| A number of readers also took the opportunity to provide some additional comments.
Most were complimentary …
“Hearsay is an excellent publication providing just the right quantity and type of information. The links are great for further reading if necessary. Thank you”
“Overall, I think Hearsay is excellent, and well balanced. Well done. “
“I was initially sceptical of Hearsay but I now look forward to receiving my copy. The format was initially unusual, but now I am used to it, I like it. There was a survey question re “what do you NEVER read” didn’t allow for a non-selection answer = there is not a piece of Hearsay that I NEVER read.”
“Excellent journal – electronic version is extremely useful.”
“I enjoy Hearsay. The distribution by e-mail is, I believe, the most efficient means of distributing such information quickly, state-wide.”
“Excellent work. I appreciate that time and effort is put into a publication such as this and express my thanks to those involved.”
“You are all doing a sensational job in putting it together, it is an excellent publication. I wish I had more time to read it. Keep up the good work!”
Some were not …
“The bar has become increasingly regulated over the past 10 years with the ridiculous introduction of compulsory CLE. Now members are having to pay for the cost of a magazine which really serves no purpose. All of the information is readily available via the internet. The photos of social functions are of interest to those who like to look at themselves. Why don’t you cut the publication and just maintain important notices to members via email. This way there may be a reduction in annual fees.”
“Bad points: It runs too slowly on even fast links (5-6 minutes to download on even the fast link I’m using now, don’t ask me about dial up). I have on a number of occasions had to cancel trying to open it and then delete it from my email because it is taking too much space. I wish you kept at least 4-6 back copies on the bar association website. [All back issues are available for downloading from www.barweb.com.au . Ed.] You need to take into account that people are accessing this from a variety of links (especially those who work in regional areas or are travelling to regional courts) and cut down the graphics content or at least have a graphics free version. There are times when I would like to download the file and read it off-line on the laptop or print it out and read it when I am travelling or sitting at the back of a courtroom, I can’t do either at the moment. I think the screens are too small, if I want to quickly scan all the articles I can’t, I have to step through each small screen at a time. In busy periods it just means that reading Hearsay is too time inefficient.”
Others also criticised the format in which Hearsay is published and delivered …
“Whenever I try to read Hearsay, it causes much grief to my computer. It does not crash, but it is far from a seamless process. Therefore I have not read the last 5 issues. The only way I could see that changing is for Hearsay to be offered in HTML format as well as its present PDF format. Otherwise I simply won’t be able to read it. Hence the reason why I only became aware of this survey when (an) email arrived reminding people of it. In my case, not a reminder but the first notification.”
“Good points: runs on several platforms. Interesting reports on recent appeals. Generally engaging articles. Smart use of technology in terms of content (which should supplement paper journals) however use of technology with respect to form is another matter. I think you are onto a great idea that deserves nurturing and for which you deserve our great thanks, but I think the format is wrong and strangling a potentially wonderful e-journal at birth.”
“I think it should be published online rather than by having to download it in PDF and then opening the file.”
“I am a Mac user. I would prefer not to have the Adobe file open in full screen format. In addition, the “exit” button at the end of the document doesn’t work once I am in the document, and I always have to “force quit” to close the file once I have read it.”
“The advice on the link for Windows users doesn’t seem to work in my system (Outlook & XP Pro) ~ unable to save as (doesn’t even appear as text which it is possible to select (and I’ve been using computers etc since 1980) .. so I don’t think its me!”
“Very time consuming to download at times.”
On the format of the Online Survey …
“There should have been an option to click showing there were no parts of Hearsay I did not read since that is the case. The clicking of that which I did was only done because without choosing one option I was unable to complete the survey. Your results might wish to reflect that the questions could have been worded better in the survey. For example I did not want to see less of any area but here was no option.”
“You asked questions about things I never read and things I would like to see less of. I would have preferred to answer ‘none’ but that was not an option.“
“The survey required a response to each ‘dot point’, whereas, for example, there is nothing I don’t read in Hearsay, but had to select something in order to move through the survey… just passing that on as comment, in case it has some bearing on the statistics…thanks.”
So far as the current mix of content is concerned …
“I do not think any particular part should be diminished …”
“One thing which it does not deal with and which I would like to see included in future, is reports of Bar Council meetings and Sub-Committee reports.”
“Case notes on federal jurisdiction cases would be of value.”
“I would like to see more criminal law content.”
As to the frequency of publication …
“It’s almost too frequently delivered, so no more frequently please.”
On the topic of whether a hard copy journal should be published in addition to, or in substitution for, Hearsay …
“The survey did not let me say that I do not think a hard copy should be published at all. No need for it. It is costly and produces much less than the electronic journal. I think Hearsay is a great innovation and should only be expanded.”
“I like Hearsay, but I love the Bar News in magazine format.”
“I don’t read Hearsay as much as I would like as it gets lost in all my other emails; I hope to go back to it, but often don’t. If it was a magazine, I could take it with me somewhere. I do struggle with the fact of having to read it on a screen at some point in chambers.”
Hearsay is grateful to each of the readers who took the time to participate in the Survey. All feedback will be taken into account in the planning of the publication’s future.
Martin Burns
Editor
{mos_sb_discuss:2} |
