It seems Kohler already bought a Tablet (like an HP or something, whatever “the iPad looks like just another tablet computer”) and hated it… and having filled his home with iMacs and Macbooks, he really hoped for something extra special. But the iPad, from what he has seen, fails to live up to his high-technicolour dreams.

Worse still, Kohler is pretty sure that the iPad is not going to save newspapers. I know that’s what we all hoped for, in fact, for as long as I can remember Steve Jobs has always said that more than anything else, he wanted to ensure the ongoing stability and prosperity of global media enterprises.

So the ‘Tablet’ (which he insists on continuing to call it post-keynote) must indeed be a bitter pill for Alan Kohler to swallow. But if this article with it’s infantile, “I hate the way the world is heading, where’s my mummy?” tone makes you want to stab something… lock up your kitchen ware because that other giant of Australian business journalism, Michael Pascoe wrote an absolute doosey last week.

Pascoe thinks Apple is “an IT gadget company” with the temerity to (I know, this is incredible) over charge innocent Aussie consumers.

As far as reality denial goes, this is an extra special article. I’m sure you have heard of Melody Gardot? I hadn’t but I live in the suburban equivalent of an iron lung so to me any cultural reference point is like mainlining speed. Anyway, Ms Gardot has a massive is on the cusp of a massive singing career which is being totally hampered by Apple iTunes Australia’s barbaric pricing structure. I know, it’s shocking. Read it and embrace the rage.

But seriously, this would be valid were it not for the teensy-wincey fact that Australian’s are used to being rogered by music publishers, book publishers and all sorts of other protected entities. The other fact that our elder statesmen of Australian journalism can dabble a bit in the world of tech-journo and appear so out of touch, makes me disappointed that the death of media isn’t all that deadly.

This is all very well coming from the public broadcaster with $800 mil coming in from Treasury. I have no problem with the ABC fulfilling its charter. What bugs me is the ABC running around doing things (with public money) where there is no imperative to do it.

I hate to say it but as Kim Williams repeated in Crikey;  “… in the digital age we need to be careful to ensure that public broadcasters like the ABC don’t merely replicate what the private sector is now doing or inadvertently crowd out market-driven creativity and innovation.”

And what is this replication that shits me? The inane, pop-culture of the malnourished, sub-70 IQ celebrity kind. Essentially why is the ABC wasting time and resources on infantile dross like this: http://blogs.abc.net.au/articulate/.

Or (and this is far worse) this: http://blogs.abc.net.au/theshallowend/.

I read the ABC Charter all the time and still can’t locate the section where it says it is required to fill the gap not taken up by commercial interests to inform and report every hot celebs current crisis or full colour documentation of the current fashion disaster unfolding at some drug-infested awards night or event opening.

Surely the funds being sent in the direction of the Vacuous Celebrities Awareness Department of the ABC would be far better administered by employing a few more journalists or funding some of the core services that are the reason for the ABCs existence?

In more recent times and with the advent of the twitter machine, this misconception has only grown. Many observing the twitter hashtag on a Thursday evening (AEST) see #qanda become a “trending topic” and start to get giddy, thinking “Our ABC has really made it on the world stage now”. Unfortunately this popularity spike occurs all too frequently and I hate to spoil things but it’s actually our communist Asian neighbours mistyping their lovable bamboo eating mascot.

As you may not know, ABC star employee contracts frequently stipulate that as soon as the first Christmas decorations appear in shops, programs must begin to wind up or cease to broadcast for the year. Not much happens in November and almost nothing in December, so the view is that little should keep the ABC luminaries away from Paris in winter or the sanctity of Pearl Beach. In keeping with this, Q&A has already packed up for the year and it is a good time to reflect on what could have been.

The worst part of Q&A is how unbearably predictable it all is. Watching the self-righteousness of David Marr with that smug grin and all knowing whine or Sophie Mirabella. Well, two words are enough to describe her.

In fact the only participant that I honestly enjoyed watching was Janet Albrechtsen. Seriously. She knows what she thinks and she just says it. No façade, no sensitivity or groupthink (if you can excuse the irony there). Sure, the underlying sado-masochistic, power suit/corporate lawyer look is pretty stale but as a form of political entertainment, I think she is a star.

I rarely read her column in the Oz because it is predictable and equivalent to unpacking seventeen gaffa taped boxes to find little inside, but on TV she is great. She is so great that I think she should have her own ABC program. Before the wowsers start wailing about ABC Board members being ‘impartial’ – what about Quentin Dempster, he somehow manages to walk the impartial tight rope? I’m sure Janet can too.  Instead of the conservatives constantly complaining about Left wing bias or the lack of conservatives on the ABC, why shouldn’t Janet have the chance to have a chat with those forgotten people ignored by our Leftist media!

The other thing that has become apparent is the complete lack of engaging female conservatives. Besides Ms Mirabella, Helen Coonan, Julie Bishop or Bettina ‘Blackshirt’ Arndt, there isn’t a lot of media talent. Poor old Miranda Devine belts out columns but she hasn’t got it for TV. Mind you, she’d be great to play Scrabble with, “Hey MD, can I borrow an UM?”

As an interim measure, I suggest Mark Scott punts Tony Jones into a new show where he can truly blossom, reading his own poetry. I think Q&A in 2010, hosted by Janet Albrechtsen would be compulsory television.

So this year I won’t speak about my disappointment that PETA doesn’t protest the Spring Racing Carnival; that fixed horse racing continues unchecked or that Your ABC is totally flogging the race for all it’s worth.

Instead, I’m going to make an observation about what happens on the other side of the track. And that is, the giddy feeling our nation gets all worked up about on race day.

Having watched people get dressed up, wearing ill-fitting suits and unspeakable hats. Having observed people passed out or projectile vomiting in the mid-afternoon sun. Having heard on countless occasions people bemoan their sudden loss of dough, I’ve realized that the Melbourne Cup experience is nothing but a school formal for grownups.

It first becomes obvious on the Tuesday morning. The crowds self-consciously adjusting their clothing, like an astronaut trying on their space suit for the first time.  You look like a clown and no amount of floral appendage or hair product is going to change that.

Then there’s the charity element. The over the top production with soulless event coordinators and PR flacks, spruiking their token charity…doing something for a ‘good cause’ when the reality is, we’ll direct millions of dollars to the TAB.

And worst of all is the elitism of this whole façade. The ‘sport of kings’ includes a bird cage, the Emirates tent and the Flemington car park. This is not dissimilar to the forgettable school formals of our youth, the cool kids in one section and the riff-raff elsewhere.

So when you head off to your Melbourne Cup social function with some B-grade celebrity host or spend money you don’t have on something fruitless and unsatisfying; just reflect for a moment on the fact that the Melbourne Cup is a regression. That it is neither remarkable nor rewarding. It’s time Australia grew up and finally left school. And if you need another reason to undestand why the race at 3pm should be unwatchable, check out the short informative video on the site here.

And if that’s still not enough, we all agree that as a nation we have to prevent this.

The crux of Rundle’s ire is that the problem with our cities is not the need for fast rail but rather the need for new cities and towns, about 20-odd.  According to Rundle, the much anticipated population bomb will make our current cities unliveable and require a significant branching out, with brand new populaces.

There’s always a rich, sweeping melodrama to Rundle’s writing. And he’s not afraid to tip his hat with passing references to anything which can populate his tomes with colour and add some ballast. But frankly, there are two things that spleen me about his latest.

One is the suggestion that we don’t actually need fast rail but must instead create these new cities with links just 30 minutes from where you would rather be, by (you guessed it) fast rail.

Secondly, these new cities and towns should not only be eco-friendly (whatever that entails) and designed by the best architects around but also not elitist. Unfortunately you really can’t have the name Gehry and the words ‘not elitist’ in the same paragraph. And by not elitist, Rundle means “low-income creative types, from painters to punk bands, can live there and transform them as they go.” Really, I think transition towns will be over-run before government starts planning Punktown. Why not just be elitist and say, “Not poor and uninteresting people”?

I sort of feel sorry for Rundle. His coverage of the Obama campaign was enriching and you couldn’t help enjoying his relish, knowing that this was going to be the most interesting thing that ever happened in his life. Staying up to critique Albo on Lateline — whether he looks like Doc Evatt or not — must feel crushing in comparison.

It’s not really worth getting so worked up about. Albo clearly doesn’t have much interest in trains, ports and roads. He’s much more worried about Carmel and the forthcoming bloodbath in NSW. But Rundle can do much better than this. This was like reading Catherine Deveny with a cock and an idea.