- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2024 07:00
|
|
- V for Vegas
- Sep 1, 2004
-
THUNDERDOME LOSER
|
62 arts organisations lose funding from Australia Council
http://www.artshub.com.au/news-arti...-council-251271
quote:The Australia Council has chosen to fund 43 new organisations among the 128 arts organisations to have received four year funding, but rejected applications from dozens of established arts organisations.
More than one third of the 147 organisations who previously received organisational funding now have no operational funding from the Federal Government.
Among the organisations no longer funded are:
Arena Theatre (Melbourne)
Express Media (Melbourne)
Force Majeure (Sydney)
KAGE Physical Theatre (Melbourne)
Legs on the Wall (Sydney)
Meanjin (Melbourne)
National Association for the Visual Arts (based in Sydney)
Next Wave Festival (Melbourne)
PACT Centre for Contemporary Artists (Sydney)
Phillip Adams Ballet Lab (Melbourne)
Red Stitch Actors' Theatre (Melbourne)
Slingsby (Adelaide)
Vitalstatistix (Adelaide)
A full list of organisations that have been funded is at the base of this article. The list of unfunded companies will be updated throughout the day.
Not all of the original 147 organisations applied for funding but ArtsHub believes applications were submitted by the vast majority of the 62 previously-funded organisations that did not receive funding.
The decline in the number of organisations funded is a result of the loss of $60 million over four years from the Australia Council budget. Of that, $12 million a year went to the Catalyst program.
The timing of the announcement will be particularly galling, as it comes in a week when the Federal Government took its Catalyst expenditure to almost twice as much as is budgeted. Catalyst does not provide operational funding instead funding projects selected by the Ministry of the Arts.
Government spends $12 m in mysterious Catalyst windfall
http://www.artshub.com.au/news-article/news/grants-and-funding/richard-watts/government-spends-12-m-in-mysterious-catalyst-windfall-251244
quote:
$11,926,128 in additional Catalyst funding was quietly announced by the Ministry for the Arts on Friday, in addition to the initial $11, 391,173 funding released last week.
Neither the Australia Council nor ArtsPeak representatives know where the money is coming from and there has been no explanation from the office of Senator Mitch Fifield, Minister for the Arts, which is now in caretaker mode ahead of the 2 July election.
Some have expressed fears that the Government has allocated next year's funding hours before it went into caretaker mode.
In total, the Catalyst program has now allocated $23,317,301 in funding, despite the fact that the program was forecast to allocate only $12 million each year, money that was taken from the Australia Council in the 2015 Budget.
However, a spokesperson for the the Department of Communications and the Arts told ArtsHub that Catalyst monies spent to date combined the full 2015-2016 allocation and additional funding for multi-year projects.
Organisations to have received funding in this additional wave of announcements include AMPAG companies Circus Oz ($75,000 to present their latest production at the Australia Now Festival, Brazil in May 2016) and The Australian Ballet ($1,000,000 for the redevelopment of The Primrose Potter Australian Ballet Centre) despite the fact that Catalyst guidelines state that projects by or in partnership with small to medium organisations will be prioritised.
So this has panned out pretty much as expected - smaller arts bodies who needed the funding will close, while larger arts bodies who would have survived without it will expand.
|
#
¿
May 13, 2016 01:46
|
|
- V for Vegas
- Sep 1, 2004
-
THUNDERDOME LOSER
|
Maybe if they did a better job of promoting themselves. Bloody ivory tower dwelling whingers.
This is some serious Windschuttling going on in this piece.
quote:
The Australian Council last week announced it would cut its annual grant to Quadrant magazine to zero.
This is the first time in the magazine’s 60-year history that we have applied for a federal literary grant and been completely denied. This not only leaves a gaping hole in our modest operating budget; it is also a political decision designed to devalue our reputation and demonstrate that the Left remains in control of the arts.
Although the Australia Council itself suffered a loss of government funds in 2015, the Quadrant decision was not taken because of a lack of money for literature. Indeed, while abolishing our grant, the council increased its funding to other literary magazines, all of them left-wing. Instead of the one-year grant of $60,000 that we applied for, the others were awarded grants of four-years, with an annual increase of from $20,000 to $40,000 for each of them. The 2016 grants list for literary magazines looks like this:
Australian Book Review, increase per year $20,000; total grant $560,000
Griffith Review, increase per year $40,000; total grant $400,000
Overland magazine, increase per year $20,00; total grant $320,000
The only leftist literary magazine to miss out this year was Meanjin, but it was teetering on its last legs anyway, with a succession of stop-gap editors since radical feminist Sophie Cunningham resigned in 2010 over plans by its board, Melbourne University Press, to end its print edition and publish it online only.
None of these publications match the output, the quality, or the readership of Quadrant. With a circulation of more than 6000 buyers/subscribers per month, it is easily the best read of these publications. Quadrant is also the most prolific publisher of poetry in Australia, in either magazine or book format, with up to 300 poems published per year for the past decade. Our Literary Editor, Les Murray, has worked on every edition since 1990, that is, for 256 of the magazine’s 518 editions. He is not only widely recognized as Australia’s greatest living poet but also Australia’s foremost poetry anthologist. He has made an outstanding and enduring contribution to the literary arts in this country, unmatched by anything achieved by the minions funded by the Australia Council.
Griffith Review and Overland are only published quarterly and each struggles to find 1000 purchasers per edition. Australian Book Review and Griffith Review publish no poetry at all. Yet all three are also heavily subsidized by universities and other government agencies. And the contents of all three have long been dominated by left-wing academic literary fashions of postmodernism and critical theory. They are little more than production lines for the Left’s limitless appetite for identity group politics of gender, race and sexual preference, and its support for any national culture, no matter how violent or barbaric, except our own.
In contrast, since its founding in 1956, Quadrant has consistently defended high culture, freedom of speech, liberal democracy and the Western Judeo-Christian tradition. Apart from the grant we have now lost, we have no other public subsidies or major patrons. We survive entirely through the honest market revenues of subscriptions, newsagent sales, and donations from subscribers.
The Australia Council’s decision to end our funding is plainly an act of revenge by its bureaucrats and advisers. It is designed to punish us for being on the same side of the political fence as the Abbott government’s Minister for the Arts, George Brandis, who himself was responding to an act of arts-funding bastardry by Julia Gillard.
Faced with the certainty that Labor would lose the 2013 election, Gillard pushed the Australia Council Act 2013 through parliament with her partners, the Greens. This was intended to both entrench the existing bureaucracy and ensure a Coalition Minister for the Arts could no longer do what all his predecessors had been able to do since 1975, that is, make his own appointments to the Literature Board and other sub-boards within the organization. George Brandis decided to circumvent this Act by cutting some Australia Council funding and placing the money saved with a new organization, Catalyst, run from within his Ministry.
However, funding for literary magazines such as Quadrant remained with the Australia Council. In response to Brandis’s action, the Australia Council cancelled last October’s round of funding applications and made us apply in February this year, announcing results last week.
Our Australia Council funding has always gone to the writers of Quadrant’s literary content, that is, our poetry, short fiction, book reviews and essays on literature, film, theatre and the arts. We had to account for every dollar of this expenditure. The Australia Council did not fund our opinion pieces, political commentary, printing, Quadrant Online, or Quadrant Books.
The decision by the Australia Council is a blatant breach of its public duty to be politically even-handed. Throughout the eleven years of the Howard government, its appointees to the Council never reduced the funding of any of the overtly left-wing literary magazines.
Despite this latest blow, we are determined to maintain the quality of our literary output. We are also determined to preserve the volume of our content and the rates we pay the authors who write for our literary pages. We intend to show adversity can bring out our best.
In the second half of 2016, Quadrant’s marks its sixtieth anniversary. We have planned a program to make this a memorable year, with a number of innovations already in the pipeline. We will be sending out invitations and placing advertisements soon.
To do this, however, we need the help of our subscribers, readers and supporters to recover the funding we have lost. Please send us a donation (tax deductible), however modest. Please print the form below, fill it in and return it ASAP. Donations can also be sent directly to the Quadrant Foundation Thank you.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 01:33
|
|
- V for Vegas
- Sep 1, 2004
-
THUNDERDOME LOSER
|
What exactly is the Australian Book Review doing with its extra funding - oh, just paying writers more money
http://www.australianbookreview.com.au/images/PDFs_2016/ABR_lifts_its_payments_to_freelance_writers.pdf
quote:
Because of strong continuing support from the Australia Council for the Arts,
subscribers and private donors, Australian Book Review has again increased its
standard rate of payment for freelance reviewers. Critics will now be paid at least
$50 per 100 words. This represents a 150% increase during the past three years.
In 2015, ABR launched a campaign to increase payments to writers and to
highlight the low or non-payment of some freelance writers elsewhere (especially
younger ones). The response to this campaign has been enthusiastic.
Peter Rose, Editor of Australian Book Review, has commented: ‘ABR takes its
responsibilities to its writers very seriously. Critics deserve to be paid properly –
like authors, publishers, printers and booksellers. I am thrilled that ABR is in
a position to increase its rates and to support Australian writers.’
Australian Book Review (a Key Organisation of the Australia Council from 2011 to
2016) welcomes the new four-year funding for 2017–20. The magazine is committed
to increasing its standard rate to $75 per 100 words over the course of that period.
Freelance writers interested in writing for ABR can find out more about the magazine
by visiting our website https://www.australianbookreview.com.au or by contacting the Editor.
We are committed to publishing new writers from around Australia. In 2015, of the
300 different writers we published, almost 100 were new to the magazine.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 01:40
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2024 07:00
|
|
- V for Vegas
- Sep 1, 2004
-
THUNDERDOME LOSER
|
Not on ghost who votes or essential website, got source?
Crikey posted:
Essential: Coalition back in the lead (but 20% don't know when election is)
31 May 2016
The Coalition has regained a lead for the first time since mid-April, with today’s Essential Report polling showing a fall in Labor’s vote. The two-point drop to 35% in Labor’s primary vote means the Coalition, with a stable primary vote of 41%, takes a 51%-49% two-party preferred lead with five weeks to go; the Greens remain on 9% and the Nick Xenophon Team is up a point to 4%.
Essential polling: Who will you vote for? Coalition leads Labor
On a (unlikely) uniform national swing, 51%-49% would deliver Labor just five seats, leaving Malcolm Turnbull with a sizeable majority. Confirming that the worst is over for the Coalition, the fall in the Prime Minister’s personal ratings is also finished: after a brief dip into net negative territory a fortnight ago, his approval rating is up a point to 41%, while his disapproval rating is down three points to 39%. Bill Shorten, meanwhile, remains almost exactly where he has been for several weeks, with a 10-point (34% approval, 44% disapproval) net disapproval rating. The only good news for Labor is that Shorten has further narrowed the gap as preferred prime minister, with Malcolm Turnbull’s lead now down to 13 points (40%-27%) compared to 15 points a fortnight ago. In December, Turnbull led Shorten by 39 points.
The poll, however, also reveals a disturbing level of ignorance about the basics of the coming election: 23% of voters don’t think the election is in July, with 8% believing it’s in June, 4% in August, around 2% later, and 9% who don’t know at all. And just 50% know that they’ll be voting in a full double dissolution election: 8% think they’re voting in a normal half-Senate and House of Reps election, another 8% think it’s only for the House of Reps and 34% didn’t know. Liberal and Greens voters were the most knowledgeable, while Labor voters appear significantly more clueless about what they would be voting for.
Essential polling: what will you be voting for?
And 36% of voters were unable to identify the current Treasurer, with 13% saying the ambassador to the United States of America, Joe Hockey, was treasurer (including 18% of Greens voters); 64% identified Scott Morrison. In each case with these questions, older voters were far better informed than younger voters: just 62% of voters under 35, for example, knew the election was in July; only 44% of under-35s could identify Scott Morrison as treasurer.
There was, however, support for amending current laws that enable governments to hunt down and prosecute any whistleblower revealing government information, no matter the public benefits from it. In the wake of remarkable mid-election raids on Labor at the behest of an embarrassed NBN, half of all voters believe current laws that enable the pursuit and jailing of whistleblowers should be confined to national security matters, while 30% support existing laws. There was a strong partisan divide to the issue: Coalition voters more strongly support the current laws (45%) than support a national security limitation (41%) while 54% of Labor voters and 78% of Greens voters back limiting anti-whistleblower laws to national security matters.
Essential also asked voters about how they viewed Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten in terms of social interaction. Turnbull was generally much more positively regarded than Shorten: 53% said they’d ask Turnbull’s advice about investing money, compared to just 11% who would ask Shorten; 34% said they’d trust Turnbull to give their children advice about the future compared to 17% Shorten; Turnbull was the preferred dinner guest (38% to 22%) and the preferred negotiator for a pay rise (36% to 27% for former union leader Shorten). However, Shorten was preferred as someone to look after your pet (no comment), preferred as someone to go to the pub for a beer, more likely to lend you money and more likely to help you.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 01:48
|
|
The Arts Party made its Pozible funding goal of $35k.
#
¿
May 9, 2016 04:22
