Public Address - Hard News (Home)

A little liberal line in the sand | May 22, 2009 12:03

For various reasons, this seems to have been quite the week for the contest of the most fundamental ideas, and emotions have sometimes been inflamed. Perhaps it's time for a little liberal line in the sand. So step on up YouTube user Stevie Bee Bishop, who decided to embark on a special project.

He explained it in a clip:

That wound up being known as THE BIG FAT GAY COLLAB! I'll let Stevie tell it:

there's a disgusting amount of hate on the internet (especially on youtube!) directed at minority groups (especially the LGBT community) so i was inspired to organize this collab video. i never set out to change the world. i did not make this for the gay haters to see. i wanted to make something light hearted and funny for the victims of gay hate, to teach them to brush off the hate and stand strong and confident as who they are. you're not alone! stevie loves you :)

the song is "fuck you" by lily allen. contrary to popular belief (including my own, before i knew better) this song was not written about george bush. lily allen said:

"this song is not a direct attack at anyone, it was originally written about the BNP in the UK but then I felt this issue has become relevant pretty much everywhere, we are the youth, we can make coolness for our future, its up to us. Go green and hate hate."

this video is our interpretation of the meaning behind the lyrics and i think that our video gives a slightly different meaning to the lyrics and directs more focus on gay discrimination. the third verse against war has been taken out for this video, as it is not the subject we're dealing with.

And here's the video itself (note: given the song they're miming to, this may not be considered safe for some workplaces):

Now, the funny thing is that you can watch this video here, but if you try and watch it actually on YouTube, you'll have a few hoops to jump though. First, you'll have to sign in to YouTube to see it -- or create an account if you don't already have one. Then you'll see this message:

This video or group may contain content that is inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube's user community.

By clicking "Confirm", you are agreeing that all videos or groups flagged by the YouTube community will be viewable by this account.

But they're not done yet. On the page itself, you'll see the message "This video may not be suitable for minors." Well, yes, it does contain swearing. But you could spend days browsing YouTube clips saying fuckity-fuck-fuck and not see these messages. No, it's teh gayz that are the problem.

Don't go blaming YouTube itself: the video is still there, after all. It's just the perils of community moderation. The "YouTube community" includes the kind of hyperactive bigot who's going to report this kind of thing.

Happily, that hasn't stopped the meme. And in response to Stevie's clips, a French group, GayClic Collab Against Homophobia has done its own version:

Without meaning any offence to Stevie and his pals, the French one is better. Better shot, funnier, more stylish.

Do you see where I'm going with this? The New Zealand creative and screen production communities are stacked with LGBT talent. Wouldn't it be cool if New Zealand joined the meme -- and blew everyone else off the dancefloor? Just sayin' …

(39 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

ffunnell Up! | May 21, 2009 11:12

I recently mentioned ffunnell, the independent publishers' ad network of which we're a part. I'm pleased to say that the ffunnell website is now active. It explains what the network is and is also the contact point for a new campaign.

You'll see the ads on participating sites now. Click on the banner and you'll go through to this page on the ffunnell site, where you can ask any questions you might have about Telecom's new XT Mobile Network, which goes live on the 29th. The questions will be answered by Telecom people, and will also inform a discussion that we'll host here on Public Address System from Monday. The idea is that you'll be able to engage Telecom technical and management staff in an actual online conversation.

It's a commercial arrangement, in that Telecom is buying a campaign with the network, but I like to think it'll be useful too.

---

Also, I'm going to be providing what help I can to the forthcoming Grey Lynn Farmers' Market, which will launch on September 6 at the Grey Lynn Community Centre in Richmond Road and will run every Sunday (except for the last Sunday of each month).

As part of preparations for launch in September, the market committee is staging a membership drive. Membership is $20 (it goes up to $30 from August) and gives members a 10% discount on produce for 12 months, along with the right to vote for the management of the organisation. You can get form by emailing .

Further, from their latest group email:

Our point of difference is that we are not just another boutique farmers' market, we represent the new generation of affordable urban food sales/production. We want to attract more people to do their weekly shopping at farmers' markets and possibly earn a secondary income by selling produce grown in local home gardens. It doesn't take a genius to work out that you can grow 10 varieties of nutritious and delicious bean sprouts in a spare cupboard and sell them for $3 each and make a healthy income on a Sunday morning. Besides that, we guarantee you'll have a great time doing it!

This Saturday morning, 23rd May we are offering a FREE presentation on growing your own produce and selling at farmers' markets. This has been organised by SIFE (Students for Free Enterprise) from AUT along with OOOOBY (Out of our own back yard) and ourselves. The talk starts at 10:00am and runs until 11:30am with time for Q & A at Grey Lynn Community Centre, 510 Richmond Road. There will be free seeds and a raffle whilst you learn a wealth of tips and techniques.

Also this weekend, there'll be a membership drive and survey being carried out in Grey Lynn, Ponsonby, Westmere, Herne Bay, Kingsland and Point Chevalier. You can complete their survey online if you wish. And there's a Facebook page.

(84 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Stop the Enabling | May 20, 2009 09:25

As was always likely to be the case, Christchurch man Jimmy Mason turned out to be another father with anger management problems. A jury has found him guilty of assault for punching his four year-old son in the face. He was acquitted on two other charges of assault for lifting up the four year-old and his two year-old brother on their bikes and forcing them down on the ground.

Witnesses also said that Mason was repeatedly shouting "fucking listen!" at his two children. He seems to have been so insensible to his own behaviour that he told the first police officer on the scene "I hit the big one in the face and that is what I do and that lady [the witness] can mind her own business."

In court, Mason declared he had entered "angry dad mode" after the younger boy had crashed his bike. He still seems to have no concept that what he did was wrong. We can only hope that the counselling likely to be ordered by the judge will bring him some perspective.

It was different story in January last year, of course. Back then, almost every media organisation in the country led with the canard that a man had first been warned by the police, and then charged, for "flicking" his son on the ear. The source for this claim was Mason himself, who was very voluble in his indignation.

We now know for sure that was not the case. So why on earth is the Herald's story this morning headlined 'Ear-flick' father guilty of assault. Wouldn't 'Father who punched son in the face found guilty of assault' be a more appropriate headline?

And why did National Radio spend most of the morning opening its bulletins with the words "in what's seen as a test of anti-smacking laws …" The judge said it was not to be seen as a test of the law change. The police said Mason would have been charged under the old law too.

The response from the pro-beating crowd to the events last year was furious and hysterical. Kiwiblog commenters fumed and boiled when Mason was warned by police, and frothed some more when he was charged with assault after police had heard from witnesses.

Family First director Bob McCoskrie declared himself "astounded" that Mason had been charged. The Christian sadists at Family Integrity republished this bizarre blog post from self-professed Christian soldier and Act Party activist Andy Moore.

This morning, McCoskrie is doing what he always does when one of his cause celebres turns out to be a bully -- crawling for cover. But he still had time to equivocate for the Herald's benefit:

But there was a concern that Mason may have been found guilty for only the ear-pull, as the actions of punching, and pulling the ear, were wrapped up in the same police charge.

"If that's the case, then it's a decision that does concerns us. We would like that clarified to understand how the law is being interpreted by the police and the courts."

That's not the case and if McCoskrie had any honesty at all he would admit it. Jimmy Mason hit his four year-old son in the face with a closed fist. That's what happened.

Anyway, this seems like a good time for me to recommend a visit to The Yes Vote, an anti-violence site raising awareness in advance of the Section 59 referendum. It's supported by, among others, Plunket, Barnodos, Save the Children and Unicef.

On the other hand, the For the Sake of Our Children Trust (yes, the organisation headed until recently by Christine Rankin) is still touting the referendum petition on its home page. Its supporters include Family First and Focus on the Family.

I'll leave you to decide who's really enabling abuse.

---

Well worth a look: Christchurch Court News, run by David Clarkson, who, back in the mists of time, was a colleague of mine at the Christchurch Star (the prosecutor in the Mason case, Deirdre Elsmore, was my sister's childhood friend, so it's quite the trip down memory lane). David has plenty on at the moment -- the Bain case continues and the Marie Davis murder case has just opened.

(574 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Current affairs TV in "making difference" shock! | May 19, 2009 09:25

Given our history of quietly shelving issues that might deflate the bounty of our farms, it's remarkable that the weekend's Sunday programme on factory pork has provoked such a rapid and prodigious response.

The Prime Minister is says he is "disturbed" by the report. The Minister of Agriculture has demanded answers. The Pork Industry Board has cancelled its shindig (no wonder, given that the owner of the farm featured is a recent director of the board itself).

And TVNZ is getting hundreds of posts from members of the public on its normally quiet message boards. It looks as if something might actually happen.

The key to the programme was the former face of New Zealand pork products, Mike King. Yes, it would have been an even better look if King had turned before he lost his promotional contract with the Pork Board, but I don't doubt his sincerity, or the real sense of horror he felt in that visit to the sow stalls.

Ironically, it's far from clear that the farming practices shown in the programme are actually illegal. And if the retail price of pork did jump by $2 a kilo if regulations were changed, it would create more space in the market for imported pork grown in even worse conditions.

But sometimes you have to do the right thing. Intensively-farmed pork is the worst meat. You shouldn't eat it. About half the country's pork production isn't yet free-range, and more than a quarter of farms still use sow stalls. I'm sure the industry can print up some stickers to tell you what you're buying.

Happily, there are already companies, like Freedom Farms, making a virtue of free-range farming. And their product tastes much, much better.

PS: A word too for Sue Kedgley. I think she's wrong on many things, but she has long been right on this one.
--

Another bouquet: I almost refused to watch Friday night's Close Up lead story on principle, so lurid and blaring were the promos for it. I'm glad I did. The story concerned a predatory 40 year-old Auckland man who has been grooming, manipulating and having sex with young gay men -- and infecting them with HIV.

The main voice in the story was that of social researcher (and Public Address reader!) Michael Stevens, and that doubtless helped with the tone of the report, which, rather than demonising gay men, emerged as a story of a community looking for help to deal with a predator. I hope they get it.

---

In this week's Media7, we're deconstructing the news. A video piece by Simon Pound will kick off a discussion with Trish Carter, Richard Langston and Paul Norris as to why TV news looks and feels the way it does. We're not planning any live crosses.

If you'd like to join us, we'd need you at The Classic in Queen Street by 3pm tomorrow and have you out by 4.30. Just hit Reply and let me know.

(173 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Put on the full armour of God | May 18, 2009 11:03

The most arresting part of Robert Draper's story for GQ magazine on the Rumsfeld years concerns the styling of the confidential briefings with which Donald Rumsfeld kept his President up to date on Iraq.

It's both hilarious and alarming. These documents weren't standard issue. Each briefing was appended, in a way that made it look like a child's school project, with a cover sheet bearing photographs -- and a Biblical quote to guide the President's feelings about the news.

This mixing of Crusades-like messaging with war imagery, which until now has not been revealed, had become routine. On March 31, a U.S. tank roared through the desert beneath a quote from Ephesians: "Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand." On April 7, Saddam Hussein struck a dictatorial pose, under this passage from the First Epistle of Peter: "It is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men."

There are various examples in a slide show on the GQ website.

As Andrew Sullivan puts it:

I wonder what's worse: a defense secretary who puts Old Testament quotes on progress updates on an invasion of a Muslim country or a defense secretary who thinks this will add to his president's knowledge and expertise.

The GQ story is referenced in a New York Times column by Frank Rich, in which Rich strongly makes the case that "[i]f the Obama administration really wants to move on from the dark Bush era, it will need a new commission, backed up by serious law enforcement, to shed light on where every body is buried."

I can certainly see that Obama would be reluctant to open up several new fronts when he already faces an arguably unprecedented array of challenges, and even that he might be responding to genuine advice from the field in, to take one example, reversing his decision to release photographs of detainee abuse. But it doesn't seem that this is going away.

(88 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!