Posts by InternationalObserver
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Yeah, I've been watching the new Hustle but somehow I'm not so enamoured this series....
.... I've just come across this clip which effectively skewers FOX News for their use of sex to sell the news. Bikini and breast shots during a serial killer report? How long before NZ TV follows suit?
I found the clip thru this blog
on Huffington Post. It makes some great points, including:Their credibility is in tatters, particularly because of the way they've pimped the Iraq war. So the cheapest way to get viewers back is through gratuitous titillation. We've seen it through the wall to wall blondes and babes delivering the news, but the graphic video and interviews they air takes it to a whole new level.
Women who choose to flaunt their sexuality is one thing, but clipping together images to parade before Fox audiences completely out of context is another. Asking a woman in trouble (because of lame pictures on the web) about non-existent lesbian trysts is insulting. Prodding her over and over again is mindless sexism at its worst.
-
Well, I've got the flu, so I can blame this on the Sudafed ...
Off the top of my head I can't help thinking that the general bureaucratisation of "treaty education" has worked against itself. You know, the perception that if you go for a job in Wellington you have to remember some spiel; if you train to be a teacher you need to include this stuff in every essay; resource consent applications need iwi approval (I don't even know if that's true), you know what I mean.
As much as "kiwis" believe in a fair crack of the whatever, they're also deeply resistant to being told what to do, and during the 90s at least treaty stuff became perfunctory and meaningless.
Yup.
There are still some non-Maori who question how the Treaty of Waitangi can be 'a living document'. It's absurd - imagine if all written agreements/contracts were 'living documents'? Every new generation would be in court forever re-arguing what the original agreement meant.
But somehow (Labour PC liberalism?) the Treaty is now the defining document of our nation and it is a living document which means it can't be defined strictly by the actual wording of the document (why, even the wording/meaning of the document is different depending on which version [English or Maori] you read) so instead the Treaty will be defined by what the politics of the day determine it to mean.
The good news is that the #2 guiding principle of our education curriculum will be the TOW, meaning children of all races (because we are all one nation afterall, albeit two peoples) will learn that to be a New Zealander one must accept Maori culture, because they were here first, y'know? And if you don't like it then you can go back to England or China or wherever your people came from because you can. But Maori don't have that option, if they don't like it they can't leave because they have no where to go (except to Sydney or Brisbane), they are from this land.
So whilst we are taught that Maui fished Aotearoa out of the sea (but also taught that that is just a delightful myth), we are also taught that Taniwha are real and we must spend a great deal of money so that local Iwi can perform a ceremony to remove them from local waterways adjascent to a new bypass. And whilst we are taught that NZ is a secular state we shall not open a new Govt Dept building/office/lobby without having a Maori prayer or blessing performed first (cue rebuttal citing the Christian prayer opening each Parliamentary session). And whilst we are taught that the cultural practice by some African tribes to remove the clitoris' of teenage girls is wrong (cue side argument about Western practice of male circumcision), we are taught that the cultural practice of Maori in insisting that women sit at the back and not speak until it is their turn is not wrong.
And whilst we may feel that it conflicts with our previously held belief that 'Girls Can Do Anything' now is not the time to argue because it is not for us (non-Maori) to argue the rights and wrongs of Maori culture (but you can say what you like about Scientology cos we all agree they're nutters, I mean really... Thetans, evil spirits dropped into volcanoes ...?!). Besides, Maori women will fight that battle themselves, on the Marae, and change will come when Maori decide it is appropriate (cue anecdotes of staunch Wahine who through the ages have proven themselves not to be second class citizens; much like the proud Muslim women who wear the Burqua and proudly celebrate their faith by walking two steps behind their husband - or any man for that matter).
I could go on but I won't. The caveat to my statement 'the Treaty will be defined by what the politics of the day determine it to mean' is that there is a ratchet clause. Meaning Maori will never accept a reduction in whatever they have received thus far under TOW (cue argument that I am being paternalistic, that Maori have 'received' nothing, only got what is rightfully theirs as per the Treaty). Which means if (say) a future National government tries to roll back (clawback?) some of the provisions of what the Treaty has come to mean in modern times then there will be more trouble. Much more. Trouble trouble trouble.
At which point I shall stay indoors with the curtains closed, and watch My Little Pony videos all day.
-
hunting and survival camps + illegal firearms does merit police involvement - using the local Iwi liaison police to bring anyone in to line and out any silliness on the marae. I assure you, Tuhoe leadership would have sorted out any of their own and Tau Iwi who were up to that kind of shit in their rohe.
Do you really think Tuhoe leadership were oblivious to what was going on in their midst? I'd also like to know more about the local Iwi liaison police. Are they a special squad, like the K9 Units, and the AOS?
-
-
About 18 months ago I found I couldn't FW or Reply with attachments via my Extra mail account (it had been fine for the previous 3 years). I started using my Gmail account to send attachments, but about 12 months ago I got fed up with Xtra and switched to Orcon. About a month after that the same problem, so back to Gmail. (I should point at that both Xtra and Orcon Help desks could find no reason/solution for the problem - evidently my line had all the necessary pings). Then about 6 months ago I was unable to send attachments via Gmail either. Which sucks. Big. Time.
Anyone got any clues/suggestions? (Other than try asking this on the TradeMe messageboards!). I run an Intel Mac, with a broadband connection. (Just saying that makes me sound more technicaly proficient than I am!). My problem is obviously karma because ...I still had to call the helpless desk every time and tussle with
In a past life I temped for 2 weeks on Telecom's 123 service. Anytime I had a question in the too hard basket I dumped the call. I had to go thru the charade of wondering what happened to the call ("Hello? Hello? are you there?) because all calls were monitored by supervisors. Who at the end of the week/day would tell you how many calls were 'unfinished' and who's fault it was. But I didn't care because I was only working there 2 weeks. (Unlike today's youth who are dilligent)
-
I'm not really sure that people who can't afford to buy stuff in the first place are a premium advertising audience.
if only someone had realised that before they started spending all their money.......
You over-estimate the market place. Having sold advertising in a previous life I can assure you there are plenty of 'businesspeople' out there who don't know jack about buying advertising. This site won't be sold on reach or demographic, it will be sold on hits.
PS: Remember the news story about the exemption for government departments from the Electoral Finance Act on which the Herald based its "Democracy Under Attack" promotion on Monday? Er, not so much, as it turns out. And the editorial tone is turning quite pissy about it.
Aw c'mon! Do you think if it wasn't for the Herald 'crusade' the Govt would have backed down on including Govt Departments advertising during the election period?
Sure, they may say now that it's being reviewed (but lets see the final bill just to be sure) but my Tui Gut tells me we were almost going to have a law denying the Exclusive Bretheren the right (okay, limiting) to electioneer, but allowing Govt Depts unfettered ad campaigns to 'inform' the public of their 'entitlements'.
And yes (because we've had this discussion before on PAS) the taxpayers do need to be informed of their entitlements, but I would suggest much of that Govt Dept advertising is subliminal electioneering. Much like those (now legal) tax payer funded Pledge Cards.
-
last year the DomPost had some photos from that party on its functions page. the usual thing of people standing around with drinks laughing.
How, though, would you represent bitchiness photographically?
Perhaps one could take the photo's around midnite, and not 9pm?
-
okay, since I've been so rude about TV3 pulling it, I suppose I should publicise it's return: TV3 is resuming 30 Rock. New eps start tonite (thurs) at 10.05pm after Californication. Here's a link to a funny bit starring Al Gore
And speaking of Californication and the Advertiser Ban driven by Family First ....
Are we going to accept this? Seriously, I thought this sort of thing only happened in the US? This is a show that screens at 9.30pm! And they've successfully convinced advertisers to pull their advertising. If we allow Family First's action to go unchecked, what next? Will & Grace?
While I accept that in a democracy anyone should be allowed to start a boycott, I also think it should be possible to challenge that boycott. Maybe we should boycott those advertisers too timid to stand up to Family First?
I'd suggest picking on one and would suggest it should be Burger King. I think it's hipocritical of them to suggest that the show is too controversial when some of their own advertising has been viewed in the same light. They won't pull those campaigns but they will pull advertising from a show screening in an adult timeslot??
What do PAS readers think? Am I right, or am I Don Quixote?
-
As for the claim made here that everyone was wearing balaclavas I would estimate there were about 40-50 masked up.
The front of the march was brash, exuberant, and at times angry
Not the same, but this reminds me of the Springbok Anti-Tour protests. The MSM of the day (I was going to say 'Middle NZ' but many of the middles class were in the marches) kept asking "Why are they [the protestors] wearing Crash Helmets? Do they want a confrontation with the Police?"
The answer was "no, but those batons hurt when they hit your head..." My point (ahem) is that there is always a bit of theatre involved (possibly in both senses of the word) when getting dressed for a protest march - especially from the young 'uns. Better they be dressed up than 'tooled up'. (Altho' some of those Taiaha were getting dangerously close to the latter)
-
</aside>
Overall, the mainstream media are part of the evil overbearing hegemonic power structure and should not be associated with, end of story.
The MSM can be divided into two distinct camps:
1] Those already owned by Rupert Murdoch
2] Those yet to be owned by Rupert Murdoch</tangent>
What a pity Musarif wasn't more accommodating ....