First of all, I'll admit that Your Views hasn't had my full attention lately. So it came as a surprise to me when I browsed the topic "Can Rodney survive this perks scandal?" (which was originally posed as "Are Rodney Hide's travel expenses justified?") and found that I had missed the creation and subsequent closure of a thread concerned with Maori Party MP Hone Harawira's own "perks scandal" and supposedly "racist" comments made in an email to former Waitangi Tribunal director Buddy Mikaere. I'm not sure how long the thread was up, or what the question posed by Your Views was - the only trace of the thread's existence appears in a statement on the naughty Rodney thread:
"The other debate about Hone has now been closed because, regrettably, it degenerated into a racist rant instead of a constructive debate."
This statement reflects that the Your Views editorial team believe that the section encourages users to engage and debate in a constructive fashion, and that in this case, the thread was taken down because it was not representing this kind of engagement. Also, by claiming to remove the thread due to its "degenerat[ion] into a racist rant", they make it seem like they actively seek to stamp out any traces of racism in Your Views. Yeah right!
Argh, I took my eye off the ball for a couple of days, something really interesting happened in Your Views and I missed the lead-up! Ah well, there's still been plenty of intriguing responses to the "Has Rodney really done it this time?" question:
Kingi (Auckland)
Hide is married and not divorced. Taking his girlfriend overseas at taxpayers expense is wrong.
I don't mind politicians spending money frivolously, but by god, could they do it whilst upholding the principles of marriage?
katie k (Auckland)
Rodney doesn't deserve praise for his apology, the only thing he deserves is a good clip around the ears. He is two faced the only thing he is sorry for is that he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar
Strewth, that cheeky chappie Rodney deserves more than just a slap on the hand with a wet bus ticket, we all bust a gut to put food on the table and his actions just take the piss.
This week Your Views also raised the question "Should TVNZ have axed Dancing with the Stars?"; another addition to its list of crucial politically-engaged topics. And as if a whole thread about Rodney wasn't enough to satisfy the Hide-haters of this world, a couple also used this thread to bag the ACT leader, who appeared on the show a few years back:
Pigs snout out (Churton Park)
Yep makes people like Rodney popular. Unless they bring Rodney back and drop him on his head. I'd donate to see that.
Wouldn't we all...
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Is the humble hooded sweatshirt responsible for NZ's serious crime problem?
Your Views often posits questions related to the findings of one study or another reported on by the Herald, taking advantage of the controversy that certain types of research can incite. “Is it best for fathers to stay away from the delivery room?” made for an amusing debate; with the suggestion of a French obstetrician that a father's presence at their baby's birth could be potentially harmful causing the users of Your Views to react with anger, confusion and as always, hilarity:
Retox (Forrest Hill)
Woman = hospital
Man = Pub
What happened to tradition? I say return to the good ol days. Call me a pig but hey, tradition is a great thing.
Other such research findings-based Your Views threads include “Are you thinking about becoming a vegetarian?” (yes, you guessed it, full of meatheads triumphing meat) and “Does eating too many sweets make kids violent?” (some saying yes, sweets are the partner in crime to the evil media, and some crying out “PC nanny state don’t try and tell me what I can feed my flippin’ kids!”)...
But this morning, waiting with bated breath at the potential dawning of a new Your Views topic, came the question: “Is crime a serious problem in NZ? Is it bad where you live?”, based on findings from a Victoria University study which found that a large number of the participants surveyed felt that crime was an issue in other areas, not their own. What a question! Especially the second half of it, which invites the moaners and groaners of the world to take centre stage...
Rahmat Ali (Manukau Central)
Yes -crime is a serious problem in NZ. Three cars broken into recently- One car door glass broken- after a month another car 3 door glasses broken- After a week another car door lock broken . Police took the complaint, but we have had nothing from them so far- Only report was sent to claim insurance.
I like it how Rahmat considers both questions, but answers the first question, a sociologically complex one at that, directly and succinctly in order to get it out of the way and detail his own experiences. Some of the responses resemble letters to the Independent Police Conduct Authority.
Mercy (Mt Wellington)
It was a very violent country before the new people started to arrive in 1810 or so. It is a lot less violent now, lets celebrate that and don't expect that New Zealand will ever be like a northern European country with an homongenous culture, they don't even have that distinction any more. The law works even if its slow and the prisons are full. At least the criminals are off the streets for a while.
An opinion that is both misinformed and racist! Top marks Mercy.
Indie Gooch (Newton)
This is a nation founded on the wholesale theft of land by threat of genocide - why would anyone be surprised that crime is a part of NZ's culture?
That’s more like it. I’d love to see Indie Gooch and Mercy battle it out in a game of New Zealand-themed Trivial Pursuit.
Jona (Katikati)
Yes crime is a big problem. I live in the country and avoid the pitfalls of urban crime, where the 'pond-life' walk around and commit opportunistic theft and vandalism. However there is still a lot of rural thieving in my area, but at least I am spared the 'hoodied up scum' sloping past and eyeballing my property advertising their intentions, as I recall from living in Whakatane. They are so obvious to watch, they can keep their heads straight ahead, but the eyes are swiveled hard to one side of the head. Another giveaway is they walk up and down past the property several times. And what's with the hoodie on in summer? A disguise? You can't disguise their knuckles dragging on the ground!
Wearing a hoodie in summer – that’s the real crime. You can’t disguise fashion crimes!
But seriously, Your Views, if you wanted to construct the perfect set of questions to incite enough rage amongst users to mobilise them to form vigilante crime-fighting communities, then you might just be on the money with this one.
Retox (Forrest Hill)
Woman = hospital
Man = Pub
What happened to tradition? I say return to the good ol days. Call me a pig but hey, tradition is a great thing.
Other such research findings-based Your Views threads include “Are you thinking about becoming a vegetarian?” (yes, you guessed it, full of meatheads triumphing meat) and “Does eating too many sweets make kids violent?” (some saying yes, sweets are the partner in crime to the evil media, and some crying out “PC nanny state don’t try and tell me what I can feed my flippin’ kids!”)...
But this morning, waiting with bated breath at the potential dawning of a new Your Views topic, came the question: “Is crime a serious problem in NZ? Is it bad where you live?”, based on findings from a Victoria University study which found that a large number of the participants surveyed felt that crime was an issue in other areas, not their own. What a question! Especially the second half of it, which invites the moaners and groaners of the world to take centre stage...
Rahmat Ali (Manukau Central)
Yes -crime is a serious problem in NZ. Three cars broken into recently- One car door glass broken- after a month another car 3 door glasses broken- After a week another car door lock broken . Police took the complaint, but we have had nothing from them so far- Only report was sent to claim insurance.
I like it how Rahmat considers both questions, but answers the first question, a sociologically complex one at that, directly and succinctly in order to get it out of the way and detail his own experiences. Some of the responses resemble letters to the Independent Police Conduct Authority.
Mercy (Mt Wellington)
It was a very violent country before the new people started to arrive in 1810 or so. It is a lot less violent now, lets celebrate that and don't expect that New Zealand will ever be like a northern European country with an homongenous culture, they don't even have that distinction any more. The law works even if its slow and the prisons are full. At least the criminals are off the streets for a while.
An opinion that is both misinformed and racist! Top marks Mercy.
Indie Gooch (Newton)
This is a nation founded on the wholesale theft of land by threat of genocide - why would anyone be surprised that crime is a part of NZ's culture?
That’s more like it. I’d love to see Indie Gooch and Mercy battle it out in a game of New Zealand-themed Trivial Pursuit.
Jona (Katikati)
Yes crime is a big problem. I live in the country and avoid the pitfalls of urban crime, where the 'pond-life' walk around and commit opportunistic theft and vandalism. However there is still a lot of rural thieving in my area, but at least I am spared the 'hoodied up scum' sloping past and eyeballing my property advertising their intentions, as I recall from living in Whakatane. They are so obvious to watch, they can keep their heads straight ahead, but the eyes are swiveled hard to one side of the head. Another giveaway is they walk up and down past the property several times. And what's with the hoodie on in summer? A disguise? You can't disguise their knuckles dragging on the ground!
Wearing a hoodie in summer – that’s the real crime. You can’t disguise fashion crimes!
But seriously, Your Views, if you wanted to construct the perfect set of questions to incite enough rage amongst users to mobilise them to form vigilante crime-fighting communities, then you might just be on the money with this one.
Monday, November 2, 2009
I want Your Views to be better. Do you?
It is not often that the users of Your Views critique the way the section is managed, the design of the questions or the quality of journalism in the related story. So when they do, their posts stand out and help to soften the blow of reading comment after comment full of gripes, groans and gullible geezers.
This very morning Your Views nominated the topic “How has National performed in its first year in office?”. Most of the users commenting feel adequately qualified to evaluate the National Party’s performance in government; being a taxpaying, true blue New Zealander is enough judging entitlement for a lot of these jokers.
However, Peaches points out that the Herald could have provided a few more hard facts in its related story before opening up the field for comments:
Peaches (Wellington City)
Could the NZ Herald please provide a bar graph showing the statistics of our debt levels and productivity levels compared to when National got into power. Also a policy general change list.
From here, I can comment.
As all of the topics or questions nominated in Your Views are linked to a related article or articles, a number of users come to the section after reading the Herald’s coverage of the issue. In saying that, news doesn’t exist in a vacuum, especially online news, so the users of Your Views might well shop around before depositing their opinions. But Peaches’ comment highlights one of the central problems with Your Views: that users are encouraged to respond to topics or questions which are closely linked to how the Herald has chosen to cover the issue concerned. Peaches seems to be critiquing the Herald and Your Views for not presenting factual information but instead privileging opinion.
In terms of criticising the Herald’s reporting and framing of opinion, Julian goes further than Peaches by suggesting the related article suspiciously paints National in a good light:
Julian (Vogeltown, Wellington City)
Did you get the Nats' press secretary to write your article?
The Herald received even more criticism of the quality of its journalism in the Your Views thread “Chris Rattue wants Wales to beat the All Blacks. Do you?”. Now usually I find the threads relating to sport in Your Views a wee bit dry (except when they intersect with something juicy like politics), but this one is off the chain. One of the Herald’s own sports columnists, Chris Rattue, wants the Welsh rugby team to beat the All Blacks, the beloved bastion of all things Kiwi, in order to give the ABs coaching panel a “giant kick up the behind”. What a disgrace!
William R (Piopio)
You are a p**** Rattue, your journalism style is absolute rubbish with your constant sarcasism (it is the lowest form of wit you know). You obviousley have a personal vendetta against Graham Henry and still cannot get over 2007. Grow up. The All Blacks will dominate Wales like they have for the last 40 years and 99.9% of New Zealand will be right behind them. Then hopefully the NZ Herald will finally see the light and get rid of you.
Dales (Sandringham)
Rattue has got to be worst sports journalist on earth. Can someone please sack him. Thanks.
There were many calls for the Herald to sack Rattue. This guy even promises to stage a boycott:
Ryan Pollock (Waitakere City)
I boycott the herald and Chris Rattue
Steady on Ryan, next thing you’ll be fronting up $450,000 for a protest march up Queen Street in the name of democracy.
mick (Kingsland)
The silly thing is, us responding to Rattue's article is exactly what nzherald would want. They want to stimulate conversation, no matter how controversal.
Yo Mick, I really like your point and I'mma let you finish, but you forgot the 'i' in controversial.
This very morning Your Views nominated the topic “How has National performed in its first year in office?”. Most of the users commenting feel adequately qualified to evaluate the National Party’s performance in government; being a taxpaying, true blue New Zealander is enough judging entitlement for a lot of these jokers.
However, Peaches points out that the Herald could have provided a few more hard facts in its related story before opening up the field for comments:
Peaches (Wellington City)
Could the NZ Herald please provide a bar graph showing the statistics of our debt levels and productivity levels compared to when National got into power. Also a policy general change list.
From here, I can comment.
As all of the topics or questions nominated in Your Views are linked to a related article or articles, a number of users come to the section after reading the Herald’s coverage of the issue. In saying that, news doesn’t exist in a vacuum, especially online news, so the users of Your Views might well shop around before depositing their opinions. But Peaches’ comment highlights one of the central problems with Your Views: that users are encouraged to respond to topics or questions which are closely linked to how the Herald has chosen to cover the issue concerned. Peaches seems to be critiquing the Herald and Your Views for not presenting factual information but instead privileging opinion.
In terms of criticising the Herald’s reporting and framing of opinion, Julian goes further than Peaches by suggesting the related article suspiciously paints National in a good light:
Julian (Vogeltown, Wellington City)
Did you get the Nats' press secretary to write your article?
The Herald received even more criticism of the quality of its journalism in the Your Views thread “Chris Rattue wants Wales to beat the All Blacks. Do you?”. Now usually I find the threads relating to sport in Your Views a wee bit dry (except when they intersect with something juicy like politics), but this one is off the chain. One of the Herald’s own sports columnists, Chris Rattue, wants the Welsh rugby team to beat the All Blacks, the beloved bastion of all things Kiwi, in order to give the ABs coaching panel a “giant kick up the behind”. What a disgrace!
William R (Piopio)
You are a p**** Rattue, your journalism style is absolute rubbish with your constant sarcasism (it is the lowest form of wit you know). You obviousley have a personal vendetta against Graham Henry and still cannot get over 2007. Grow up. The All Blacks will dominate Wales like they have for the last 40 years and 99.9% of New Zealand will be right behind them. Then hopefully the NZ Herald will finally see the light and get rid of you.
Dales (Sandringham)
Rattue has got to be worst sports journalist on earth. Can someone please sack him. Thanks.
There were many calls for the Herald to sack Rattue. This guy even promises to stage a boycott:
Ryan Pollock (Waitakere City)
I boycott the herald and Chris Rattue
Steady on Ryan, next thing you’ll be fronting up $450,000 for a protest march up Queen Street in the name of democracy.
mick (Kingsland)
The silly thing is, us responding to Rattue's article is exactly what nzherald would want. They want to stimulate conversation, no matter how controversal.
Yo Mick, I really like your point and I'mma let you finish, but you forgot the 'i' in controversial.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
DonKey needs to keep Rhort-ney Hide's snout out of the trough
Rodney Hide is being labelled a hypocrite after having his girlfriend accompany him on an overseas tour, all paid for by the Great New Zealand Taxpayer. A number of responses to the Your Views question "Are Rodney Hide's travel expenses justified?" have reacted with shock and disbelief at the suggestion that Rodney has managed to score himself a lady friend. However, overall this thread reflects one thing that Your Views users can always be counted on to do: continually reference politicians or other public figures not by their real names but by some kind of incredibly witty and cutting nickname. Oh and the heavy circulation of the same cynical phrases over and over again (PC gone mad being the most favoured). Okay so this phenomenon is by no means limited to the space of Your Views, as the public, journalists and politicians have been thinking up nasty names to call each other since the year dot. As Matt Southall from spEak You're bRanes notes, speaking about the BBC's Have Your Say section:
"Nobody ever writes "New Labour" or "Gordon Brown". These petty internet gnomes proudly write "Nu LiarBore", "Gordon CLOWN" or something similarly inventive and hilarious. You can almost see their smiles of satisfaction as they type it. Funny and subversive. Brilliant."
Hiawatha (Auckland Central)
Rhort-ney Hide, you deserve to be fired. What a sad hypocrite you are.
I'm sure Hiawatha is pleased with her shot at Rodney Hide. Yeah, make a funny word play on his name, that'll learn him! As we saw in a previous post about John Key's American adventure, to hilariously refer to John Key you say 'DonKey', for Helen Clark it's 'Auntie Helen' or 'Head Girl Helen'.
Certain phrases get circulated again and again, each time getting more and more frustrating to read and yet, gathering more momentum as they go...
wellwisher (Penrose)
Just another pig at the trough.
Shane (Grey Lynn)
Rodney Hide should first pay back his partners expenses then he should resign. He has no creditabilty and is just another pig with his face in the trough.
Huia Gold Coast (Queensland)
Hide is a pompous hypocrite who has shown that he is just another right wing reptile with his snout in the trough?
Yes, yes, we get it. Politicians are pigs with snouts or faces in the trough. Very creative! 10 out of 10 for all of you.
Margot Campbell (Napier)
The lefties will jump all over this. Rodney is the only one with steel balls in our parliament. Good that he brings a girl rather than a boy.
Don't look for the splinter on some someone else. Look for the log on yourself.
And if you weren't outraged by that, here's some more Margot for ya! From the thread "Would you trade your regular breaks for time off later?":
Margot Campbell (Napier)
Who cares about this? The only people who take 'smoko' are the bottom of th bell curve who put lids on yoghurt. They vote red anyway.
The more I read Your Views, the more Margot Campbell's posts stick out and the more convinced I am that she must be a fake whose posts are designed to piss off the "PC brigade". She is also the bright spark who inspired the 'Ratbags suckling at the public teat' label in the tag cloud. Interesting that the moderation lets through some appalling homophobic remarks too, especially as they promise to weed out any posts that could be "considered discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual preference, nationality, age, disability, etc." Letting Margot's post go through just adds more weight to my theory that she is part of a Your Views forum conspiracy, dreamed up to incite maximum levels of offense and controversy.
"Nobody ever writes "New Labour" or "Gordon Brown". These petty internet gnomes proudly write "Nu LiarBore", "Gordon CLOWN" or something similarly inventive and hilarious. You can almost see their smiles of satisfaction as they type it. Funny and subversive. Brilliant."
Hiawatha (Auckland Central)
Rhort-ney Hide, you deserve to be fired. What a sad hypocrite you are.
I'm sure Hiawatha is pleased with her shot at Rodney Hide. Yeah, make a funny word play on his name, that'll learn him! As we saw in a previous post about John Key's American adventure, to hilariously refer to John Key you say 'DonKey', for Helen Clark it's 'Auntie Helen' or 'Head Girl Helen'.
Certain phrases get circulated again and again, each time getting more and more frustrating to read and yet, gathering more momentum as they go...
wellwisher (Penrose)
Just another pig at the trough.
Shane (Grey Lynn)
Rodney Hide should first pay back his partners expenses then he should resign. He has no creditabilty and is just another pig with his face in the trough.
Huia Gold Coast (Queensland)
Hide is a pompous hypocrite who has shown that he is just another right wing reptile with his snout in the trough?
Yes, yes, we get it. Politicians are pigs with snouts or faces in the trough. Very creative! 10 out of 10 for all of you.
Margot Campbell (Napier)
The lefties will jump all over this. Rodney is the only one with steel balls in our parliament. Good that he brings a girl rather than a boy.
Don't look for the splinter on some someone else. Look for the log on yourself.
And if you weren't outraged by that, here's some more Margot for ya! From the thread "Would you trade your regular breaks for time off later?":
Margot Campbell (Napier)
Who cares about this? The only people who take 'smoko' are the bottom of th bell curve who put lids on yoghurt. They vote red anyway.
The more I read Your Views, the more Margot Campbell's posts stick out and the more convinced I am that she must be a fake whose posts are designed to piss off the "PC brigade". She is also the bright spark who inspired the 'Ratbags suckling at the public teat' label in the tag cloud. Interesting that the moderation lets through some appalling homophobic remarks too, especially as they promise to weed out any posts that could be "considered discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual preference, nationality, age, disability, etc." Letting Margot's post go through just adds more weight to my theory that she is part of a Your Views forum conspiracy, dreamed up to incite maximum levels of offense and controversy.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
How bizarre, how bizarre
New Zealanders love a good protest march. Out on the streets, banner in hand, chanting this, that and the other. Alright - so maybe we don't all get out and march, but we all enjoy a wee nostalgia trip down Memory Lane. But now the 87.6% of New Zealanders who voted in the smacking referendum are being called on to show their anger and frustration at the total disregard for democracy in this country. Some businessman is fronting up $450,000 for the march, which is a lot of money to spend on banners and refreshments for the troops. I bet around half of that covers Simon Barnett's appearance fee.
But anyway, it's about democracy! The people want to be heard! They want action! They want to be able to smack their kids if they damn well want to! But will the users of Your Views march? Will you march to support action on the smacking referendum?
Yelspal (Epsom)
Does anybody else see irony in the half-wits announcing a march for the right to beat children on the same day some of Nia Glassie's murderers launch an appeal against their sentences?
Yes, I see the irony. But ouch, comparing child murderers with middle New Zealand? Dodgy territory...
Bonny Le Grice (Papatoetoe)
How bizarre that people want to march for the right to hit other people.
Followed by...
JC (Avonhead)
How bizzare that some people living in a so-called democratic country advocate not listening to the voice of 87% of the population.
(How bizarre, how bizarre! Another nostalgic reminisce!)
Technically JC, it wasn't the 'voice' of 87% of the population. Only 1,682,717 votes were cast, so it's actually only 87.6% of that. Estimates of NZ's current population lie around 4,315,800. You do the math!
Doc (Riccarton)
Wish I was there to march on two counts. To protest against politicians interfering in my family's business and also for ignoring the very substantial vote.
Blathering on about petition wording is a red herring. People knew full well what they were voting on. Don't insult us.
As for the stupid comment about smacking being violence - its crappy thinking like that that creates little monsters who have no respect, no manners, no idea of right and wrong and that do not understand that bad behaviour has consequences for themeslves and others. Smacking leads to better citizens and less violence.
Gosh, how could anyone confuse smacking and violence? They're clearly two different things. Doc has outlined it explicitly for us. Smack your kids and they'll be better for it. Harden up New Zealand!
But in all seriousness, anyone want to organise a counter-march? We don't need $450,000, my Mum's got a couple of tins of red paint and we'll just need to get hold of some old bedsheets.
But anyway, it's about democracy! The people want to be heard! They want action! They want to be able to smack their kids if they damn well want to! But will the users of Your Views march? Will you march to support action on the smacking referendum?
Yelspal (Epsom)
Does anybody else see irony in the half-wits announcing a march for the right to beat children on the same day some of Nia Glassie's murderers launch an appeal against their sentences?
Yes, I see the irony. But ouch, comparing child murderers with middle New Zealand? Dodgy territory...
Bonny Le Grice (Papatoetoe)
How bizarre that people want to march for the right to hit other people.
Followed by...
JC (Avonhead)
How bizzare that some people living in a so-called democratic country advocate not listening to the voice of 87% of the population.
(How bizarre, how bizarre! Another nostalgic reminisce!)
Technically JC, it wasn't the 'voice' of 87% of the population. Only 1,682,717 votes were cast, so it's actually only 87.6% of that. Estimates of NZ's current population lie around 4,315,800. You do the math!
Doc (Riccarton)
Wish I was there to march on two counts. To protest against politicians interfering in my family's business and also for ignoring the very substantial vote.
Blathering on about petition wording is a red herring. People knew full well what they were voting on. Don't insult us.
As for the stupid comment about smacking being violence - its crappy thinking like that that creates little monsters who have no respect, no manners, no idea of right and wrong and that do not understand that bad behaviour has consequences for themeslves and others. Smacking leads to better citizens and less violence.
Gosh, how could anyone confuse smacking and violence? They're clearly two different things. Doc has outlined it explicitly for us. Smack your kids and they'll be better for it. Harden up New Zealand!
But in all seriousness, anyone want to organise a counter-march? We don't need $450,000, my Mum's got a couple of tins of red paint and we'll just need to get hold of some old bedsheets.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Should we stick with Your Views? How are you coping with Your Views?
A couple of posts back, the response by Your Views user Lampie in regard to the question "Do you have faith in the Government's handling of the economy?" got me thinking about the expectations that users have of Your Views as a forum for public discussion. Lampie's response, "No, next stupid question." seems to reflect an expectation that the section is not functioning as it could do; simply asking stupid questions which generate stupid answers. Although it's hard to predict the exact sentiment behind Lampie's response, if you delve inside Your Views a little, you're bound to find users criticising the section for a number of reasons - ranging from obviously polarising or inappropriate questions to publishing overtly racist sentiment. Users have a right to feel frustrated as in the Rules section for Your Views, the editorial team claim to "encourage wide debate" (where this blog takes its name from!) and to filter out discriminatory remarks, however, time after time it is evident that the moderation process fails. One only has to look at the thread concerning Maori Television and Rugby World Cup coverage to see this.
However, sometimes a user response will pop up in full support of the space Your Views provides. For example, in the thread "How well do you think the police handled the Aisling Symes case?", jack goes against the sentiment of a number of users who criticise the Herald for raising such an "inflammatory" question.
jack (North Shore)
A thank you:
I'd like to congratulate the NZ Herald for the existence of this public forum.
It is important for the public to be able to have their say without much if any censoring.
It would be even better if emails are sent to the NZ Police and the W. Council insisting that they actually READ and consider these comments!
Thanks to NZ Herald. Keep it up (and try to make posts appear sooner).
Although jack makes a small request for responses to be uploaded more promptly, his comment is celebrates Your Views and the Herald. Pat-on-the-back, job well done. The suggestion that the NZ police and Waitakere City Council check out the responses reflects the fear that the sentiment expressed in Your Views might not be reaching the right people. As hinted at in a previous post concerning John Key's potential play date with the Dalai Llama, I would not be at all surprised if media advisors and politicians regularly scroll the pages of Your Views in the belief that they can use it to gauge "the voice of the people".
Some users appear to believe that the Herald's interactive opinion features could entirely replace the need for government, as evident in the thread "Should we stick with MMP?":
Cartman (Auckland)
Lets just get rid of the politicians altogether and make all the decisions by internet polling on the Herald website.
Okay so perhaps Cartman's suggestion is a joke - the television series where he derives his username from is known for sarcasm and satire. But it does point to the ever-increasing prevalence and power of electronic opinion polling. Here's hoping the day never comes that New Zealand is governed by the whims of Herald readers.
However, sometimes a user response will pop up in full support of the space Your Views provides. For example, in the thread "How well do you think the police handled the Aisling Symes case?", jack goes against the sentiment of a number of users who criticise the Herald for raising such an "inflammatory" question.
jack (North Shore)
A thank you:
I'd like to congratulate the NZ Herald for the existence of this public forum.
It is important for the public to be able to have their say without much if any censoring.
It would be even better if emails are sent to the NZ Police and the W. Council insisting that they actually READ and consider these comments!
Thanks to NZ Herald. Keep it up (and try to make posts appear sooner).
Although jack makes a small request for responses to be uploaded more promptly, his comment is celebrates Your Views and the Herald. Pat-on-the-back, job well done. The suggestion that the NZ police and Waitakere City Council check out the responses reflects the fear that the sentiment expressed in Your Views might not be reaching the right people. As hinted at in a previous post concerning John Key's potential play date with the Dalai Llama, I would not be at all surprised if media advisors and politicians regularly scroll the pages of Your Views in the belief that they can use it to gauge "the voice of the people".
Some users appear to believe that the Herald's interactive opinion features could entirely replace the need for government, as evident in the thread "Should we stick with MMP?":
Cartman (Auckland)
Lets just get rid of the politicians altogether and make all the decisions by internet polling on the Herald website.
Okay so perhaps Cartman's suggestion is a joke - the television series where he derives his username from is known for sarcasm and satire. But it does point to the ever-increasing prevalence and power of electronic opinion polling. Here's hoping the day never comes that New Zealand is governed by the whims of Herald readers.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Robin Hood and his Murderous Merry Men
The highly publicised incident of several Auckland Grammar boys bowing down in front of a Nazi flag, captured on camera and put up for some lols on Facebook, has prompted calls for a greater understanding of the Holocaust. Naturally, Your Views is all over it: "What history should schools be teaching our students?" So basically, what magical history topic will stop ignorant teenage behaviour?
A fairly predictable array of responses from the Your Views bunch: "more on the World Wars!"/ "more on the Treaty of Waitangi!"/"less PC propaganda!"
But one comment stood out from the rest with for its clear insight, finally exposing the link between the welfare state and systematic mass murder.
AGW Sceptic (Greenlane)
What should be taught is that the term NAZI stood for National Socialist. That's right, the NAZI party were a pack of socialists, so all those from the left of the political spectrum who accuse the free market right wing of being NAZI's need to take a good look at themselves. They should also be taught that the death toll attributed to Adolf Hitler was nothing compared to that of other leftist leaders such as Stalin & Mao. The further left you go the more murderous they become, but I haven't heard of any free marketeers murdering people yet.
They should also be taught that Robin Hood was a thief & a murderer, not a hero.
Yeah, bloody Robin Hood should have let the richies keep their riches and wait for the money to 'trickle-down' to the poor.
A fairly predictable array of responses from the Your Views bunch: "more on the World Wars!"/ "more on the Treaty of Waitangi!"/"less PC propaganda!"
But one comment stood out from the rest with for its clear insight, finally exposing the link between the welfare state and systematic mass murder.
AGW Sceptic (Greenlane)
What should be taught is that the term NAZI stood for National Socialist. That's right, the NAZI party were a pack of socialists, so all those from the left of the political spectrum who accuse the free market right wing of being NAZI's need to take a good look at themselves. They should also be taught that the death toll attributed to Adolf Hitler was nothing compared to that of other leftist leaders such as Stalin & Mao. The further left you go the more murderous they become, but I haven't heard of any free marketeers murdering people yet.
They should also be taught that Robin Hood was a thief & a murderer, not a hero.
Yeah, bloody Robin Hood should have let the richies keep their riches and wait for the money to 'trickle-down' to the poor.
Friday, October 16, 2009
'Cause I gotta have faith
The New Zealand government is borrowing $250 million per week to cope with the ongoing effects of the economic recession. As expected with the announcement of such a scary figure, fingers are being pointed, stress levels are rising and questions are being asked. One such question is being raised by Your Views. Do you have faith in the Government's handling of the economy? Well, do you?
Victor (Auckland)
No not at all. National Government is as bad as Labour Government. They are only there to look after their interest and of their friends and buisness colleagues.To cut down the governemt expenditure I urge Government to take the bold steps immediately:
1- Introduce death penalty for cold bloded murderers - saving cost on prison expenses and lesson to every one that if you take any one's life be prepared to lose your life.
2- Cut down on Immigrants and refugees coming to NZ
3- Impose family planning like India & China - maximum of 2 child per family. No extra benefits to be given if the mum ( solo) or parents they decide to have more then 2 children.
4- Change laws now that no former MP can claim for free travel benefits if they are no longer in Governement.
5- Change the term of the Government to 4 or 5 years to save millions in election costs & scrap MMP.
6-Cut the slaries of all Govt executives, Cabinets Ministers & MP's by 10% across the board.
7-Restrict overseas trips by MP and Government officials
8- Cut down the benefits to people who are able to work but are damn too lazy to work
9- Introduce tougher laws for manufactures & distributors of P- Life sentence.
Victor details his list of remedies for the country's woes, urging the current government to take heed of his suggestions. Victor doesn't have faith in the government's ability to handle the recession, but he does seem to have faith in using Your Views as a direct link to John Key. This reminds me of what Matt Southall, creator of spEak You're bRanes, said in a piece for the Guardian about users of the BBC's Have Your Say forum:
Laurence's prescription for a better New Zealand isn't as detailed as Victor's, however, he does outline John Key's first tasks: "tak[ing] his head out of his ass" and to "stop buggering around with Maori types and other crank groups". Using this kind of language is sure to discredit his response in the eyes of some other users, but more vulgar is Laurence's assertion that Maori are "types" who belong to a "crank" group. I wonder if we'd also find Laurence commenting in the Your Views thread on the Maori Television bid for the Rugby World Cup coverage rights, declaring that it's a pain in the ass for Key to be buggering around with Maori Television. "Refocus your priorities John, no more buggering around and get that head out of your ass!"
Margot Campbell (Napier)
They're doing around a gazillion times better through a recession than what Micheal and Helen did through the boom years. However, 1 gazillion is not good enough. JK is still a bit PC left wing. It might be time for Rodney to run the show to cut out the nonsense.
I have a fantastic yet terrifying mental image of Rodney Hide decked out in a yellow lycra bodysuit with a giant anti-PC sign on the front, cape blowing in the wind.
Lampie (Glen Eden)
No, next stupid question.
I love it. Lampie not only suggests that this question is stupid, but highlights the expectation that the next question will be stupid also. And yet Lampie still answers these stupid questions! Why do people continue to use Your Views if they dislike the service it is offering? I think that question deserves an entire post to itself. Stay tuned!
Victor (Auckland)
No not at all. National Government is as bad as Labour Government. They are only there to look after their interest and of their friends and buisness colleagues.To cut down the governemt expenditure I urge Government to take the bold steps immediately:
1- Introduce death penalty for cold bloded murderers - saving cost on prison expenses and lesson to every one that if you take any one's life be prepared to lose your life.
2- Cut down on Immigrants and refugees coming to NZ
3- Impose family planning like India & China - maximum of 2 child per family. No extra benefits to be given if the mum ( solo) or parents they decide to have more then 2 children.
4- Change laws now that no former MP can claim for free travel benefits if they are no longer in Governement.
5- Change the term of the Government to 4 or 5 years to save millions in election costs & scrap MMP.
6-Cut the slaries of all Govt executives, Cabinets Ministers & MP's by 10% across the board.
7-Restrict overseas trips by MP and Government officials
8- Cut down the benefits to people who are able to work but are damn too lazy to work
9- Introduce tougher laws for manufactures & distributors of P- Life sentence.
Victor details his list of remedies for the country's woes, urging the current government to take heed of his suggestions. Victor doesn't have faith in the government's ability to handle the recession, but he does seem to have faith in using Your Views as a direct link to John Key. This reminds me of what Matt Southall, creator of spEak You're bRanes, said in a piece for the Guardian about users of the BBC's Have Your Say forum:
Who do they think they're talking to? The Queen? Terry Wogan? Father Christmas? I can tell you, actually. They all think they're addressing Gordon Brown. This is about as sophisticated as their politics gets. The BBC = the state = Gordon Brown. Having their tragic witterings "published" on the BBC's site (THE BBC!!! THE ACTUAL BBC!!!!!) is, for them, a validation of their moronic opinion and as good as speaking directly to the prime minister.
Although I like to think I have a little more faith (the word of the day, really) in the users of Your Views, Southall no doubt points to the imagined communicatory connection between the State and features like Have Your Say and Your Views. Victor - perhaps write a letter to Mr Key with your thoughts? Such brilliant suggestions really need to reach the PM asap.
Laurence (United Kingdom)
Key needs to take his head out of his ass and stop buggering around with Maori types and other crank groups and immediately start with plans on improving productivity, closing the wage gap with Australia, paying off our huge overseas debt and developing other industries away from our dependance on agriculture. Key and National need to refocus their priorities and really think about what we voted them in for ie:creating jobs and improving living standards.
Laurence's prescription for a better New Zealand isn't as detailed as Victor's, however, he does outline John Key's first tasks: "tak[ing] his head out of his ass" and to "stop buggering around with Maori types and other crank groups". Using this kind of language is sure to discredit his response in the eyes of some other users, but more vulgar is Laurence's assertion that Maori are "types" who belong to a "crank" group. I wonder if we'd also find Laurence commenting in the Your Views thread on the Maori Television bid for the Rugby World Cup coverage rights, declaring that it's a pain in the ass for Key to be buggering around with Maori Television. "Refocus your priorities John, no more buggering around and get that head out of your ass!"
Margot Campbell (Napier)
They're doing around a gazillion times better through a recession than what Micheal and Helen did through the boom years. However, 1 gazillion is not good enough. JK is still a bit PC left wing. It might be time for Rodney to run the show to cut out the nonsense.
I have a fantastic yet terrifying mental image of Rodney Hide decked out in a yellow lycra bodysuit with a giant anti-PC sign on the front, cape blowing in the wind.
Lampie (Glen Eden)
No, next stupid question.
I love it. Lampie not only suggests that this question is stupid, but highlights the expectation that the next question will be stupid also. And yet Lampie still answers these stupid questions! Why do people continue to use Your Views if they dislike the service it is offering? I think that question deserves an entire post to itself. Stay tuned!
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Compassion over controversy? Never!
After last night's discovery of missing Auckland toddler Aisling Symes, Police Inspector Gary Davey stated: "I know you've got a lot of questions, and so do I." As with any event which reaches a high level of national significance, Your Views gets right in there to asks its own question, not missing the opportunity to capture how the "public" really feel about the issue.
Your Views asks: How well do you think the police handled the Aisling Symes case?
This question belongs to what we might call the "privilege of hindsight" theme common across Your Views questions; Did Civil Defence respond appropriately to the tsunami warning?/What do you think of the police's handling of the Napier siege?/Was Paula Bennett right to release income details on two solo mothers?
A high number of Your Views users have pointed towards the inflammatory nature of the question posed, accusing the Herald of sensationalising what is an extremely tragic event:
Kiwi (Waikato/King Country)
What a inflamatory question. At this stage we know nothing of how this poor girl ended up where she was or how the Police received information she was there or decided to look there. Before we start blaming the Police how about waiting till all the facts are out and thinking of the families involved.
Responsible Kiwi (Eureka)
Come on NZ Herald - we expect more from you than a question that reeks of media hype. The Police seem to have conducted themselves with the utmost professionalism and compassion. The whole community has pulled together. Very sad outcome but I guess in one way it didn't end up like the McCanns - never knowing. Love to the family.
mixer1976 (Titirangi)
Really really sad that some people use this forum to criticise the Police, which is probably only due to their own shortcomings with the law. These are usually the same people who have the 'told you so' mentality, with their only contribution to the community being to criticise others from behind the security of a keyboard.you are weak people. [...] A ridiculous inflammatory question by the Herald - highly insensitive at a time like this. How about compassion over controversy for once!
Once again it is great to see user criticism of Your Views posted in the section, with the highly sensitive nature of the story and the feeling that it is 'too soon' to be asking this question working to generate disapproval.
Grant (Mt Eden)
Did a whole lot better then your jackass reporting! They were out there day and night doing their jobs and looking for her. Far too soon for this type of question and you should remove it straight away. The police did a wonderful job. but oh noooo! It's never tooo soon for the Herald to put questions like this up and they are only want to get a reaction from people. (Of course this wont get put up, but I do feel better - rant over)
I bet when the Your Views moderator(s) sees the phrase "Of course this wont get put up", they post the comment just to call the user's bluff. By publishing the entire comment, the moderators make Your Views seem even more open to criticism; however, it somehow feels like Grant is also disempowered by this. Grant thinks the thread should be removed and predicts that his comment will go unpublished - Your Views enforces that he is wrong on both accounts.
Wayne Lo (Mt Albert)
Those saying that the cops are above criticism probably have fascistic tendencies. This is the way of Communist China in the past - adulation of public officials and public servants. They are getting away from that sort of thing now bigtime - as anyone familiar with the Chiense blogsphere would well know.
The Herald is completely correct in bringing questioning the actions of the police - in any democracy (or at least in any democracy which wishes to remain so), the police, the judiciary, and the politicians should all be held up to ruthless and relentless scrutiny.
As Wayne Lo demostrates, not all users appear critical of Your Views' decision to post such a question. Wayne fully supports the Herald in questioning the actions of any civil servants, arguing that such questions are necessary for a well-oiled democracy.
C R (Papakura)
I didn't help search so I don't have a right to comment.
Technically C R, if only users with a first-hand involvement in an issue or event had the right to comment in Your Views, then the section would be unrecognisable. Your Views is the way it is because people with varied levels of understanding and involvement in certain issues or events feel compelled to share their opinions. Your proximity to the issue or event is irrelevant. Whether you were a member of the search party or simply followed the news coverage, Uncle Your Views wants YOU!
Your Views asks: How well do you think the police handled the Aisling Symes case?
This question belongs to what we might call the "privilege of hindsight" theme common across Your Views questions; Did Civil Defence respond appropriately to the tsunami warning?/What do you think of the police's handling of the Napier siege?/Was Paula Bennett right to release income details on two solo mothers?
A high number of Your Views users have pointed towards the inflammatory nature of the question posed, accusing the Herald of sensationalising what is an extremely tragic event:
Kiwi (Waikato/King Country)
What a inflamatory question. At this stage we know nothing of how this poor girl ended up where she was or how the Police received information she was there or decided to look there. Before we start blaming the Police how about waiting till all the facts are out and thinking of the families involved.
Responsible Kiwi (Eureka)
Come on NZ Herald - we expect more from you than a question that reeks of media hype. The Police seem to have conducted themselves with the utmost professionalism and compassion. The whole community has pulled together. Very sad outcome but I guess in one way it didn't end up like the McCanns - never knowing. Love to the family.
mixer1976 (Titirangi)
Really really sad that some people use this forum to criticise the Police, which is probably only due to their own shortcomings with the law. These are usually the same people who have the 'told you so' mentality, with their only contribution to the community being to criticise others from behind the security of a keyboard.you are weak people. [...] A ridiculous inflammatory question by the Herald - highly insensitive at a time like this. How about compassion over controversy for once!
Once again it is great to see user criticism of Your Views posted in the section, with the highly sensitive nature of the story and the feeling that it is 'too soon' to be asking this question working to generate disapproval.
Grant (Mt Eden)
Did a whole lot better then your jackass reporting! They were out there day and night doing their jobs and looking for her. Far too soon for this type of question and you should remove it straight away. The police did a wonderful job. but oh noooo! It's never tooo soon for the Herald to put questions like this up and they are only want to get a reaction from people. (Of course this wont get put up, but I do feel better - rant over)
I bet when the Your Views moderator(s) sees the phrase "Of course this wont get put up", they post the comment just to call the user's bluff. By publishing the entire comment, the moderators make Your Views seem even more open to criticism; however, it somehow feels like Grant is also disempowered by this. Grant thinks the thread should be removed and predicts that his comment will go unpublished - Your Views enforces that he is wrong on both accounts.
Wayne Lo (Mt Albert)
Those saying that the cops are above criticism probably have fascistic tendencies. This is the way of Communist China in the past - adulation of public officials and public servants. They are getting away from that sort of thing now bigtime - as anyone familiar with the Chiense blogsphere would well know.
The Herald is completely correct in bringing questioning the actions of the police - in any democracy (or at least in any democracy which wishes to remain so), the police, the judiciary, and the politicians should all be held up to ruthless and relentless scrutiny.
As Wayne Lo demostrates, not all users appear critical of Your Views' decision to post such a question. Wayne fully supports the Herald in questioning the actions of any civil servants, arguing that such questions are necessary for a well-oiled democracy.
C R (Papakura)
I didn't help search so I don't have a right to comment.
Technically C R, if only users with a first-hand involvement in an issue or event had the right to comment in Your Views, then the section would be unrecognisable. Your Views is the way it is because people with varied levels of understanding and involvement in certain issues or events feel compelled to share their opinions. Your proximity to the issue or event is irrelevant. Whether you were a member of the search party or simply followed the news coverage, Uncle Your Views wants YOU!
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Swamp fever
John Key hasn't RSVP-ed the Dalai Lama's invitation for the two of them to have some hang time during the Buddhist leader's visit to Auckland in December. One of Key's election promises was that he would meet up with the Dalai Lama, and phwoar, come on John, everyone knows you can't back out on one of those. But the United Chinese Association of New Zealand asked back in April for John to reject the Dalai Lama's visa application. Come on John, you can't please everyone - make a decision.
Your Views has offered the question: Should John Key meet with the Dalai Lama? I'm sure John Key's media adviser is hanging on the every word of the users of Your Views right now.
Cartman (Auckland)
No he shouldnt China is too important as a trade partner to offend.
Why does he need to see the Dalai Lama anyway? Waste of his time really and its not worth the risk of getting involved in any way.
"Ahh, good point. Trade is pretty important. Must pass these comments on to John."
Graham (Howick)
Cartman (Auckland). It is exactly this repulsive ideology that has seen New Zealands identity/country sold down the river for a few pieces of silver. As long as someone is making money, then everythings alright. Bah Humbug!
"Ooh wait, we don't want to tarnish the image of New Zealand as a peacekeeping and democratic nation. Hmm. In a bit of a bind here."
Melissa (Mt Eden)
Yes he should. Some of these comments are appalling. Always money and economics before ethics with you right wing conservatives. You can't take money past the grave can you? Sort out your priorities! The Dalai Lama is the leader of the Tibetan people, therefore Key has every reason to meet with him plus he said he would.
The Chinese government terrify me. One day we'll all be speaking Chinese and the only 'night life' will be BBQ restaurants and karaoke bars.
"I quite like dining at BBQ restaurants and John is pretty mean on the ol' Singstar. However, as Melissa points out, we did kinda promise we'd meet up with the dude."
Jimmy (New Zealand)
PM John Key, yellow fever (Chinese immegrants) has already swamped NZ. Now please dont let our authority to be swamped by China.
Meet the Dalai Lama if not as a leader, then as a spritual one.
"Too right, can't have reds under the bed when we've already got yellow fever on every bloody corner. Maybe we could swing this to make the hippies happy that John's up for a bit of spirituality while appealing to the hard-line anti-immigration folks through dismissing China's disapproval. Perfect plan. I'll get on the phone to Johnny boy..."
Your Views has offered the question: Should John Key meet with the Dalai Lama? I'm sure John Key's media adviser is hanging on the every word of the users of Your Views right now.
Cartman (Auckland)
No he shouldnt China is too important as a trade partner to offend.
Why does he need to see the Dalai Lama anyway? Waste of his time really and its not worth the risk of getting involved in any way.
"Ahh, good point. Trade is pretty important. Must pass these comments on to John."
Graham (Howick)
Cartman (Auckland). It is exactly this repulsive ideology that has seen New Zealands identity/country sold down the river for a few pieces of silver. As long as someone is making money, then everythings alright. Bah Humbug!
"Ooh wait, we don't want to tarnish the image of New Zealand as a peacekeeping and democratic nation. Hmm. In a bit of a bind here."
Melissa (Mt Eden)
Yes he should. Some of these comments are appalling. Always money and economics before ethics with you right wing conservatives. You can't take money past the grave can you? Sort out your priorities! The Dalai Lama is the leader of the Tibetan people, therefore Key has every reason to meet with him plus he said he would.
The Chinese government terrify me. One day we'll all be speaking Chinese and the only 'night life' will be BBQ restaurants and karaoke bars.
"I quite like dining at BBQ restaurants and John is pretty mean on the ol' Singstar. However, as Melissa points out, we did kinda promise we'd meet up with the dude."
Jimmy (New Zealand)
PM John Key, yellow fever (Chinese immegrants) has already swamped NZ. Now please dont let our authority to be swamped by China.
Meet the Dalai Lama if not as a leader, then as a spritual one.
"Too right, can't have reds under the bed when we've already got yellow fever on every bloody corner. Maybe we could swing this to make the hippies happy that John's up for a bit of spirituality while appealing to the hard-line anti-immigration folks through dismissing China's disapproval. Perfect plan. I'll get on the phone to Johnny boy..."
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Would you be happy to put up with polarised discussion?
Maori Television has so far put in the highest bid for gaining the rights to screen the Rugby World Cup games in 2011. The Herald reported on the likelihood of Te Reo being included as part of the commentary, saying that the majority of commentary would be in English but with 5-10% Maori phrases. They even included a wee English-to-Maori translation of common rugby terms down the bottom of the story.
Your Views asks the question: Would you be happy to watch Rugby World Cup games on Maori TV? Strange phrasing here, with a definite insinuation that watching rugby on Maori TV would not sit comfortably with some people. It might as well be saying: "Could you put up with the odd Te Reo word or phrase during a Rugby World Cup game?", as if the language is simply a nuisance.
"Would you be happy driving with screaming kids in the back seat?"
GT (East Tamaki)
No, I do not want to have to listen to Maori in the middle of the games. I don't mind if you want to spread Maori culture, but not like this. This would be akin to force feeding. Don't people know that it's rude to speak another language in front of people who don't understand it? What's the difference between that and forcing everyone to watch Maori TV where they wouldn't understand 10% of the commentary?
M. L (Remuera)
Just out of principle: Absolutely not! I'm just sick to death of Maori organisations constantly having their hands out to the taxpayer to fund their enterprises. They just have an insatiable appetite for Government handouts. If I need a "fix" of Maori culture I'll just trot off down to the Auckland Museum, thanks. I don't want it rammed down my throat, constantly.
Both of these responses liken the expression of Maori language and/or culture to force-feeding, as something which is being 'rammed down' people's throats. I'm sure GT doesn't mind speaking English in front of people who don't understand it. M.L's suggestion that Maori culture is best represented in the Auckland Museum shows his/her imagining of Maori as museum artefacts, not as a culture which might -GASP- change over time.
T Carrington (Berhampore)
Good on Maori TV for punching above their weight. If the Maori Affairs people are trying to get messages through to Maoris and also to promote Maori business then doing it at a time when most of the world is watching smacks of good thinking. Better than spending it on welfare benefits I say.
Sad to see so many people including your reporter eating and talking straight out of TVNZ's trough - the question is, who benefits from leaking all this bid information and that would be TVNZ - a broadcaster renown for long lunches whose bosses have been subsidised by my taxes for more than half a century - and yet we moan about little ol Maori TV?
Shame on those journos who pandered without thinking to an obvious TVNZ set up.
I continue to be surprised by the amount of criticism of the Herald's reporting being approved by the moderators of Your Views. Apparently they didn't let 'The brat prince' get away with his first submission to Your Views on this topic:
The brat prince (Queensland)
Take two, a less brutal summation as the NZ Herald declined to publish my previous rant. I find it offensive to be forced to learn a language that I do not care for. I am not alone; the majority of the population does not speak Maori.The fact that a station targeting a minority of the population thinks it has earned the right to hijack our national sport is presumptuous to say the least. Maori TV is kidding itself it thinks this will endear itself to the masses and generate interest in the Maori language, it will, and is having the reverse effect.
I hate to think what was written in the rejected response. No one is making you learn a language! Therefore you cannot take offence. Last I checked Aotearoa New Zealand had three official languages - English, Maori and NZ Sign Language - so you can expect any of them to pop up anywhere. Although here's a user who feels that Maori is a foreign language:
Tinnyliz (Wellington City)
As long as the commentary is 100% English I don't care which channel it's on. I can't stand watching anything in a foreign language.
Your Views asks the question: Would you be happy to watch Rugby World Cup games on Maori TV? Strange phrasing here, with a definite insinuation that watching rugby on Maori TV would not sit comfortably with some people. It might as well be saying: "Could you put up with the odd Te Reo word or phrase during a Rugby World Cup game?", as if the language is simply a nuisance.
"Would you be happy driving with screaming kids in the back seat?"
GT (East Tamaki)
No, I do not want to have to listen to Maori in the middle of the games. I don't mind if you want to spread Maori culture, but not like this. This would be akin to force feeding. Don't people know that it's rude to speak another language in front of people who don't understand it? What's the difference between that and forcing everyone to watch Maori TV where they wouldn't understand 10% of the commentary?
M. L (Remuera)
Just out of principle: Absolutely not! I'm just sick to death of Maori organisations constantly having their hands out to the taxpayer to fund their enterprises. They just have an insatiable appetite for Government handouts. If I need a "fix" of Maori culture I'll just trot off down to the Auckland Museum, thanks. I don't want it rammed down my throat, constantly.
Both of these responses liken the expression of Maori language and/or culture to force-feeding, as something which is being 'rammed down' people's throats. I'm sure GT doesn't mind speaking English in front of people who don't understand it. M.L's suggestion that Maori culture is best represented in the Auckland Museum shows his/her imagining of Maori as museum artefacts, not as a culture which might -GASP- change over time.
T Carrington (Berhampore)
Good on Maori TV for punching above their weight. If the Maori Affairs people are trying to get messages through to Maoris and also to promote Maori business then doing it at a time when most of the world is watching smacks of good thinking. Better than spending it on welfare benefits I say.
Sad to see so many people including your reporter eating and talking straight out of TVNZ's trough - the question is, who benefits from leaking all this bid information and that would be TVNZ - a broadcaster renown for long lunches whose bosses have been subsidised by my taxes for more than half a century - and yet we moan about little ol Maori TV?
Shame on those journos who pandered without thinking to an obvious TVNZ set up.
I continue to be surprised by the amount of criticism of the Herald's reporting being approved by the moderators of Your Views. Apparently they didn't let 'The brat prince' get away with his first submission to Your Views on this topic:
The brat prince (Queensland)
Take two, a less brutal summation as the NZ Herald declined to publish my previous rant. I find it offensive to be forced to learn a language that I do not care for. I am not alone; the majority of the population does not speak Maori.The fact that a station targeting a minority of the population thinks it has earned the right to hijack our national sport is presumptuous to say the least. Maori TV is kidding itself it thinks this will endear itself to the masses and generate interest in the Maori language, it will, and is having the reverse effect.
I hate to think what was written in the rejected response. No one is making you learn a language! Therefore you cannot take offence. Last I checked Aotearoa New Zealand had three official languages - English, Maori and NZ Sign Language - so you can expect any of them to pop up anywhere. Although here's a user who feels that Maori is a foreign language:
Tinnyliz (Wellington City)
As long as the commentary is 100% English I don't care which channel it's on. I can't stand watching anything in a foreign language.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Sweets for my sweet?
If torturing animals and setting things on fire were the signs you were looking for in your child to predict their potential future as a serial killer, then think again. The humble M&M or Chupa Chup could have devastating consequences for children, according to a study published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, which was reported in The Independent and then cut and pasted in the Herald. The head of the study, Simon Moore, was quoted as saying "Our favoured explanation is that giving children sweets and chocolate regularly may stop them learning how to wait to obtain something they want. Not being able to defer gratification may push them towards more impulsive behaviour, which is strongly associated with delinquency."
Having a close eye on all things Your Views-related, you begin to wonder whether they deliberately pull stories like these off the wire in order to create ridiculous questions and which will no doubt incite controversy. The question "Does eating too many sweets makes kids violent?" certainly fits the bill. Not to add it has a pretty great typing error which you would have expected someone to have picked up and changed by now, but over 24 hours after the question was posted, the incorrect grammar remains.
Bundi (Te Atatu South)
How Bloody Ridiculous - Where do we find these rocket scientists - who is paying for these pathetic research. Where are the stupid pills because we need to find them and throw them away!
Next we will be getting told that your child will be a violent offender if you made him wear Thomas the Bloody Tank pyjamas - waste of time and money.
My wife loves sweets and has so since she was a child - i am now waiting for her to flip and hunt me down with a knife because that is what these morons are implying.
Good Grief Penthol
Bundi - I'm not too sure they're rocket scientists, I have an inkling that they're psychiatrists as hinted by the journal title the article was published in. Keep an eye on that wife of yours.
WelshJerry (Waiheke Island)
Typical herald reporting - the study shows that violent criminals are sweet eaters - but no-one is suggesting it is because of it.
Parents who feed their children sweets all day are irresponsible, and likely to let their children down in many other ways - which means poorly brought up kids who of course are more likely to be violent crims than well brought up ones.
Another criticism of the Herald gets up on Your Views, the reason as to why moderators let this kind of comment slip past continues to create intrigue. Maybe it's so they appear to be encouraging constructive criticism of their work? Or maybe its because it's not really 'Herald reporting' as the story is sourced from The Independent, so the Herald think the joke's on WelshJerry?
Sirk (Remuera)
I thought that video games was meant to be the reason that kids are violent, also rap music, heavy metal music, certain books, comics, rock and/or roll music, TV shows, satanic ritual child abuse, clergy child abuse etc.
I bet it was pants and shoes that made most of those kids violent along with breathing oxygen. I bet at some point they all wore pants and shoes while breathing an approximately 20% oxygen atmosphere.
Pithy cynicism at its best, Sirk. The only way to protect children from all of society's ills is not to have them at all, surely.
Having a close eye on all things Your Views-related, you begin to wonder whether they deliberately pull stories like these off the wire in order to create ridiculous questions and which will no doubt incite controversy. The question "Does eating too many sweets makes kids violent?" certainly fits the bill. Not to add it has a pretty great typing error which you would have expected someone to have picked up and changed by now, but over 24 hours after the question was posted, the incorrect grammar remains.
Bundi (Te Atatu South)
How Bloody Ridiculous - Where do we find these rocket scientists - who is paying for these pathetic research. Where are the stupid pills because we need to find them and throw them away!
Next we will be getting told that your child will be a violent offender if you made him wear Thomas the Bloody Tank pyjamas - waste of time and money.
My wife loves sweets and has so since she was a child - i am now waiting for her to flip and hunt me down with a knife because that is what these morons are implying.
Good Grief Penthol
Bundi - I'm not too sure they're rocket scientists, I have an inkling that they're psychiatrists as hinted by the journal title the article was published in. Keep an eye on that wife of yours.
WelshJerry (Waiheke Island)
Typical herald reporting - the study shows that violent criminals are sweet eaters - but no-one is suggesting it is because of it.
Parents who feed their children sweets all day are irresponsible, and likely to let their children down in many other ways - which means poorly brought up kids who of course are more likely to be violent crims than well brought up ones.
Another criticism of the Herald gets up on Your Views, the reason as to why moderators let this kind of comment slip past continues to create intrigue. Maybe it's so they appear to be encouraging constructive criticism of their work? Or maybe its because it's not really 'Herald reporting' as the story is sourced from The Independent, so the Herald think the joke's on WelshJerry?
Sirk (Remuera)
I thought that video games was meant to be the reason that kids are violent, also rap music, heavy metal music, certain books, comics, rock and/or roll music, TV shows, satanic ritual child abuse, clergy child abuse etc.
I bet it was pants and shoes that made most of those kids violent along with breathing oxygen. I bet at some point they all wore pants and shoes while breathing an approximately 20% oxygen atmosphere.
Pithy cynicism at its best, Sirk. The only way to protect children from all of society's ills is not to have them at all, surely.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Politicians: As crooked as a barrel of snakes
The issue of disclosing the name or names behind political donations is back in the spotlight. National appear to be doing an about-turn in regards to the topic of disclosing the names of those who donate, which is bound to incite a great debate over whether National are fulfilling the general "cut the PC crap"-type promises. Your Views asked: Should the source of political donations be more transparent?
Blerkie Dronks (Remuera)
What difference does it make, anyway? Each party is as bad as the other; all as crooked as a barrel of snakes.
Many comments allude to the classic stereotype of politicians as inherently evil and corrupt, but Blerkie Dronks dismisses the question entirely, effectively saying that political processes don't warrant critical thought as all politicians are liars.
Richard (Timaru)
Sounds like a well needed tidy up of the cock-up labour did, and fixing laws that have been badly written for a long time.
Lyall (Sandringham)
Richard (Timaru) please read the article. National are supporting the "Cock-up" that Labour did because Labour are saying they did not go far enough.
This is about National attempting to minimise disclosure and supporting the existing bill is better, to them, than extending the disclosure rules.
I can only assume that National has more to hide.
It's so interesting when the users critique each other's interpretation of events. Telling Richard to "read the article" is sure to make him pretty mad, especially as he seems pretty convinced of Labour's "cock-up" and National's job as Mister Fix-it. I'll keep an eye out for Richard's reply!
Jay (Swanson)
I am gobsmacked that a party (the National Party!) that campaigned with the utmost bitter intensity against a law which this newspaper branded anti-democratic (which it was never intended to be, but a charge which suited the Nats political aspirations and gave their friends in the Herald carte blanche to run with it) has been barely tweaked and the current mob in power now seem to think that Labour kinda got it right!
But what is equally amazing is the matter of fact way that the Herald reports this without any of the emotive hyberbolic language that it used in its descriptions of Labour's original bill. I guess with an international community looking on, and with a realisation that many countries have these kinds of laws, that they are not, after all, anti-democaratic, that it might be a tad "obvious" if the current government turned the table. Really "gets my goat."
As with many other mainstream news outlets, the NZ Herald has many faults (see Editing the Herald for a daily update of such weaknesses!). However, you've got to pat them on the back for allowing Your Views users to criticise their coverage, obviously the moderator didn't take great exception to Jay's comments. Mind you, the rules for Your Views do state that posts are subject to editing for 'length and clarity' so who knows the true extent of Jay's criticism, except perhaps Jay himself?
Blerkie Dronks (Remuera)
What difference does it make, anyway? Each party is as bad as the other; all as crooked as a barrel of snakes.
Many comments allude to the classic stereotype of politicians as inherently evil and corrupt, but Blerkie Dronks dismisses the question entirely, effectively saying that political processes don't warrant critical thought as all politicians are liars.
Richard (Timaru)
Sounds like a well needed tidy up of the cock-up labour did, and fixing laws that have been badly written for a long time.
Lyall (Sandringham)
Richard (Timaru) please read the article. National are supporting the "Cock-up" that Labour did because Labour are saying they did not go far enough.
This is about National attempting to minimise disclosure and supporting the existing bill is better, to them, than extending the disclosure rules.
I can only assume that National has more to hide.
It's so interesting when the users critique each other's interpretation of events. Telling Richard to "read the article" is sure to make him pretty mad, especially as he seems pretty convinced of Labour's "cock-up" and National's job as Mister Fix-it. I'll keep an eye out for Richard's reply!
Jay (Swanson)
I am gobsmacked that a party (the National Party!) that campaigned with the utmost bitter intensity against a law which this newspaper branded anti-democratic (which it was never intended to be, but a charge which suited the Nats political aspirations and gave their friends in the Herald carte blanche to run with it) has been barely tweaked and the current mob in power now seem to think that Labour kinda got it right!
But what is equally amazing is the matter of fact way that the Herald reports this without any of the emotive hyberbolic language that it used in its descriptions of Labour's original bill. I guess with an international community looking on, and with a realisation that many countries have these kinds of laws, that they are not, after all, anti-democaratic, that it might be a tad "obvious" if the current government turned the table. Really "gets my goat."
As with many other mainstream news outlets, the NZ Herald has many faults (see Editing the Herald for a daily update of such weaknesses!). However, you've got to pat them on the back for allowing Your Views users to criticise their coverage, obviously the moderator didn't take great exception to Jay's comments. Mind you, the rules for Your Views do state that posts are subject to editing for 'length and clarity' so who knows the true extent of Jay's criticism, except perhaps Jay himself?
I want to ride my bicycle vs. I love my car
The battle of cyclists versus car drivers is currently raging on Your Views, after an incident involving a car and four bicycles on Auckland's Tamaki Drive prompted them to ask the question: What can be done to make cycling in NZ safer?
Michaelauknz (Mt Eden)
Look New Zealanders are always being hijacked by minority self interest groups and these guys are no exception -
Now they want to have cars even doing 40km 24/7 (some cyclist travel faster than that) and have the road widened so they can continue riding 4 abreast laughing and joking and acting in an often abusive dominating way towards motorists.
I have very good video footage of these guys riding 4 and 2 up in the middle of the actual road in busy times.
Put them back on the footpath, their time is over and from the attacks given here toward motorist by themselves no change will be coming from there attitudes, they got away for far to long being threatening and dysfunctional-
More accidents will happen.No lesson has been learnt here.
Sadly the only thing missing now is the place, date and time.of the next one.
NZ is currently 27th going to 35th in the OECD ranking of the top 25 developed countries and is suffering from the impact of the smart ones who have left.this proves my point.
I can just see Michaelauknz engaging in a vigilante-style surveillance operation, complete with binoculars and camouflage gear.
Halkelorno (Northpark)
What can be done? very little, considering its Auckland. Why ? Just think about a little.
20 or so years ago, Auckland was a relatively safe place to drive,however what successive governments have done is allowed almost unfetted immigration from a huge variety of Pacific Island countries, Asian and African and Indian countries where the majority of the people did not own or drive a car or have any road user experience. The then come to New Zealand and the previous stricter road rules and license tests were conveniently lowered to fit PC rules, no English tests needed and feel free to use an interpreter. What would you expect to happen on the roads. More drivers, totally unskilled, no road sense plus no real knowledge of how to drive a car. Remember when you had to Drive a Manual Car in order to gain your license ? Not any more, this would be too hard and very UN- PC. Now we have the visible evidence and unenviable Road Toll results.
Now we have all the nodding heads, the plaintive outcry's "Something should be done", all in vain because the real answer is too Un PC and we as a people have long lost the guts and fortitude to do anything to rectify the problem.
We will tinker!
There is always someone who names immigration as the key determinant in any problem you throw at them. You might not have seen a link between cyclists, road safety and immigration but ah-ha! Halkelorno has made it as clear as day.
Pepe Perez (Birkenhead)
Nothing will be resolved with the rather emotional motorist vs cyclist debate that is being played out in this forum.
There is a simple answer. Motorists must obey stop signals - which is so rare these days that I wonder why we have the regulation at all. (Which is another debate) Cyclists must stop for red traffic signals - which is so rare . etc etc. Then the existing westbound Special Vehicle Lane (Bus Lane);that is about to turn into a T2 Transit Lane, is extended back into Mission Bay and be made 6am to 10am Monday to Sunday. Should there be a similar Special Vehicle Lane eastbound for the morning and evening peaks for the same reasons. Not my call, but worth thinking about.
In the end, cyclists and motorists need to and can live together without conflict - but each has to show respect to the other; not easy to find in the society we live in today. Finally, we all need to respect and obey the laws governing operation of a vehicle on our nations roads to ensure we keep this sort of accident to a minimum.
Pepe Perez doesn't see the "emotional" discussion in this thread as resulting in any concrete resolution, and instead proposes everyone sticks to the road rules. Commonsense prevails? Cyclists and motorists travelling together in harmony. What a beautiful way to end the post.
Michaelauknz (Mt Eden)
Look New Zealanders are always being hijacked by minority self interest groups and these guys are no exception -
Now they want to have cars even doing 40km 24/7 (some cyclist travel faster than that) and have the road widened so they can continue riding 4 abreast laughing and joking and acting in an often abusive dominating way towards motorists.
I have very good video footage of these guys riding 4 and 2 up in the middle of the actual road in busy times.
Put them back on the footpath, their time is over and from the attacks given here toward motorist by themselves no change will be coming from there attitudes, they got away for far to long being threatening and dysfunctional-
More accidents will happen.No lesson has been learnt here.
Sadly the only thing missing now is the place, date and time.of the next one.
NZ is currently 27th going to 35th in the OECD ranking of the top 25 developed countries and is suffering from the impact of the smart ones who have left.this proves my point.
I can just see Michaelauknz engaging in a vigilante-style surveillance operation, complete with binoculars and camouflage gear.
Halkelorno (Northpark)
What can be done? very little, considering its Auckland. Why ? Just think about a little.
20 or so years ago, Auckland was a relatively safe place to drive,however what successive governments have done is allowed almost unfetted immigration from a huge variety of Pacific Island countries, Asian and African and Indian countries where the majority of the people did not own or drive a car or have any road user experience. The then come to New Zealand and the previous stricter road rules and license tests were conveniently lowered to fit PC rules, no English tests needed and feel free to use an interpreter. What would you expect to happen on the roads. More drivers, totally unskilled, no road sense plus no real knowledge of how to drive a car. Remember when you had to Drive a Manual Car in order to gain your license ? Not any more, this would be too hard and very UN- PC. Now we have the visible evidence and unenviable Road Toll results.
Now we have all the nodding heads, the plaintive outcry's "Something should be done", all in vain because the real answer is too Un PC and we as a people have long lost the guts and fortitude to do anything to rectify the problem.
We will tinker!
There is always someone who names immigration as the key determinant in any problem you throw at them. You might not have seen a link between cyclists, road safety and immigration but ah-ha! Halkelorno has made it as clear as day.
Pepe Perez (Birkenhead)
Nothing will be resolved with the rather emotional motorist vs cyclist debate that is being played out in this forum.
There is a simple answer. Motorists must obey stop signals - which is so rare these days that I wonder why we have the regulation at all. (Which is another debate) Cyclists must stop for red traffic signals - which is so rare . etc etc. Then the existing westbound Special Vehicle Lane (Bus Lane);that is about to turn into a T2 Transit Lane, is extended back into Mission Bay and be made 6am to 10am Monday to Sunday. Should there be a similar Special Vehicle Lane eastbound for the morning and evening peaks for the same reasons. Not my call, but worth thinking about.
In the end, cyclists and motorists need to and can live together without conflict - but each has to show respect to the other; not easy to find in the society we live in today. Finally, we all need to respect and obey the laws governing operation of a vehicle on our nations roads to ensure we keep this sort of accident to a minimum.
Pepe Perez doesn't see the "emotional" discussion in this thread as resulting in any concrete resolution, and instead proposes everyone sticks to the road rules. Commonsense prevails? Cyclists and motorists travelling together in harmony. What a beautiful way to end the post.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Did DonKey do well or did he make an ass of himself?
John Key has sure had a swell time in New York. He met Obama! He even went on the David Letterman Show! Reading out the "Top Ten Reasons to Visit New Zealand" as part of the Late Show's "Top Ten" feature, the script given to Key to read contained New Zealand stereotypes and slang, some of which American audiences could understand and some deliberately indecipherable by them; referring to the "whanau", the "bach" and "jandals".
In response to Key's representation of both himself and New Zealand on the world stage, Your Views asked its users: How do you rate John Key's performance? The question leaves itself open to interpretation, although if you examine the question in light of the related story it is clear they are asking about his representation on the world stage.
Kate Bennett (Auckland)
John has been in power long enough to give him a mark. I would give me a failing pass mark for the reasons that he has done little or nothing to improve the economy. He has managed to increase the taxpayers burden and contributions through the ETS scheme and the proposed super city.
I've cut Kate short here, as she does go on to talk more about taxpayer interests, but what strikes me is that she isn't interested in his performance in New York, but his performance as a politician. This comment is evidence that the unfocused nature of the question opens the field up to all kinds of interpretations of how to assess John Key's "performance".
Inevitably, Your Views users compared John Key's public persona with that of the previous Prime Minister of New Zealand, Helen Clark:
Bruce (Wellington CBD)
I think John Key is presentable as New Zealand's leader whereas Helen wasn't.
Jae (Manukau City)
Good on you john key.u were gr8. good to see our prime minister has a gr8 sence of humour.if it was helen clark.sheeeeshhh i can imagine the mockery david letterman would of given to her.and should would of read the top ten with her normal 'bland tone' of voice.
Ian (Glen Eden)
Overall I think his performance has been good, but the real "difference" between DonKey and Head Girl Helen showed up when they both commented on Sir Howard Morrison's death yesterday (on the TVNZ news last night). Head Girl Helen's comments were much more personal and relevant and reflected the fact that she had a much greater knowledge of his life's experiences. I think this alone reflected how much more "indepth" Helen Clark's general knowledge and command of NZ (Kiwi) events is.
Ian uses the comical names "DonKey" and "Head Girl Helen" to describe Key and Clark respectively. This is a common feature of online discussion forums, using alternative humourous and/or derogatory names when referrng to public figures. Although these names are often used to criticise the people being referred to (in an attempt to reveal some kind of truth behind their public persona), Ian is clearly using the terms in jest.
In response to Key's representation of both himself and New Zealand on the world stage, Your Views asked its users: How do you rate John Key's performance? The question leaves itself open to interpretation, although if you examine the question in light of the related story it is clear they are asking about his representation on the world stage.
Kate Bennett (Auckland)
John has been in power long enough to give him a mark. I would give me a failing pass mark for the reasons that he has done little or nothing to improve the economy. He has managed to increase the taxpayers burden and contributions through the ETS scheme and the proposed super city.
I've cut Kate short here, as she does go on to talk more about taxpayer interests, but what strikes me is that she isn't interested in his performance in New York, but his performance as a politician. This comment is evidence that the unfocused nature of the question opens the field up to all kinds of interpretations of how to assess John Key's "performance".
Inevitably, Your Views users compared John Key's public persona with that of the previous Prime Minister of New Zealand, Helen Clark:
Bruce (Wellington CBD)
I think John Key is presentable as New Zealand's leader whereas Helen wasn't.
Jae (Manukau City)
Good on you john key.u were gr8. good to see our prime minister has a gr8 sence of humour.if it was helen clark.sheeeeshhh i can imagine the mockery david letterman would of given to her.and should would of read the top ten with her normal 'bland tone' of voice.
Ian (Glen Eden)
Overall I think his performance has been good, but the real "difference" between DonKey and Head Girl Helen showed up when they both commented on Sir Howard Morrison's death yesterday (on the TVNZ news last night). Head Girl Helen's comments were much more personal and relevant and reflected the fact that she had a much greater knowledge of his life's experiences. I think this alone reflected how much more "indepth" Helen Clark's general knowledge and command of NZ (Kiwi) events is.
Ian uses the comical names "DonKey" and "Head Girl Helen" to describe Key and Clark respectively. This is a common feature of online discussion forums, using alternative humourous and/or derogatory names when referrng to public figures. Although these names are often used to criticise the people being referred to (in an attempt to reveal some kind of truth behind their public persona), Ian is clearly using the terms in jest.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
You can count on us
The familiar names Foodtown and Woolworths will soon be a thing of the past as Progressive Enterprises, who owns these two supermarket brands, prepares to overhaul their image by choosing to retain only the Countdown brand and giving it a revamp.
This development calls for a Your Views topic! What do you think of the Countdown move? What annoys you about supermarket shopping? Now, at first look these questions are related - yes, they're both about supermarkets. However, the second question is quite unrelated to the news item and rather, specifically gives users the licence to begin moaning and groaning about the most everyday of activities!
In terms of responses, there are those who, ironically, take a "shopping list" approach to express their annoyance at supermarket shopping:
Daytripper (Hamilton)
Lots of things annoy me at the supermarket
1. Narrow isles - so sick of having to wait forever while someone dawdles around the supermarket
2. Constant wine sales - how about a food sale instead
3. Spend $70 at Pak n Save save 6 cents - spend $100's of dollars still only save 6 cents
4. Pak n Save Clarence Street Hamilton store, hot cooked chickens by the front entrance, even in foil bag completely stone cold by the time you get to the checkout.
5. No plastic bags at this checkout sign - Countdown - so what you can just grab a plastic bag at the next checkout on your way out.
Jesse's Poppa (Whangarei)
1: the unruly snotty nosed kids that are not under parental control.
2: the stupid people that use their trolleys to ram your ankles.
3: the ever annoying bloody music palyed in almost all stores.
4: the dozy pathetic drivers than can not park entirely within a parking space.
5: the lazy buggers that leave trolleys all over the car park and in particular and empty parking space.
And some choose to comment directly on the human condition:
Dan Hutchins (Newtown)
Lack of trolley edicate.
Tanz (Napier)
It's annoying when the checkout person is really slow and there is a long line waiting. Grrrrr makes me mad!
Bundi (Te Atatu South)
Arrogant, snotty nosed women who think they can leave their trolleys wherever they want in the aisle and stand at the shelves blocking the only access through. I love my trolley because it becomes as stock car and i just continue past ramming their trolley out of the way to the embarrassment of my wife and kids haha
And then toby enters the fray in an attempt to put things in to perspective:
toby (Hornby)
After reading some of the pathetic moaning on here I have to say:
Be thankful you can walk into a huge building full of food and goods and fill your trolley up with a mountain of them, and then book it up on credit!
Millions of poor/starving people the world over wake up every day and think "how am I going to feed my family today and where will I find enough food?"
So someone left their trolley in your way? Good grief, get a life.
To be fair, toby, moaning is exactly what was asked for by Your Views. Your fellow users were just responding to the question given, a question which specifically asked what "annoyed" people about supermarket shopping, not how they felt about supermarket shopping. We all love the opportunity for a good moan sometimes!
This development calls for a Your Views topic! What do you think of the Countdown move? What annoys you about supermarket shopping? Now, at first look these questions are related - yes, they're both about supermarkets. However, the second question is quite unrelated to the news item and rather, specifically gives users the licence to begin moaning and groaning about the most everyday of activities!
In terms of responses, there are those who, ironically, take a "shopping list" approach to express their annoyance at supermarket shopping:
Daytripper (Hamilton)
Lots of things annoy me at the supermarket
1. Narrow isles - so sick of having to wait forever while someone dawdles around the supermarket
2. Constant wine sales - how about a food sale instead
3. Spend $70 at Pak n Save save 6 cents - spend $100's of dollars still only save 6 cents
4. Pak n Save Clarence Street Hamilton store, hot cooked chickens by the front entrance, even in foil bag completely stone cold by the time you get to the checkout.
5. No plastic bags at this checkout sign - Countdown - so what you can just grab a plastic bag at the next checkout on your way out.
Jesse's Poppa (Whangarei)
1: the unruly snotty nosed kids that are not under parental control.
2: the stupid people that use their trolleys to ram your ankles.
3: the ever annoying bloody music palyed in almost all stores.
4: the dozy pathetic drivers than can not park entirely within a parking space.
5: the lazy buggers that leave trolleys all over the car park and in particular and empty parking space.
And some choose to comment directly on the human condition:
Dan Hutchins (Newtown)
Lack of trolley edicate.
Tanz (Napier)
It's annoying when the checkout person is really slow and there is a long line waiting. Grrrrr makes me mad!
Bundi (Te Atatu South)
Arrogant, snotty nosed women who think they can leave their trolleys wherever they want in the aisle and stand at the shelves blocking the only access through. I love my trolley because it becomes as stock car and i just continue past ramming their trolley out of the way to the embarrassment of my wife and kids haha
And then toby enters the fray in an attempt to put things in to perspective:
toby (Hornby)
After reading some of the pathetic moaning on here I have to say:
Be thankful you can walk into a huge building full of food and goods and fill your trolley up with a mountain of them, and then book it up on credit!
Millions of poor/starving people the world over wake up every day and think "how am I going to feed my family today and where will I find enough food?"
So someone left their trolley in your way? Good grief, get a life.
To be fair, toby, moaning is exactly what was asked for by Your Views. Your fellow users were just responding to the question given, a question which specifically asked what "annoyed" people about supermarket shopping, not how they felt about supermarket shopping. We all love the opportunity for a good moan sometimes!
Let's settle this over a beer
Assisted by figures from Statistics New Zealand, the Herald asserts that kiwi expats are returning home. The housing market looks set to prosper as expats flock home in droves to buy houses and sit down with a glass of L&P and some Marmite on Vogel's.
Your Views asked: As an expat, what are your thoughts on returning home? When you consider this question in light of others posed by Your Views, it's actually rather good. It defines a target audience within the group of Your Views users and contains an open question. Let's see how the users respond...
2 Shaxs (United States of America)
Reasons to Return -
1: Clean, Green
2: Lack of populace ( 4 mill.c'mon, thats nothing )
3: Surf, Beaches - no pollution.
4: No pollution ( read 3 )
5: No Genetically Modified Crapola in Food.
6: Mum,Daughter.( Normal - I miss family stuff )
7: Uncrowded Surf.
Reasons to say the hell away -
1: Lazy Maoris who want to steal your stuff. Don't call me racist as I am a Maori, but growing up there, I have seen Maoris who think the Dole and the DPB are a birth right, and what is yours is theirs ( after they break a window to get to it )
2: Bemoaning Politicians such as Peter Sharples who think Maor's should have everything handed to them because of injustices.
3: Pakehas who fall under the same heading as 2.
4: Pathetic, trivial sentences for criminals.
Wake up NZ. Rapes should be 25+. Mandatory. Assaults with weapons = Attempted Murder. Murder ( no brainer here ) = LIFE / NO Chance of parole. Thefts,If you didn't learn after the 3rd conviction, 10yrs no parole. Drunk Driving - easy too. 1st - lose car. Gone. Nada.$5000 fine. 2nd - 5yrs Prison.
In Shaxs' view, New Zealand is not just "clean" and "green" but has "no pollution". Does he work for the Tourism Board? No wait, he can't because he highlights his fear of the amount of crime in New Zealand and describes all Maori as lazy, dole-bludging thieves. Guess what Shaxs? That's a racist stereotype, so yes, I'm deeming your comment racist.
Now for an interesting interaction between a "kiwi" and an expat:
Jeepers (Auckland)
What amazes me is that these people take off overseas to make their money but when times get tough they come running home! Do we really need these people back who can't show determination and stickability in hard times.
Monkeyboy (United Kingdom)
I have to laugh at comments by people like Jeepers who go on the attack to people who have moved overseas. I earn five times what I could in NZ so it makes sense to earn overseas and save to come back home. Unfortunately in NZ opportunities are scarce, wages are low, taxes are high, and can someone please tell me why interest rates are so high for mortgages in NZ, almost double the UK rates. Kiwis pay almost 10% of their property mortgage value in interest each year, that is scandalous and the Australian owned banks are laughing all the way to the.
NZ is and will always be my home, it doesn't make me a traitor to my country because I am making the most of opportunities that will allow me contribute to the NZ economy by returning with hard earned overseas cash (like John Key did).
Jeepers I will be returning home in a couple of years, not because times are tough but because I will have enough money to buy a house freehold and semi retire (all before 40). I will be more than happy to buy you a beer, if you can get the time off work.
Jeepers (Auckland)
Monkeyboy (UK), would love a beer and yes I have the time because I am retired and yes I'm only 45. And I did it here in NZ by hard work and seeing the need for a product that no one else did.
I would love to be a fly on the wall in the pub where Jeepers and Monkeyboy sit down for a bevvie!
Your Views asked: As an expat, what are your thoughts on returning home? When you consider this question in light of others posed by Your Views, it's actually rather good. It defines a target audience within the group of Your Views users and contains an open question. Let's see how the users respond...
2 Shaxs (United States of America)
Reasons to Return -
1: Clean, Green
2: Lack of populace ( 4 mill.c'mon, thats nothing )
3: Surf, Beaches - no pollution.
4: No pollution ( read 3 )
5: No Genetically Modified Crapola in Food.
6: Mum,Daughter.( Normal - I miss family stuff )
7: Uncrowded Surf.
Reasons to say the hell away -
1: Lazy Maoris who want to steal your stuff. Don't call me racist as I am a Maori, but growing up there, I have seen Maoris who think the Dole and the DPB are a birth right, and what is yours is theirs ( after they break a window to get to it )
2: Bemoaning Politicians such as Peter Sharples who think Maor's should have everything handed to them because of injustices.
3: Pakehas who fall under the same heading as 2.
4: Pathetic, trivial sentences for criminals.
Wake up NZ. Rapes should be 25+. Mandatory. Assaults with weapons = Attempted Murder. Murder ( no brainer here ) = LIFE / NO Chance of parole. Thefts,If you didn't learn after the 3rd conviction, 10yrs no parole. Drunk Driving - easy too. 1st - lose car. Gone. Nada.$5000 fine. 2nd - 5yrs Prison.
In Shaxs' view, New Zealand is not just "clean" and "green" but has "no pollution". Does he work for the Tourism Board? No wait, he can't because he highlights his fear of the amount of crime in New Zealand and describes all Maori as lazy, dole-bludging thieves. Guess what Shaxs? That's a racist stereotype, so yes, I'm deeming your comment racist.
Now for an interesting interaction between a "kiwi" and an expat:
Jeepers (Auckland)
What amazes me is that these people take off overseas to make their money but when times get tough they come running home! Do we really need these people back who can't show determination and stickability in hard times.
Monkeyboy (United Kingdom)
I have to laugh at comments by people like Jeepers who go on the attack to people who have moved overseas. I earn five times what I could in NZ so it makes sense to earn overseas and save to come back home. Unfortunately in NZ opportunities are scarce, wages are low, taxes are high, and can someone please tell me why interest rates are so high for mortgages in NZ, almost double the UK rates. Kiwis pay almost 10% of their property mortgage value in interest each year, that is scandalous and the Australian owned banks are laughing all the way to the.
NZ is and will always be my home, it doesn't make me a traitor to my country because I am making the most of opportunities that will allow me contribute to the NZ economy by returning with hard earned overseas cash (like John Key did).
Jeepers I will be returning home in a couple of years, not because times are tough but because I will have enough money to buy a house freehold and semi retire (all before 40). I will be more than happy to buy you a beer, if you can get the time off work.
Jeepers (Auckland)
Monkeyboy (UK), would love a beer and yes I have the time because I am retired and yes I'm only 45. And I did it here in NZ by hard work and seeing the need for a product that no one else did.
I would love to be a fly on the wall in the pub where Jeepers and Monkeyboy sit down for a bevvie!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
What's in a name?
The Geographic Board has ruled in favour of putting the "h" back in W(h)anganui. Michael Laws isn't happy - surprise, surprise. Laws stated that the changing of the name was "more than just about the letter h" and described the Geographic Board as an "uncaring and unthinking organisation which is attempting in one foul swoop to expunge Wanganui's history, heritage, mana and culture."
With every new development in the W(h)anganui saga, the Your Views topic Should it be 'Wanganui' or 'Whanganui'?, which was created back in May, has been reinvigorated with interest. The thread of comments features energetic debate, with polarised discussion amongst both fans of the "h" and the anti-"h" brigade (the members of which probably also belong to the anti-PC brigade).
Dan (Wellington City)
If it's a spelling mistake why not correct it? Or is this one of those things that is supposed to be "racially charged" or an example of "political correctness gone mad"?
Dan gets the prestige of having the first post on the ever-growing thread of responses and manages to be both critical and pithy in this comment. Many representatives of the "h"-team posting on the thread seem to employ the correct spelling argument, which no doubt motivated the Geographic Board in their decision to rule in favour of the name change.
Of course anything Michael Laws-related mobilises the ML defence force:
Carpe Diem (Half Moon Bay)
Leave it alone! Tell all the PC boot lickers to to take a hike! Good on you Michael.
But what is most interesting about this thread are the debates surrounding the representation of New Zealand and Maori history. The perpetuation of misinformation is rife, with users pertaining to speak as expert historians in order to reinforce their opinion.
Geebs (Queensland)
It is time NZers took a stand and dealt with real issues. Maori have no rights as they are not indigenous, never were and never will be. It is time for people to realise that Maori are conning everyone and the parliamentarians are allowing for this to occur. Historical facts show the Maori ate the first people and don't forget it. Stop them eating into your rights now.
Misinformed viewpoints are quite concerning. But what is more concerning is when the spread of misinformation is applauded and therefore reinforced by other users:
Maureen (Queensland)
Good on ya geebs of Queensland. Anyway aren't the Maori originally from Taiwan?
But then, like a knight in shining armour, Jay from Swanson arises with a challenge to these assumptions surrounding the interpretation of NZ and Maori history:
Jay (Swanson)
I see we have experts on the Maori and te Reo Maori from Queensland, Canada, you name it. Maureen of Queensland, if by opining that Maori are "not indigenous" to NZ you mean that they were not the first people here, you must have found out something that no-one else has. If you go and check the current research you will find that there is no evidence which even suggests that there were others here before eastern Polynesians. If by saying that Maori were not indigenous you mean that they did not occur naturally here then we have to say that no-one on the planet is indigenous to anywhere except perhaps Ethiopians whose antecedents (and yours) it is thought spontaneously emerged there.
Although Jay doesn't mention any specific writing on the subject, he manages to question the circulation of assumed (and yet false) facts in the debate. Discussion forums are widely perceived as spaces in which people are able to reaffirm and reinforce their beliefs amongst like-minded peers, deterring those holding differing opinions. The interaction of responses between these users shows that this isn't always necessarily the case, and that folks will speak up if they see assumptions and misinformation being circulated without question.
With every new development in the W(h)anganui saga, the Your Views topic Should it be 'Wanganui' or 'Whanganui'?, which was created back in May, has been reinvigorated with interest. The thread of comments features energetic debate, with polarised discussion amongst both fans of the "h" and the anti-"h" brigade (the members of which probably also belong to the anti-PC brigade).
Dan (Wellington City)
If it's a spelling mistake why not correct it? Or is this one of those things that is supposed to be "racially charged" or an example of "political correctness gone mad"?
Dan gets the prestige of having the first post on the ever-growing thread of responses and manages to be both critical and pithy in this comment. Many representatives of the "h"-team posting on the thread seem to employ the correct spelling argument, which no doubt motivated the Geographic Board in their decision to rule in favour of the name change.
Of course anything Michael Laws-related mobilises the ML defence force:
Carpe Diem (Half Moon Bay)
Leave it alone! Tell all the PC boot lickers to to take a hike! Good on you Michael.
But what is most interesting about this thread are the debates surrounding the representation of New Zealand and Maori history. The perpetuation of misinformation is rife, with users pertaining to speak as expert historians in order to reinforce their opinion.
Geebs (Queensland)
It is time NZers took a stand and dealt with real issues. Maori have no rights as they are not indigenous, never were and never will be. It is time for people to realise that Maori are conning everyone and the parliamentarians are allowing for this to occur. Historical facts show the Maori ate the first people and don't forget it. Stop them eating into your rights now.
Misinformed viewpoints are quite concerning. But what is more concerning is when the spread of misinformation is applauded and therefore reinforced by other users:
Maureen (Queensland)
Good on ya geebs of Queensland. Anyway aren't the Maori originally from Taiwan?
But then, like a knight in shining armour, Jay from Swanson arises with a challenge to these assumptions surrounding the interpretation of NZ and Maori history:
Jay (Swanson)
I see we have experts on the Maori and te Reo Maori from Queensland, Canada, you name it. Maureen of Queensland, if by opining that Maori are "not indigenous" to NZ you mean that they were not the first people here, you must have found out something that no-one else has. If you go and check the current research you will find that there is no evidence which even suggests that there were others here before eastern Polynesians. If by saying that Maori were not indigenous you mean that they did not occur naturally here then we have to say that no-one on the planet is indigenous to anywhere except perhaps Ethiopians whose antecedents (and yours) it is thought spontaneously emerged there.
Although Jay doesn't mention any specific writing on the subject, he manages to question the circulation of assumed (and yet false) facts in the debate. Discussion forums are widely perceived as spaces in which people are able to reaffirm and reinforce their beliefs amongst like-minded peers, deterring those holding differing opinions. The interaction of responses between these users shows that this isn't always necessarily the case, and that folks will speak up if they see assumptions and misinformation being circulated without question.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)