Peter Skinner writes: The Bureau of Meteorology is a enterprise title made up of a French and a Greek phrase with 20 letters — together with an extra of vowels organised in sequences that may check 50% of Australian spellers, have been it not for spellcheck. Most different establishments on this state of affairs would spend $220,000 to rebrand with a particular three-letter acronym, particularly one with a particular mixture of higher and decrease case letters, and simply vocalised.
WJ Forgan-Smith writes: Clearly, Charlie Lewis, you might have by no means labored in an enormous organisation. Branding is simply sooo essential. Spending simply in need of $70,000 for “communication and implementation planning help” appears a cut price. Then once more, I collect the chap who didn’t assume to register the suitable Twitter deal with now has a job at “the Bureau”.
I admire the restyled Bureau has an growing variety of opponents, however when all is claimed and completed some model names transcend time, whereas the CEO who agreed the change is not going to. One additionally assumes there’s a group inside the company workplace’s “enterprise companies group” that’s overstaffed and on the lookout for some position to justify much more.
Michael Thorpe writes: I’d have thought a serious focus can be model recognition and belief, and the BoM has that in spades. Why did the decision-makers on the BoM select this specific promoting firm? Have been different pitches even thought of?
Get Crikey FREE to your inbox each weekday morning with the Crikey Worm.
Ron Aanensen writes: I’m dissatisfied that “the Bureau” didn’t settle for my tender. For a mere $50,000 and a most 12-week timeframe I might have provided “of Meteorology” as its new title. “The Bureau” sounds an excessive amount of like a French TV present or the nickname of the FBI for it to work in Australia. However just like the Nice Sandy Desert, Pebble Seaside and the Snowy Mountains, “of Meteorology” matches proper in.
Martin Butterfield writes: Fairly certain that both this was a prank or a number of the high-priced assist (beforehand often known as the fits in carpet metropolis) within the Bureau felt that “the BoM website” sounded too like “the bombsite”. The latter is extra of a fear than the previous.
Collen O’Brien writes: My weather-watching associates handily consult with the BoM as “the BoM website”. This model change jogs my memory of an article I learn in regards to the high brass at McDonald’s within the US being angered and horrified to find that in Australia not solely was their beloved model known as “Macca’s”, however native executives thought nothing of it. In fact, the time period “Macca’s” now signifies cultural acceptance, as does “BoM website”, and all with out spending a single greenback.
Ghillian Sullivan writes: It’s the BoM. It all the time was the BoM, and it all the time would be the BoM. Australians are inordinately keen on the time period. When Aussies say “verify it on the BoM” (and we do that very often), everybody smiles. “The Bureau” may very well be any bureau for something anyplace. The BoM ought to be asking for its a refund. I’m nonetheless calling it the BoM.
Craig Hayes writes: This appears to have taken place below the earlier authorities. It will need to have been exhausting for the LNP authorities to proceed to downplay the results of local weather change when individuals stored hitting them over the pinnacle with the Bureau of Meteorology’s personal analysis, so what higher option to
diminish its standing than have it relinquish the nomenclature so properly related to credibility and objectivity?
I can’t see some other motive for the title change aside from a ham-fisted try to demote “the Bureau” and, by proxy, give company to conspiracy theorists who would additionally like to listen to much less about our growing common temperatures over the previous 30 years. I suppose it might have turned out worse for “the Bureau”. C Phrase Communications might have come again with the Division Endeavor Meteorological Enterprise.
Martin Munz writes: Australia’s latest announcement that it’s reversing the Morrison authorities’s choice to recognise West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is to be welcomed. Morrison’s cynical and political act presumed the nationalism of some Jewish voters in Wentworth would possibly put the misplaced pursuits of Israel earlier than all others. That calculation was incorrect.
The standing of West Jerusalem is a matter within the ongoing tragedy of Palestinian dispossession that reveals no signal of decision, save by Israeli drive of arms. Australia shouldn’t be within the small group of countries that diplomatically help Israeli unilateralism by giving credence to its unlawful declare to West Jerusalem as its capital, however the attribute vehemence of the Israel-Australian foyer that has captured the Jewish institution. Australia’s announcement rectifies a shameful piece of political opportunism and reverts our place to one in every of stability shared by the worldwide neighborhood. It’s a principled choice that ought to be welcomed by all.
Gary Gibbon writes: Undoubtedly one of many nice company mysteries in Australian historical past is how Alan Joyce has managed to maintain his extraordinarily well-paid job when his 14-year watch has presided over the worldwide trashing of the model, the deplorable remedy and wholesale sacking of workers and the tanking of buyer companies. I’m merely astounded and may solely sadly conclude his shareholders are involved solely with inflated backside strains.
David Simpson writes: Qantas mustn’t must repay its JobKeeper help. The Morrison authorities, as an alternative of handing out unconditional sums, ought to have demanded fairness in Qantas (for the taxpayers) on the share worth equal on the time. The taxpayers (i.e. us) might now be promoting our shares again into the market and recouping our funds — with a revenue. Or possibly taxpayers might acquire a seat on the board and attempt to cease Alan Joyce behaving like a prick. A authorities not affected by company seize can be an enchancment — however I believe we received’t see one within the close to future, a nationwide anti-corruption fee however.
Ken Thomson writes: I imagine all Qantas’ JobKeeper cash ought to be repaid and all of the bonuses/shares paid/given ought to be reclaimed and used to compensate travellers and practice new workers or compensate illegally sacked employees.
PETA says sure, ‘stunts’ do work
Mimi Bekhechi (campaigns strategist) writes: Your points administration skilled appears unsure whether or not protests work, and quotes PETA’s latest demonstration in Sydney by which a chef appeared to barbecue a (faux) canine.
Why will we do this stuff? We do them as a result of they work. Not like the enormous firms that make billions confining, mutilating and slaughtering animals for revenue, organisations like ours wouldn’t have monumental advertising budgets that can be utilized to steer folks that these obscene enterprise practices are by some means unremarkable and morally acceptable. We get our message throughout, and really efficiently, by utilizing eye-catching performances that seize headlines, shock, provoke debate and wake individuals as much as the cruelty they’re supporting, often unwittingly.
These protests could upset, shock and even anger some, however they could begin to realise they’ve been lied to. And from consciousness comes motion, as now we have seen within the big progress in help for veganism and animal rights.
The psychopathic tendencies of CEOs
Dr Terry Sullivan writes: A research some years in the past in England discovered that about 25% of CEOs have been psychopaths. Attention-grabbing. I ponder what the proportion is in Australia? Do CEOs, boards, and many others get classes in tradition, battle of curiosity or ethics, or is the sharemarket the one factor that counts? These are questions that ought to be investigated in depth. It appears to me we learnt nothing from the royal fee into the banks. Cash appears to override all concerns of tradition, battle of curiosity and ethics.
When you’re feeling happy, aggravated or impressed, write to letters@crikey.com.au. Please embody your full title to be thought of for publication. We reserve the best to edit for size and readability.
