Communications Innovations: CSIRO must be given greater Oz status

The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) is arguably one of Australia's greatest assets. Yet little more than lip service tends to be given to this organisation even when its innovations are ground-breaking. To make matters worse, Australia rarely takes advantage of its discoveries in the early stages of adoption.

Traditionally, Australia runs a trade deficit in telecommunications equipment and has been a technology 'taker' since the Canadian Samuel McGowan brought the telegraph with him to Victoria in the 1854. McGowan had to improvise on several occasions to overcome the challenges of deploying telegraph technology where there were manufacturing skills and capability were rare. 

Given that for most of Australia's telecommunications history, the telecoms equipment ndustry existed as a monopsony, it is little wonder that the industry never really developed. But it makes little sense why that should be the case now, unless Australia will simply focus on patenting new innovations.

For example, last year the CSIRO won a settlement for the use of its use of wifi technology by Hewlett-Packard, with many other well-known global communications companies in the firing line. The patent was registed in 1996 with hardly a sigh from the Australian community about the technology's potential.

Today, the CSIRO is producing another world's first with the miniturisation of a radio receiver onto a chip 5 x 5mm in size. The CSIRO has developed the chip with Sappicon Semiconductor which has its headquarters in Sydney. These chips will replace receivers used in radio astronomy which are currently the size of a fridge. 

But there is not even a whisper from the traditional media.

The National Broadband Network could assist with the development of an innovative Australian communications equipment industry. Given its reputation,  the CSIRO is well-placed to lead such an Australian revolution.

But the old debates over Telstra (not that Telstra is a laggard) and whether we need broadband at all are quietly ignoring a weak area of Australia' seconomy that makes no sense at all. In the meantime, Australians should be very proud of the CSIRO and give this national asset the status it deserves.

Once the rest of the world goes NBN the doubters will shut up!

It is one thing to debate the details of the NBN implementation, quite another to think that things are rosy in Australia. But does it matter? At the rate that other countries are building their own NBNs, let's just hope that it becomes commonplace before the naysayers kill off another Australian innovation.

Australians are notorious for waiting for others to move first. The number of times we hear: "How can the government do this when nobody else in the OECD is doing it?" is just another tired example of cultural cringe. Australians can and should innovate.

The skills shortage in electronic communication in this country is nearing the ridiculous. Assumptions about digital natives are drastically wrong. Less people know how to use Web 2.0 or higher bandwidth technologies than most people think. Without an NBN, this skills gap will only increase in comparison.

Rather than embracing the NBN, we seem to be sliding into a debate over its actual worth. In the meantime, the rest of the world is doing what Australia is doing already. We can't even see when we are in the lead. Let's take a brief look around the world:

According to AustralianIT:

President Barack Obama has pledged to put broadband in every American home and his administration has already designated over $US 7 billion in economic stimulus money to expand broadband access in underserved communities.

Governments such as New Zealand are claiming that the private sector is simply not moving fast enough and are funding new infrastructure. Not everyone agrees but the government is moving forward. Developing countries such as Jordan in the Middle East are also funding a NBN (with private sector support). There are many more in the pipeline.

This morning's Australian Financial Review article makes a great case study to explain to my students why they are not allowed to reference Wikipedia in my classes. But how long will the argument against Australia's NBN stand up to comparative wisdom?

It is always difficult to be a first-mover in Australia. Sometimes it is not worth the hassle. But Australia has the opportunity to be a world leader. Let Australians innovate and stop talking about innovation while holding us back. Give us the NBN. Let's debate the implementation, but there is no argument against the NBN itself.

It is time for those who don't know what they are talking about to simply shut up and get out of the way.

Step 3: Assessment Items

How do you replace an essay plan (worth 10%) and an essay (1500 words, worth 40%) with blogs and media sharing?

I have decided on this:

1. Media Sharing Activity:

Due by 9am Monday in the following Weeks:

    Sharing Topic 1 = Week 3
    Sharing Topic 2 = Week 4
    Sharing Topic 3 = Week 5
    Sharing Topic 4 = Week 6
    Sharing Topic 5 = Week 7
    You must comment on two other media article posts per week using the 'comments' function

Details: Each week, share at least one media article, using the AddThis application provided in Firefox Portable, and add the article to the blog with some of your own commentary of at least 80 words on the following topics:

    Topic 1: Industry Policy
    Topic 2: Competition Regulation
    Topic 3: Industry Regulation
    Topic 4: Assistance to Business from Government
    Topic 5: Trade Policy

2. Blogging Activity:

Due by 9am Monday in Weeks:

    Blog Question 1 = Week 9
    Blog Question 2 = Week 10
    Blog Question 3 = Week 11
    Blog Question 4 = Week 12
    Blog Question 5 = Week 13
    You must critique two other posts per week using the 'comments' function

Blog Questions:

• Why did many governments believe there was no alternative to opening domestic economies to global competition? Use examples to support your argument.
• Is Australian society elitist, corporatist or pluralist? Use examples to support your argument.
• Should governments support industries which are not internationally competitive? Why or why not? Use examples to support your argument.
• How much influence does the OECD have on Australian industry policy? Use examples to support your arguments.
• Are corporations able to respond to society's needs faster than governments? Why? Provide examples to support your argument.

Click here to view the file I am using for today’s lecture. Please note that this is only one part of the lecture which will include research skills, using the library databases and various demonstrations.

I am not posting the recorded lectures outside of the LMS just yet, as I need to work through the copyright issues. I need to ensure my lectures do not breach the provisions of the new Flexible Fair Dealing section 200AB of the Copyright Act 1968 before I make this next move during the Winter Term.