Hard News: Acid Man
57 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Police report declares drugs out of control. More powers/resources needed to control it.
Lobby group pops up on Morning Report to confirm the sky is falling and they are unfunded.
Minister in charge gravely agrees it's a crisis and something must be done, but money is short.
It must be budget time.
-
Simon Sweetman looks like he's too young to remember the "bad old days" of New Zealand music, when there was no airplay, even for insanely popular bands (Screaming Mee Mees, Blam Blam Blam, Toy Love, etc) - and when Crowded House had to get airplay overseas before they got played here. Mainstream radio may play the Exponents and the Dudes nowadays, but they sure didn't when those songs were originally released.
As far as I'm concerned, THAT'S what Music Month is for - a celebration of where we are now compared to where we were then, and yes a chance for New Zealand musicians to promote their music to a wider audience than otherwise. The Press had a snarky column this morning too, along the lines of "we interview a New Zealand band every week and review New Zealand records often - why should we acknowledge Music Month?"
Strange attitudes, yes - but perhaps born out of lack of knowledge of how far New Zealand music has come in the last 25 years....
-
Acid: yeah, doors of your mind opening and all that, but it just *lasts too damn long*. By hour 14 it's like: OK, the walls can stop pulsing now, my lysergic friend. KTHX.
New Zealand Music Month: I remember lo those many years ago when local bands were scorned and reviled. I think it's a pleasant change.
-
Simon Sweetman is the worst music writer in the country. He is to music writing what The Feelers are to music: dull, insipid, unchallenging and mediocre. This is a man that gave a recent Tears For Fears re-issue a rave review, for f--ks sake.
That Dom Post article is interesting, in that it's all about subtext, not subject. It's having a pop at Judith Tizard through her failing some small quiz. I expect assorted music biz types also bombed out in it, but there's no mention of that. I suspect that National's arts and culture spokesman / woman (whoever it is) would've done just as bad. I've no qualms with the Dom Post taking a pop at Tizard, but I just wish they'd be more honest about the context they do it in.
Conversely, if it was "NZ Film Month" I bet the Dom Post would've been all gushy about it, peeing their pants over all the Wellington film types (that's a pop at the paper, not Wellingtonians, btw).
However, I saw the clip of Tizard singing at the launch on the news last night and it was just as embarassing as that wretched version of 'The Gambler' that Labour ministers did at the recent conference. It makes them look stupid and they really need to step away from the mic.
As for Chris Knox's comment's, well, I admire the guy's honesty: it is a great opportunity to promote his umpteenth album. Also, NZ Music Month in general seems to be about promoting the more commercially-friendly end of the scene. If it gets a few people the recognition they crave, good on 'em.
But NZMM's, by and large, of no consequence to the less commercial bands, yet they still manage to get themselves known through other means. I was talking to Die! Die! Die!'s manager the other day and their about to tour America with the Van Bondies, which will do their "career" a lot more good than having a couple of songs played on commercial radio.
-
Simon Sweetman looks like he's too young to remember the "bad old days" of New Zealand music, when there was no airplay, even for insanely popular bands (Screaming Mee Mees, Blam Blam Blam, Toy Love, etc) - and when Crowded House had to get airplay overseas before they got played here. Mainstream radio may play the Exponents and the Dudes nowadays, but they sure didn't when those songs were originally released.
Good call. I remember when the utterly mainstream DD Smash (Dave Dobbyn's '80s band) had a #1 album in about '82 or so. Commercial radio wouldn't touch them with a barge pole, despite their popularity and very mainstream sound.
-
Just the normal shallow interpretation of the evidence: I think this response from a couple of months ago sums it up - you should always follow the money. If drugs were decriminalised and regulated (as advocated by this Chief of Police ) then the two big financial losers would be the criminals and the Police...
"... we’ll just keep plugging away out here, delivering you a country with one of the lowest crime rates and and a social system that is the envy of much of the world, judging by how much of it turns up every year to see how we do things. Of course you’ll never hear about it, because it doesn’t sell newspapers or win elections.
Comment by Slarty — 27 February 2008 @ 8:56 am
#Slarty, there is no organisation in New Zealand including the Government that has such overwhelming access to and influence over the media as the police. Police stories fill newspapers and radio and TV bulletins every single day. Furthermore the police are represented on all kinds of local body and community liaison groups and organisations.
If with all this coverage Police are failing to distribute real information about what works I suggest it is well overdue for a big shake out at Police HQ.
I think you'd find that Police would be told to stay out of policy, and leave that to the Politicians...
-
Ahhh, LSD... Happy days. Much better than weed for me - less of tendency to overeat and stare at the tv, much more time spent feeding ducks and talking about sunsets. Yes, I am a hippy.
Re that Stuff (via SMH) article about Lindsay McDougall - since when has the manager of Anthony Callea been known as an 'artist'?
-
I was always very interested that for a long time New Zealand was the only country in the world where the drug of choice after weed was LSD. I think it said something about our national character (in a kind of fractured hologram way).
-
Regarding that article about the alleged $1bln+ cost of drugs, most of the costs identified were those of drug *prohibition*. So if drugs were legalised, we'd be a billion dollars better off as a nation.
-
Its a moot point where they plucked their figures from, I have been unable to locate a copy of the actual research. The bottom line is prohibition is a failed policy. In that context I don't see why the figures are any more credible, peer reviewed or not.
FYI from the Otago Uni Cannabis Awareness Week, re the debate last night...
The debate was good, but with 6 participants things got a bit diffuse. Pauline Gardener while focused on the harms drugs cause a percentage of users, supported the 2 year moratorium on policing cannabis. Jim Anderton who didn't look that comfortable showed himself to be the wily politician he is, by using the meeting to announce the BERL etc results concerning the cost of illicit drug use - particularly cannabis. Professor Kevin Dawkins was a blunt critic of the process Anderton had overseen with regard to BZP. Chris Fowlie, Ross Bell and Nandor Tanczos all spoke well. Amongst the 250 people in the audience there seemed to be nobody who opposed drug law reform.
-
Salient will be running a full page obituary in next weeks issue, for Al.
Mr Anderton just released a speech
in which he puts the social cost of illict drug use at $1.31 billion, in which he says that"Over a third of the social costs of illicit drug use are caused by cannabis. That’s $444 million of social costs in 2006 from cannabis alone."text
He launches in to a triad about how we should be strong to protect society. Since marijuana is such a big problem, wouldn't it make more sense to decriminalise, educate and then tax it?
Same with other drugs. Education is the key. LSD is not addictive, and Hofmann beleived that it was " just a tool to turn us into what we are supposed to be."
-
Sorry for the thread-jack, but who wants to bet Gordon Brown is wishing that this is just a bad, bad trip. :)
-
Tizard got 40% correct in the quiz. I got more than that.
But the classic quote in the "gotcha" story is from Tizard herself.
When the reporter advised her of her sucess rate, she said: "I don't know the details honey, I just write the policy and ask for the money".
Classic! At least she can rhyme. She should do a rap and form a band called Judith and the Dykes. She may do better than Moana and the Ministers.
Anyways, isnt it great that Shihad and Conchords are charting 1 and 2 this week?
-
My fave NZ musician is Steve Hill but I bet they won't play any of his stuff in NZ music month.
Do you have to still live here to be an "NZ musician"? Or does your music have to be in a supported genre - downbeat, dub, indy, maybe psytrance but definitely *not* hard trance?
-
Rich, funny you should say that, but Steve's my favourite NZ Musician as well. I knew him pretty well when he was a retailer. I wonder if Judith Tizard even knows who he is?
Perhaps I`ll link to some of his mixes on my blog during the month to give him a plug. He’s released over 150 productions, which have sold over 500,000 singles and appeared on 2,000,000 compilation units. He entered the UK Top 75 Single Chart over 9 times. He has remixed 5 UK Top 40 Singles, appeared on over 12 record labels, recorded under more than 10 aliases, and collaborated with over 15 of the scene’s premier league artists. HIs latest 3CD 60 track album is HTML - Hard Trance is My Life.
-
My fave NZ musician is Steve Hill but I bet they won't play any of his stuff in NZ music month.
Who's "they"?
Do you have to still live here to be an "NZ musician"?
No, not for NZ On Air support, which is largely radio-focused and includes radio plugging, the Kiwi (and Indie and Iwi) Hit Discs for radio, $5k video grants, plus small and a few larger recording grants. I don't know anything about the Phase 5 export scheme.
Creative NZ gives grants to less commercial projects. There's a little, matchable, TradeNZ support, I think. And of course you do have to be in the country and demonstrating progress in your chosen field to qualify for a PACE scheme.
And there's the NZ Music Commission, a busy little agency that gets by on a few hundred thousand a year, and in turn helps support Independent Music NZ, which (aside from lining up with RIANZ on the Copyright Amendment Bill) is a pretty sound outfit.
Or does your music have to be in a supported genre - downbeat, dub, indy, maybe psytrance but definitely *not* hard trance?
I think the key thing is that you apply for it. I suspect it's that Steve didn't, rather than because there's a "no hard trance" rule (I mean, like most people could tell you the difference between that and psytrance). I think the music that gets funded most often is radio-friendly rock. The downbeat people are usually fairly good at business.
I thought Chris Chetland at Kog had a legitimate grievance when they were putting out so many records and kept falling through the cracks, but that's a function of NZ On Air having become the default delivery mechanism.
-
Dave: If you go to Wellington's hard dance parties we might have met. I tend to wear lots of shiny stuff and hang out with the WDC people.
I must get that album, maybe. Is it available in unmixed?
-
Oh and Rich, no, you don't have to live in NZ to be classed as a Kiwi musician. Shihad opened NZ Music month last year, I think, flying over from Aussie to do so.
-
RIP Mr Hoffman, reminds of the three hours spent last october appreciating this:
http://www.fineartbrokers.com/media/wdfabMedia/degas-marty.JPG
-
I was being a bit flip, anyway. But when I hear NZ Music Month I do tend to think of wall-wall Shihad, Dave Dobbyn and maybe Scribe.
For all I know Steve Hill "has" had some sort of NZ music support. With those sort of numbers though, he maybe doesn't need it..
-
<i>but that's a function of NZ ON Air having become the default delivery mechanism.</i>
Of course they`re not delivering anything for NZ Music Month this year - Brendan Smyth is not even in the country at the mo - the NZ Music Commission is runing the show pretty much without NZOA. D`you knmow why, Russell? -
"Simon Sweetman looks like he's too young to remember the "bad old days" of New Zealand music, when there was no airplay, even for insanely popular bands (Screaming Mee Mees, Blam Blam Blam, Toy Love, etc) - and when Crowded House had to get airplay overseas before they got played here."
Well he should remember. The sad state of airplay for these bands carried on all the way through to the mid/late 90's. In '96 there was only about 6% NZ content on NZ radio(ironically songs from artists that could really have done with the supprt 20 years earlier) and that's not so long ago.
I know in many ways NZMM focuses mainly on the more commercial end of the market, but many of these "commercial" artists wouldn't have been heard on a commercial radio playlist 10 years ago and while there are many great artists that will still not get the direct exposure through NZMM, I believe it has the effect of increasing the audience for these artists. I guess it's a branding exercise with the message that NZ music is a quality product and this message does in some cases have a trickle down effect. Maybe one day we'll have 30% local content on radio as a result.
-
I am probably a generation or half a generation older than y'all and that might be why I am surprised that a lot of you are in favour of recreational drugs. I'm not coming from a "drugs are immoral" point of view. I'm pretty keen on my prescription drugs and I'm not sure if marijuana should be illegal.
How would you people who are parents feel about your kids using LSD etc if it were legal and available?
-
Heh, RB. The irony of having you have a go at Sean Plunket for media training one day, getting jiggy with Tizzy the next.
Jeez, if only someone could take Jim Anderton tripping some time... Matter of fact, make LSD compulsory for MP induction as part of their oath to this country.
Now THAT'S DAFT!
-
How would you people who are parents feel about your kids using LSD etc if it were legal and available?
look, when my offspring are old enough to do all the (currently)LEGAL drugs of their own volition, then i hope they have the maturity and advice under their belts to choose how to approach the arbritrarily illegal ones too.
a large percentage of young people are going to try these things, whether they are legal or not. simple fact.
if the consciousness-altering substance is properly regulated, there is likely to be better access to realistic advice and education, and you know what you are buying/taking is what you think it is. Prohibition puts people at the mercy of crime syndicates, essentially. you cannot be sure if you are taking x, y or z. consumer guarantees act does not apply, for some strange reason.
i can think of a lot worse things for young people to get up to than taking LSD and going to the art gallery or park.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.