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.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)