How far does Australian mainstream media masthead readership reach?

From the AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPER HISTORY GROUP NEWSLETTER No 65 December 2011:

MASTHEAD READERSHIP: PRINT AND ONLINE COMBINED

Roy Morgan Research has released a new readership metric for newspapers, combining print and website audiences into one "masthead readership" number to meet demands from the publishers for data that quantifies their total reach (Australian, Media section, 14 November 2011, p.25). According to the latest Roy Morgan Single Source data (July 2010-June 2011), Melbourne's Herald Sun has the highest net masthead readership in Australia: nearly 2.7 million. This is 258,000 more readers than the Sydney Morning Herald (with a masthead readership of nearly 2.4 million), which is just ahead of Sydney's Daily Telegraph (with a masthead readership greater than 2.3m). Brisbane's Courier Mail ranks fourth with a masthead readership of over 1.84m, placing the Brisbane title just ahead of Melbourne's Age with its masthead readership of nearly 1.78m. Seventy-one per cent of the Australian's masthead readership read the printed version; the website, theaustralian.com.au, has a readership of 619,000 readers, which is more than 4.6 times the readership of national rival, the Australian Financial Review's website, afr.com. The Australian Financial Review's masthead readership appears to owe more to its printed version of the newspaper than its website. Eighty-two per cent of the Australian Financial Review's masthead readership read the printed version of this newspaper, but only 30,000 readers (or 5pc of its total masthead readership) read both the printed version and the website. Perhaps there is a connection between the existence of a paywall on afr.com, and that this newspaper brand has the lowest duplication of readers between its printed version and website. With a readership of 1,115,000, smh.com.au has the highest readership of all the Australian metro daily newspaper websites.

So you thought the Gillard Government had promised you would control your own e-Health database information?

You thought the Gillard Government had promised you would control your own personal, social and medical information included in the e-Health national database and whether this information was ever accessed by health professionals?

Well Brisbane GP Dr Steve Hambleton (left) is one of many who don’t think so and, who as Federal President of the Australian Medical Association set out to create the legal right to trawl for information without the consent or knowledge of the individual.

It is inevitable that this information (often anecdotally filtered through the biased eye of family members) will in many instances be included in the e-Health database and, because it is included in someone else's files there will be no right to insist inaccurate information is corrected or deleted.

Having worked in multidisciplinary teams in the past, I know that in certain areas of public health hard copy patient files often contain what can only be described as elements of  unsubstantiated gossip. There is no reason to believe that Dr. Hambleton's desire to trawl for information will be any better at sorting the wheat from the chaff. 

Dr. Hambleton’s application to the Privacy Commissioner.

The result…………………………

Legislative Instruments

Privacy Act 1988 - Part VI - Public Interest Determination No. 12 - Collection of Family, Social and Medical Histories This Determination permits a specific health service provider to collect third party health information from an individual (or a person 'responsible' for an individual) without the third party's consent, for inclusion in the individual's family, social or medical history.

Some or all of this item commenced

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011L02569

Privacy Act 1988 - Part VI - Public Interest Determination No. 12A - Collection of Family, Social and Medical Histories

This Determination gives general effect to Public Interest Determination No. 12 to permit health service providers to collect third party health information from an individual (or a person 'responsible' for an individual) without the third party's consent, for inclusion in the individual's family, social or medical history.

Some or all of this item commenced

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2011L02573

Photograph found at Google Images

The barely literate Bolta commits yet another LOL so that I can approach year's end on a laugh

“I may be becoming a Marxist as I age,

with class power becoming only too obvious,

even if the classes are defnined {sic} less by money

and more by political and and {sic} institutional power.”

Andrew Bolt – Sunday, December 11, 11 (07:54 am)

Sometimes the young make my heart sing - Part Five

http://youtu.be/Ko3e6G_7GY4

"Get It Done":

Urging Climate Justice,
Youth Delegate Anjali Appadurai

Mic-Checks UN COP 17 Summit

Durban Climate Change Conference
November/December 2011

The United Nations Climate Change Conference, Durban 2011, brings together representatives of the world's governments, international organizations and civil society. The discussions will seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP 16 last December.

The Sydney Morning Herald 11 December 2011 - 7:14PM

A United Nations climate conference has reached a hard-fought agreement on a far-reaching program meant to set a new course for the global fight against climate change.

The 194-party conference agreed to start negotiations on a new accord that would ensure that countries will be legally bound to carry out any pledges they make. It would take effect by 2020 at the latest.

The deal doesn't explicitly compel any nation to take on emissions targets, although most emerging economies have volunteered to curb the growth of their emissions.

Currently, only industrial countries have legally binding emissions targets under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Those commitments expire next year, but they will be extended for at least another five years under the accord adopted on Sunday - a key demand by developing countries seeking to preserve the only existing treaty regulating carbon emissions.

The proposed Durban Platform offered answers to problems which for years have bedevilled negotiations on global warming.

Controversial issues include sharing the responsibility for controlling carbon emissions and helping the world's poorest and most climate-vulnerable nations cope with changing forces of nature.

The US was a reluctant supporter, concerned about agreeing to join an international climate system that was expected to be opposed in Congress....

Environmentalists criticised the package - as did many developing countries in the debate - for failing to address what they called the most urgent issue, to move faster and deeper in cutting carbon emissions.

"The good news is we avoided a train wreck," said Alden Meyer, recalling predictions a few days ago of a likely failure. "The bad news is that we did very little here to affect the emissions curve."

Scientists say that unless those emissions - chiefly carbon dioxide from power generation and industry - level out and reverse within a few years, the earth will be set on a possibly irreversible path of rising temperatures that lead to ever greater climate catastrophes.

Sunday's breakthrough capped 13 days of hectic negotiations that ran a day and a half over schedule.