Hard News: Swine flu and swearing
152 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last
-
Nice, Sofie. (Squid and tree survival, I mean). I enjoyed the Media 7 Russell. I thought Philip didn't have enough airtime though. Interesting points made about Attitude. It's a programme I watch every week, I know some of the people who work on it (you meet the best people at the Big King), and I too have wondered if it might not, at times, be a little white bread. I appreciate there is a lack of funding, and the people who work on it do it for lots of love, but it was a salient point Philip made. I had never heard of that Sally journo person - very articulate and funny. Is she on National Radio or summat? Sacha, you looked suitable serious - very thoughtful. Full of, what's that word, gravitas.
-
and I too have wondered if it might not, at times, be a little white bread.
Better than brown bread, init
Sacha, you looked suitable serious - very thoughtful. Full of, what's that word, gravitas.
Much like yourself dear. :))I agree, great show Russell
-
Thank you for the feedback. I just saw the show myself for the first time - busy week. I looked as tired as I felt (note to self - don't close eyes even for a moment while camera on). Also seem to have unconsciously adopted my old radio habits of nodding lots rather than making noise. Maybe caffeine would have helped after all, though my head may have fallen off.
I'm not sure about Philip's final point - was the first time I'd heard that particular criticism too. My issues with Attitude (discussed in the Attitude Awards thread last year) are more about the individualised elite sports worldview and well-intentioned fixation on the wrong group of people's attitudes. However I personally think it's fair enough to select presenters who present well - and the show is designed to reach a mainstream audience who happen to love Sunday mornings. People shouldn't be doing jobs just because they are disabled (although it helps in some areas). Many disabled people aren't obvious - does that rule them out of on-air roles?
I had to reassure Sally afterwards that I'm not particularly PC about the language either - just aware of its power in change, something I share with Philip (although I'm possibly a little more pragmatic).
Before we had seen his clip played, Curtis and I were talking about those evil words we know to listen out for - "suffer", "confined", "bound", "despite", "overcome", "special", "normal", "brave", "inspiring" and so on. We get a lot of that in the media and it's just not good enough. Thanks, Russell, for creating a chance to chip away at it.
-
Sacha - it was only a brief insight into the disability world and I thought everything you said was very sensible (because I know we agree on on a lot of this stuff anyway). I would like to see more philosophical discussions about these things in the MSM (or even on Attitude)
But I hate that term PC. Those who use it in an accusatory way are signally that they are too intellectually lazy or arrogant to think about the political and personal power of words or concepts, and are are being very defensive about their right to retain power over others.
So, Sacha, please stay proud to be PC re disability.
-
I know what you mean but I'm not PC, Hilary, and I don't think Sally was using it with either malice or laziness. I found her story about broadcasting funding being turned down because Attitude was the only disability show instructive. We need a wider market of disability representations. Then we could have a broader conversation amongst the different ways of understanding it, not just amongst academics.
What annoys me is the spending of public funds in ways that undermine the official position government has signed up to in the NZ Disability Strategy and the UN Disability Convention. Most of our scarce research funding is still spent in clinical frameworks that amount to poking disabled people with a stick and recording the noise they make. Archaic and doesn't help at all.
-
I can imagine that, Steven. Was I also stroking a cat?
-
I know what you mean but I'm not PC, Hilary, and I don't think Sally was using it with either malice or laziness. I found her story about broadcasting funding being turned down because Attitude was the only disability show instructive.
Sure was. The impression was that they put Sally in the disability box without bothering to think about her prop as what it was -- mainstream early-evening TV -- even though she had South Pacific Pictures behind her. That must be bloody frustrating.
-
The offensiveness is even more basic than that for me - the idea that there should only be one show, when we make up one in five of the population. Who the f$%k do they think pays for their funding?
-
Sure was. The impression was that they put Sally in the disability box without bothering to think about her prop as what it was -- mainstream early-evening TV -
That's what I thought she said. I liked that she saw herself as normal as any other person on the planet looking for funding, which is what I wish for anyone. The reality with that is however, the competition is fierce when seeking funding.With that in mind, I do suspect she had been put into the too hard box because she was in a wheelchair and that is just plain wrong, and all too common.
-
Heh. You weren't thinking of this one from their home page?
-
Scientists publish report and warn of the possibilities of a pig pandemic after swine flu moves from human to hog during a scientific test.
-
This may piss a few people off but I think it raises a valid point.
We are all disabled in some way or another. I can't write blockbusting crime novels and don't get me started on animation I am just incapable of that kind of patience. Steven Hawkin can run rings around almost anyone when it comes to theoretical physics.
The point is that nothing in the world, or universe for that matter, is perfect and we have to accommodate imperfection in order to cope with reality.
In striving to create equality in society some have, with the best of intentions, attempted to hobble the the capabilities of the many to reduce the disadvantage of the few. This is sometimes a low impact cost effective measure such as wheelchair access to venues and public buildings, sometimes an expensive and mostly pointless requirement of local authority (a particular example springs to mind of a requirement for wheelchair access through a jewelers workshop to a toilet. The toilet floor had to be raised and we were ordered to move a staircase 150 mm to meet the code size of the room, move the safe and reverse a door to open outwards which then required a wall to be moved, even though the step at the entrance of the shop did not allow wheelchair access and was to be retained under heritage listing.)
We have to accept that there are minorities that have every right to access almost anything that is accessible to the majority.
So if I see someone having difficulty achieving what they are entitled to, I will offer to help rather than get on the phone to the local authority and demand changes. I mean, if we actually cared about each other a little more then these problems would just go away.
I have re-read this and it sounds a bit naff but I'll post it anyway in the hope of raising my point, if you can understand my rambling ways. ;-) -
Sorry, I didn't mean that anyone on that Media7 programme was being derogatory about PC stuff, but that in general it is easy to find yourself apologising for standing up for rights etc when this might be unpopular or not mainstream. So people should never apologise when being accused of being PC (I see it as Politically Challenging). Be proud to be PC!
Re the Disability Strategy, government departments have to report against it and its principles every year. You can find some fascinating details about what govt departments have been doing on the Office for Disability Issues website www.odi.govt.nz. If TVNZ was still a govt department they would have to too, and it would be more than one light ent weekly programme way out of primetime (and some tragedy/hero objectifying pieces scattered here and there as 'current affairs').
For example, Stats NZ is thinking seriously about how they could collect useful data about disability in NZ as per Objective 10 of the NZDS.
Yet who, outside the sector, a few people from govt agencies, and some politicians, know anything about the NZDS, let alone the UN convention? There is systemic failure somewhere.
-
If TVNZ was still a govt department they would have to too, and it would be more than one light ent weekly programme way out of primetime
Stating the obvious, but it's the same reason there's a mere nod at disability as to why there's no minority programming at all in prime time - the advertisers. They pay for display at the optimum viewing time around programmes aimed at their target market. That won't change until the profit model does. Why is Media 7 on Freeview/Sky (where I can't access it) and not on TV1? The wrong values are at the top of the hierarchy.
-
So if I see someone having difficulty achieving what they are entitled to, I will offer to help rather than get on the phone to the local authority and demand changes. I mean, if we actually cared about each other a little more then these problems would just go away.
Indeed. I'm very fond of saying that legislation is a blunt instrument that does little to change attitudes. I wish I knew why empathy was in such short supply and the rush to judgment so quick. Hmmm, that's willfully naive on my part, I do know, really.
-
thinking seriously
Statistics NZ do seem to have been listening and things should improve, especially if disability is added to better-framed surveys like GSS. I have done a bit of work with them myself to progress matters that government agencies had not picked up adequately. I also developed localised disability demographic statistics myself because no one else was taking responsibility for that. Am having to update those figures this weekend (unpaid) to send to the select committee, so please excuse me feeling a tad uncharitable.
Frankly, government agencies have all had 8 years to respond to the NZ Disability Strategy's Objective 10 about evidence. I understand it takes time and that there was no extra funding allocated to implementing the NZDS but progress has been slow at best and we have missed out on many opportunities. Talking about "rights" does not get you very far in an evidence-based policy environment. I trust you'll understand why "thinking seriously" after 8 years does not seem enough to me.
The size of the population group (about 800,000) and the scope of the issues is not even close to being matched by the statistical and research efforts of our public servants and funders. Worth remembering when you read the optimistic summary of NZDS progress to 2007.
Here's how bad it is compared with other significant population groups. There is still no standard definition of disability (let alone as part of POSS) that is consistent with the Disability Strategy and other modern approaches. Disability is treated as if disabled people are diseased, with a consequent focus on how many of us there are with various things wrong with us. Stats NZ persisted with a medicalised 1980 WHO definition in the most recent 2006 post-census Disability Survey (though more recent WHO standards do not seem much better, reflecting poor international understandings). Unfortunately, organisations like District Health Boards and even the Human Rights Commission parrot those tired medicalised definitions in their own uncoordinated and irregular statistical work. Competent analytical capacity is low but unvalued.
That national Disability Survey remains our sole regular data series (updated only every five years) because no one has made Stats NZ include a consistent disability cross-tab in the rest of the publicly-funded data they administer with their $90m annual budget. For example, in the quarterly Household Labour Force survey that would enable us to compare employment rates regularly. I suggested a viable cross-tab last year, so we'll see whether that gets picked up. It's not that hard.
There were some concerns about the validity of the 2006 Disability Survey and its results have still not all been released - though that sadly didn't extend to selected measures and misleading headline totals which have been repeated by others (and which amount to Stats NZ miraculously 'curing' well over 100,000 disabled Kiwis between 2001 and 2006). Using the wrong totals produces wrong calcuations about things like employment (where the rate of labour force participation was stated to have again miraculously increased from 40% to 60%). No one seems to be challenging the results.
External advocacy about this crucial underpinning for change is weak, fragmented and under-informed. Government accountability seems close to zero, without forceful representation or significant work programmes from any agency. Extremely long way to go, trust me. Don't want to get into a detailed discussion here, but am available offline for consultation in this area. :)
-
I wish I knew why empathy was in such short supply
I suppose many of us noticed that after his participating in "Dancing With the Stars" Rodney Hide seemed to display an empathy previously absent from his persona. I put this down to the necessity of empathy in the performance of paired dancing. He has since recovered however.
-
I wish I knew why empathy was in such short supply
I was reminded this week that stocism, so much a part of the europaen colonisation story, is an apathetic philosophy so perhaps as one has become the story we might tell ourselves and other has become entrenched in the culture.
-
Sacha: I have just been to an extremely interesting disability research conference in Sydney that had attendees from all over the Asia Pacific. Only 4 of us from NZ and only one from non-academia and that was a very nice man from Stats NZ who had come specifically to learn more about the place of stats in disability research, and what was needed and would be useful (specifically as a result of the NZDS Objective 10).
Attending was also one retired Australian stats man who had contributed regional data to the WHO's ICF (International Classification of Functioning or whatever) which is being used more and more by Education and Health, and seems to be much more social model based than previous measures which focussed on broken body parts.
So things are slowly improving and its due to activism such as yours.
-
That's encouraging, Hilary, but ICF is still very medicalised too.
-
And it shows in the Washington Group work too, unfortunately.
-
( the ) other has become entrenched in the culture.
I have a problem with the term Significant Other as a descriptor for "Partner" It allways seems like you should regard them as the enemy.
;-) -
Tim, you mean " stoicism" i presume, being stoic? I'm not quite getting what you mean here:
so perhaps as one has become the story we might tell ourselves and other has become entrenched in the culture.
Sorry, maybe I'm being a bit thick. i agree stoicism has been seen as a pioneer culture's virtue - when I read the latest Listener's review of James Belich's new book "Replenishing the Earth: the Settler Revolution & Rise of the Anglo World" and it describes Hokitika in 1867 having 102 hotels, i reckon the settler wives must have been very stoic indeed!
-
Rodney Hide seemed to display an empathy previously absent from his persona.
Really? You're having me on :-)
I couldn't bear to watch him making like a demented squirrel and remembering, at the same time, that he's a powerful little snot of an MP.
-
Kerry, I caertainly understand why the colonists has stoic attitues, and the book (hard to link) explained it far more easily, so here's Wikipedia:
The idea was to be free of suffering through apatheia (Greek: ἀπάθεια) or peace of mind (literally,'without passion'),[24] where peace of mind was understood in the ancient sense — being objective or having "clear judgment" and the maintenance of equanimity in the face of life's highs and lows.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.