Our Short-Shrifted Academic Journals

What is now The Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy was first published in 1935.

When Australian researchers publish their work, the journal they choose to publish in has implications for their academic careers. Journals are important vehicles for peer-review and a particular journal’s reputation is a useful measure of the quality of the research output. However, the system is often skewed to ignore research focused exclusively on Australian issues.

My first article in Quadrant, Our Short-Shrifted Academic Journals.

Dear farmers, nobody wants to eat fungus-fed beef

Sheep near Gunning NSW

In an era where ‘trusting the science’ is the medieval equivalent of paying to touch a relic to cure cancer, I think it’s time Australians told climate activists who don’t want us eating red meat to go and get stuffed. That is my opinion.

Writing in the Unfiltered newsletter, Alexandra Marshall had this to say:

Side-stepping slightly to agriculture, but still on the topic of idiotic green things, Michael de Percy drags fungus-fed beef over the coals. ‘In an era where ‘trusting the science’ is the medieval equivalent of paying to touch a relic to cure cancer, I think it’s time Australians told climate activists who don’t want us eating red meat to go and get stuffed. That is my opinion.’ I agree with him, but what about you? How do you feel about taxpayer money being spent on fussing about with cattle feed in the name of Net Zero?

 My latest in The Spectator Australia, Dear farmers, nobody wants to eat fungus-fed beef.

Australian scientists announced that they have discovered a way to reduce the methane emissions from livestock - by adding fungus.

The research may be sound, and the fungus may be safe. But I don’t care. I will refuse to eat it.@FlaneurPolitiq https://t.co/6STKp1Bfo1

— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) February 16, 2025

Matt Canavan responds to Hate Crime bill fallout

Senator Matt Canavan at CPAC 2024 in Brisbane

Following the fallout from those conservative senators who did not vote against the government’s Hate Crime Bill last week, I questioned Senator Matt Canavan about his support for the bill. In drafting legislation, there is always a trade-off for politicians between the process of enabling legislation and the optics of voting for legislation that might not be popular to one’s base.

Canavan has been an advocate for Australia’s traditional resources and energy sector. I heard him speak at CPAC 2024 in Brisbane last year and he is usually not backward in coming forward about issues that are dear to conservatives. I was curious to know his reasons for supporting the Hate Crime Bill.

Here’s how Senator Canavan responded to my questions.

Writing in the Unfiltered newsletter, Alexandra Marshall had this to say:

Senator Matt Canavan has answered Michael de Percy’s questions regarding the changes he tried to make to the Hate Crime Bill and the reasons he decided to vote for it in the end, even though he has faced some backlash from his followers. ‘I am not a libertarian. We must maintain an orderly and harmonious society. People threatening or inciting violence should be charged.’

In The Best of Flat White, Alexandra wrote: 

The tightening of restrictions on speech and lowering of the bar for incitement has left Australia in a heated debate – no more so than on the right where the Coalition and several members of centre-right minor parties either voted in favour of Labor’s bill or abstained. Even much-loved figures in the Blue Ribbon movement, such as Matt Canavan, have faced criticism for ultimately following the government’s lead. If you wish to hear his response, please refer to Michael de Percy’s article.

My latest in The Spectator Australia, Matt Canavan responds to Hate Crime bill fallout.

Michael de Percy has asked Senator Matt Canavan about his social media followers who were unhappy with his vote in support of the Hate Crimes Bill.

Senator Canavan: ‘I have a strong record fighting on free speech matters.

‘I was part of a team that not only defeated the… pic.twitter.com/aTkpBaYpzs

— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) February 13, 2025

Senator Canavan responded:

Thank you Michael de Percy (@FlaneurPolitiq) for a reasonable write up of my comments on why I voted for the Hate Crimes laws last week even though my amendments failed.

There are always good reads in the @SpectatorOz!https://t.co/xIH3GljsQB

— Senator Matt Canavan (@mattjcan) February 13, 2025