Cool!
via Andrew Sullivan’s Daily Dish
I like Mihingarangi Forbes
Click to read at www.nzherald.co.nz
I like journalist Mihingarangi Forbes* and I don’t care who knows it, or whether they agree or disagree with me. It’s good to have her voice, her character, her background and her point of view represented on our airwaves.
Read Sarah Stuart’s Twleve Questions with Mihingarangi Forbes.
Good on her. Congratulations on her new job hosting Native Affairs.
Sometimes I think Maori TV is this country’s last best hope for public (television) broadcasting.
– P
*Professionally and as a viewer. We’re not friends.
The ACT Party’s “rejuvenation”.
The Son of Man (French: Le fils de l’homme) 1964 by René Magritte.
For some reason, listening to the ACT Party leader John Banks spouting slogans on Focus on Politics prior to the Party’s Saturday conference in art lover Alan Gibbs’ barn, I thought of this surrealist painting.
What hope has ACT got of “rejuvenation” with John Archibald Banks (66) as their leader? His kind of political pragmatism (there are other words we could use) seems repellent to young, enthusiastic, idealistic political wannabes. They learn quick, unlike their elders, it seems.
The Party stands or falls with Epsom and the National Party’s (legitimate, for now, but whiffy) electoral ‘arrangement’ to deliver a blue seat to ACT. That just doesn’t seem viable.
Where have the big ideas gone?
I can see why Cactus Kate left.
– P
PS Read this: Old White Guys by Cliff Schecter at Al Jazeera. Interesting.
Ralph Hotere RIP
Ralph Hotere by Marti Friedlander
I was sad to hear this news this afternoon on my way to a exhibition opening at a gallery on the North Shore.
Ralph Hotere was a trail blazer, a visionary … and an artist. RIP
– P
Taking it seriously. Barack Obama polishes his speech notes.
This is a photo by White House official photographer Pete Souza of a version of US President Barack Obama’s draft speech notes marked up for changes.
When he’s ‘on’ Barack Obama is a fine orator — possibly the best of his generation. What this photo shows me is that he really works to polish and prepare. And fair enough. He’s in the big leagues.
President Barack Obama works on his inaugural address with Jon Favreau, Director of Speechwriting, not pictured, in the Oval Office, Jan. 16, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) Click to view it at Flickr
via @GalleyCat and @nzdodo
I’m reminded that Ernest Hemingway talked about getting started writing by accepting the fact that you will write a “shitty first draft” … and then have something to IMPROVE.
That’s a good lesson I’ve used myself and passed on to other authors.
– P
On one’s motivations for a rant
Three reasons. Pick one. (from Seth Godin)
Sometimes a good old fashioned tongue-lashing (or what I recently called a “pro bono hatchet job”) is well-motivated. Sometimes not.
Without second-guessing yourself up your own wazoo, it’s worth occasionally reflecting on these things, huh? Worth asking yourself (myself) ‘So, what am I trying to achieve?’
No-one’s motivations are completely clear, but I believe in being unequivocally critical (truthful) where I see it is merited.
Let the sparks fly where they may. Job 5:7 (groan)
– P
Seth Godin is worth following. His blog is here.
Colin Craig: Getting ahead in politics by being polarising
Hmm. I’m not sure about the reliability of privately-funded political surveys (although National Party operative David Farrar may do quite well from them) but I notice this approach …
The leaflet includes a survey of 2200 New Zealanders commissioned by Mr Craig which showed that 71 per cent of respondents felt MPs should consult their electorates and vote according to their wishes.
… targeting National MPs seems to be standard fare for Colin Craig’s Conservative Party.
Here’s a NZ Herald report about Colin Craig’s latest effort to get traction for his Party. He seems to be trying to establish a point of difference, re-staking a claim on the right of the political spectrum.
With the ACT Party looking shaky to the point of distemper, there will be room on the right for a new fringe party. Mr Craig may be quite prescient in basing a line of attack on Prime Minister John Key’s credibility as expressed in his twisting-in-the-wind voting record.
But calling John Key “too gay”? Really?
“First, attract attention by any means…”
It was interesting to hear that Lockwood Smith’s biggest regret after 30 years in Parliament was that he voted in accordance with his electorate’s wishes and not his conscience on the issue of Homosexual Law Reform… Continue reading →
Home-made hovercraft. Nice.
“Leaf blower + pool noodle + plywood + shower curtain + small boy = hovercraft” — John Edwards
I showed this picture (from my Twitter buddy John Edwards) to my 12 year old — before I even had a chance to ask him wha— ‘Nice hovercraft!’ he said.
Indeed. Well done John.
– P
PS The wonders of gaffer tape!
Would this policy stop impostors and sock puppets … or just cripple Twitter?
pic: venicemaskedball.co.uk – click
No masks
I noticed a comments policy at the foot of a fascinating, sad article on Frontline about Nancy Lanza: Raising Adam Lanza (worth a read).
As we’ve discussed recently, there’s a ‘cabal’ or two of impostors pretending to be other people for whatever various disclosed and undisclosed reasons (see Spoofing David Fisher and The dissatisfying hollowness of @BarnsleyBill, Russell Beaumont’s internet impostor and Let a little air in, @BarnsleyBill.)
So these ‘guidelines’ kinda-sorta jumped out at me.
In order to foster a civil and literate discussion that respects all participants, FRONTLINE has the following guidelines for commentary. By submitting comments here, you are consenting to these rules:
Readers’ comments that include profanity, obscenity, personal attacks, harassment, or are defamatory, sexist, racist, violate a third party’s right to privacy, or are otherwise inappropriate, will be removed. Entries that are unsigned or are “signed” by someone other than the actual author will be removed. We reserve the right to not post comments that are more than 400 words. We will take steps to block users who repeatedly violate our commenting rules, terms of use, or privacy policies. You are fully responsible for your comments.
I recall last year there was a spate of commenters at interest.co.nz using other people’s well-established user names from the PropertyTalk forum to maliciously sew confusion, it seemed to me. The use of the @BarnsleyBill sock puppet/profile on Twitter by ‘three or four other people’ (besides long-time user ‘Russell Beaumont’) as discussed (link above) also seems to somewhat fit into that category: murky.
We’ll never see the end of the use of noms de plume, it seems to me, but is it possibly a good start to introduce policies like Frontline’s?
Yeah.
– P
Is internet ad filtering THEFT? Or a response to abuse?
Competing for eyeballs is fine — but be aware your actions have consequences. (pic: arbroath.blogspot.com – click)
I’ve worked in commercial radio so I understand the commercial reality: In radio, TV, newspapers and magazines, advertising revenue is what keeps the lights on. Advertising pays the bills.
Traditionally (which doesn’t always mean it’s good, right?) advertising in these media has been predominantly a version of interruption marketing — viz. find something your target audience is interested in, then interrupt them with your commercial messages, painfully (but not enough to drive them away).
On a related thought:, journalists pride themselves as truth-tellers, feeling even better about it if the truth being told is inconvenient to those in power:
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed.” — George Orwell
Another view was nicely expressed by Jack Shafer recently:
Journalism is what’s on the other side of the ad.
Which got me thinking.
‘New media’ or internet marketing, like everything else in life, demands a learning curve. And boy, it’s been ugly at times. Personally, I find TV on demand, with its insistence on playing the same ad three or four times during an episode of, say, Homeland, or The Daily Show at the light end of the annoyance spectrum.
On the other hand, serpentine, swirling ads near and all over news websites are an unwelcome intrusion into my consciousness — when I’m trying to read, dammit! — and it’s one that I don’t tolerate for long.
On my day-to-day web browser I use Safari AdBlock and GlimmerBlocker to shield me from the time- and attention-wasting circus of internet ads (particularly animated ones).
I leave Google Chrome unfiltered and, indeed, routinely rely on Chrome’s embedded Flash player to view content that my otherwise Flash-less set-up cannot decode — but that’s less and less because of the widespread use of the HTML5 video standard, in part due to the increasing use of mobile browsers including Apple’s iOS.
So, because of my set-up I don’t generally even see the ads … but when I do, I’m aghast at how dominating they are. (For instance Facebook. Bleurgh!)
I have, in my professional life, paid for web advertising in the form of banner ads (but not Google Adsense) and accept that my ‘message’ will be filtered out by people like me, even if we’re actually interested in the products or services being offered. I have to find a better way to reach them.
I see that filtering as your right to control what comes into your house, and akin to muting the ads on TV or putting a ‘no junk mail’ sticker on your letterbox. But some in the ad industry seem to look at it differently: like, by using an ad blocker I’m stealing. Say what?
From an article Ad Blocking: Theft Or Fair Use? by Josh Dreller, Director Client & Industry Solutions at Visual IQ (via AdExchager) …
Ad Blocking = Stealing
I bet most users would applaud an ad-free Internet. However, if ad blocking were considered “stealing,” would most people pause and reconsider? I believe so.
So let’s call it what it is. Circumventing the fair value exchange of free content on a website is basically like downloading pirated music or jumping over the subway station turnstile. Users “pay” to access content by allowing ads to be shown adjacent to the free content they’re consuming. I doubt the Internet users who can’t wait to block ads would also then pay $5/month to read ESPN.com, IMDB.com, etc. Many people would probably pay for Facebook, but not the billions that are on the social network now. Can you imagine people paying per video on YouTube?
We are ALL self-righteous hypocrites
So, I’ve finally found the space to read Jonathan Haidt’s masterpiece The Righteous Mind which was a much-appreciated Christmas gift. I’m enjoying it. Very persuasive.
A slam in the early pages is this: “… the take home message of the book is ancient. It is the realisation we are all self-righteous hypocrites.”
Well! OK then. Glad that’s out in the open.
– P
Addictions
‘Driving High’ drug awareness campaign poster (click to enlarge)
I spotted this poster on a wall near my office in Epsom (John Banks country) and it reminded me of a time long ago in the omigod 1980s when I ran a street theatre company with a group of Christian friends. I wrote our scripts and acted in or narrated many of them.
‘Wholemeal Theatre Company’ our sandwich board said — and, being windy Wellington, that board was made of the heaviest wood we could manage … so it didn’t blow down Cuba Mall and clonk an innocent passerby mid-performance. In tone we were all very Python-esque, people said (I loved Monty Python, still do, and aimed for a Not the Nine O’Clock News, Alas Smith and Jones feel) … it seemed well-received and we loved doing it.
Through that street theatre group I was lucky enough to participate in an acrobatics workshop (really challenging!) with some friends and dancers from the Royal NZ Ballet … but that’s another story.
Anyway, one day after a lunchtime street show I was approached by someone from ALAC — then the Alcohol Liquor Advisory Council — and, long story short, we were commissioned by them to do a series of pointed comedy sketches and performances on the topic of why/how misuse of booze can be dangerous. We were happy to do it. Good times.
From the look of this poster, whoever is running alcohol/drug education these days is still going for a quirky approach.
Good on them.
Do you have ‘an addictive personality’? Welcome to the human race!
From my point of view the ‘social problem’ caused by alcohol abuse is not usually about the particular substance — human societies all around the world have found ways to create alcohol — from malt & hops to wine made with grapes or plums or pears to sake to cane liquor and whisky, vodka and moonshine.
In fact, history shows we’re very good at finding all sorts of substances to abuse on our way to reaching an ‘altered state’. A school friend of mine was so desperate for a ‘high’ he ingested drugs designed to save dogs who had swallowed 1080 poison. Continue reading →
Cameron Slater is social media “beef lasagne”
Truth in advertising? Meh, I don’t think so. (Images, left: radiotimes.com right: Cameron Slater)
Oh dear. In another example of his near-pathological ‘I-can-dish-it-out-but-can’t-take-it’ mindset, Pakuranga’s social media thug Cameron Slater is emoting ‘upset’ about comments on Twitter. (sigh)
This loutish, heavy-handed propagandist makes a habit of cyberstalking, goading and abusing public figures and those whom he perceives as the National Party’s political enemies … and some within the Party who have offended him like Michelle Boag who knocked his dad off the Party President perch.
Cameron and his mostly pseudonymous cabal of wide boys seem to delight in provoking bite-back from public figures. (I’ve written about this before See: Drunken yobos spit in MP’s face, then skite to their mates like idiot schoolboys and Stalker Cameron Slater: new year, same bullsh*t.)
I see Cameron Slater as the horse meat “beef lasagne” of South-East Auckland social media, with his frequent use of deceptive labels. He exhibits an at best tenuous grip on the notion of ‘facts’ — routinely twisting and distorting real events with apparent disregard for fairness and accuracy. He gives spin doctors a bad name.
Cameron’s schtick is fizzing up nonsense for the purposes of Shock! Horror! spittle-flecked and dishonest attacks on people with whom he disagrees online. His purpose is to ‘hurt’ them. If by his ravings and incitement of his followers he can cause negative ‘real world’ effects for his targets (like, say, financial, or their employment), then all the better, according to this nasty bully-boy. (He has spelt all this out on his histrionic hate blog — search for ‘NFWAB’.) So much for free speech.
Cameron also gloatingly celebrates a ‘Sledge of the day’ (so long as it’s not one aimed at him or one of his his political heroes, right?) But, oh noes, today Cameron is breathlessly affecting a case of the vapours with journalist David Fisher for a mean joke on Twitter (oh, please) which cited one of Cameron’s blog posts about depression … as merrily documented on his blog in his typical shrieking, one-eyed, half-the-story fashion. Continue reading →
