Academic literature on the topic 'Nick Griffin'

In this paper, I attempt to present an example of following Hallidays grammatical system in analysing a text that can bear racial references. Doing so, the text analysis can be viewed from a critical discourse analysis perspective. The text chosen, titled Europe Must Close Its Borders or be Swamped by Third World, published in 2009, exhibits a typical example of the political rhetoric used by far-right political parties represented by one of its leaders in Britain, Nick Griffin. My assumption is that every word, every verb, and every phrase used is carefully chosen to convey the intended agendas of the party to its prospect voters in a clever way, which achieves its maximum effect with little or no apparent violation to the press guidelines. I also believe that such a stirring text, as far as the paper is concerned, would benefit from the use of various types of verbs and phrases that should suffice the requirement of the analysis. The paper may be of good use to students interested in studying this system of analysis as it deeply goes into the details of the used text.

After 1945 and the end of WWII, denying the Holocaust became an explicit taboo in most European countries. More specifically, in Austria, denying the Holocaust in public implies legal consequences: the so-called Verbotsgesetz persecutes any public utterances which even insinuate National Socialist ideology (utterances, symbols, songs, images) and the Holocaust denial. Naturally, it remains difficult for the courts to substantiate any accusations and to prove that somebody has actually uttered Holocaust denial if the meanings are only implied, inferred, or alluded to. Thus, in spite of such explicit sanctions, politicians of the far-right have found many coded and implicit discursive-pragmatic practices and devices of denying the Holocaust, even during parliamentary debates and official speeches. In my paper, I compare the “discourses about Holocaust denial” in Austria and the UK, in two case studies: the first one relates to the controversy about some utterances of Barbara Rosenkranz who stood as candidate of the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ) for election to Austrian Presidency in April 2010. Secondly, I focus on the debates triggered by Nick Griffin from the British extreme right party BNP, in and after his appearance in the prominent BBC 1 weekly show Question Time, in 2009. I apply the Discourse-Historical Approach in CDA for the detailed analysis of such recurring debates and foreground the patterns of a globalised politics of denial.

In September 2004, the Museum of Brisbane, Museums Australia and the Centre for Public Culture and Ideas at Griffith University hosted a symposium, ‘Cities and Museums’, at the university's Southbank campus. This event initiated a conversation among museum professionals and academics from across Australia. Nick Winterbotham, from Leeds City Museum, and Morag Macpherson, from Glasgow's Open Museum, and were keynote speakers. Their papers provided perspectives on museum policy and practice in the United Kingdom and Europe, and demonstrated how museums can contribute to urban and cultural regeneration. Those papers are available on the Museum of Brisbane website (www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/MoB). The Cities and Musuems section in this issue of Queensland Review brings together papers that explore the relationship of cities and museums across global, national and local Brisbane contexts, and from diverse disciplinary perspectives. The disciplines represented in this selection of papers from the symposium include social history, urban studies, literary fiction, and heritage and cultural policy.

AbstractSince 9/11, Islamophobia has been gaining the attention of scholars, and, increasingly, it is perceived to be an integral part of the emerging zeitgeist of the 21st century. However, the term itself is much debated and little consensus exists as to what it means. Using data drawn from political debate on talk radio between Nick Griffin, Chairman of the British National Party, and Abdul, a Muslim from Manchester and membership categorisation analysis as a methodology, this paper aims to reveal the category-work by which Islamophobia is achieved as a members’ accomplishment. Findings indicate that two versions of Islamophobia are talked into being. On the one hand, Griffin “does” Islamophobia through the operation of an adversarial standard relational pair Islam/West which operates within a membership categorisation device “worlds”, and so he achieves exclusion through cultural incompatibility. On the other hand, Abdul uses the membership categorisation device “race” within which the adversarial standard relational pair Muslim/Asian-White British is operative, and so he ascribes overt racist attitudes to Islamophobes.

Abstract EUGR is still a serious problem in very low birth weight preterm infants. The gradual improvement in neonatal intensive care has allowed the survival of newborns with increasing low weight and gestational age, with a higher incidence of major nutritional problems and diseases (Goldenberg 2008). EUGR was defined as growth parameters ≤ 10° centile at discharge, compared to the expected intrauterine growth for post-menstrual age. Recently EUGR was defined, in a dynamic way, as the reduction in anthropometric parameters z-score between birth and discharge >1SD (Griffin 2016). Aims of our study were to evaluate: the incidence of EUGR, the nutritional intake, the main risk factors, the auxological and neurological outcome. We enrolled 346 newborns admitted to our NICU from 2010 to 2016 with gestational age (GA) at birth < 30 weeks and/or birth weight <1500 gr. Infants with malformations or syndromes were excluded. The incidence of EUGR was 73.1% for weight, 66.3% for length and 39.3% for head circumference. We observed a decrease in SD mainly during the first 14 days of life. From two weeks to discharge, no significant catch-up growth was observed. Risk factors for EUGR were: male gender, reduced GA (p=0.000), low birth weight (p=0.000), lower minimum weight achieved (p=0.000), more time to recover birth weight (p=0.000), lower growth rate per day (p=0.001), longer period of total parenteral nutrition (p=0.008), later onset of minimal enteral feeding (p=0.006), later achievement of the full enteral feeding (p=0.000), cesarean section (p=0.006), incomplete corticosteroid prophylaxis (p=0.025), postnatal steroids use (p=0.000), mechanical ventilation (p=0.000), pulmonary bronchodysplasia (p= 0.000), leukomalacia (p=0.06), patent ductus arteriosus (p=0.000), retinopathy of prematurity (p= 0.008), late onset sepsis (p= 0.09). In 197 patients post-discharge clinical follow up at 1, 3 and 24 months of correct age (CA) was performed. Around 88% of all our sample showed normal neurological development. 12% at 1 and 3 months had abnormal general movements (both writhing and fidgety movements) or absent (p = 0.001). At 24 months CA patients with abnormal/absent fidgety movements had neurological disabilities and 83% were EUGR. At 24 months, 17% had weight <10th centile and all were EUGR. 25% showed an overgrowth (weight >75th centile) with a probably increased risk of metabolic disease later in life. The incidence of EUGR increased over the years due to the augmentation in preterm births with lower GA. The first 14 days of life were a critical period and nutrition is known to be mandatory to promote newborns’ growth (Asbury 2019). The EUGR condition negatively affected the neurological (Chien 2018) and auxological (Takayanagi 2018, Wood 2018) outcome of preterm infants and the early recognition of this condition is extremely important in order to implement a careful and prolonged follow-up.

Introduction Negative stereotyping of alternative diets such as veganism and other plant-based diets has been common in Australia, conventionally a meat-eating culture (OECD qtd. in Ting). Indeed, meat consumption in Australia is sanctioned by the ubiquity of advertising linking meat-eating to health, vitality and nation-building, and public challenges to such plant-based diets as veganism. In addition, state, commercial enterprises, and various community groups overtly resist challenges to Australian meat-eating norms and to the intensive animal husbandry practices that underpin it. Hence activists, who may contest not simply this norm but many of the customary industry practices that comprise Australia’s meat production, have been accused of promoting a vegan agenda and even of undermining the “Australian way of life”.If veganism meansa philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals. (Vegan Society)then our interest in this article lies in how a stereotyped label of veganism (and other associated attributes) is being used across Australian public spheres to challenge the work of animal activists as they call out factory farming for entrenched animal cruelty. This is carried out in three main parts. First, following an outline of our research approach, we examine the processes of stereotyping and the key dimensions of vegan stereotyping. Second, in the main part of the article, we reveal how opponents to such animal activist organisations as Animals Australia attempt to undermine activist calls for change by framing them as promoting an un-Australian vegan agenda. Finally, we consider how, despite such framing, that organisation is generating productive public debate around animal welfare, and, further, facilitating the creation of new activist identifications and identities.Research ApproachData collection involved searching for articles where Animals Australia and animal activism were yoked with veg*n (vegan and vegetarian), across the period May 2011 to 2016 (discussion peaked between May and June 2013). This period was of interest because it exposed a flare point with public discord being expressed between communities—namely between rural and urban consumers, farmers and animal activists, Coles Supermarkets (identified by The Australian Government the Treasury as one of two major supermarkets holding over 65% share of Australian food retail market) and their producers—and a consequent voicing of disquiet around Australian identity. We used purposive sampling (Waller, Farquharson, and Dempsey 67) to identify relevant materials as we knew in advance the case was “information-rich” (Patton 181) and would provide insightful information about a “troublesome” phenomenon (Emmel 6). Materials were collected from online news articles (30) and readers’ comments (167), online magazines (2) and websites (2) and readers’ comments (3), news items (Factiva 13), Australian Broadcasting Commission television (1) and radio (1), public blogs (2), and Facebook pages from involved organisations, specifically Australia’s National Farmers’ Federation (NFF, 155 posts) and Coles Supermarkets (29 posts). Many of these materials were explicitly responsive to a) Animals Australia’s Make It Possible campaign against Australian factory farming (launched and highly debated during this period), and b) Coles Supermarket’s short-lived partnership with Animals Australia in 2013. We utilised content analysis so as to make visible the most prominent and consistent stereotypes utilised in these various materials during the identified period. The approach allowed us to code and categorise materials so as to determine trends and patterns of words used, their relationships, and key structures and ways of speaking (Weerakkody). In addition, discourse analysis (Gee) was used in order to identify and track “language-in-use” so as to make visible the stereotyping deployed during the public reception of both the campaign and Animals Australia’s associated partnership with Coles. These methods enabled a “nuanced approach” (Coleman and Moss 12) with which to spot putdowns, innuendos, and stereotypical attitudes.Vegan StereotypingStereotypes creep into everyday language and are circulated and amplified through mainstream media, speeches by public figures, and social media. Stereotypes maintain their force through being reused and repurposed, making them difficult to eradicate due to their “cumulative effects” and influence (Harris and Sanborn 38; Inzlicht, Tullett, Legault, and Kang; Pickering). Over time stereotypes can become the lens through which we view “the world and social reality” (Harris and Sanborn 38; Inzlicht et al.). In summation, stereotyping:reduces identity categories to particular sets of deeds, attributes and attitudes (Whitley and Kite);informs individuals’ “cognitive investments” (Blum 267) by associating certain characteristics with particular groups;comprises symbolic and connotative codes that carry sets of traits, deeds, or beliefs (Cover; Rosello), and;becomes increasingly persuasive through regulating language and image use as well as identity categories (Cover; Pickering; Rosello).Not only is the “iterative force” (Rosello 35) of such associative stereotyping compounded due to its dissemination across digital media sites such as Facebook, YouTube, websites, and online news, but attempts to denounce it tend to increase its “persuasive power” (29). Indeed, stereotypes seem to refuse “to die” (23), remaining rooted in social and cultural memory (Whitley and Kite 10).As such, despite the fact that there is increasing interest in Australia and elsewhere in new food norms and plant-based diets (see, e.g., KPMG), as well as in vegan lifestyle options (Wright), studies still show that vegans remain a negatively stereotyped group. Previous studies have suggested that vegans mark a “symbolic threat” to Western, conventionally meat-eating cultures (MacInnis and Hodson 722; Stephens Griffin; Cole and Morgan). One key UK study of national newspapers, for instance, showed vegans continuing to be discredited in multiple ways as: 1) “self-evidently ridiculous”; 2) “ascetics”; 3) having a lifestyle difficult and impossible to maintain; 4) “faddist”; 5) “oversensitive”; and 6) “hostile extremists” (Cole and Morgan 140–47).For many Australians, veganism also appears anathema to their preferred culture and lifestyle of meat-eating. For instance, the NFF, Meat & Livestock Australia (MLA), and other farming bodies continue to frame veganism as marking an extreme form of lifestyle, as anti-farming and un-Australian. Such perspectives are also circulated through online rural news and readers’ comments, as will be discussed later in the article. Such representations are further exemplified by the MLA’s (Lamb, Australia Day, Celebrate Australia) Australia Day lamb advertising campaigns (Bembridge; Canning). For multiple consecutive years, the campaign presented vegans (and vegetarians) as being self-evidently ridiculous and faddish, representing them as mentally unhinged and fringe dwellers. Such stereotyping not only invokes “affective reactions” (Whitley and Kite 8)—including feelings of disgust towards individuals living such lifestyles or holding such values—but operates as “political baits” (Rosello 18) to shore-up or challenge certain social or political positions.Although such advertisements are arguably satirical, their repeated screening towards and on Australia Day highlights deeply held views about the normalcy of animal agriculture and meat-eating, “homogenizing” (Blum 276; Pickering) both meat-eaters and non-meat-eaters alike. Cultural stereotyping of this kind amplifies “social” as well as political schisms (Blum 276), and arguably discourages consumers—whether meat-eaters or non-meat-eaters—from advocating together around shared goals such as animal welfare and food safety. Additionally, given the rise of new food practices in Australia—including flexitarian, reducetarian, pescatarian, kangatarian (a niche form of ethical eating), vegivores, semi-vegetarian, vegetarian, veganism—alongside broader commitments to ethical consumption, such stereotyping suggests that consumers’ actual values and preferences are being disregarded in order to shore-up the normalcy of meat-eating.Animals Australia and the (So-Called) Vegan Agenda of Animal ActivismGiven these points, it is no surprise that there is a tacit belief in Australia that anyone labelled an animal activist must also be vegan. Within this context, we have chosen to primarily focus on the attitudes towards the campaigning work of Animals Australia—a not-for-profit organisation representing some 30 member groups and over 2 million individual supporters (Animals Australia, “Who Is”)—as this organisation has been charged as promoting a vegan agenda. Along with the RSPCA and Voiceless, Animals Australia represents one of the largest animal protection organisations within Australia (Chen). Its mission is to:Investigate, expose and raise community awareness of animal cruelty;Provide animals with the strongest representation possible to Government and other decision-makers;Educate, inspire, empower and enlist the support of the community to prevent and prohibit animal cruelty;Strengthen the animal protection movement. (Animals Australia, “Who Is”)In delivery of this mission, the organisation curates public rallies and protests, makes government and industry submissions, and utilises corporate outreach. Campaigning engages the Web, multiple forms of print and broadcast media, and social media.With regards to Animals Australia’s campaigns regarding factory farming—including the Make It Possible campaign (see fig. 1), launched in 2013 and key to the period we are investigating—the main message is that: the animals kept in these barren and constrictive conditions are “no different to our pets at home”; they are “highly intelligent creatures who feel pain, and who will respond to kindness and affection – if given the chance”; they are “someone, not something” (see the Make It Possible transcript). Campaigns deliberately strive to engender feelings of empathy and produce affect in viewers (see, e.g., van Gurp). Specifically they strive to produce mainstream recognition of the cruelties entrenched in factory farming practices and build community outrage against these practices so as to initiate industry change. Campaigns thus expressly challenge Australians to no longer support factory farmed animal products, and to identify with what we have elsewhere called everyday activist positions (Rodan and Mummery, “Animal Welfare”; “Make It Possible”). They do not, however, explicitly endorse a vegan position. Figure 1: Make It Possible (Animals Australia, campaign poster)Nonetheless, as has been noted, a common counter-tactic used within Australia by the industries targeted by such campaigns, has been to use well-known negative stereotypes to discredit not only the charges of systemic animal cruelty but the associated organisations. In our analysis, we found four prominent interconnected stereotypes utilised in both digital and print media to discredit the animal welfare objectives of Animals Australia. Together these cast the organisation as: 1) anti-meat-eating; 2) anti-farming; 3) promoting a vegan agenda; and 4) hostile extremists. These stereotypes are examined below.Anti-Meat-EatingThe most common stereotype attributed to Animals Australia from its campaigning is of being anti-meat-eating. This charge, with its associations with veganism, is clearly problematic for industries that facilitate meat-eating and within a culture that normalises meat-eating, as the following example expresses:They’re [Animals Australia] all about stopping things. They want to stop factory farming – whatever factory farming is – or they want to stop live exports. And in fact they’re not necessarily about: how do I improve animal welfare in the pig industry? Or how do I improve animal welfare in the live export industry? Because ultimately they are about a meat-free future world and we’re about a meat producing industry, so there’s not a lot of overlap, really between what we’re doing. (Andrew Spencer, Australian Pork Ltd., qtd. in Clark)Respondents engaging this stereotype also express their “outrage at Coles” (McCarthy) and Animals Australia for “pedalling [sic]” a pro-vegan agenda (Nash), their sense that Animals Australia is operating with ulterior motives (Flint) and criminal intent (Brown). They see cultural refocus as unnecessary and “an exercise in futility” (Harris).Anti-FarmingTo be anti-farming in Australia is generally considered to be un-Australian, with Glasgow suggesting that any criticism of “farming practices” in Australian society can be “interpreted as an attack on the moral integrity of farmers, amounting to cultural blasphemy” (200). Given its objectives, it is unsurprising that Animals Australia has been stereotyped as being “anti-farming”, a phrase additionally often used in conjunction with the charge of veganism. Although this comprises a misreading of veganism—given its focus on challenging animal exploitation in farming rather than entailing opposition to all farming—the NFF accused Animals Australia of being “blatantly anti-farming and proveganism” (Linegar qtd. in Nason) and as wanting “to see animal agriculture phased out” (National Farmers’ Federation). As expressed in more detail:One of the main factors for VFF and other farmers being offended is because of AA’s opinion and stand on ALL farming. AA wants all farming banned and us all become vegans. Is it any wonder a lot of people were upset? Add to that the proceeds going to AA which may have been used for their next criminal activity washed against the grain. If people want to stand against factory farming they have the opportunity not to purchase them. Surely not buying a product will have a far greater impact on factory farmed produce. Maybe the money could have been given to farmers? (Hunter)Such stereotyping reveals how strongly normalised animal agriculture is in Australia, as well as a tendency on the part of respondents to reframe the challenge of animal cruelty in some farming practices into a position supposedly challenging all farming practices.Promoting a Vegan AgendaAs is already clear, Animals Australia is often reproached for promoting a vegan agenda, which, it is further suggested, it keeps hidden from the Australian public. This viewpoint was evident in two key examples: a) the Australian public and organisations such as the NFF are presented as being “defenceless” against the “myopic vitriol of the vegan abolitionists” (Jonas); and b) Animals Australia is accused of accepting “loans from liberation groups” and being “supported by an army of animal rights lawyers” to promote a “hard core” veganism message (Bourke).Nobody likes to see any animals hurt, but pushing a vegan agenda and pushing bad attitudes by group members is not helping any animals and just serves to slow any progress both sides are trying to resolve. (V.c. Deb Ford)Along with undermining farmers’ “legitimate business” (Jooste), veganism was also considered to undermine Australia’s rural communities (Park qtd. in Malone).Hostile ExtremistsThe final stereotype linking veganism with Animals Australia was of hostile extremism (cf. Cole and Morgan). This means, for users, being inimical to Australian national values but, also, being akin to terrorists who engage in criminal activities antagonistic to Australia’s democratic society and economic livelihood (see, e.g., Greer; ABC News). It is the broad symbolic threat that “extremism” invokes that makes this stereotype particularly “infectious” (Rosello 19).The latest tag team attacks on our pork industry saw AL giving crash courses in how to become a career criminal for the severely impressionable, after attacks on the RSPCA against the teachings of Peter Singer and trying to bully the RSPCA into vegan functions menu. (Cattle Advocate)The “extremists” want that extended to dairy products, as well. The fact that this will cause the total annihilation of practically all animals, wild and domestic, doesn’t bother them in the least. (Brown)What is interesting about these last two dimensions of stereotyping is their displacement of violence. That is, rather than responding to the charge of animal cruelty, violence and extremism is attributed to those making the charge.Stereotypes and Symbolic Boundary ShiftingWhat is evident throughout these instances is how stereotyping as a “cognitive mechanism” is being used to build boundaries (Cherry 460): in the first instance, between “us” (the meat-eating majority) and “them” (the vegan minority aka animal activists); and secondly between human interest and livestock. This point is that animals may hold instrumental value and receive some protection through such, but any more stringent arguments for their protection at the expense of perceived human interests tend to be seen as wrong-headed (Sorenson; Munro).These boundaries are deeply entrenched in Western culture (Wimmer). They are also deeply problematic in the context of animal activism because they fragment publics, promote restrictive identities, and close down public debate (Lamont and Molnár). Boundary entrenching is clearly evident in the stereotyping work carried out by industry stakeholders where meat-eating and practices of industrialised animal agriculture are valorised and normalised. Challenging Australia’s meat production practices—irrespective of the reason given—is framed and belittled as entailing a vegan agenda, and further as contributing to the demise of farming and rural communities in Australia.More broadly, industry stakeholders are explicitly targeting the activist work by such organisations as Animals Australia as undermining the ‘Australian way of life’. In their reading, there is an irreconcilable boundary between human and animal interests and between an activist minority which is vegan, unreasonable, extremist and hostile to farming and the meat-eating majority which is representative of the Australian community and sustains the Australian economy. As discussed so far, such stereotyping and boundary making—even in their inaccuracies—can be pernicious in the way they entrench identities and divisions, and close the possibility for public debate.Rather than directly contesting the presuppositions and inaccuracies of such stereotyping, however, Animals Australia can be read as cultivating a process of symbolic boundary shifting. That is, rather than responding by simply underlining its own moderate position of challenging only intensive animal agriculture for systemic animal cruelty, Animals Australia uses its campaigns to develop “boundary blurring and crossing” tactics (Cherry 451, 459), specifically to dismantle and shift the symbolic boundaries conventionally in place between humans and non-human animals in the first instance, and between those non-human animals used for companionship and those used for food in the second (see fig. 2). Figure 2: That Ain’t No Way to Treat a Lady (Animals Australia, campaign image on back of taxi)Indeed, the symbolic boundaries between humans and animals left unquestioned in the preceding stereotyping are being profoundly shaken by Animals Australia with campaigns such as Make It Possible making morally relevant likenesses between humans and animals highly visible to mainstream Australians. Namely, the organisation works to interpellate viewers to exercise their own capacities for emotional identification and moral imagination, to identify with animals’ experiences and lives, and to act upon that identification to demand change.So, rather than reactively striving to refute the aforementioned stereotypes, organisations such as Animals Australia are modelling and facilitating symbolic boundary shifting by building broad, emotionally motivated, pathways through which Australians are being encouraged to refocus their own assumptions, practices and identities regarding animal experience, welfare and animal-human relations. Indeed the organisation has explicitly framed itself as speaking on behalf of not only animals but all caring Australians, suggesting thereby the possibility of a reframing of Australian national identity. Although such a tactic does not directly contest this negative stereotyping—direct contestation being, as noted, ineffective given the perniciousness of stereotyping—such work nonetheless dismantles the oppositional charge of such stereotyping in calling for all Australians to proudly be a little bit anti-meat-eating (when that meat is from factory farmed animals), a little bit anti-factory farming, a little bit pro-veg*n, and a little bit proud to consider themselves as caring about animal welfare.For Animals Australia, in other words, appealing to Australians to care about animal welfare and to act in support of that care, not only defuses the stereotypes targeting them but encourages the work of symbolic boundary shifting that is really at the heart of this dispute. Further research into the reception of the debate would give a sense of the extent to which such an approach is making a difference.ReferencesABC News. “Animal Rights Activists ‘Akin to Terrorists’, Says NSW Minister Katrina Hodgkinson.” ABC News 18 Jul. 2013. 21 Feb. 2019 <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-18/animal-rights-activists-27terrorists272c-says-nsw-minister/4828556>.Animals Australia. “Who Is Animals Australia?” 20 Feb. 2019 <http://www.animalsaustralia.org/about>.———. Make It Possible. Video and transcript. 21 Oct. 2012. 20 Feb. 2019 <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM6V6lq_p0o>.The Australian Government the Treasury. Independent Review of the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct: Final Report. Commonwealth of Australia, 2018. 1 Apr. 2019 <https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/Independent-review-of-the-Food-and-Grocery-Code-of-Conduct-Final-Report.pdf>.Bembridge, Courtney. “Australia Day Lamb Ad, Starring Lee Lin Chin, Attracts Dozens of Complaints from Vegans.” ABC News 20 Jan. 2016. 21 Feb. 2019 <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-11/vegans-lodge-complaints-over-lamb-ad/7081706>.Blum, Lawrence. “Stereotypes and Stereotyping: A Moral Analysis.” Philosophical Papers 33.3 (2004): 251–89.Bourke, John. “Coles Undermines Our Way of Life.” Weekly Times Now 5 Jun. 2013. 19 Jun. 2013 <http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2013/06/05/572335_opinion-news.html>.Brown, Frank. “Letter to the Editor.” Northern Miner 9 Dec. 2014. 18 Nov. 2017 <http://www.newscorpaustralia.com/brand/northern-miner>.Canning, Simon. “MLA’s Australia Day Vegan Flaming Lamb Ad Cleared by Advertising Watchdog.” Mumbrella News 19 Jan. 2016. 18 Nov. 2017 <https://mumbrella.com.au/mlas-australia-day-vegan-flaming-lamb-ad-cleared-by-advertising-watchdog-340779>.Cattle Advocate. “Coles Bags a Boost for NFF.” Farm Weekly 3 Jul. 2013. 20 Feb. 2018 <http://www.farmweekly.com.au/news/agriculture/agribusiness/general-news/coles-bags-a-boost-for-nff/2660179.aspx>.Chen, Peter John. Animal Welfare in Australia: Politics and Policy. Sydney: U of Sydney Press, 2016.Cherry, Elizabeth. “Shifting Symbolic Boundaries: Cultural Strategies of the Animal Rights Movement.” Sociological Forum 25.3 (2010): 450–75.Clark, Chris. “Animals Australia under the Microscope.” ABC Landline 16 Jun. 2013. 24 Jun. 2013 <http://www.abc.net.au/landline/ content/2013/s3782456.htm>.Cole, Matthew, and Karen Morgan. “Vegaphobia: Derogatory Discourses of Veganism and the Reproduction of Speciesism in UK National Newspapers.” The British Journal of Sociology 62.1 (2011): 134–53.Coleman, Stephen, and Giles Moss. “Under Construction: The Field of Online Deliberation Research.” Journal of Information Technology and Politics 9.1 (2012): 1–15.Cover, Rob. “Digital Difference: Theorizing Frameworks of Bodies, Representation and Stereotypes in Digital Games.” Asia Pacific Media Educator 26.1 (2016): 4–16.Emmel, Nick. “Purposeful Sampling.” Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach. London: Sage Publications, 2013. 2–12. 28 Feb. 2019 <http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.ecu.edu.au/10.4135/9781473913882>.Flint, Nicole. “The ABC Continues to Broadcast Animals Australia Footage while Failing to Probe the Group’s Motivations.” The Advertiser 28 Oct. 2014. 18 Nov. 2017 <http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/>.Gee, James Paul. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge, 2010.Glasgow, David. “The Law of the Jungle: Advocating for Animals in Australia.” Deakin Law Review 13.1 (2008): 181–210.Greer, Anna. “‘Akin to Terrorism’: The War on Animal Activists.” Overland 9 Aug. 2013. 21 Feb. 2019 <https://overland.org.au/2013/08/akin-to-terrorism-the-war-on-animal-activists/>Harris, Janeen. “Coles Are the Piggy in the Middle of Animal Welfare Confrontation.” The Conversation 13 Jun. 2013. 21 Feb. 2019 <https://theconversation.com/coles-are-the-piggy-in-the-middle-of-animal-welfare-confrontation-15078>.Harris, Richard Jackson, and Fred W. Sanborn. A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication. 6th ed. New York: Routledge, 2014.Hunter, Jim. “Animals Australia Bags Hot Property.” Weekly Times Now 10 Jun. 2013. 19 Jun. 2013 <http://tools.weeklytimesnow.com.au/yoursay/comment_all.php>.Inzlicht, Michael, Alexa M. Tullett, Lisa Legault, and Sonia K Kang. “Lingering Effects: Stereotype Threat Hurts More than You Think.” Social Issues and Policy Review 5.1 (2011): 227–56.Jonas, Tammi. “Coles & Animals Australia: Unlikely Bedfellows?” Blog post. 6 Jun. 2013. 24 Jun. 2013 <http://www.tammijonas.com/2013/06/06/coles-animals-australia-unlikely-bedfellows/>.Jooste, James. “Animals Australia Ready to Launch New Advertisements Calling for Ban on Live Exports, after Complaints about Previous Campaign Dismissed.” ABC News 16 Feb. 2016. 21 Feb. 2019 <http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2016-02-15/live-export-animals-australia-advertising-complaint-dismissed/7168534>.KPMG. Talking 2030: Growing Agriculture into a $100 Billion Industry. KPMG, 2018. 21 Feb. 2019 <https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/f0cfd1_26dbb49eea91458d8b1606a0006ec20e.pdf>.Lamont, Michèle, and Virág Molnár. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences.” Annual Review of Sociology 28 (2002): 167–95.MacInnis, Cara C., and Gordon Hodson. “It Ain’t Easy Eating Greens: Evidence of Bias towards Vegetarians and Vegans from Both Source and Target.” Group Process and Intergroup Relations 20.6 (2017): 721–44.Malone, Paul. “Farmers Face Changing World.” The Canberra Times 9 Jun. 2013. 22 Nov. 2013 <https://www.canberratimes.com.au/>.McCarthy, John. “Farmers Angered by Coles Campaign.” The Courier-Mail 4 Jun. 2013. 24 Jun. 2013 <http://www.couriermail.com.au/>.Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA). Australia Day Lamb 2016: Commence Operation Boomerang. Video. 9 Jan. 2016. 8 Nov. 2017 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i15OPuFvmA>.———. Celebrate Australia with a Lamb BBQ. Video. 11 Jan. 2017. 8 Nov. 2017 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX__i-zeaWs>.———. “Lamb Campaigns.” No date. 8 Nov. 2017 <https://www.mla.com.au/marketing-beef-and-lamb/domestic-marketing/lamb-campaigns/>.Munro, Lyle. “Animals, ‘Nature’ and Human Interests.” Controversies in Environmental Sociology. Ed. Rob White. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. 61–76.Nash, Fiona. “Nationals Senator Congratulating Animals Australia’s Damaging …. .” The Nationals for Regional Australia 6 Jun. 2013. 21 Jun. 2013 <http://nationals.org.au/>.Nason, James. “Coles Bagged over Animals Australia Campaign.” Beef Central. 4 Jun. 2013. 22 Nov. 2013 <http://www.beefcentral.com/news/coles-bagged-over-animals-australia-campaign/>.National Farmers’ Federation. Facebook post. 30 May 2013. 26 Nov. 2013 <http://www.facebook.com/NationalFarmers>.Patton, Michael Quinn. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 2nd ed. London: Sage, 1990. Pickering, Michael. Stereotyping: The Politics of Representation. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001.Rodan, Debbie, and Jane Mummery. “The ‘Make It Possible’ Multi-Media Campaign: Generating a New ‘Everyday’ in Animal Welfare.” Media International Australia, 153 (2014): 78–87.———. “Doing Animal Welfare Activism Everyday: Questions of Identity.” Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 30.4 (2016): 381–96.Rosello, Mireille. Declining the Stereotype: Ethnicity and Representation in French Culture. Hanover: U of New England, 1998.Sorenson John. “Constructing Terrorists: Propaganda about Animal Rights.” Critical Studies on Terrorism 2.2 (2009): 237-56.Stephens Griffin, Nathan. Understanding Veganism: Biography and Identity. Cham: Springer International, 2017.Ting, Inga. “Australia is the Meat-Eating Capital of the World.” The Sydney Morning Herald 27 Oct. 2015. 20 Feb. 2019 <http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/australia-is-the-meateating-capital-of-the-world-20151027-gkjhp4.html>.V.c. Deb Ford. “National Farmers Federation.” Facebook post. 30 May 2013. 26 Nov. 2013 <http://www.facebook.com/NationalFarmers>.Van Gurp, Marc. “Factory Farming the Musical.” Osocio 4 Nov. 2012. 21 Feb. 2019 <https://osocio.org/message/factory-farming-the-musical/>.Vegan Society. “History.” 20 Feb. 2019 <https://www.vegansociety.com/about-us/history>.Waller, Vivienne, Karen Farquharson, and Deborah Dempsey. Qualitative Social Research: Contemporary Methods for the Digital Age. London: Sage, 2016Weerakkody, Niranjala. Research Methods for Media and Communication. South Melbourne: Oxford UP, 2009.Whitley, Bernard E., and Mary E. Kite. The Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth, 2006.Wimmer, Andreas. “The Making and Unmaking of Ethnic Boundaries: A Multilevel Process Theory.” American Journal of Sociology 113.4 (2008): 970–1022.Wright, Laura. The Vegan Studies Project: Food, Animals, and Gender in the Age of Terror. Georgia: U of Georgia Press, 2015.

Refereed publications (also known as peer-reviewed) are the currency of academia, yet many PhD theses in Australia result in only one or two such papers. Typically, a doctoral thesis requires the candidate to present (and pass) a public Confirmation Seminar, around nine to twelve months into candidacy, in which a panel of the candidate’s supervisors and invited experts adjudicate upon whether the work is likely to continue and ultimately succeed in the goal of a coherent and original contribution to knowledge. A Final Seminar, also public and sometimes involving the traditional viva voce or oral defence of the thesis, is presented two or three months before approval is given to send the 80,000 to 100,000 word tome off for external examination. And that soul-destroying or elation-releasing examiner’s verdict can be many months in the delivery: a limbo-like period during which the candidate’s status as a student is ended and her or his receipt of any scholarship or funding guerdon is terminated with perfunctory speed. This is the only time most students spend seriously writing up their research for publication although, naturally, many are more involved in job hunting as they pin their hopes on passing the thesis examination.There is, however, a slightly more palatable alternative to this nail-biting process of the traditional PhD, and that is the PhD by Published Papers (also known as PhD by Publications or PhD by Published Works). The form of my own soon-to-be-submitted thesis, it permits the submission for examination of a collection of papers that have been refereed and accepted (or are in the process of being refereed) for publication in academic journals or books. Apart from the obvious benefits in getting published early in one’s (hopefully) burgeoning academic career, it also takes away a lot of the stress come final submission time. After all, I try to assure myself, the thesis examiners can’t really discredit the process of double-blind, peer-review the bulk of the thesis has already undergone: their job is to examine how well I’ve unified the papers into a cohesive thesis … right? But perhaps they should at least be wary, because, unfortunately, the requirements for this kind of PhD vary considerably from institution to institution and there have been some cases where the submitted work is of questionable quality compared to that produced by graduates from more demanding universities. Hence, this paper argues that in my subject area of interest—film and television studies—there is a huge range in the set requirements for doctorates, from universities that award the degree to film artists for prior published work that has undergone little or no academic scrutiny and has involved little or no on-campus participation to at least three Australian universities that require candidates be enrolled for a minimum period of full-time study and only submit scholarly work generated and published (or submitted for publication) during candidature. I would also suggest that uncertainty about where a graduate’s work rests on this continuum risks confusing a hard-won PhD by Published Papers with the sometimes risible honorary doctorate. Let’s begin by dredging the depths of those murky, quasi-academic waters to examine the occasionally less-than-salubrious honorary doctorate. The conferring of this degree is generally a recognition of an individual’s body of (usually published) work but is often conferred for contributions to knowledge or society in general that are not even remotely academic. The honorary doctorate does not usually carry with it the right to use the title “Dr” (although many self-aggrandising recipients in the non-academic world flout this unwritten code of conduct, and, indeed, Monash University’s Monash Magazine had no hesitation in describing its 2008 recipient, musician, screenwriter, and art-school-dropout Nick Cave, as “Dr Cave” (O’Loughlin)). Some shady universities even offer such degrees for sale or ‘donation’ and thus do great damage to that institution’s credibility as well as to the credibility of the degree itself. Such overseas “diploma mills”—including Ashwood University, Belford University, Glendale University and Suffield University—are identified by their advertising of “Life Experience Degrees,” for which a curriculum vitae outlining the prospective graduand’s oeuvre is accepted on face value as long as their credit cards are not rejected. An aspiring screen auteur simply specifies film and television as their major and before you can shout “Cut!” there’s a degree in the mail. Most of these pseudo-universities are not based in Australia but are perfectly happy to confer their ‘titles’ to any well-heeled, vanity-driven Australians capable of completing the online form. Nevertheless, many academics fear a similarly disreputable marketplace might develop here, and Norfolk Island-based Greenwich University presents a particularly illuminating example. Previously empowered by an Act of Parliament consented to by Senator Ian Macdonald, the then Minister for Territories, this “university” had the legal right to confer honorary degrees from 1998. The Act was eventually overridden by legislation passed in 2002, after a concerted effort by the Australian Universities Quality Agency Ltd. and the Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee to force the accreditation requirements of the Australian Qualifications Framework upon the institution in question, thus preventing it from making degrees available for purchase over the Internet. Greenwich University did not seek re-approval and soon relocated to its original home of Hawaii (Brown). But even real universities flounder in similarly muddy waters when, unsolicited, they make dubious decisions to grant degrees to individuals they hold in high esteem. Although meaning well by not courting pecuniary gain, they nevertheless invite criticism over their choice of recipient for their honoris causa, despite the decision usually only being reached after a process of debate and discussion by university committees. Often people are rewarded, it seems, as much for their fame as for their achievements or publications. One such example of a celebrity who has had his onscreen renown recognised by an honorary doctorate is film and television actor/comedian Billy Connolly who was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Letters by The University of Glasgow in 2006, prompting Stuart Jeffries to complain that “something has gone terribly wrong in British academia” (Jeffries). Eileen McNamara also bemoans the levels to which some institutions will sink to in search of media attention and exposure, when she writes of St Andrews University in Scotland conferring an honorary doctorate to film actor and producer, Michael Douglas: “What was designed to acknowledge intellectual achievement has devolved into a publicity grab with universities competing for celebrity honorees” (McNamara). Fame as an actor (and the list gets even weirder when the scope of enquiry is widened beyond the field of film and television), seems to be an achievement worth recognising with an honorary doctorate, according to some universities, and this kind of discredit is best avoided by Australian institutions of higher learning if they are to maintain credibility. Certainly, universities down under would do well to follow elsewhere than in the footprints of Long Island University’s Southampton College. Perhaps the height of academic prostitution of parchments for the attention of mass media occurred when in 1996 this US school bestowed an Honorary Doctorate of Amphibious Letters upon that mop-like puppet of film and television fame known as the “muppet,” Kermit the Frog. Indeed, this polystyrene and cloth creation with an anonymous hand operating its mouth had its acceptance speech duly published (see “Kermit’s Acceptance Speech”) and the Long Island University’s Southampton College received much valuable press. After all, any publicity is good publicity. Or perhaps this furry frog’s honorary degree was a cynical stunt meant to highlight the ridiculousness of the practice? In 1986 a similar example, much closer to my own home, occurred when in anticipation and condemnation of the conferral of an honorary doctorate upon Prince Philip by Monash University in Melbourne, the “Members of the Monash Association of Students had earlier given a 21-month-old Chihuahua an honorary science degree” (Jeffries), effectively suggesting that the honorary doctorate is, in fact, a dog of a degree. On a more serious note, there have been honorary doctorates conferred upon far more worthy recipients in the field of film and television by some Australian universities. Indigenous film-maker Tracey Moffatt was awarded an honorary doctorate by Griffith University in November of 2004. Moffatt was a graduate of the Griffith University’s film school and had an excellent body of work including the films Night Cries: A Rural Tragedy (1990) and beDevil (1993). Acclaimed playwright and screenwriter David Williamson was presented with an Honorary Doctorate of Letters by The University of Queensland in December of 2004. His work had previously picked up four Australian Film Institute awards for best screenplay. An Honorary Doctorate of Visual and Performing Arts was given to film director Fred Schepisi AO by The University of Melbourne in May of 2006. His films had also been earlier recognised with Australian Film Institute awards as well as the Golden Globe Best Miniseries or Television Movie award for Empire Falls in 2006. Director George Miller was crowned with an Honorary Doctorate in Film from the Australian Film, Television, and Radio School in April 2007, although he already had a medical doctor’s testamur on his wall. In May of this year, filmmaker George Gittoes, a fine arts dropout from The University of Sydney, received an honorary doctorate by The University of New South Wales. His documentaries, Soundtrack to War (2005) and Rampage (2006), screened at the Sydney and Berlin film festivals, and he has been employed by the Australian Government as an official war artist. Interestingly, the high quality screen work recognised by these Australian universities may have earned the recipients ‘real’ PhDs had they sought the qualification. Many of these film artists could have just as easily submitted their work for the degree of PhD by Published Papers at several universities that accept prior work in lieu of an original exegesis, and where a film is equated with a book or journal article. But such universities still invite comparisons of their PhDs by Published Papers with honorary doctorates due to rather too-easy-to-meet criteria. The privately funded Bond University, for example, recommends a minimum full-time enrolment of just three months and certainly seems more lax in its regulations than other Antipodean institution: a healthy curriculum vitae and payment of the prescribed fee (currently AUD$24,500 per annum) are the only requirements. Restricting my enquiries once again to the field of my own research, film and television, I note that Dr. Ingo Petzke achieved his 2004 PhD by Published Works based upon films produced in Germany well before enrolling at Bond, contextualized within a discussion of the history of avant-garde film-making in that country. Might not a cynic enquire as to how this PhD significantly differs from an honorary doctorate? Although Petzke undoubtedly paid his fees and met all of Bond’s requirements for his thesis entitled Slow Motion: Thirty Years in Film, one cannot criticise that cynic for wondering if Petzke’s films are indeed equivalent to a collection of refereed papers. It should be noted that Bond is not alone when it comes to awarding candidates the PhD by Published Papers for work published or screened in the distant past. Although yet to grant it in the area of film or television, Swinburne University of Technology (SUT) is an institution that distinctly specifies its PhD by Publications is to be awarded for “research which has been carried out prior to admission to candidature” (8). Similarly, the Griffith Law School states: “The PhD (by publications) is awarded to established researchers who have an international reputation based on already published works” (1). It appears that Bond is no solitary voice in the academic wilderness, for SUT and the Griffith Law School also apparently consider the usual milestones of Confirmation and Final Seminars to be unnecessary if the so-called candidate is already well published. Like Bond, Griffith University (GU) is prepared to consider a collection of films to be equivalent to a number of refereed papers. Dr Ian Lang’s 2002 PhD (by Publication) thesis entitled Conditional Truths: Remapping Paths To Documentary ‘Independence’ contains not refereed, scholarly articles but the following videos: Wheels Across the Himalaya (1981); Yallambee, People of Hope (1986); This Is What I Call Living (1988); The Art of Place: Hanoi Brisbane Art Exchange (1995); and Millennium Shift: The Search for New World Art (1997). While this is a most impressive body of work, and is well unified by appropriate discussion within the thesis, the cynic who raised eyebrows at Petzke’s thesis might also be questioning this thesis: Dr Lang’s videos all preceded enrolment at GU and none have been refereed or acknowledged with major prizes. Certainly, the act of releasing a film for distribution has much in common with book publishing, but should these videos be considered to be on a par with academic papers published in, say, the prestigious and demanding journal Screen? While recognition at awards ceremonies might arguably correlate with peer review there is still the question as to how scholarly a film actually is. Of course, documentary films such as those in Lang’s thesis can be shown to be addressing gaps in the literature, as is the expectation of any research paper, but the onus remains on the author/film-maker to demonstrate this via a detailed contextual review and a well-written, erudite argument that unifies the works into a cohesive thesis. This Lang has done, to the extent that suspicious cynic might wonder why he chose not to present his work for a standard PhD award. Another issue unaddressed by most institutions is the possibility that the publications have been self-refereed or refereed by the candidate’s editorial colleagues in a case wherein the papers appear in a book the candidate has edited or co-edited. Dr Gillian Swanson’s 2004 GU thesis Towards a Cultural History of Private Life: Sexual Character, Consuming Practices and Cultural Knowledge, which addresses amongst many other cultural artefacts the film Lawrence of Arabia (David Lean 1962), has nine publications: five of which come from two books she co-edited, Nationalising Femininity: Culture, Sexuality and Cinema in Britain in World War Two, (Gledhill and Swanson 1996) and Deciphering Culture: Ordinary Curiosities and Subjective Narratives (Crisp et al 2000). While few would dispute the quality of Swanson’s work, the persistent cynic might wonder if these five papers really qualify as refereed publications. The tacit understanding of a refereed publication is that it is blind reviewed i.e. the contributor’s name is removed from the document. Such a system is used to prevent bias and favouritism but this level of anonymity might be absent when the contributor to a book is also one of the book’s editors. Of course, Dr Swanson probably took great care to distance herself from the refereeing process undertaken by her co-editors, but without an inbuilt check, allegations of cronyism from unfriendly cynics may well result. A related factor in making comparisons of different university’s PhDs by Published Papers is the requirements different universities have about the standard of the journal the paper is published in. It used to be a simple matter in Australia: the government’s Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) held a Register of Refereed Journals. If your benefactor in disseminating your work was on the list, your publications were of near-unquestionable quality. Not any more: DEST will no longer accept nominations for listing on the Register and will not undertake to rule on whether a particular journal article meets the HERDC [Higher Education Research Data Collection] requirements for inclusion in publication counts. HEPs [Higher Education Providers] have always had the discretion to determine if a publication produced in a journal meets the requirements for inclusion in the HERDC regardless of whether or not the journal was included on the Register of Refereed Journals. As stated in the HERDC specifications, the Register is not an exhaustive list of all journals which satisfy the peer-review requirements (DEST). The last listing for the DEST Register of Refereed Journals was the 3rd of February 2006, making way for a new tiered list of academic journals, which is currently under review in the Australian tertiary education sector (see discussion of this development in the Redden and Mitchell articles in this issue). In the interim, some university faculties created their own rankings of journals, but not the Faculty of Creative Industries at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) where I am studying for my PhD by Published Papers. Although QUT does not have a list of ranked journals for a candidate to submit papers to, it is otherwise quite strict in its requirements. The QUT University Regulations state, “Papers submitted as a PhD thesis must be closely related in terms of subject matter and form a cohesive research narrative” (QUT PhD regulation 14.1.2). Thus there is the requirement at QUT that apart from the usual introduction, methodology and literature review, an argument must be made as to how the papers present a sustained research project via “an overarching discussion of the main features linking the publications” (14.2.12). It is also therein stated that it should be an “account of research progress linking the research papers” (4.2.6). In other words, a unifying essay must make an argument for consideration of the sometimes diversely published papers as a cohesive body of work, undertaken in a deliberate journey of research. In my own case, an aural auteur analysis of sound in the films of Rolf de Heer, I argue that my published papers (eight in total) represent a journey from genre analysis (one paper) to standard auteur analysis (three papers) to an argument that sound should be considered in auteur analysis (one paper) to the major innovation of the thesis, aural auteur analysis (three papers). It should also be noted that unlike Bond, GU or SUT, the QUT regulations for the standard PhD still apply: a Confirmation Seminar, Final Seminar and a minimum two years of full-time enrolment (with a minimum of three months residency in Brisbane) are all compulsory. Such milestones and sine qua non ensure the candidate’s academic progress and intellectual development such that she or he is able to confidently engage in meaningful quodlibets regarding the thesis’s topic. Another interesting and significant feature of the QUT guidelines for this type of degree is the edict that papers submitted must be “published, accepted or submitted during the period of candidature” (14.1.1). Similarly, the University of Canberra (UC) states “The articles or other published material must be prepared during the period of candidature” (10). Likewise, Edith Cowan University (ECU) will confer its PhD by Publications to those candidates whose thesis consists of “only papers published in refereed scholarly media during the period of enrolment” (2). In other words, one cannot simply front up to ECU, QUT, or UC with a résumé of articles or films published over a lifetime of writing or film-making and ask for a PhD by Published Papers. Publications of the candidate prepared prior to commencement of candidature are simply not acceptable at these institutions and such PhDs by Published Papers from QUT, UC and ECU are entirely different to those offered by Bond, GU and SUT. Furthermore, without a requirement for a substantial period of enrolment and residency, recipients of PhDs by Published Papers from Bond, GU, or SUT are unlikely to have participated significantly in the research environment of their relevant faculty and peers. Such newly minted doctors may be as unfamiliar with the campus and its research activities as the recipient of an honorary doctorate usually is, as he or she poses for the media’s cameras en route to the glamorous awards ceremony. Much of my argument in this paper is built upon the assumption that the process of refereeing a paper (or for that matter, a film) guarantees a high level of academic rigour, but I confess that this premise is patently naïve, if not actually flawed. Refereeing can result in the rejection of new ideas that conflict with the established opinions of the referees. Interdisciplinary collaboration can be impeded and the lack of referee’s accountability is a potential problem, too. It can also be no less nail-biting a process than the examination of a finished thesis, given that some journals take over a year to complete the refereeing process, and some journal’s editorial committees have recognised this shortcoming. Despite being a mainstay of its editorial approach since 1869, the prestigious science journal, Nature, which only publishes about 7% of its submissions, has led the way with regard to varying the procedure of refereeing, implementing in 2006 a four-month trial period of ‘Open Peer Review’. Their website states, Authors could choose to have their submissions posted on a preprint server for open comments, in parallel with the conventional peer review process. Anyone in the field could then post comments, provided they were prepared to identify themselves. Once the usual confidential peer review process is complete, the public ‘open peer review’ process was closed and the editors made their decision about publication with the help of all reports and comments (Campbell). Unfortunately, the experiment was unpopular with both authors and online peer reviewers. What the Nature experiment does demonstrate, however, is that the traditional process of blind refereeing is not yet perfected and can possibly evolve into something less problematic in the future. Until then, refereeing continues to be the best system there is for applying structured academic scrutiny to submitted papers. With the reforms of the higher education sector, including forced mergers of universities and colleges of advanced education and the re-introduction of university fees (carried out under the aegis of John Dawkins, Minister for Employment, Education and Training from 1987 to 1991), and the subsequent rationing of monies according to research dividends (calculated according to numbers of research degree conferrals and publications), there has been a veritable explosion in the number of institutions offering PhDs in Australia. But the general public may not always be capable of differentiating between legitimately accredited programs and diploma mills, given that the requirements for the first differ substantially. From relatively easily obtainable PhDs by Published Papers at Bond, GU and SUT to more rigorous requirements at ECU, QUT and UC, there is undoubtedly a huge range in the demands of degrees that recognise a candidate’s published body of work. The cynical reader may assume that with this paper I am simply trying to shore up my own forthcoming graduation with a PhD by Published papers from potential criticisms that it is on par with a ‘purchased’ doctorate. Perhaps they are right, for this is a new degree in QUT’s Creative Industries faculty and has only been awarded to one other candidate (Dr Marcus Foth for his 2006 thesis entitled Towards a Design Methodology to Support Social Networks of Residents in Inner-City Apartment Buildings). But I believe QUT is setting a benchmark, along with ECU and UC, to which other universities should aspire. In conclusion, I believe further efforts should be undertaken to heighten the differences in status between PhDs by Published Papers generated during enrolment, PhDs by Published Papers generated before enrolment and honorary doctorates awarded for non-academic published work. Failure to do so courts cynical comparison of all PhD by Published Papers with unearnt doctorates bought from Internet shysters. References Brown, George. “Protecting Australia’s Higher Education System: A Proactive Versus Reactive Approach in Review (1999–2004).” Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004. Australian Universities Quality Agency, 2004. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.auqa.edu.au/auqf/2004/program/papers/Brown.pdf>. Campbell, Philip. “Nature Peer Review Trial and Debate.” Nature: International Weekly Journal of Science. December 2006. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/> Crisp, Jane, Kay Ferres, and Gillian Swanson, eds. Deciphering Culture: Ordinary Curiosities and Subjective Narratives. London: Routledge, 2000. Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). “Closed—Register of Refereed Journals.” Higher Education Research Data Collection, 2008. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/research_sector/online_forms_services/ higher_education_research_data_ collection.htm>. Edith Cowan University. “Policy Content.” Postgraduate Research: Thesis by Publication, 2003. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.ecu.edu.au/GPPS/policies_db/tmp/ac063.pdf>. Gledhill, Christine, and Gillian Swanson, eds. Nationalising Femininity: Culture, Sexuality and Cinema in Britain in World War Two. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1996. Griffith Law School, Griffith University. Handbook for Research Higher Degree Students. 24 March 2004. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.griffith.edu.au/centre/slrc/pdf/rhdhandbook.pdf>. Jeffries, Stuart. “I’m a celebrity, get me an honorary degree!” The Guardian 6 July 2006. 11 June 2008 ‹http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/comment/story/0,,1813525,00.html>. Kermit the Frog. “Kermit’s Commencement Address at Southampton Graduate Campus.” Long Island University News 19 May 1996. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.southampton.liu.edu/news/commence/1996/kermit.htm>. McNamara, Eileen. “Honorary senselessness.” The Boston Globe 7 May 2006. ‹http://www. boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/05/07/honorary_senselessness/>. O’Loughlin, Shaunnagh. “Doctor Cave.” Monash Magazine 21 (May 2008). 13 Aug. 2008 ‹http://www.monash.edu.au/pubs/monmag/issue21-2008/alumni/cave.html>. Queensland University of Technology. “Presentation of PhD Theses by Published Papers.” Queensland University of Technology Doctor of Philosophy Regulations (IF49). 12 Oct. 2007. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/Appendix/appendix09.jsp#14%20Presentation %20of%20PhD%20Theses>. Swinburne University of Technology. Research Higher Degrees and Policies. 14 Nov. 2007. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.swinburne.edu.au/corporate/registrar/ppd/docs/RHDpolicy& procedure.pdf>. University of Canberra. Higher Degrees by Research: Policy and Procedures (The Gold Book). 7.3.3.27 (a). 15 Nov. 2004. 11 June 2008 ‹http://www.canberra.edu.au/research/attachments/ goldbook/Pt207_AB20approved3220arp07.pdf>.

06–652Angelova, Maria (Cleveland State U, USA), Delmi Gunawardena & Dinah Volk, Peer teaching and learning: co-constructing language in a dual language first grade. Language and Education (Mutilingual Matters) 20.2 (2006), 173–190.06–653Asada, Hirofumi (Fukuoka Jogakuin U, Japan), Longitudinal effects of informal language in formal L2 instruction. JALT Journal (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 28.1 (2006), 39–56.06–654Birdsong, David (U Texas, USA), Nativelikeness and non-nativelikeness in L2A research. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (Walter de Gruyter) 43.4 (2005), 319–328.06–655Bruen, Jennifer (Dublin City U, Ireland), Educating Europeans? Language planning and policy in higher education institutions in Ireland. Language and International Communication (Multilingual Matters) 5.3&4 (2005), 237–248.06–656Carpenter, Helen (Georgetown U, USA; carpenth@georgetown.edu), K. Seon Jeon, David MacGregor & Alison Mackey, Learners' interpretations of recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.2 (2006), 209–236.06–657Chujo, Kiyomi (Nihon U, Japan; chujo@cit.nihon-u.ac.jp) & Masao Utiyama, Selecting level-specific specialized vocabulary using statistical measures. System (Elsevier) 34.2 (2006), 255–269.06–658Coffey, Stephen (Università di Pisa, Italy; coffey@cli.unipi.it), High-frequency grammatical lexis in advanced-level English learners' dictionaries: From language description to pedagogical usefulness. International Journal of Lexicography (Oxford University Press) 19.2 (2006), 157–173.06–659Comajoan, Llorenç (Middlebury College, USA; lcomajoa@middlebury.edu), The aspect hypothesis: Development of morphology and appropriateness of use. Language Learning (Blackwell) 56.2 (2006), 201–268.06–660Cowie, Neil (Okayama U, Japan), What do sports, learning Japanese, and teaching English have in common? Social-cultural learning theories, that's what. JALT Journal (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 28.1 (2006), 23–37.06–661Cumbreno Espada, Ana Belen, Mercedes Rico Garcia, alejandro curado fuentes & eva ma dominguez Gomez (U Extremadura, Mérida, Spain; belencum@unex.es), Developing adaptive systems at early stages of children's foreign language development. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 18.1 (2006), 45–62.06–662Derwing, Tracey, Ron Thomson (U Alberta, Canada; tracey.derwing@ualberta.ca) & Murray Munro, English pronunciation and fluency development in Mandarin and Slavic speakers. System (Elsevier) 34.2 (2006), 183–193.06–663Djité, Paulin G. (U Western Sydney, Australia), Shifts in linguistic identities in a global world. Language Problems & Language Planning (John Benjamins) 30.1 (2006), 1–20.06–664Ellis, Nick (U Michigan, USA), Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Liguistics (Oxford University Press) 27.1 (2006), 1–24.06–665Ellis, Rod (U Auckland, New Zealand; r.ellis@auckland.ac.nz), Shawn Loewen & Rosemary Erlam, Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.2 (2006), 339–368.06–666Ghabanchi, Zargham (Sabzevar Teacher Training U, Iran; zghabanchi@sttu.ac.ir), Marjan Vosooghi, The role of explicit contrastive instruction in learning difficult L2 grammatical forms: A cross-linguistic approach to language awareness. The Reading Matrix (Readingmatrix.com) 6.1 (2006), 121–130.06–667Gillies, Robyn M. & Michael Boyle (U Queensland, Australia), Teachers' scaffolding behaviours during cooperative learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education (Routledge/Taylor & Francis) 33.3 (2005), 243–259.06–668Graham, Suzanne (U Reading, UK; s.j.graham@reading.ac.uk), Listening comprehension: The learners' perspective. System (Elsevier) 34.2 (2006), 165–182.06–669Holmes, Prue (U Waikato, New Zealand), Problematising intercultural communication competence in the pluricultural classroom: Chinese students in a New Zealand university. Language and International Communication (Multilingual Matters) 6.1 (2006), 18–34.06–670Hemard, Dominique (London Metropolitan U; d.hemard@londonmet.ac.uk), Evaluating hypermedia structures as a means of improving language learning strategies and motivation. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 18.1, (2006), 24–44.06–671Howard, Martin (U College, Ireland; mhoward@french.ucc.ie), The expression of number and person through verb morphology in advanced French interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (Walter de Gruyter) 44.1 (2006), 1–22.06–672Howard, Martin (U College, Cork, Ireland; mhoward@french.ucc.ie), Isabelle Lemée & Vera Regan, The L2 acquisition of a phonological variable: The case of /l/ deletion in French. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 16.1 (2006), 1–24.06–673Jin, Lixian (De Montfort U, UK) & Martin Cortazzi, Changing practices in Chinese cultures of learning. Language, Culture and Curriculum (Multilingual Matters) 19.1 (2006), 5–20.06–674Laufer, Batia (U Haifa, Israel; batialau@research.haifa.ac.il) & Tamar Levitzky-Aviad, Examining the effectiveness of ‘bilingual dictionary plus’ – a dictionary for production in a foreign language. International Journal of Lexicography (Oxford University Press) 19.2 (2006), 135–155.06–675Long, Mike (U Maryland, USA), Problems with supposed counter-evidence to the Critical Period Hypothesis. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (Walter de Gruyter) 43.4 (2005), 287–317.06–676McDonough, Kim (Northern Arizona U, USA; kim.mcdonough@nau.edu), Interaction and syntactic priming: English L2 speakers' production of dative constructions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.2 (2006), 179–207.06–677Mohan, Bernard (U British Columbia, Canada; bernard.mohan@ubc.ca) & Tammy Slater, A functional perspective on the critical ‘theory/practice’ relation in teaching language and science. Linguistics and Education (Elsevier) 16.2 (2005), 151–172.06–678Mori, Setsuko (Kyoto Sangyo U, Japan; setsukomori@mac.com) & Peter Gobel, Motivation and gender in the Japanese EFL classroom. System (Elsevier) 34.2 (2006), 194–210.06–679Oh, Janet (California State U, USA) & Terry Kit-Fong Au, Learning Spanish as a heritage language: The role of sociocultural background variables. Language, Culture and Curriculum (Multilingual Matters) 18.3 (2005), 229–241.06–680Pica, Teresa (U Pennsylvania, USA; teresap@gse.upenn.edu), Hyun-Sook Kang & Shannon Sauro, Information gap tasks: Their multiple roles and contributions to interaction research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.2 (2006), 301–338.06–681Pietiläinen, Jukka (U Tampere, Finland), Current trends in literary production in Esperanto. Language Problems & Language Planning (John Benjamins) 29.3 (2005), 271–285.06–682Polio, Charlene (Michigan State U, USA; polio@msu.edu), Susan Gass & Laura Chapin, Using stimulated recall to investigate native speaker perceptions in native-nonnative speaker interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.2 (2006), 237–267.06–683Pujol, Dídac (Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain; didac.pujol@upf.edu), Montse Corrius & Joan Masnou, Print deferred bilingualised dictionaries and their implications for effective language learning: A new approach to pedagogical lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography (Oxford University Press) 19.2 (2006), 197–215.06–684Radford, Julie (U London, UK), Judy Ireson & Merle Mahon, Triadic dialogue in oral communication tasks: What are the implications for language learning?Language and Education (Mutilingual Matters) 20.2 (2006), 191–210.06–685Sagarra, Nuria (Pennsylvania State U, USA; sagarra@psu.edu) & Matthew Alba, The key is in the keyword: L2 vocabulary learning methods with beginning learners of Spanish. The Modern Language Journal (Blackwell) 90.2 (2006) 228–243.06–686Schauer, Gila A. (Lancaster U, UK; g.schauer@lancaster.ac.uk), Pragmatic awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development. Language Learning (Blackwell) 56.2 (2006), 269–318.06–687Sharpe, Tina (Sharpe Consulting, Australia), ‘Unpacking’ scaffolding: Identifying discourse and multimodal strategies that support learning. Language and Education (Mutilingual Matters) 20.2 (2006), 211–231.06–688Shi, Lijing (The Open U, UK), The successors to Confucianism or a new generation? A questionnaire study on Chinese students' culture of learning English. Language, Culture and Curriculum (Multilingual Matters) 19.1 (2006), 122–147.06–689Singleton, David (U Dublin, Ireland), The Critical Period Hypothesis: A coat of many colours. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (Walter de Gruyter) 43.4 (2005), 269–285.06–690Stowe, Laurie A. (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen) & Laura Sabourin, Imaging the processing of a second language: Effects of maturation and proficiency on the neural processes involved. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (Walter de Gruyter) 43.4 (2005), 329–353.06–691Tatar, Sibel (Boğaziçi U, Turkey), Why keep silent? The Classroom participation experiences of non-native-English-speaking students. Language and International Communication (Multilingual Matters) 5.3&4 (2005), 284–293.06–692Toth, Paul D. (U Wisconsin-Madison, USA; ptoth@wisc.edu), Processing instruction and a role for output in second language acquisition. Language Learning (Blackwell) 56.2 (2006), 319–385.06–693Tseng, Wen-Ta, Zoltán Dörnyei & Norbert Schmitt (U Nottingham, UK), A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Liguistics (Oxford University Press) 27.1 (2006), 78–102.06–694Tsuda, Sanae (Tokai Gakuen U, Japan), Japan's experience of language contact: A case study of RADIO-i, a multilingual radio station in Nagoya. Language and International Communication (Multilingual Matters) 5.3&4 (2005), 248–263.06–695Usó-Juan, Esther (U Jaume I, Castelló, Spain; euso@ang.uji.es), The compensatory nature of discipline-related knowledge and English-language proficiency in reading English for academic purposes. The Modern Language Journal (Blackwell) 90.2 (2006) 210–227.06–696Van Boxtel, Sonja, Theo Bongaerts & Peter-Arno Coppen, Native-like attainment of dummy subjects in Dutch and the role of the L1. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (Walter de Gruyter) 43.4 (2005), 355–380.06–697Vetter, Anna & Thierry Channier (U de Franche-Comte, France; anna.vetter@univ-fcomte.fr), Supporting oral production for professional purposes in synchronous communication with heterogenous learners. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 18.1, (2006), 5–23.06–698Vickers, Caroline & Ene, Estela (California State U, USA; cvickers@csusb.edu), Grammatical accuracy and learner autonomy in advanced writing. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 60.2 (2006), 109–116.06–699Vine, Elaine W. (Victoria U Wellington, New Zealand), ‘Hospital’: A five-year-old Samoan boy's access to learning curriculum content in his New Zealand classroom. Language and Education (Mutilingual Matters) 20.2 (2006), 232–254.06–700Wang, Yuping (Griffith U, Queensland, Australia. y.wang@griffith.edu.au), Negotiation of meaning in desktop videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. ReCALL (Cambridge University Press) 18.1 (2006), 122–145.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-15T19:46:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luciana Teixeira Gomes.pdf: 2757741 bytes, checksum: 16c23d6fe64c800c3e69db2e17c6ef33 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-08-21<br>This study discuss about how the work Griffin & Sabine Trilogy contempletes the gender and the tradicional epistolar romance. The paper will consider some aspects and conceptions about the gender and the epistolar narrative consolidated ond the Nick Bantock s Triology. The resources used by the author are detached to considerer a new and instigated epistolar romance that could sustain the tension existed between the two speechs: literature and plastics arts One becomes, therefore, essential not only the analysis of the relations of the literal and pictorial contents of the postcards and letters of the trilogy (delimited in 2º volume of the trilogy, intitled Sabine´s Notebook: In Which The Extraordinary Correspondence of Griffin & Sabine Continues),but also the study of the double one as a possibility of reading of the trilogy.<br>O presente trabalho discute em que medida a obra Griffin & Sabine Trilogy contempla o gênero e o romance epistolar tradicional. Para isso, aborda alguns conceitos e características do gênero e da narrativa epistolar incorporados na trilogia de Nick Bantock. Destaca os recursos utilizados pelo autor para conceber um romance epistolar instigante e inovador que mantêm em tensão dois diferentes discursos: literatura e artes plásticas. Portanto, torna-se, imprescindível não somente a análise das relações dos conteúdos textuais e pictóricos dos postais e cartas da trilogia (delimitada no 2º volume da trilogia, intitulado Sabine´s Notebook: In Which The Extraordinary Correspondence of Griffin & Sabine Continues), mas também o estudo do duplo como uma possibilidade de leitura da trilogia.

The thesis assesses the 'modernisation' of the British National Party (BNP) primarily between October 1999 and May 2003 under the leadership of Nick Griffin. During the 1980s and 1990s while Extreme Right Parties (ERPs) in many Western European countries achieved notable electoral support, British ERPs were languishing on the fringes of British politics. In October 1999, the BNP (the largest of the groups on the British Extreme Right) underwent a change of leadership which has had a quite dramatic impact on the party, as new leader Nick Griffin has sought to make the BNP 'modem' and 'electable'. Between 2001 and 2003 the BNP experienced a dramatic upturn in electoral fortunes, and by May 2003 could boast 16 local councillors. Existing literature tends to stress voter demand when explaining support for ERPs; such an approach ignores the nature of the party itself. In contrast, this thesis adopts a supply-side perspective, noting the significance of party leadership and discourse in accounting for the varied electoral performance of British ERPs. The thesis does not seek to analyse the increase in support for the BNP between 2001 and 2003, but rather, seeks to identify and examine a major reason why the party has been more successful during this period; namely the party's 'modernisation' under the leadership of Nick Griffin. The thesis notes that Griffin's leadership has been crucial in facilitating vital changes to the BNP's overt discourse. These have enabled the party to portray itself as a relevant political force and the defender of the British "silent majority", and have made the 'modernised' party far more able than the 'old' BNP to exploit any political opportunities presented to them. The thesis concludes that the modernisation process has been significant; however, doubts remain as to the veracity of the party's new, 'moderate' position.

This thesis examines through the means of a comparative perspective, factors which have allowed the British National Party to enjoy recent electoral success at the local level under the leadership of party chairman Nick Griffin. Such electoral successes have arisen despite the seemingly relative obscurity of the party at the turn of the century. A number of different aspects are examined in order to achieve this aim. The history of the far right in the UK is examined to establish whether the BNP have changed their stance in comparison to previous far right movements. The BNP are also investigated comparatively with other West European parties who have enjoyed national success, as a means of discovering whether the party are similar to their far right neighbours and why they have not enjoyed similar national success. The press coverage of the BNP is examined at a local and national level, using content analysis and the LexisNexis database. The thesis looks at the role played by the BNP in local elections and the decline of participation in political activity, to establish if there is a link between these two factors. Finally a case study is taken of Calderdale in West Yorkshire, to establish directly if any of the above factors can be directly applied to BNP electoral success in this district. The research discovers that there are opportunities for the BNP to establish a connection with the electorate in local politics which are not necessarily available at times of general election.

This thesis examines through the means of a comparative perspective, factors which have allowed the British National Party to enjoy recent electoral success at the local level under the leadership of party chairman Nick Griffin. Such electoral successes have arisen despite the seemingly relative obscurity of the party at the turn of the century. A number of different aspects are examined in order to achieve this aim. The history of the far right in the UK is examined to establish whether the BNP have changed their stance in comparison to previous far right movements. The BNP are also investigated comparatively with other West European parties who have enjoyed national success, as a means of discovering whether the party are similar to their far right neighbours and why they have not enjoyed similar national success. The press coverage of the BNP is examined at a local and national level, using content analysis and the LexisNexis database. The thesis looks at the role played by the BNP in local elections and the decline of participation in political activity, to establish if there is a link between these two factors. Finally a case study is taken of Calderdale in West Yorkshire, to establish directly if any of the above factors can be directly applied to BNP electoral success in this district. The research discovers that there are opportunities for the BNP to establish a connection with the electorate in local politics which are not necessarily available at times of general election.

Australia is home to an incredible diversity of native animals. While Australian animals are among the most unique in the world, they are also among the most endangered, with hundreds currently on the brink of extinction. We must act quickly if we are to save these species, as once gone, they are gone forever.&#x0D; &#x0D; Extinct is a collection of artworks from established and emerging Australian fine artists, each depicting an Australian animal that has already, for various reasons, tumbled over the edge into extinction. Extinct laments their loss, but also celebrates their former existence, diversity and significance. The stunning artworks are accompanied by stories of each animal, highlighting the importance of what we have lost, so that we appreciate what we have not lost yet.&#x0D; &#x0D; Extinct features artworks from Sue Anderson, Brook Garru Andrew, Andrew Baines, Elizabeth Banfield, Sally Bourke, Jacob Boylan, Nadine Christensen, Simon Collins, Lottie Consalvo, Henry Curchod, Sarah Faulkner, Dianne Fogwell, David Frazer, Martin George, Bruce Goold, Eliza Gosse, Simone Griffin, Johanna Hildebrandt, Miles Howard-Wilks, Nick Howson, Brendan Huntley, Ben Jones, Alex Latham, Rosemary Lee, Amanda Marburg, Chris Mason, Terry Matassoni, Rick Matear, Eden Menta, Reg Mombassa, Tom O'Hern, Bernard Ollis, Emma Phillips, Nick Pont, Geoffrey Ricardo, Sally Robinson, Anthony Romagnano, Gwen Scott, Marina Strocchi, Jenny Watson and Allie Webb.&#x0D; &#x0D;

This chapter details events following Gaspar Ortega's loss to Emile Griffith. Dismantling the Indian placed Griffith firmly in the uppermost reaches of boxing royalty. He made fifty thousand dollars from the match and was named “boxer of the month” by the National Boxing Association. For Gaspar, the title battle with Griffith was not just a loss. He had let down his family, his country. Nick Corby called Gaspar on the phone one day while he was recovering from the Griffith fight. The loss had been physically ruinous and emotionally devastating. Now Corby proposed a new game plan: a tour. They would travel throughout Mexamerica, picking up every single fight they could find. Short on options and with nothing else to fall back on, Gaspar agreed.

The success of Ballad for Americans allowed Latouche to move into nice quarters in Greenwich Village and marry Theodora Griffis. During this period, that is, the early 1940s, his new friends included Carson McCullers and Leo Lerman. He also continued to befriend notable émigrés, including Brion Gysin, Jimmy Ernst, Yul Brynner, Marlene Dietrich, Eleonora and Francesco von Mendelssohn, Anaïs Nin, and Ruth Yorck. Meanwhile, his interest in the occult was reflected in his friendships with medium Eileen Garrett, palmist Margaret Mamlok, sand astrologers Charles Jayne and Natacha Rambova. He and many of his friends took stimulants under the supervision of Dr. Max Jacobson, with whom Latouche collaborated on some projects, and who became known as the notorious Dr. Feelgood.

This chapter assesses the attempts of the British National Party, now the major extreme Right formation to impact on the Ulster problem in the 1990s, a decade which would see the Provisional IRA and loyalist paramilitary ceasefires and the difficult and torturous process that would produce the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement of 1998, an agreement that effectively ended the Troubles. For the BNP, however, the decade would be one of evolution as John Tyndall’s control of was gradually broken by Nick Griffin. Influenced by the electoral success of Jean Marine Le Pen’s Front National in France, Griffin would begin the process of party modernisation that would see the BNP gain 60 local council seats a two seat in the European Parliament in the first decade of this century. As the BNP’s British fortunes brightened Ulster as an issue gradually disappeared from its literature. British progress sweetened the pill of failure in Northern Ireland as the previous unfruitful experience of the extreme Right in Northern Ireland was repeated; with even the White Nationalist Party failing to make a major impact even as Northern Ireland developed a serious racist problem.

This chapter assesses the state of the National Front as it sought to contribute to the loyalist/Unionist struggle against the imposition of the Anglo-Irish Agreement (AIA), an agreement reached between the British and Irish Governments, and which infuriated the loyalist and Unionist community as the Irish Government was given an advisory role in the governance of Northern Ireland, and worrying because it was uncertain whether and when such ‘influence’ would be instrumental or marginal. Opposition involved cooperation with loyalist paramilitaries but proved worrying when loyalist paramilitaries resorted to sectarian violence. For the NF, however, its already limited scope for action in Northern Ireland was reduced further by an internal split provoked by a new leadership cadre headed by Nick Griffin, which sought to turn the organisation into a revolutionary movement proposing the creation of an independent Ulster, and opposed by a ‘Flag’ faction which sought co-operation with Unionist and loyalist leaders. As Unionist opposition to the AIA failed and Government rejected its position that it would refuse to negotiate until the agreement was abandoned. By 1990 Unionist leaders had agreed to talks with the Government at the same time as divisions within the NF led to its collapse.