Responding to a huge volume of questions on borders, refugees and migration, Geraldine Brooks, Tom Elliott, Voranai Vanijaka and Mark Colvin search for insight and progress on this charged and crucial subject. 'I've had a lot of experience in places where people squander a great deal of human life fighting over five metres of sand. For me, the less borders, the better.'Geraldine Brooks As a nation composed mostly of migrants, modern Australia’s relationship with refugees and asylum seekers runs deep: through regional and global wars, famine and disaster, and economic and political upheavals. In recent years, that discussion has become increasingly polarised and fearful. Meanwhile, asylum seekers continue to suffer in conditions that most people agree are unacceptable, cruel. Throughout all this, Australia’s challenge and policy response has made world news. Now, with Europe’s dramatic influx of refugees mostly from Syria, the question has renewed urgency – of a kind that demands answers beyond the obfuscation of politics. Left to right: Geraldine Brooks, Tom Elliott, Voranai Vanijaka and Mark Colvin See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It has to be said: the cat pictures might not be enough. The internet definitively sucks sometimes. It’s a willing and fertile host to our most objectionable prejudice, anger and desire; an open marketplace for exploitation, child porn and illicit drugs and weapons. It provides a container for our greed, impatience and emotional evasiveness, and its liberating potential often feels like a false promise buried in a much larger mountain of disconnection, voyeurism and social media-fuelled narcissism. Even the feelgood and useful bits are compromised – our tracked behaviour is sold to advertisers, while security agencies like the NSA have been found to spy extensively on … well, almost everybody. Cory Doctorow In that light, is it blind and foolish to defend the internet – or does idealism provide a corrective vision? What gives this incredible technological structure its potency? What does the internet offer in terms of political freedom and social mobility, privacy and big data, and broadcasting and publishing and political change – and what does it cost us? Blogger, science fiction author, Electronic Frontier Foundation special advisor and Boing Boing co-editor Cory Doctorow speaks with multitalented and beloved broadcaster, writer and director Alan Brough about whether we should really destroy the internet – or whether it instead needs our protection. Your tweets: ‘We have yet to articulate a coherent way of thinking about security and the internet.’ @doctorow#askinterrobangpic.twitter.com/0gaaUEKlRQ— The Wheeler Centre (@wheelercentre) November 28, 2015 Lack of disclosure with digital security leads to failure. ‘This is how every alchemist ends up drinking mercury.’ @doctorow#askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 .@doctorow is talking about very surprising ways in which industries co-opt governments to protect their IP, and generate $. #askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 Computers in everything: digital locks for protectionist practices, anti-circumvention rules feed the beast. Ergh @doctorow#askinterrobang— Kate B. (@eyeofbast) November 28, 2015 "We haven't reached peak surveillance. There's plenty of ways the internet could be creepier. Like wifi Barbie." @doctorow#askinterrobang— steph harmon (@stephharmon) November 28, 2015 Mass surveillance operates on the principle that watching another individual costs nothing. @doctorow#askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 We need to have spaces that are not ‘on the record’ in order to have social progress. @doctorow#askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 "When the Beatles co-opted other cultures it was called art. When Public Enemy co-opted the Beatles, it was theft" @doctorow#askinterrobang— steph harmon (@stephharmon) November 28, 2015 ‘I’m incapable of making predictions. I’m a science fiction author.’ @doctorow#askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 ‘Our mission, if you care about this stuff, is to try and get other people to care before it’s too late.’ @doctorow on digital security.— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 Watching @doctorow continue to fight the good fight thanks to @askinterrobang. It’s depressing and empowering at the same time.— Josh Kinal (@sealfur) November 28, 2015 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If we peel back religion, politics, economics and other big players in our collective pursuit of the ‘common good’ … what do we end up with? How are our ideas of goodness formed – and can they ever be agreed upon? The panel: Mark Colvin, Anne Summers, Alan Duffy, Raimond Gaita and Gregory Phillips As globalisation and technology draw the world closer together, they’ve also revealed chasms in how we relate to each other as nations, cultures and individuals – and how we resolve conflicts. What happens when good intentions are incompatible? Raimond Gaita, Anne Summers, Gregory Phillips and Alan Duffy come together to seek out and dissect practical questions of ethics: are there basic values or ideas of goodness or fairness that we can all share? What, specifically, are they? What even is ‘ethical’, should we strive for it – and can there be a middle ground? Hosted by Mark Colvin. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Australian racism is a slippery thing. We’ve seen it (at the football, on a bus with a singing French tourist, in select policies of successive governments, at anti-something protests). We know it exists. But as a nation – a deeply multicultural one, arguably defined by migration – we haven’t progressed to a realistic understanding of who we are, what that means and what we thus expect of ourselves and each other. The panel: Benjamin Law, Voranai Vanijaka, Nakkiah Lui, Gregory Phillips and Abdul AbdullahWhen is Australia racist? Questions of difference and fairnessWatch Watch the video of this conversation How do we distinguish our ideals from the real world? Is mainstream Australian – whatever that means – capable of living up to its own myths? Let’s not let subcultures off the hook, either. What draws our meanest impulses out of hiding? When do we laugh about our differences … and when do they come to define us? With artist Abdul Abdullah, writer and comedian Nakkiah Lui, Aboriginal health expert Gregory Phillips, journalist and political commentator Voranai Vanijaka and Gaysia author Benjamin Law, we’ll explore Australian equality on a number of fronts: representation, social support, sex and decision-making. Our panellists consider what it might take to achieve a culture that reflects a true picture of Australia back to itself – and what we’d be losing if we didn’t. Your reactions @wheelercentre is #askinterrobang panel sess When Is Australia Racist? pic.twitter.com/WdwBhDfkik— Melissa O'Donovan (@SoulGroundau) November 28, 2015 Does Australia market and export an image of 'us' as Multicultural and more than just a white image #askinterrobang— Monique Toohey (@MoniqueToohey) November 28, 2015 Greg Phillips crystal clear on Aust not dealing with colonisational genocide & the legacy that hangs in power strictures #askinterrobang— Kristin Alford (@kristinalford) November 28, 2015 @MoniqueToohey Who is the We? Who is the You?That was never defined in the session.— Melissa O'Donovan (@SoulGroundau) November 28, 2015 @SoulGroundau@stephharmon No, in regards to my Aboriginality— Nakkiah Lui (@nakkiahlui) November 28, 2015 "I've never felt Australian" - @nakkiahlui. Perhaps Aboriginal... but that is a white construct, doesn't represent culture #askinterrobang— Kristin Alford (@kristinalford) November 28, 2015 It's false to say everyone is racist - Greg Phillips. Lots of cultures are accepting of difference, it comes down to values #askinterrobang— Kristin Alford (@kristinalford) November 28, 2015 Racism is structural. Ethnocentrism is what need to be mindful of and overcome. Identify the dynamic & call it out #askinterrobang— Monique Toohey (@MoniqueToohey) November 28, 2015 'There is no such thing as reverse #racism. Reverse racism presumes there is egalitarianism.' @gregoryabstarr#askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 Whiteness: cultural blindness to see ones own advantage & benefit in society #askinterrobang#noroomforracism— Monique Toohey (@MoniqueToohey) November 28, 2015 @stephharmon@askinterrobang@voranai#askinterrobang How is that reverse? Reverse would be beating up yourself because of someone's race— Paul (@paulkoan) November 28, 2015 Strands of industrialisation & capitalism are inseparable from racism in this discussion - they shapes resources & values. #askinterrobang— Kristin Alford (@kristinalford) November 28, 2015 Cultural intelligence is needed to improve intercultural relations social cohesion, health & education outcomes & innovation #askinterrobang— Monique Toohey (@MoniqueToohey) November 28, 2015 'When is it racism and when is it white supremacy?' @nakkiahlui asks at #askinterrobang— BitterSweet (@spoonfulofthyme) November 28, 2015 Can cultures with strong social and environmental consciences also be racist? #askinterrobang— Ayan Dasvarma (@amravsad) November 28, 2015 Where can we create spaces for intercultural interaction & can we make it mandatory for politicians to be residents there? #askinterrobang— Monique Toohey (@MoniqueToohey) November 28, 2015 How do u unpackage urself from ur racial and/or cultural personal identity? By continuing to use the national/racial label? #askinterrobang— Melissa O'Donovan (@SoulGroundau) November 28, 2015 'Australia is not a multicultural country - it has many ethnic groups.' Greg Phillips #askinterrobang— BitterSweet (@spoonfulofthyme) November 28, 2015 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How are you? Such a habitual, everyday question remains one of our most difficult to answer honestly and fully. Where do we even begin? Are we ever possessed by just one state or feeling? What moves the tides of our emotional lives? 'Friendships are chosen. Family are not chosen. By definition, if something's chosen, it's chosen for certain kinds of reasons … the concept of friendship and the concept of being a father, a mother, a sister or a brother … they have standards. They're not always the standards of morality.'Raimond Gaita In a thoughtful discussion to address our very large – and more nuanced – human dilemmas, Raimond Gaita, Jane Caro, Benjamin Law, Kristin Alford and Sammy J  interrogate our search for meaning and contentment within our own circumstances (including gender, cultural background, upbringing and socio-economic position). Why happiness rather than contentment? Why does a part of us want to destroy what we love? Are we born happy, spending our lives defending that, or are we born neutral – destined to spend our lives trying to attain happiness? How is it possible to be incredibly happy and incredibly sad at the same time? Our Brains Trust attempt to resolve the complicated experiences of satisfaction, kindness and contradiction.Your tweets Why are people nicer to you on your birthday? They are thankful that you exist #askinterrobang#speccypic.twitter.com/lluaYkyPrB— Sue Hogg (@planetsuzie) November 28, 2015 Jane Caro advocates for realistic lower expectations so that it'll be easier to find happiness. #askinterrobang— Shannon Hick (@Toast_forDinner) November 28, 2015 "The baseline for happiness is remarkably easy to achieve" - how much do we really need to be happy? @mrbenjaminlaw at #askinterrobang— Rose Johnstone (@RoFloJohnstone) November 28, 2015 ‘What sort of friend are you; do you think you should be? What do you offer?’ @kristinalford#askinterrobangpic.twitter.com/BiebbLmVXx— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 Do soul mates exist & what are the chances of meeting them? RaiGaita jumps in 'she's sitting right there' audience weeps 💗 #askinterrobang— Shannon Hick (@Toast_forDinner) November 28, 2015 'The concept of #friendship and the concept of being a father, or a mother, or a sister, or a brother – they have standards. They're not always the standards of #morality, because #love can sometimes compete with morality … the idea that you can have friendship without the possibility of guilt strikes me as foolish; like the idea that you could have love without the possibility of sorrow.' #RaimondGaita, exploring questions of relativity and hope at 'Why are people nicer when it's your birthday?', part of #askinterrobang today. A photo posted by The Wheeler Centre (@wheelercentre) on Nov 27, 2015 at 6:36pm PST See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As part of The Interrobang, Cheryl Strayed – author of Wild and Tiny Beautiful Things – shares a story of her children leaping, literally, into the unknown. 'When I contemplated the question of the relationship between words and actions,' she begins, 'I thought about a recent experience I had with my kids. For the last two summers, I've gone to the little town of Chamonix, France. I teach a writing workshop there every summer, and it's one of those little villages in the Alps with just a few city streets – and all around you are these beautiful, high snowy peaks. The first summer we went there, my kids were eight and nine. Chamonix in the winter is a skier’s paradise, but in the summer that are basically two things to do: hike, or go to the top of the mountain and jump off with nothing but a kite on your back.' See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The chicken is just the egg’s way of making another egg.Mary Norris 'Well,' says Mary Norris – New Yorker copy editor and author of Between You & Me: Confessions of a Comma Queen, 'it’s true that my life has been completely squandered on words. I’ve hardly ever done anything!' As part of The Interrobang, Norris unpicks the complex relationship between words and actions. If actions give birth to words, and words may inspire actions, does it really come down to deciding between the figurative chicken or the egg? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this rollicking short lecture, MasterChef Australia-winning chef and Destination Flavour presenter Adam Liaw attempts to pick apart the differences – etymologically, compositionally, and culturally – between muffins and cupcakes. Along the way, he touches on how we assign meaning to what we eat, and how the tiniest of changes made decades or centuries ago can influence what we find on our plates today. 'If you tell people you had a muffin for breakfast, they're like, "Oh, you've got your whole life together. How do I get so successful and vivacious?" But if you tell them you had a cupcake for breakfast, it's like you woke up fully clothed, face down, in a pool of your own vomit, and they're calling your friends to arrange an intervention. For something that's so compositionally similar, we've attributed roles to muffins and cupcakes that are completely unassailable.' 'When I first got the email about this topic,' Adam says, 'I happened to be standing next to Ben Shewry, from Attica. I thought, I've got one of Australia's best chefs right next to me – I should probably ask him. I said, "Ben, what is the difference between a cupcake and a muffin?" He thought about it for about five seconds, looked me straight in the eye, and said, "A cupcake is never savoury, and a muffin is never iced.' Which is bloody good; it's a brilliant definition. You can't get much better than that. But, of course, that's not the end of the story.' See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Scientists have told us how the world began, but how do they think it will end? Explore pre-human mass extinctions (and how close it came to ‘the end’) – and why our thoughts often drift toward apocalyptic predictions and end time fears – with a half hour talk from molecular biologist and science communicator Upulie Divisekera. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the hierarchy of improbable things, a grammatical error in the pages of the New Yorker must certainly sit close to the top – and as copy editor at the notoriously fastidious literary institution, Mary Norris has been at the frontline of the fight against errant apostrophes for several decades.  In conversation with Jane Caro at The Interrobang, Norris shared the story of her ascendance to the throne of the comma queen. Beginning her working life as a ‘foot-checker’ at a public pool in Cleveland, Norris noted that her life has followed a classic ‘foot-checker to fact-checker/from toes to prose’ trajectory. Contrary to popular belief, Norris admitted during the conversation, errors do slip into the pages of the New Yorker. Her first? Erroneously rendering ‘chaise longue’ as ‘chaise lounge’. An easy mistake to make, but it was an error that wasn’t readily overlooked. ‘Are the glory years of the New Yorker gone forever?’ asked a reader, in a typewritten letter that an elder copy editor made sure to circulate around the office. (‘They certainly are!’, the copy editor had made sure to scribble underneath.) The New Yorker’s style guide is famously opinionated, sometimes obstinately so. ‘The Democrats coöperate to reëlect the President,’ Norris has offered, as an example of a sentence that could be found in no other magazine. Still, she told Caro, ‘When writers complain about the New Yorker style, I think, “You’re writing for the New Yorker; shut up”.’  Listen to the full discussion – featuring digressions into the battle between editors and writers in driving linguistic change, the dire need for a second person plural, the stylistic flexibility of the dash, and a meta-discussion on the interrobang. Bow down to the comma queen!Your tweets: .@MaryNorrisTNY talking about joy of catching a mistake & shame of making one. All editors in audience nodding furiously. #askinterrobang— Katie Purvis (@katiemelb) November 28, 2015 The grammar nerd inside me is in linguistic heaven right now. #askinterrobang— Will Dawson (@willegitimate) November 28, 2015 .@JaneCaro: 'Emily Dickinson uses dashes in extraordinary ways.' @MaryNorrisTNY: 'She's infuriating.' #askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 Who drives language change, people or editors? Mary Norris: Editors "are fucking backseat drivers." #askinterrobang— kate o'd (@readingkate) November 28, 2015 "Read, read, read, read and study a foreign language." Mary on how we can get kids to do grammar gooder #askinterrobang— kate o'd (@readingkate) November 28, 2015 .@MaryNorrisTNY: "If Gone With the Wind were written today, Scarlett wouldn't say 'Fiddle-dee-dee' but 'Fuck this shit'" 😆 #askinterrobang— Katie Purvis (@katiemelb) November 28, 2015 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Discuss the complexities of gender and power with the formidable critical faculties of Meghan Daum, Jane Caro, Geraldine Brooks, Nakkiah Lui and Sally Warhaft. While Roxane Gay has popularised the notion of being a ‘bad feminist’, one might ask: what does a good feminist look like? How about a good woman, parent, lover, worker? Why be good, anyway? Left to right: Jane Caro, Nakkiah Lui, Meghan Daum, Sally Warhaft and Geraldine Brooks In a broad, inclusive and multi-generational discussion covering the soft corners and spiked edges of today’s feminism, we put our Brains Trust to work on the major questions that women face. How should a woman be at work, in love, and in relation to power? How might women think through approaches to parenthood, personal safety and professional prejudice? What is a modern family? What’s femininity, and how valuable is it? How can diverse feminism consolidate influence? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Where are we headed – and what will the journey be like? How do we deal with rapid change, how can we make more deliberate decisions – and how do we ensure we’re even included in that process? In this session, Cory Doctorow, Adam Liaw, Kristin Alford and Maggie Ryan Sandford explore the changing technologies, social dynamics and global circumstances behind what’s coming next. As children, what did the panellists picture the future would look like? 'The Jetsons,' says Adam Liaw. 'It was technologically-based, but the characters and their motivations were all the same. Technology facilitated things, but it didn't change the people that we were. I don't think people anticipate themselves changing when they think about the future. They always think that surroundings change but people stay the same – and that's what The Jetsons showed, I think.' Kristin Alford anticipated the future (now, the present) would be an overwhelmingly solar-powered one, while Maggie Ryan Sandford envisioned human-animal telepathy, 'especially with whales'. Cory Doctorow, meanwhile, notes that the first taste he had of the concept of 'The Future' occurred when his father returned from watching video footage of Doug Engelbart's 'Mother of All Demos' back in the 1970s (in which Engelbart demonstrated a proof-of-concept of hypertext, video conferencing, the computer mouse and word processing). 'The thing that engelbart’s vision didn’t have, and the thing that surprised me, and the lesson I’ve taken with me since then is the notion that all complex ecosystems have parasite,' says Doctorow. The Doug Engelbart future was the Epcot Centre future, it was the Jetsons future, it was very clean. It didn’t have 419 Nigerian scammers, and it didn’t have griefers who take over your webcam exploiting a zero day, capture incidental nude footage and then threaten to expose it on your MySpace account unless you perform live sex acts on your webcam for them. All that stuff that turned out to actually be in the future was missing from the Doug Engelbart – the people were missing around the edges. That, I think, was the collision of the future we anticipated and the future we got.' Listen to the full discussion, featuring digressions on the future of food, trend forecasting, and the uneasy balance to be found between optimism and pessimism when it comes to predicting what comes next.Your tweets: . @adamliaw bringing the biological imperative to taste fat to a discussing on the future of how and what we eat. #askinterrobang— J M Melican (@jmmelican) November 28, 2015 'The past is compost for the future.' @doctorow . New-tech doesn't 'succeed' old-tech, the old-tech still exists. #askinterrobang— J M Melican (@jmmelican) November 28, 2015 Do futurists hate trends forecasters? @kristinalford 'YES. Absolutely.' #askinterrobang— Shannon Hick (@Toast_forDinner) November 28, 2015 'Hope is a necessary but insufficient precondition...' says @doctorow . Uses treading water after shipwreck example. #askinterrobang— J M Melican (@jmmelican) November 28, 2015 For @kristinalford , 'pessimism is inevitable from the research' she does into future threats, especially on climate. #askinterrobang— J M Melican (@jmmelican) November 28, 2015 .@mmccwill likes the idea of 'peak indifference': 'the audacity of meh'. #askinterrobang— The Interrobang (@askinterrobang) November 28, 2015 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.