The world didn’t end after all.
From the Mayan end of times prophecy beloved of New Agers and conspiratorially minded types, which signally failed to materialise, to Tony Abbott’s more parochial but equally apocalyptic claims about the effect that the carbon tax would have on all aspects of Australian life, 2012 was meant to be the year that would see the end of life as we know it.
Certainly Julia Gillard was widely expected to have had her political life, at least as the occupier of The Lodge, ended this year. But after comfortably surviving the long-awaited leadership challenge from Kevin Rudd, Gillard slowly but surely regained political momentum as the public realised that the carbon tax had not had the impact on their finances and employment they feared.
And in the defining moment of the Australian political year, Gillard rose in the chamber in a debate over allegations about text messages sent by former Speaker Peter Slipper and proceeded to eviscerate Tony Abbott over his attitudes towards women.

But as Deakin University’s Patrick Stokes pointed out in his article No, you’re not entitled to your opinion, read by more than 300,000 people worldwide and re-tweeted by luminaries such as Richard Dawkins and Ricky Gervais, we live in an era when many feel that having access to the means to express an opinion gives that view veracity by dint of its own existence. Which is usually not the case.

But there are of course experts in given fields who we should listen to when they speak out on an issue. Many of these could be found on The Conversation this year, on issues as diverse as the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper, the rise of the Massive Open Online Course and the ongoing, seemingly never-ending debate over how Australia should deal with people arriving by boat to claim asylum.
The leader of our expert panel on asylum seekers, Monash University’s Sharon Pickering, was recognised for her timely and considered input in the debate with the 2012 Human Rights Award in Print and Online Media.
Internationally, President Obama was re-elected comfortably against his Republican challenger Mitt Romney. The Conversation’s dedicated US elections page featured contributors from both Australia and the US, with a group blog and weekly podcast offering analysis and engagement with the campaign beyond the traditional print media approach.

The Conversation’s commitment to providing informed expert analysis saw a series of articles on the Syrian bloodbath from authors with direct experience of the increasingly complex conflict, one that has been characterised by what many see as agenda driven reporting from the mainstream media.
The year also saw the establishment of The Conversation’s dedicated columnists. Bronwyn Lea’s regular take on the world of literature quickly gained a dedicated following while Mat Hardy peels away the layers of spin and propaganda that so often surround reporting on the Middle East. Lauren Rosewarne’s adroit interpretations of popular culture artefacts entertain and provoke in equal measure while John Keane charts the ebb and flow and evolution of democracy around the globe. Meanwhile, Sarah Joseph gave her take on all things human rights, sparking much debate with her columns on freedom of speech.
For the politics and society desk, the year to come will pivot on the Australian federal election. Julia Gillard will enter 2013 hoping that instead of presiding over a Queensland-style wipeout she will at least be able to make Tony Abbott fight for every seat. Tony Abbott will be crossing his fingers and hoping the latest polls are an indication of things to come.

We also look forward to hearing from our readers as the year unwinds. Your comments and feedback inform our coverage every bit as much as the events we cover. It is after all, The Conversation.
Mat Hardy
Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University
"while Mat Hardy peels away the layers of spin and propaganda that so often surround reporting on the Middle East."
I thought I was just adding my own layers of spin and propaganda!
Steve Drummond
Retired (self funded)
Yes Mat, the first casualty in war nowadays is any blogger with the temerity to offer an opinion.
James Jenkin
EFL Teacher Trainer
I'm not sure people were so worried about the impact of the carbon tax on 'their finances and employment', and the tax would mean 'the end of life as we know it'.
We average punters understood there was compensation, and the ecomony would continue to function. We're not that dim.
However, many people seemed concerned that the tax was a 'broken promise', and that it was a pointless churn of money.
Mike Hansen
Mr
"We're not that dim." What are you saying about Tony Abbott - he is that dim?
"many people seemed concerned that the tax was a 'broken promise', and that it was a pointless churn of money." That would be the same people who reject climate science.
And I am with Peter Ormonde - bring back the red tick. As your most popular article states "No, you’re not entitled to your opinion" - I for one was happy to see the poorly argued opinions get their just desserts.
Ken Swanson
Geologist
"And I am with Peter Ormonde - bring back the red tick. As your most popular article states "No, you’re not entitled to your opinion" - I for one was happy to see the poorly argued opinions get their just desserts."
Oh yes Mike. You would have been running with the Mayan High Priests. Those all knowing god like intellectuals who were never wrong and never to be questioned. There would not have been a red tick amongst them.
Mike Hansen
Mr
@Ken Swanson
So you have not read the article Ken.
https://theconversation.edu.au/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978
Like your comments on climate science, you never let the lack of knowledge stand in the way of a ill-informed rant.
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
Just a note to say thanks to the Conversation Crew for giving me at least a wonderful year of stimulating ideas and the odd challenging argument. I am actually very proud that Australia can produce such a publication. It is a mark of the talent running about the place.
And the tone of it reflects a spritely irreverence that is missing in similar sciency outlets from afar and that goes to the core of Australian culture and our subversive attitude to authority and the pompous.
A special word…
Read moreSurrogacy Centre
Artificial Insemination --- Safe Way to Motherhood
Your article is thought-provoking which is one of my favorite kinds of writing. You are obviously an accomplished writer, and if not, you should be.
My page : http://www.surrogacycentre.com.au/artificial-insemination-helps-couples.html
Grendelus Malleolus
Senior Nerd
I prefer to marine that Tony Abbott believes that the Mayan Apocalypse could not occur because the Carbon Tax made it too expensive for <insert deity> to rain fire anywhere.
Grendelus Malleolus
Senior Nerd
"Marine"? Imagine...
Ken Swanson
Geologist
I think the Mayan Apocalypse is more akin to the climate alarmist claims we have today.
Probably scared the hell out of the Mayans who thought there would be no world left for their ancestors but alas the predictions were overblown and we are all still here.
Or could a more accurate comparison be made between the Mayan high priests and Julia Gillard's promise of a budget surplus in 2013 (like so many of her promises)
These things just never seem to come true
It is a shame the ancient Mayans never got to vote though because unlike us, they could not redress their situation via an election like we can.
Comment removed by moderator.
Comment removed by moderator.
Comment removed by moderator.
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
Ken,
What do you mean we're all still here??? I don't know about you but quite obviously this new eternity is just more and more of the same. For some folks no evidence is sufficient - for others, none is required. :)
Now are you going to make us finish off 2012 with a spirited spat about climate change?
Now I've noticed that a lot of geolists seem to take your view. Rarely are their objections spelled out geologically - assuming that it is the nature of their worldview and the science they understand that makes the notion of global warming either a furphy or quite tolerable, even pleasant. Either that or we're dealing with a mob of coal mining industry hacks who are in thrall to their paychecks. But let's assume the former.
So tell me Ken, what is there about geology - the world view it helps structure - that fosters this overwhelming optimism? How come so many geologists know this climate business is off with the pixies and the Mayan "appockolisp"?
Sarah Joseph
Director, Castan Centre for Human Rights Law at Monash University
Nice overview Rory. Happy New Year!