Thank you. Excellent analysis. A typical Wellington Beltway institution that needs a complete overhaul of its personnel. And I can speak from keyboard-to-keyboard experience.
Well done. It's about time someone took a good hard look at the Media Council too (what used to be the Press Council). Our local independent rag here in Cambridge is being killed by a thousand cuts from pathetic cry babies having their whinging complaints about headlines - headlines only - upheld by the Media Council. Mostly the lay people on the Council.
If I've understood it correctly, from what I've read elsewhere, the complaint could not be classified as hate speech, inciting violence or any of the other buzzwords used these days, except perhaps mildly racist. Yes, Plunket is a "shock jock", he can be offensive and crass etc, but similar outrages can be found in many places on the internet. I can only imagine that the BSA have seized on this chance to further attempt to begin a widespread censorship of free speech and set a precedent for further intervention. Heaven help us all if they succeed.
I absolutely agree this move by the bsa stinks of an attempt to shut the platform down along with anyone else they dont like what in the world has this country become, we listen to these podcasts because they tell us truthful accounts of whats happening unlike the woke paid media of nz. I think i shall become a paidup member of the the platform thanks bsa
Thanks so much for this response to the BSA brouhaha. I listened to Sean Plunket's piece and sort of expected and hoped you'd make a response. Thanks for laying it all out so clearly. I am always alert to what might be partisan incursions into limiting speech, and this effort from the BSA is exactly what that feels like.
On the money Halfling. Again. Methinks there may just happen to be political motivation driving this case. The Platform is now a serious media player, (good on them) and a threat to the woke narrative. Funny too that a ‘Tikanga’ complaint of all things got them going.
Cambridge defines mumbo jumbo as “words or activities that seem complicated or mysterious but have no real meaning”. Truth, in this case, would be an absolute defence for Mr Plunket cos tikanga is exactly that! (AKA ‘selectively applied bullshit’…)
Thin end of the wedge this Orwellian overreach… Get rid of the BSA, what good do they actually do?
Well Boris, I can't resist responding to your thoughts about the nature of Sean's comment. When I heard him say it, way back in July, I thought it was an ignorant and foolish comment. But I strongly defend his right to say it on his program and agree that there is political motivation behind the BSA's action.
Ouch! But thank you Sheryl! Genuinely. I did not hear him make the comment, so I hope I have understood his 'transgression' correctly. Tbh, Boris would have been far harsher in his critique of 'all things Tikanga' for in his not-so-humble-opinion, tikanga is worse than animistic nonsense, it is very, very dangerous to a society founded upon a worldview that sees the universe as ordered and consistent. And a society that runs a legal system based on (mostly...) clear guidance and common law principles thrashed out over centuries by very clever people and not simplistic savages.
But my thanks to you is because you have expressed an opinion & challenged dear ol' Boris's position. Neither you, nor I, nor Sean attempted to incite violence or get anyone hurt. So the complaint is a daft and spurious one. And the need for any bureaucrat such as those who live at the BSA to get engaged, non-existent. Not only should they stay the bleep away from non-broadcasters, but they should be disbanded. I see no need for their existence at all.
p.s. Why was his comment 'ignorant & foolish' if I may ask?
Hi Boris. In answer to your question, I found Sean's comment ignorant because it suggests little or no knowledge of tikanga Maori, and thus is foolish for its disparagement. I should state that I'm not Maori, I'm an older NZ woman of European descent. My understanding of tikanga Maori is that it's a body of traditional knowledge and practice about how to live, how to relate to others and to the land.
I was acquainted with tikanga Maori throughout my working life in the area of health. I know about as much of the language as most pakeha NZers might who haven't formally learned it. I have found that none of the tikanga remotely resembles the "mumbo-jumbo" that you defined and Sean was implying. It's entirely comprehensible if one pays attention without fear or antipathy.
I really can't see how tikanga Maori could be "very very dangerous". At most I have concerns about the attempts we've seen in the last few years to impose it in places I don't think it belongs, like workplaces and compulsory Uni courses.
Basically I think Sean's comment says more about him than about tikanga Maori.
Essentially it is all about worldview. All that we do stems from that. NZ (as a nation hitherto) has believed in a universe that is ordered and consistent. (Created by God as per the Christian tradition and whilst many don't actually believe that, they still share the same worldview based upon Judeao Christian traditions that facilitated science and the easy life we now get to live). Te Ao Maori, a critical aspect of 'tikanga' does not believe in such a universe. Maori spiritual belief is animistic and pagan. They believe that inanimate objects have spirits. That is of course 'mumbo jumbo', or absolute and total bollocks in other parlance.
This is why karakia are so wrong. They believe we HAVE to 'pray' over 'things' to keep the evil spirits away. Maori walk around during blessings and 'touch' tables, chairs etc, in order to 'cleanse' them. This is voodoo nonsense. (Imagine if we required an exorcism to use a hospital room after someone dies...) Tikanga believes physical things are 'unclean' and 'evil', hence rahui's and the like. This is indeed very dangerous for a society. Raising children to believe in this bullshit will not facilitate scientific and rational thought. You simply cannot do genuine science when the reaction of the physical realm depends on the whim of the gods. Tohunga used to lord it over their people, just like witch doctors. Until the Ratana Church arose to stop their power and the Suppression Act was passed in 1907. Or how about having to pay 'taniwhas' who just happen to live in the river where the motorway wants to go? Or add to the cost of all developments because some Iwi twat has to walk around the site and ensure no naughty ghosts are lurking. This shit already happens and we are paying for it. Total crap.
You may not be affected by this nonsense, but malleable young minds will be. If you want kids to grow up thinking they cannot eat food on the mountain top because the gods will get upset, then fine. I however, as a staunch fan of science and good theology, do not.
David, the OED now defines telecommunication as "The transmission or exchange of information over a distance using electrical, radio, optical, or other electromagnetic signals, as by telegraph, telephone, radio, television, (in later use) the internet, etc.," which will be grist to the BSA's mill.
However, it seems from my limited knowledge that the internet is fundamentally different to electrical, radio, optical, or other electromagnetic signals, in that it works through a network of interconnected computers to form a network through which the computers send data to each other. Whereas with radio and television, sounds and visual images are transmitted form a transmitter to a receiver, with people involved at each end of the process and by means of electromagnet waves, with the internet they are transmitted through computer networks.
In short, broadcasting involves person with transmitter to people with receivers transmission. The internet involves person to computer-to-computer networks-to computer to person transmission. Electrical, radio, optical, or other electromagnetic signals are the ways computers in the networks communicate with each other
It seems to me you are better placed than most to opine on whether my supposed fundamental difference is legitimate differentiation.
Or maybe the Platform could find and resurrect the Good ship "Tiri" (Think Radio Hauraki 1970 ) retrofit Starlink and park 12 miles offshore to stop this BSA Overreach should it progress further.
Not quite sure how the Law defines or could define the origins of the said internet transmission/upload, given that it could come via any overseas server and is not just limited to New Zealand consumption.
Exactly what I was thinking and remembering my teenaged years of listening to Radio Hauraki. The thing about the internet, as Tina says in the Turners ad, is that it’s everywhere. The BSA clearly has no jurisdiction over anyone or anything beyond NZ’s borders. And many within NZ’s borders have easy access to a plethora of international audio, visual and written forms of media via the internet.
If the BSA claims jurisdiction over The Platform, I wonder about the status of my own publication, Just the Business, which while written, also exists solely on the internet. Or, for that matter, this Halfling publication.
Thank you. Excellent analysis. A typical Wellington Beltway institution that needs a complete overhaul of its personnel. And I can speak from keyboard-to-keyboard experience.
Well done. It's about time someone took a good hard look at the Media Council too (what used to be the Press Council). Our local independent rag here in Cambridge is being killed by a thousand cuts from pathetic cry babies having their whinging complaints about headlines - headlines only - upheld by the Media Council. Mostly the lay people on the Council.
If I've understood it correctly, from what I've read elsewhere, the complaint could not be classified as hate speech, inciting violence or any of the other buzzwords used these days, except perhaps mildly racist. Yes, Plunket is a "shock jock", he can be offensive and crass etc, but similar outrages can be found in many places on the internet. I can only imagine that the BSA have seized on this chance to further attempt to begin a widespread censorship of free speech and set a precedent for further intervention. Heaven help us all if they succeed.
I absolutely agree this move by the bsa stinks of an attempt to shut the platform down along with anyone else they dont like what in the world has this country become, we listen to these podcasts because they tell us truthful accounts of whats happening unlike the woke paid media of nz. I think i shall become a paidup member of the the platform thanks bsa
Join the Revolution Lee!
If we're looking for "shock jocks", just look at Parliament.
Perhaps we should all lodge complaints about new Maori Party MP Oriini Kaipara??
Thanks so much for this response to the BSA brouhaha. I listened to Sean Plunket's piece and sort of expected and hoped you'd make a response. Thanks for laying it all out so clearly. I am always alert to what might be partisan incursions into limiting speech, and this effort from the BSA is exactly what that feels like.
On the money Halfling. Again. Methinks there may just happen to be political motivation driving this case. The Platform is now a serious media player, (good on them) and a threat to the woke narrative. Funny too that a ‘Tikanga’ complaint of all things got them going.
Cambridge defines mumbo jumbo as “words or activities that seem complicated or mysterious but have no real meaning”. Truth, in this case, would be an absolute defence for Mr Plunket cos tikanga is exactly that! (AKA ‘selectively applied bullshit’…)
Thin end of the wedge this Orwellian overreach… Get rid of the BSA, what good do they actually do?
Well Boris, I can't resist responding to your thoughts about the nature of Sean's comment. When I heard him say it, way back in July, I thought it was an ignorant and foolish comment. But I strongly defend his right to say it on his program and agree that there is political motivation behind the BSA's action.
Ouch! But thank you Sheryl! Genuinely. I did not hear him make the comment, so I hope I have understood his 'transgression' correctly. Tbh, Boris would have been far harsher in his critique of 'all things Tikanga' for in his not-so-humble-opinion, tikanga is worse than animistic nonsense, it is very, very dangerous to a society founded upon a worldview that sees the universe as ordered and consistent. And a society that runs a legal system based on (mostly...) clear guidance and common law principles thrashed out over centuries by very clever people and not simplistic savages.
But my thanks to you is because you have expressed an opinion & challenged dear ol' Boris's position. Neither you, nor I, nor Sean attempted to incite violence or get anyone hurt. So the complaint is a daft and spurious one. And the need for any bureaucrat such as those who live at the BSA to get engaged, non-existent. Not only should they stay the bleep away from non-broadcasters, but they should be disbanded. I see no need for their existence at all.
p.s. Why was his comment 'ignorant & foolish' if I may ask?
Hi Boris. In answer to your question, I found Sean's comment ignorant because it suggests little or no knowledge of tikanga Maori, and thus is foolish for its disparagement. I should state that I'm not Maori, I'm an older NZ woman of European descent. My understanding of tikanga Maori is that it's a body of traditional knowledge and practice about how to live, how to relate to others and to the land.
I was acquainted with tikanga Maori throughout my working life in the area of health. I know about as much of the language as most pakeha NZers might who haven't formally learned it. I have found that none of the tikanga remotely resembles the "mumbo-jumbo" that you defined and Sean was implying. It's entirely comprehensible if one pays attention without fear or antipathy.
I really can't see how tikanga Maori could be "very very dangerous". At most I have concerns about the attempts we've seen in the last few years to impose it in places I don't think it belongs, like workplaces and compulsory Uni courses.
Basically I think Sean's comment says more about him than about tikanga Maori.
Thanks Sheryl
Essentially it is all about worldview. All that we do stems from that. NZ (as a nation hitherto) has believed in a universe that is ordered and consistent. (Created by God as per the Christian tradition and whilst many don't actually believe that, they still share the same worldview based upon Judeao Christian traditions that facilitated science and the easy life we now get to live). Te Ao Maori, a critical aspect of 'tikanga' does not believe in such a universe. Maori spiritual belief is animistic and pagan. They believe that inanimate objects have spirits. That is of course 'mumbo jumbo', or absolute and total bollocks in other parlance.
This is why karakia are so wrong. They believe we HAVE to 'pray' over 'things' to keep the evil spirits away. Maori walk around during blessings and 'touch' tables, chairs etc, in order to 'cleanse' them. This is voodoo nonsense. (Imagine if we required an exorcism to use a hospital room after someone dies...) Tikanga believes physical things are 'unclean' and 'evil', hence rahui's and the like. This is indeed very dangerous for a society. Raising children to believe in this bullshit will not facilitate scientific and rational thought. You simply cannot do genuine science when the reaction of the physical realm depends on the whim of the gods. Tohunga used to lord it over their people, just like witch doctors. Until the Ratana Church arose to stop their power and the Suppression Act was passed in 1907. Or how about having to pay 'taniwhas' who just happen to live in the river where the motorway wants to go? Or add to the cost of all developments because some Iwi twat has to walk around the site and ensure no naughty ghosts are lurking. This shit already happens and we are paying for it. Total crap.
You may not be affected by this nonsense, but malleable young minds will be. If you want kids to grow up thinking they cannot eat food on the mountain top because the gods will get upset, then fine. I however, as a staunch fan of science and good theology, do not.
Yes, differing worldviews, and that makes Substack an interesting place. Cheers Boris ☺️
David, the OED now defines telecommunication as "The transmission or exchange of information over a distance using electrical, radio, optical, or other electromagnetic signals, as by telegraph, telephone, radio, television, (in later use) the internet, etc.," which will be grist to the BSA's mill.
However, it seems from my limited knowledge that the internet is fundamentally different to electrical, radio, optical, or other electromagnetic signals, in that it works through a network of interconnected computers to form a network through which the computers send data to each other. Whereas with radio and television, sounds and visual images are transmitted form a transmitter to a receiver, with people involved at each end of the process and by means of electromagnet waves, with the internet they are transmitted through computer networks.
In short, broadcasting involves person with transmitter to people with receivers transmission. The internet involves person to computer-to-computer networks-to computer to person transmission. Electrical, radio, optical, or other electromagnetic signals are the ways computers in the networks communicate with each other
It seems to me you are better placed than most to opine on whether my supposed fundamental difference is legitimate differentiation.
Thanks for the comment Gary.
The technical discussion will be available as from 7:15 tomorrow morning.
By relying on telecommunications they ignore the way the Internet actually works.
Very well written as always thank you.
Or maybe the Platform could find and resurrect the Good ship "Tiri" (Think Radio Hauraki 1970 ) retrofit Starlink and park 12 miles offshore to stop this BSA Overreach should it progress further.
Not quite sure how the Law defines or could define the origins of the said internet transmission/upload, given that it could come via any overseas server and is not just limited to New Zealand consumption.
Exactly what I was thinking and remembering my teenaged years of listening to Radio Hauraki. The thing about the internet, as Tina says in the Turners ad, is that it’s everywhere. The BSA clearly has no jurisdiction over anyone or anything beyond NZ’s borders. And many within NZ’s borders have easy access to a plethora of international audio, visual and written forms of media via the internet.
If the BSA claims jurisdiction over The Platform, I wonder about the status of my own publication, Just the Business, which while written, also exists solely on the internet. Or, for that matter, this Halfling publication.