Welcome to the May issue of Caravan World.

I’m writing this editorial in a taxi en route to the Melbourne airport, leaving behind CW HQ for Sydney to attend the NSW Caravan Show.

Why not wait until I’m in my hotel room? Well, the thing about publishing (or any other deadline environment, for that matter) is that you take your moments when you can. Besides, it was while I was staring out the taxi window, watching freeways and scrubland role past frame by frame, that it occurred to me I’m lately spending more time travelling in the air – speeding by plane to attend a launch, opening, or show – than I am on the ground. The view might be great from that height on a clear day (depending, of course, on where you’re going), but you can’t do anything more than look – even getting up to stretch the legs can be a problem, especially if you’ve a window seat.

Not that I mind, though. The opportunity to travel as part of the job is just one of the perks of being part of a magazine like CW, and we do get to see some terrific places - sometimes locations I wouldn’t have thought to visit otherwise.

In any case, we’ll have a report on the NSW show in the next issue. This month, though, we’ve got pics of the Perth show to tide you over until then.

There’s something else about publishing I should mention here: it’s a collaborative effort, with many different hands working tirelessely to deliver the goods on time. Which brings me to this mea culpa. Last issue we announced the start of a new competition in which readers had the chance to win a Thetford three-way fridge. Unfortunately, the wrong page ended up in the magazine - I could entertain you with the details, but suffice it to say we’ve got it right in this issue (I hope) and we’re extending the duration of the competition by one month to make up for the error. We apologise for the inconvenience. It is a terrific prize and I encourage all to enter.

Standards to swear by

When did television become so profane? On a friend’s advice, I’ve been tuning into a show about a certain Scottish chef whose mission is to make one restaurant, on the brink of closure, profitable again per episode.

This entails berating the staff and owner, “telling it like it is”, so to speak, as he prepares new attitudes and a new menu in the lead up to the relaunch of the ailing restaurant in question.

Armed with what could be the filthiest mouth in the UK - I counted 16 expletives from one ad break to the next - the chef swears his way to success almost every time. �

Some might say it makes him endearing. Others might say it makes him offensive. Which brings me to my point. Where should the line be drawn between regulation and censorship, and stepping back and allowing a consumer to make their own choice? In the case of the chef, is accessability a factor, ie, should his lessons in cooking and cursing be shown in its current 8.30pm time slot? Is that sufficient to ensure those whose ears are best protected from certain words aren’t exposed?

While a given program remains popular – and I must admit to actually enjoy the above show – then inevitably the argument will continue, as vested interests claim that all they’re doing is providing the fodder – what we do with it is up to us. And if such an argument was mounted, perhaps they’d have a point. Who’d want their ability to choose taken away? So long as we are able to change the channel and, yes, turn the page, the perhaps it’s up to us to determine our own standards.

The question, of course, is what those standards are. In the case of the Scottish chef, his show is reportedly rating highly in Australia...