Posts by Sacha
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Danyl Mclauchlan,
the threat of violence etc appears to be frightening to people who are unlikely to commit crimes in the first place
And there's scope for discussing that as a mechanism of social control. I believe Mr Cauchi has some useful ideas to contribute there, though I don't much admire some of his other ones.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to DCBCauchi,
Shouting 'fire' in a crowded theatre can be, and has been, a valid artistic strategy
Once the trampled crowd realises who's responsible, I doubt that claiming "art" is going to protect you much. Better hope you enjoy a social and legal system that trades off constraints of your absolute rights and imposes some responsibilities of citizenship.
-
This is one case where besides some solid publicity I'd actually prefer a restorative justice process so all involved get to understand each other's perspectives. Seems better than the slim chance of a meaningful and non-traumatising counter-prosecution.
To me, this one of those issues where our own emotional responses mirror those at the heart of the situation. I guess we're all capable of being vigilantes. I'm reminded that a prime function of justice is to protect potential perpetrators from our own raw human inclinations, not just to defend victims.
-
Hard News: The digital switch-off, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Berlusconi stupid
Hey, that film has an invisible opposition too
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Russell Brown,
most ASD people are truthful souls, often to their own cost
<Nods ruefully>
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to Che Tibby,
i think he's referred to PAS as the self-appointed guardians
Oh I know what sneering Mr Cauchi is is referring to, bolstered by his previous contributions. I just have little tolerance for fuckwittedness today. And if I overstep certain bounds in that, there would be consequences.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to DCBCauchi,
self-appointed guardians of community morals attempting to silence people they don't approve of is a bad thing
The Broadcasting Standards Authority are not self-appointed. Press Council might be a different matter, sure - but the overall framework that governs mediated speech in this country is subject to parliamentary oversight. Take up your desire for a neoliberal paradise with them.
-
In general my preference is to add more voices and conversations to provide balance rather than to prohibit speech.
However, our media system is broken in ways that mean that approach can not currently work. And it's seldom well-off white men who pay the price for that, is it.
Speech is not so neatly separated from action either as some quaint conventions would have it.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to nzlemming,
free speech is exactly the right to use a megaphone
Wrong - that's a privilege governed by broadcasting law and other such statutes. And the Broadcasting Standards are explicit about a broadcaster's duty not to harm people or social groups in specified ways.
Lhaws can say whatever he likes in person, but he does not have some special protection to be able to multiply his views using mass media without constraint or consequence.
-
Hard News: About Arie, in reply to DCBCauchi,
Like it or not, Laws is just as entitled to express his point of view as anyone else.
Bullshit to notions that 'free speech' means freedom to a megaphone and from consequences. Broadcasting comes with conditions. Take the right-wing tosh elsewhere, David.
Snap