Which came first? The chicken or.......

Found at Scott Godwin's photostream at Flickr

Which came first - the chicken or the rock face?

Saturday cutes

Orphaned infant Flying Fox by Australian photographer Steve Parish

Northern New South Wales first quarter 2009 newspaper readership and circulation figures

Roy Morgan Report, June 2009: North Coast Newspapers.

Table showing Readership April 2007 to March 2009 (1st column) and Circulation January to March 2009 (2nd column)

Northern New South Wales
Tweed Daily News, M-F	11,000	4,593
Tweed Daily News, Sat	10,000	5,182
Lismore/Northern Rivers – The Northern Star, M-F	37,000	14,903
Lismore/Northern Rivers – The Northern Star, Sat	56,000	23,164
Grafton/Clarence Valley – The Daily Examiner, M-F	16,000	5,596
Grafton/Clarence Valley – The Daily Examiner, Sat	15,000	6,397
The Coffs Coast Advocate, Mon/Tue/Thu/Fri	10,000*	3,293†
The Coffs Coast Advocate, Wed/Sat	45,000*	31,194#

Source:
Readership – Morgan Mar 09; M-F av. and Sat; APN total distribution area *Average readership
Circulation – ABC Jan to Mar 09; M-Sat av. and Sat †Publisher's claim #CAB Oct 08 to Mar 09

Now The Daily Examiner editor, Peter Chapman, is very fond of bragging that 'his' newspaper was the fastest growing daily newspaper in regional Australia in the first quarter of 2009.

However, if one compares circulation figures (average net paid sales/net circulation) for the first two quarters 2008 with the first quarter 2009, then it works out that each week The Daily Examiner managed to sell 76 extra newspapers, as 2009 Saturday circulation figures have actually fallen.

Compared with The Daily Examiner circulation figures for the last two quarters of 2004 these current figures are even less impressive, in view of the painfully slow circulation growth up to and including January-March 2009.

If one compares The Northern Star across those same quarters in 2008 and 2009 then a different story unfolds. It has shown circulation growth both Monday-Friday and Saturday and, therefore sells an extra 1,341 newspapers each week.

One has to suspect that Mr. Chapman in relying on percentages is hoping that no-one will enquire into what hard numbers his bragging might actually represent.

UPDATE:

More rubbery figures? The only conclusion I can draw from these latest numbers (which appear to indicate that quarter to quarter The Daily Examiner circulation varies markedly) is that this newspaper has more casual readers than it has devoted followers.

APN released these figures later this morning.
The publishing group sees these figures as showing a year-on-year 5% circulation increase for The Daily Examiner and a 1% increase for The Northern Star.

Table showing Readership April 2007 to March 2009 (1st column) and Circulation April to June 2009 (2nd column)

Northern New South Wales
Tweed Daily News, M-Sat	11,000	4,773
Tweed Daily News, Sat	10,000	5,222
Lismore/Northern Rivers – The Northern Star, M-Sat	40,000	15,141
Lismore/Northern Rivers – The Northern Star, Sat	56,000	22,997
Grafton/Clarence Valley – The Daily Examiner, M-Sat	16,000	5,811
Grafton/Clarence Valley – The Daily Examiner, Sat	15,000	6,483
The Coffs Coast Advocate, Mon/Tue/Thu/Fri	10,000*	3,293†
The Coffs Coast Advocate, Wed/Sat	45,000*	31,194#

Source:
Readership – Morgan March 2009; M-Sat av. and Sat readership; APN total distribution area *Average readership
Circulation – ABC April to June 2009; M-Sat av. and Sat †Publisher’s claim #CAB October 2008 to March 2009

Clarence Valley environmental groups get their dander up over water resources

From A Clarence Valley Protest on 11 August 2009:

Clarence River dam proposal slammed as deceptive

Local opinion continues to firm on the Region 6 Murray Darling Association proposal to request that the Federal Government only undertake yet another investigation of a Clarence River catchment freshwater diversion, but also give consideration to a larger scheme involving what is perilously close to being a mega-dam.

In The Daily Examiner today it was reported:

ABSOLUTE misinformation, unacceptable, highly misleading, a great lie, half-baked, inordinately expensive and of negligible benefit ... these are a few of the terms environmental groups have been using in response to the latest proposal to divert the Clarence to the west.

The Clarence Valley Environment Centre's John Edwards was particularly scathing in his assessment:

He said if the proponents were seeking 24 per cent of flows, it would equate to a dam of 8,000,000 megalitres.“The largest dam ever proposed for the Clarence had a capacity of 5,000,000 megalitres,” he said.“That dam would have seen the inundation of Jackadgery and the Nymboida village, require re-routing of the Gwydir Highway and Armidale roads totalling 60km and the complete closure of the Old Glen Innes Road between Buccarumbi and Dalmorton.“The claim that no pumps would be required and that water would flow downhill through a 22 kilometre tunnel is the greatest lie of all. The water would need to be pumped more than 800 metres upwards through a minimum 60km tunnel to reach the Beardy River.“This half-baked plan has most likely been dreamed up by an engineer wanting to build something, who has not the faintest link to reality.”

People who eat junk food have too much time on their hands?

I dips me lid to Stilgherrian who did a tweet recently on a post of the history of a fast food fad:
The McGangBang: a McChicken Sandwich Inside a Double Cheeseburger [a chronicle]
Yep, all that supersizing really get the old brain cells jinking 'n' jiving.
Pity about the waistlines........

I sent the link to Maud up the Street and she reckons that whoever thought up the McName must have minute danglely bits.

Just can't please some people

Pic from Google Images

Moggy Musings [Archived material from Boy the Wonder Cat]

A fly in the sky musing: One slick English kitteh.

"My cat is awesome at catching flies. He will be laying down when an unsuspecting fly will buzzes past him, he simply plucks it out the air - admittedly when he lifts his paw up it flies away, but it's still impressive".

James Embleton of Peterborough commenting on a BBC online news website

Fatty flying home musing: Fatty an 10 yr old Staffie was found wandering in Yamba and after being missing from his original Sydney home for most of the last eight years was flown home by Rex Airlines in June 2009.

An Itty Bitty Kitty Committee musing: Out in the blogosphere they know how to promote kittehs needing homes. Good website, good work! Charlene Butterbean - I lurvs u...

Departed pet musing: The deddie word has raised its head in a blog. The Orstrahyun mentions hearing about a psychic who charges at least $100 an hour for speaking to departed pets and conveying messages.
Darryl thinks that all cats would say from the great beyond is "Feed me".

I don't think we would be less chatty than before - I'm sure we would also say "Let me in", "Let me out", "Just scratch behind my ear will you", "Why is the dog in my bed?", "Take it away - it's not up to my culinary standards"and "Is Malcolm Turnbull STILL moaning?"

Senator Abetz gives dissembling apology to the Prime Minister, Senate and Australian people

Liberal Senator Eric Abetz rose to his feet in the Senate on 11 August 2009 and denied any wrongdoing in the OzCar matter.
His apology may be to his own satisfaction, however it may not be seen as a redemptive by others.

According to the Commonwealth Hansard:

Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (12.44 pm)—Mr President, I seek leave to make a statement not exceeding three minutes.(Tasmania) (12.44 pm)—Mr President, I seek leave to make a statement not exceeding three minutes.
The PRESIDENT—Leave is granted for three minutes.—Leave is granted for three minutes.
Senator ABETZ—I thank the Senate. A lot has been said and written about my involvement in what—I thank the Senate. A lot has been said and written about my involvement in what has now become known as the OzCar affair. I have already publicly apologised, but I wanted to take this very first opportunity in the Senate to repeat that apology and in addition apologise for any perceived reflection on the Senate. I also want to briefly deal with the three assertions made against me: that I pressured a witness; that I misled a Senate hearing; and that I scripted a witness's evidence. All three assertions are
wrong. First, as the joint statement I made with the Leader of the Opposition on 4 August makes clear, the witness volunteered his information. When the witness approached us we listened because he was a person with direct knowledge of the matters in question. The second assertion is that I misled the Senate on 19 June by suggesting that a journalist had told me about the now known to be fake email and its contents. The simple fact is that a journalist did tell me this. He said he had been contacted by the witness, who had
shared his information including the contents of the email. The journalist then shared that information with me. As the joint statement made clear, the witness had previously shown me the email. Both statements are true; they are not mutually exclusive. Having received information from two separate sources it is quite appropriate to rely solely or partially on just one of those sources without exposing the other. The third claim is that I scripted the evidence, coached the witness and somehow interfered with the provision of evidence to the committee. This allegation is also wrong. Again, as spelt out in the joint statement, at no stage did I script the evidence, coach the witness or suggest what his answers might be. I would point out to the Senate that talking to witnesses before they give their evidence is common practice, so is asking questions provided by a third party. Every senator knows this is true. Indeed, ministers know beforehand many of the questions they will be asked in question time. I can even recall being given notice of questions the crossbenchers proposed to ask me. It is how the parliament works. However, improper influence of a witness is what the standing orders provide against, as they should. There was no improper influence. I repeat: I did not pressure a witness, I did not script a witness's evidence, nor did I mislead the Senate. Having said that, Mr President, I would like to take this opportunity to repeat my apology to the Australian people and to the Prime Minister over this matter and again apologise for any perceived reflection on the Senate. I thank the Senate.