To Whom It May Concern,

Mike

 A factual story

For as long a Mike could remember, he wanted to go to sea. That was his dream. He did not want to go as a radio operator like his father, James, nor as an ordinary seaman like his uncles had. Mike wanted to be a deck officer and, someday, become a Captain. Yet times were tough in the early years of his life.

Michael Keating was born 22^nd September 1931 in Clifton, Bristol during the Great Depression that preceded the Second World War. Life in England during Mike’s early years were not easy, especially for his mother, Margaret, who stayed at home while James went to sea to earn what he could for the family.

Mike had only begun school for a short time when the Second World War was declared and his father moved the family to Blaisdon to work at Filton as a security officer in charge of Air Raid Safety.

Mike went through school still holding onto the dream of going out to sea, much to his father’s adamant disapproval.

“One fool in the family is quite enough,” James once said to Mike. Yet when Mike turned seventeen and sat the entrance exam for the Royal Navy for the second time, it became clear to James that this was what he truly wanted.

In the summer of 1948, Mike worked with his father on one of A & P Campbell’s paddle steamers. The Captain, an old Scotsman named Findlay Brander knew that Mike wanted to go to sea and while Mike stayed on board for some of his summer holidays, Brander taught him the basics of seamanship.

In August, two Bristol Channel Pilots who were waiting for their Pilot Cutter to come in and pick them up told Mike of a vacancy for an apprentice on the pilot boat. A week later he was enlisted as a junior probationer on the “Belle View”. He was 17 years old.

In July 1951, Portishead, Mike worked on a cutter that was moored as a form of accommodation for the older apprentices and shipmates. It was here, when he was rostered off, that he met Maureen, the woman that would one day become his wife. At the time Mike had two and a half years left of his apprenticeship and when he was not at sea they lived fifty miles apart, yet he had fallen in love. Many, including Maureen’s mother, opposed the relationship, causing at one point, Maureen to lose two jobs for the sake of being with Mike. Yet, against all odds, love triumphed.

Eventually, Mike had won over Maureen’s parents and when he returned from India in July, 1954, he asked for Maureen’s hand in marriage. Mike and Maureen were married in August, 1956 and moved to an apartment in Bristol. When Maureen gave birth to their first child, Mathew in June 1957, Mike was still out at sea until he was a few months old. It was from then that the beginning of this chapter of the Keating family began.

Dominic was born in October, 1959. When Anita was born in the January of 1961, the family had moved to a house in Bristol closer to where Mike worked as a Pilot up the Bristol Channel at the Port. John was born in September, 1962 and Mike and Maureen made the decision to move into a bigger house out into the country on acreage where they could raise the family.  While the family was living in Portbury, Mary was born in September 1963, Julia in August 1964 and Ben in September 1966. The family of nine lived out in the county for four more years.

By 1970 the Shipping trade had all but died off. The containerisation of freight had been introduced to major ports and the Port of Bristol was not one of them. After looking at their options, Mike moved his family to Plymouth to attend the university there for three years. After completing his degree in Maritime Studies in 1973, the Keating family immigrated to Perth, Australia where Mike worked briefly until he went back to sea on the Australian Coast for two years.

In 1975, Mike was then offered a job with the Australian Maritime Safety Authority and the family moved to Canberra. Mike and Maureen stayed in Canberra until all of their children had left home and Mike retired briefly in 1987. After being offered work with the United Nations, Mike moved to Tuvalu with Maureen for three years. When his contract ended they returned to Australia and Mike took up work in Tasmania as an Instructor at the Maritime College.

In 1992 Michael Keating officially retired and moved with Maureen to Townsville where they lived for 14 years. When Maureen fell ill they moved to Cairns, closer to their second eldest son, Dominic. Maureen passed away in 2010; a beautiful wife, mother and grandmother.

Mike spent a year travelling around the world, staying with family and friends, until he returned to Australia in 2011 to live on Magnetic Island off the coast of Townsville.  Mike currently still lives on the island in Horseshoe Bay. The last time the eldest of his Grandchildren went to visit him for his 80^th birthday in September he told them about a couple he had met who offered him a job as a Pilot on their ship. He’s still considering taking up the offer.

To Whom It May Concern,

 It's a curious feeling when you realise your world is changing. It always hits me in a spectacularly ordinary moment. I know it's natural, I'm not particularly worried.  These moments do however put a lot of your life into perspective.  I can feel the world moving that little bit faster around me. I'm seeing the people I love less and it makes the time I'm with them all the more important.

 New thoughts are mattering to me in a massive way. Especially thoughts about things I couldn't even fathom before; politics, freedom, liberty, love, a time to be bold, a time to say nothing.  There is an element of pure discovery in all of this though. I'm discovering more about people and not all of that is in a good way.

I'm discovering more about what I believe is important. This post has been extremely self oriented but I suppose it was coming. Please excuse me for the lapse in concentration (if my prior posts hadn't already done that). But I vowed to write about people and for all intents and purposes, I am a person.

To Whom It May Concern,

I've been reading letters my Grandpa sent to me about his childhood and thinking about the life that was lead back then. While we are extremely privileged to live in the 21st century I cannot help but to envy him a few, I suppose unimportant, norms. I'm not sure either if envy is the word I'm searching for but perhaps I'll figure that out further on in this post.

My Grandpa was born in 1931, the Great Depression. Times were incalculably tough and reading how his family, well, my family, functioned during those times is incredible. Yet there was something about those times that seems so very genuine. The way people were back then, even as war loomed over them, was truly genuine.

A community really was just that. When food was rationed it was left out on the street to be collected. We wouldn't dream of that now. I don't doubt that at times food was stolen but we are so suspicious of each other now that it would not be a possibility.  Families helped other families when times got especially tough. Nine year olds could ride a bicycle five miles to the closest bus stop to get to school. The thought of that these days renders most parents in total panic.

Following that further, '30 minutes of exercise' as a necessity definitely didn't exist. Why? Because people HAD to keep fit to survive. These days a child will complain throughout their entire school career about walking a few streets over to the bus stop with their school bags. If it really comes down to it and we have to walk to school, well, isn't that just the end of the world? The way we abuse what we have been given; transport, running water, the ability to keep physically fit, readily available food...it puts things into perspective.

As I think about it I come to a horrifying realisation.

The only thing that would make people change their lifestyles and not take advantage of what we have been given is war.

Isn't that disgusting.

To Whom It May Concern,

I think there is much that we take for granted regarding the imagination of a child. I honestly believe it is a source we should learn from. This world is far too big and there are far too many awful realities without having hope that the good guys will chase the monsters away. Why do we let logic win once we get a little older? I doubt we are any better off for it. In fact we may even be worse off because relinquishing our hold over belief in everything makes our world that little bit greyer. What's wrong with believing anyway?

Have you ever seen a child by themself that was so absorbed in the crux of their imagination that they didn't even register your presence? So enthralled by their own version of a story that they have squatted down as low as humanly possible but are still perfectly mobile as they scoot across the ground vigorously? It's cute right? You almost envy them that innocence.

Well, the only thing that's stopping you is your own pride. It would be a great shock to come upon a 40 year old man, with his arms outstretched, zooming down the pathway. Why? It's not what adults do. To see a grown woman rolling down a grassy hill for funsies would be utterly absurd. But wouldn't it also be freaking fantastic?!

Obviously, there is a time when adults need to be adults and children likewise but that is not all of the time. Give yourself a moment, even once a week, to act like a complete child.

Jump in the puddles.
Play on the swings.
Make up Batman's next adventure.
Sing a song with three lyrics over and over again.
Dance in the living room by flailing your arms and bouncing.
Go and watch a kids movie. Nemo never fails to impress.

I think this world could benefit by throwing off the veil of responsibility every now and then.

To Whom It May Concern,

Remember being told never to bite the hand that feeds you? It's not always that simple. Sometimes that hand needs to know not to oppress. History has shown us that countless times. Well, what if that hand was the government? Would you still do it then?

Some of the greatest songs are written about just that.

Cue two perfectly opposite examples: Try not to judge.

Country music singers, the Dixie Chicks, released a song that was banned in the U.S because it challenged the government for sending their boys out to war and not bringing them home. Titled 'Not Ready To Play Nice', the song's lyrics even hint towards death threats the girls received when they tried to release the song.
Have a listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pojL_35QlSI&ob=av2e

Punk rock band, Rise Against, focus their lyrics on political, social and environmental issues of our time without flinching. The song 'Hero of War' is a clear example of this. A song about the horrors of what it really means to be a soldier of war, the lyrics will resonate with you for a very long time.
I deeply recommend hearing this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DboMAghWcA

So, it happens in music all of the time. The last place I thought it would happen would be in public media. I love public media, if you read my last post you'd have a vague sense of how I feel about commercial media. That said, while I understood that public media was funded by the government I had never really realised how necessary it is for public media to oppose the government for the sake of the people. It was only until I was literally told this in my seventh lecture that it made sense. The people would not watch a government funded program that endorsed the government. What's the point?

In the wise words of my lecturer Dr Bruce Redman, if the government ever start to like shows like the ABC then we're all buggered. Public media is for the public, I just wonder how long this will last. It's stood the test of time so far but how long can we have a media that is designed to challenge the authority? Better yet, what if people like the musicians stated above had a say about what public media should be? Would we allow it? Would other nations follow suit? In my opinion? Not a chance.

To Whom It May Concern,

 I'm watching Days Of Our Lives or the Bold and the Beautiful or one of those rubbish television shows. I'm not sure why, I just got sucked in. Everybody seems so be pregnant and crying. I feel stupid just watching this. I can envision my brain cells depleting. I'm getting dumber.

What's wrong with television? I understand they want to reach everyone in the general public but surely if they aimed for a more intelligent audience evolution would kick in A LITTLE BIT! Yet, that trend seems fairly common in media these days. My sixth lecture for Journalism and Communication kind of cleared up any disillusions I had about why I felt dumb watching television. Commercial media does target a 'dumber' audience.

Consider these shows: A Current Affair, Today Tonight, Neighbours, Home and Away, The Project.
If you like watching most of these shows its probably because it doesn't take a whole heap of brain power and you are fed information that makes good gossip. No judgement here.

Cue explanatory photo:

It boils down to what we're happy with. Are we content watching television because it uses very little brain power and we just have to sit there? Or would we rather be watching more engaging and intelligent shows? And is it really worth starting an uprising over? In the eyes of a journalist I'd say yes, dammit. In the eyes of an ordinary citizen I'm fence sitting. What do you think about it? Hmm?

To Whom It May Concern,

There is an incredible attraction to the human voice. I have never really considered radio a beautiful medium until Steve Austin spoke in a sound lecture in my fifth week at Uni. Steve spoke about how one of the most important aspects of being a radio presenter was to remain human. Yet, it is such an obvious realisation when you consider the human voice. To find someone who listens to you is a precious thing and that is something that radio presenters truly strive to do. They listen. That is the kind of media that makes me remember why I started this degree. I wanted to be a part of something run by people, about things that affected people, for people. I couldn't care less if that is a lame theory. It's why I started this degree. To make sure that people were informed.

Radio and sound is the perfect medium for that. There aren't any flashy pictures or confusing images to distract you. It's just one voice that you can tune in and out as you please. One of the most beautiful things about radio is that you have the chance to put in your own two cents. Radio is media by the people, for the people, with the people. Doesn't that just warm the cockles of your heart?

It goes without saying that some voices truly 'speak' to you. I have never met a soul on this planet who wasn't swayed by the unmistakable sound of Morgan Freeman speaking. If I could write a script with God as a voice over, Freeman would be my man. Props to War of the Worlds for coining that one. But beyond that, consider your teachers, parents, friends and family. Often you don't care if what they are talking about is rubbish - you just want them to speak. Yet when they do, everyone listens. And remembers. That is an incredible attraction and proof that there is more to radio than meets the ear, excusing that terrible pun.

To Whom It May Concern,

I remember standing in an art gallery looking at all of the paintings and wondering why this was 'art'. There was an intense variety of art work on the walls and it was obvious that all of the work had been done by different people at different moments yet that did not necessarily make it art. So what did? How could a picture mean so much to someone that they deem it 'art'?

My fourth lecture in Journalism and Communication presented to me the notion of picture stories as being just as powerful as the written word. In my view, the written word will only influence those who can relate to it or who crave to understand it. So can that be said for pictures? Doubtless. Yet, it is the people interpreting those images and their stories that decide whether it is powerful or not.

Consider Jason deCaires Taylor. This is a man who sculpts for hours upon hours and then literally throws his artwork out to sea. I thought it was a perfectly insane thing to do so I looked into his work. It is beautiful. Truly, incredibly breath-taking. To me.

One of his images in particular holds a place in my heart.

(It's definition can be translated to mean a change in circumstance/fortune)

Vicissitudes

If you go to Grenada in the West Indies and dive five metres down you will come across twenty six people. Isn't that just so deliciously absurd?! But more than that is who are these people? Why are they holding hands? Why face out and not in? One of the most astounding realisations is they were put underwater for people to find? Here, in this picture of  26 individuals, joined by the hands, at the bottom of the ocean. There is no explanation given. We know from the title that these people are experiencing a change in circumstance. We probably could have figured that out alone. The remarkable thing is that  there are thousands of stories we could tell from this picture.

Thus, I have come to realise that the old saying was wrong. A picture does not tell a thousand words. It tells a thousand stories. People can relate to stories and that is why it must be art.

To Whom It May Concern,

I will aways cherish more about a book than its story.
There is much more to a magazine than the pictures.
Newspapers always smell old and fantastic.

Except that is all personal opinion. Maybe you loathe the weight of carrying around a book? Perhaps you only care for the pictures of a magazine? It's even possible that the smudges on your fingers from a Newspaper are just too much to bear and you wish to be free of this 'traditional' media. My second lecture in Journalism and Communication made me think about the mentality behind the move from 'traditional' to 'modern' media. I'll be the first to say I'm not a fan. But, that is once again my personal opinion and probably not relevant. I'll promise to try and concentrate.

'Modern' media encompasses much of the technological revolutions of our century. News is delivered to you straight from your laptop, iPad or iPhone. You can even subscribe to online newspapers to be better enlightened by what is happening around you. It seems wonderful, doesn't it?
Magazines are now making a move towards online publishing, for those who prefer the ease of access they get from technology. Suddenly, you have both your newspapers and your magazines delivered straight to your inbox. Sweet, right?
Now for the tri-fecta. Let's publish books electronically and ensure that no one has to go out of their way to access the news, literature or articles. How could there be anything wrong with such simplicity?

It's simple, traditional media will die. That is what's wrong. Books are already on their way out with massive reductions in sales. Magazines are converting to online publishing so fast it's a wonder they bother to publish hard copies at all. Yet, that is not completely relevant either because it is coloured by my opinion.

What is relevant is the fact that with so many people subscribing to various online media sites, the demand for a new kind of news will emerge. There is no denying that there is a mentality popular among us that craves to be entertained. It's human nature. Boredom is well, boring. So, it is only too long before a rise in entertainment-based news is in demand. What does that mean for journalism if the stories that aren't thrilling don't cut it? Following this further, a newspaper costs around $1 - $3. Can the industry-driven businessmen guarantee that it wont change?

'Modern' media is not entirely bad, it times of crisis quick and easy access to information is vital. However, the death of 'tradtional' media may be a bigger sacrifice than it seems.