Years pass, but still, she waits.

Memorials are made as his whereabouts remain unknown, a makeshift funeral of his favourite
belongings are tossed in his bodiless coffin and buried deep underfoot. Perhaps somewhere his
body lay underfoot, who knows, who knew, and who will ever find out.

The now tearless woman goes about her day, forcing a smile at those who spare a second glance,
and the phone, a once regularly used utensil lay lifelessly in its holder.  A ring of an unusual kind
echoes down the hall. In a droid like motion she gets up and answers the door.

Two oversized men greet her cradling a very familiar materialistic, yet somewhat withered
possession she vividly recognises as an item she’d laundered time and time before. She gasps for
breath. Could these average Joe’s be the light at the end of her tunnel? The suppliers of all her  
unanswered questions? What did they know? And why did it take so long to find out? She
lashes out at the men, bloated with rage, profoundly pounding on one of the men’s chests like a
snare drum. Her outburst only justified by the lack of emotions this now jaded women seems to
possess. She’d stopped living a long time ago, in her eyes her existence is only warranted by the
hopeful recovery of her son. On countless occasions she’d sit and anticipate her reaction to
the words she could only wish to exit from either of the men’s mouths. At last they come.

“We’ve found your son”. These words, four little, single syllable words, she’d been waiting to hear
for years, now expressed in the most unwanting of circumstances. With the realisation that this
conversation is real and not another faucet of her tormenting dreams, she welcomes the men in
baring her once ever so common, welting eyes.

For the first time in a long while the silence is welcomed too, the soundless room says so much,
gives so much comfort and answers all her questions. But this silence is to be one of only
temporary comfort as the men have a job to do.

They explain to her in detail the findings of her son, just a disfigured face, a limbless skull lay
dormant under the shade of a beautiful pear tree off the shores of a now prevalent tourist
destination. He had stood on a land mine patrolling the beach back in the summer of 45’ but with an
accidental misspelling of his name on the duty card, his whereabouts and missing went unreported.

The response is minimal. Satisfaction of his final whereabouts gives her relief but the end of a
dream, the perhaps reuniting of her lost, but very alive son, seizes to continue. Her attention is
drawn to the belongings in one of the men’s hand. “This was the only intact personal possession of
your son’s, found buried at the scene,” one of the men uncomfortably noted. “Ironic huh? How a
delicate handkerchief can be the only thing to withstand such a heavy blow,” she mutters in an
unenthusiastic tone. She is handed the bundled up handkerchief and realising it has an inner
content, unravels it.

“They were what identified your son, ma’am”, the teeth that once sat snug in his head and reflected
his every emotion, pile up ever so loosely in the crevice of her hands. All she can do is cradle
them, they look so strange, alone, utterly jawless in a constant smile, not in the least like his. The
men came and went leaving the lone woman to grieve. She sit’s for a while but her eyes remain dry
and after pointlessly preparing herself for another sleepless night, she snaps.

Her waiting, fizzling to tragedy, her patience, everything but the key to her happiness.  How can
people suggest that patience is the key to happiness? She’s wasted so much time waiting, watching
her life pass her by. She’s now just an old woman, a completely ordinary, uninspiring woman. So
many dreams and aspirations unachieved by the passing up of opportunities as she’d wait. She peers
up at the clock, the time once again has nothing but slipped by, it’s midnight. In an explosion of her
bottled up emotions now engorging her more than ever before, she grabs the cluster of teeth, his
utterly jawless smile and hurls them out the kitchen door. Where would they land? It didn’t matter.
The broken woman collapses wirily on the kitchen floor, falling aimlessly into that stupid sleep,
knowing him dead at least, soul rested and finally home, back by her hand.
 

Monday, 17 September 2012

Returning Items

Refunds for faulty goods
For the first time ever this weekend, I returned an item I'd brought because it was faulty. It was a $100 AUD handbag and the zip was busted. After umming and arrring about returning it because I had to then find time in my schedule to drive (between the 14 day returning window) all the way back to the store to return it I decided it was too much money for me (just a part time worker and uni student) to throw away. Thankfully the lady at the counter of the store I returned the handbag to tags attached was very apologetic and without question issued me a new bag, but it got me thinking...How much money is thrown away every year in faulty items that don't get returned to stores, for either losing tags, not being able to return it in the designated time bracket, fear of rejection or it all just being "too hard"

Upon a little bit of research I found that in Australia, generally, customers do not have automatic right to return goods and receive a refund. However, customers can return goods and receive a refund if:
  • the customer was tricked into buying the item (eg if you buy something because the seller tells you it is brand new, then you learn that it is second hand);
  • the goods were defective and the buyer was not aware of this defect at the time of purchase;
  • the goods are not of ‘merchantable quality’ (i.e. basic level of quality and performance expected for the price paid and description given); or
  • the goods do not do what the customer was led to believe they would do; or
  • the goods do not match the description or sample provided during ordering.
Customers may also claim compensation for loss or damages caused by faulty goods.

I was hoping to provide fabulous statistics about the amount of money lost annually in faulty, non-returned items but of course people don't return these products so the issue has been unreported!  Perhaps this is a potential story to take up when I get the chance and broaden my Journalism skills, I think the findings might be surprizing..For now though, if you're reading this I'd like to hear about your returning stories, whether they were pleasant or not or if you've just decided there are too many hoops to jump through and it's not worth the hassle..



Jour1111 Lecture Monday 17th September

If It Bleeds It Leads.
This weeks lecture was on News Values. We started by trying to find a definition on the topic, and in doing this Dr Redman asked this question, what would be the top news story, if today's top stories didn't happen? For example if the Muslims riots didn't occur in Sydney and Kate Middleton didn't bear breast, what would the big news channels have reported on? Its a good question to ponder, and I for one began to wonder how corporations then prioritize and "put on hold" major stories to fill these sorts of gaps...This is what today's lecture was all about.

Back to a conventional definitions, in a simplified form, we define News Values as, "The degree of prominence a media outlet gives to a story and the attention that is paid by an audience" This however is one of a myriad of definitions we find to define News Values.

One universal note to make is  News Value is decided under these categories:

Impact-
Audience Identification- Locality, Interesting Viewer Relevance
Pragmatics- Ethics, Current affairs, Practical
Celebrity Status
Emotional Value
Follow Up
Source Influence

An issue we find regarding News Values is that upon having universal categories, News Value prominence in these categorizes can differ immensely. This is in the sense that where one news corporation prioritizes Audience Identification as a leading factor in these news stories, another might consider Celebrity Status to hold more importance and centre news segments around that.

When discussing News Values at work, we see the Journalists favourite tool being implmented, the trusty triangle. Simply the larger segment at the top holds basic precedence over the pointy general hoopla at the bottom.




A man by the name of Prof. Johan Galtung distinguished 12 common factors when detrimining news agendas and inturn News Values, these are:

1. Negativity
2. Proximity
3. Recency
4. Currency
5. Continuity
6. Uniqueness
7. Simplicity
8. Personality
9. Expectedness (Predictability)
10. Elite Nations or People
11. Exclusivity
12. Size


Upon this realization 3 hypotheses where created:

- The Additivity hypothesis that the more factors an event stisfied, the higher the probibilty in that it becomes news
-The complementarity hypothesis that the factors will tend to exclude each other
-The Exclusion hypothesis that events that satisfy none or very few factors will usually not become news



I'll now go back to my beginning sentence, "If It Bleeds, It Leads" I began my reflection with this statement as it is generally sums up the classic belief or leading point behind News Values. This statement suggests that if it bleeds, i.e. death, emotion, shock horror murder accidents etc, it will be of more success than stories centered around happy, materialistic news stories. I'd have to agree with this statement as I converse with my peers about current affairs, very rarely is the first story brought up about supermarket prices, rather it be about catching a criminal or a tragic death. More and more however, we are seeing an increasing trend in "If its local it leads" which suggests, locality and person-ability pulls viewers. By associating viewers with the stories on a personal front people are more inclined, to watch under a pretense that A. This news story will aid in MY safety or protection around my local neighborhood, B. This news story is about MY family or friend or friend of friend, lets see how they go,   or C. I visit supermarkets in this area regularly this story directly influences me and MY shopping experience. The common denominator here is MY. Modern day society want to hear stories of direct relevance and impact to their daily lives. Ultimately the audience are the stakeholders and whatever they desire goes, cause at the end of the day with out an audience all news is, is a group of opinionated people relaying past events like a physics predicting 9/11 three days after the event occurred. completely redundant.