A reflection on #MarchInMarch
Just thinking about what I was planning this time last week, and reflecting on the paucity of news coverage that might have some of the issues that took so many people into the streets around the country.
This was particularly prompted by this nice enquiry and the reply it received from the Sydney Morning Herald. There has been many articles online about how individuals felt about getting out and marching last Sunday, but the main stream media’s reaction seems to have been a shock to many who took part and were not, in my opinion, cynical enough about what is considered newsworthy.
I can’t remember where I read it, but there was one piece that claimed they had contacted the local Perth newspaper, who seemed to expect a press release to write a story about last Sunday’s march. I think this illustrates the differences in expectations on both sides that just were not fulfilled.
One of the things #MarchInMarch were quite proud of is that it was not organised by the ‘usual suspects’, and there by hangs the first expectation. The ‘usual suspects’ would have known to publicise the march not just to the people they were trying to reach, but also to the main stream media, so that they would know that something was going to happen – if nobody (important?) knows it is happening, does it actually a) matter or b) happen?
On the other hand, as Ms Maley notes in her reply, she considers herself a “journalist” and not a “reporter”. To my mind that is part of the problem. There is an expectation that “reporters” report on what is happening around them, while “journalists” both report and comment on what happens.
The ordinary people who organised and marched expected to see reports of their action in their local and national papers. I know I did. I was both pleased and slightly disappointed, but unsurprised, that the reportage shown in various TV news shows tended to focus on the ‘rude bits’ and the apparently ‘unfocused message’ and that a lot of the journalism has also focused on the ‘rude bits’ and that there was no single message on to which their story could latch. I suspect that the hook in much of the journalism I have read this week was actually missed.
As I understand it, #MarchInMarch was more about the feeling that many have obviously had that their concerns for their country are being ignored, and to a degree minimised because it didn’t conform to the accepted form of protest. That feeling got ordinary people marching in their streets, many for the first time. This is not something such a diverse range of people do, ordinarily!
Perhaps, that is the Real Story. That a bunch of ordinary folk, using social media, organised something to express how they feel about their country without the conventional forms. Because the conventional media are neither informing them as they desire and now expect to be informed, nor are those media reporting what is happening when those of us on social media get it more immediately but others don’t. Don’t they also deserve to make their own minds up, as those of use who watch Twitter or Facebook do?
Increasingly the reportage online and ease of access to online information means that there is a greater need by newspapers (online and print) and broadcast media to improve their reportage of what happens. Or is it that sneaking suspicion correct that if things were just reported as they happened, without the newspaper owners opinion influencing those reports, the journalism (the reportage plus opinion) would be more blatant and the ordinary consumer could make their own minds up about things?
I do know that I have increasingly felt that when I read the online newspapers or watch/listen to broadcast news that only one side of the story is being told. I increasingly feel that there are some people who are so desperate to be proved right, and ‘in control’, that they will ignore every indication that they are ill-informed or even wrong, just so they can feel good about themselves. And I find myself increasingly concerned that my country might be in the control of those who fit that description. That is why I was motivated to stand up and be counted in that ‘unfocused’ mob that gathered on Langley Park last Sunday. But then, I don’t think it was unfocused, because there were just so many issues concerning every one of us who felt they had to be there.
Now that could have done with some “reporting”.
#MarchinMarch #Perth
I’ve just got home from the Perth “March In March”. We left early because the DD had reached her limit, but she felt she had to at least turn up to the start of the march.
About 3000+/- I think, may have been a little more, gathered on Langley Park around 10:30 this morning.
A Channel 9 camera was spotted at the beginning of the show as the marchers were Welcomed to Country by Nyoonga representatives, as was someone’s camera carrying drone (which got a bit of a snarl from the crowd). There were lots of placards about lots of topics, some more poignant than others of course. A fair number of small and not so small children and dogs were toddling around. And a lot of support from various union groups was visible in the crowd.
 |
We were officially harangued by:
|
All speakers castigated both political parties for their treatment of refugees, and though the only visible political party was the Greens (Scott Ludlam was present, but I didn’t notice until afterwards) the ALP wasn’t officially present. There were several people there who I’ve seen associated with the ALP though, and the TLCWA was quite visible in several union blocks. [Update: I’ve been informed via my Twitter stream that Sen Louise Pratt and Sen. Sue Lines were also present.]
| The unions were even invited to lead off the march as they were organised enough to look like they were leaders – I suppose it pays to have practised getting a crowd marching over many years *twinkles*If there was a mood to the crowd I would rate it as “very annoyed” possibly even at the ‘cup of tea, stirred vigorously’ level of annoyance – but then, Perth would like to be a “proper” city … *a very dry grin* |  |
Hopefully there will be more information from other sources about the Perth march. Perhaps there will be more imagery of the march on the TV news than just the Welcome and the little sacred fire that acknowledged that this was ‘business’ that Australians need to deal with.
I’m glad I went, even if the DD and I didn’t actually march.
Slave trade capitalism and the new Republican Party
Slave trade capitalism and the new Republican Party.
More elegantly put than I had been contemplating. I find it confirming of the thought that the current crop of “wealthy folk” who wish to reduce the opportunities for everyone a) do not realise that ideas are like fertiliser and that the more you have the more there are, and b) if ‘poor people’ can’t buy stuff, then ‘rich people’ can’t sell nearly as much stuff as they currently do so they won’t be as ‘rich’ as they might otherwise become!
Having just completed Paul Barry’s “Breaking News” I found myself a little sorry for Mr Murdoch. Mostly because he portrays something I have noted with many other “righteous men” in their delight in confirming that other men are not like them; hard-working, able to create wealth (always a sign that “god” is on their side, even if it’s source is not always crystal clear), and with a low taste for scandalous gossip about others.
Like John Calvin or Tomás de Torquemada and even Ayatollah Khomeini, the righteousness and sense of being better than anyone else seems to both drive them forward and blind them to other interpretations of their actions. Almost as if, because they are doing it, it is therefore right, no matter what the law or custom of a country has struggled to rise above and thereby all things are reduced to dross and baseness, confirming their righteousness and better-ness.
I also get the sense from Mr Barry’s words that Mr Murdoch’s offspring are left with a need to constantly prove themselves worthy of their father’s love. I wonder if that is reflects Mr Murdoch’s own need to be worthy of his father, and somehow prove himself ‘better’ than Sir Keith Murdoch as well as the “Old Establishment”.
From where I sit having read more than one book on Rupert Murdoch, in spite of his privileged starting positions I wonder if somehow he does not love himself, and that makes it easier for his apparent desire to be the most wealthy and influential person on the planet. Because only then will he be worthy in his own eyes?
It is too easy though, to dismiss everything that Mr Murdoch has done as an outright evil. There are many other influences on the current state of the Murdoch empire. And one has to credit Mr Murdoch with one great love of his life – he does love the idea of printing news about what is happening in the world and to those whom he thinks should be put in their place.
I look forward to Mr Barry’s sequel to this book, possibly after Mr Murdoch has “retired” and certainly after the convulsions of the court cases are over.
Abandon the shark cull, please! UPDATE:
UPDATE: Received 20140114.12:14
Hi [incorrectly spelt personal name redacted]
Thank you for your email.
These new shark mitigation strategies are in force to uphold the WA Government’s duty of care for West Australians and give all of us the ability to make responsible decisions about our water use.
We have spoken to a wide range of stakeholders including fishing industry representatives, Recfishwest, marine scientists and academics, Surfing WA, the Recreational Water Users Association, The Department of Fire and Emergency Services, Surf Life Saving WA, conservation groups, board riders and other Australian State Governments. Submissions were also received from the CSIRO and WA Water Police to ensure that these measures are warranted.
The hooks on the drum lines are very big and are specifically designed to target big sharks. The bait is also specifically selected to target sharks and not dolphins. In this respect all due care is being taken to ensure only large shark are caught. The 1km distance from shore is in line with SLSWA protocols. In Queensland drum lines are set as close as 350m from shore.
I understand this is a controversial issue however and have passed your feedback onto the Minister for Fisheries office.
Thank you for contacting me.
Kind Regards,
Nathan Morton MLA
Member for Forrestfield
Notes: This reply, although it had my original email attached with my name spelt in full, still managed to misspell my name. It’s the little things that count … *sighs*
Abandon the shark cull, please!
Nathan Morton was elected to represent the seat of Forrestfield at the last WA State election. This means he is supposed to be my representative in State Parliament. Which means that I can bring things to his attention that I think need to be paid attention to.
The proposed shark cull in Western Australia is something that I think should be less about vengeance against creatures who were ‘doing their thing’ and tragically taking the lives of two people enjoying their lives ‘doing their thing’ right where those hungry animals where being, well, hungry!
It doesn’t make the loss of life any less sad, and not to dismiss lightly that loss either, but unless there is sound evidence (and I don’t mean ‘goodness me, there’s a triangular fin in the water’) that a particular shark is making a habit of eating people instead of seals, what good does killing hundreds of other sharks, or other aquatic creatures who will be caught and killed by the proposed drum-line hooks, do then?
If people want to dress up like seals in wetsuits and enjoy surfing and diving in places where sharks also go hunting for their dinner, then surely it is the responsibility of the people involved to be aware of their risks?
As far as I can tell, the only ones interested in this shark cull are the politicians, and I’m sure there are many more deaths that they would have a better chance of doing something about or averting than attempting to take pot-shots at big hungry fish!
So, this is the letter I have just sent to my representative:
Dear Mr Morton
It is with increasing dismay that I note the pleas of scientists, fishermen, surf-riders and others who are familiar with the sea-coast, are being ignored by the current government with regards to the proposed “shark cull”.
All human deaths at sea are tragic — but this knee-jerk response is scientifically unproven and pushes already vulnerable species to the brink, not to mention affecting other species lower down the food chain by removing top predators. In the end it will also affect the livelihoods of fishermen and enjoyment of the oceanic environment, as has been seen in other places around the world.
Culling sharks is merely a cosmetic solution to the problem of shark attacks. Public education and shark avoidance are measures with long-lasting effects that will ensure the co-existence of sharks and humans. Non-invasive methods such as aerial patrols have been proven to work in minimising the already small chance of a shark attack. In the long-term, these measures will probably prove less costly than shooting sharks that may not have taken a bite out of a human.
It is only an hysteria-driven populist reaction by this government that is proposing such an expensive, ultimately useless, and unscientific cull.
It would be far more cost effective to educate West Australians as to the risks, allowing those who desire the liberty and responsibility of swimming with sharks the privilege of doing so.
As my representative in the West Australian parliament I expect you to present my request to Premier Barnett that this shark cull be abandoned and more effective and long-lasting educational action be provided, based on information from the Department of Fisheries – who I have to note, have not yet let the tender for the cull as of today’s date, 8th January 2014.
Kind regards,
Your employer
Eighty-four days, and counting …
I think the thing I hate most about the quality of journalism and political behaviour in the last four years is that I find it more and more difficult to understand where these so-called “Liberals” and their friends are coming from. I mean, they don’t seem to even conform to “conservative values” that the Liberal party used to stand for (at least when I started reading about these things).
It makes is so much more easy to hate, which has to be the most divisive and controlling emotion, so easily mobilised to cause death or destruction on many levels. And the saddest part of it, is that I see those blogs where civil conversation has held its own in that time becoming more and more strident and absorbing those hateful attitudes into their own discourse.
One thing that also (sort of) amuses me is that the ‘leftist collective’ seems to be made up of far more individuals with their own take on the world, politely expressed or defended as necessary. A cacophony of different voices, each welcomed for adding a new light on our mutual understandings.
This is in comparison to the group-think of ‘right thinking’ outlets consisting of individual individuals. Where disagreement with the leader of the pack is to court a snarling put-down intimidating the offender into acceptable behaviour. Where fear and obedience seem to be the order of the day. It is behaviour that suggests these people are themselves afraid and, hating what they are afraid of, try to make others afraid and hate-full too.
I have no idea how to change it, except that I need to be aware of how easy it is to slip into a hating mindset. I need to prevent myself sliding into an easy stereotyping of all things ‘not in the leftist collective’ as being wrong and therefore hateful and forgetting that these people are my fellow citizens. I need to be braver at calling out the sorts of language that tears down people, that makes them “not like us”, and I need to find more effective ways to explain my point of view in terms that these ‘New Liberals” can understand.
Eighty-four days since the election, and things are getting nastier than they ever were before Mr Abbott’s party was elected into government. I think the coming year will test my resolution to not sink to the depths so easily manipulated by the likes of some newspaper opinion writers or Mr Abbott’s front bench parliamentary colleagues.
Weeping in frustration already …
“I voted Liberal this time around, because I felt they would do a better job than Labor overall. I really want them to engage with people on this issue. It’s going to be a tough fight, but one we can win if all of us ensure the new government hear us.” – Nick Paine, Change.org/nbn
And I get to live with people telling me this for the next how many years?
It really puzzles me how it is those people barely over the age of consent, probably voting in their first real election, have voted for the Liberal or National Party presuming that an online petition will make a difference to a bunch of politicians who have, for the previous three years, undermined the whole concept of building infrastructure that would provide work, connection and possibility for the future for ALL Australians no matter where they live.
But because the pervading media miasma was one that portrayed the ALP and anything they did as being ‘incompetent’, or ‘wasteful’ or just plain wrong, so many young people are now surprised when they get ignored by the politicians whom they have helped into office without reading the fine print of policy. Is it only people who have had experience of being deprived because of fine print we didn’t read were aware that there was something fishy about the whole last three years worth of reporting in the MSM about parliament and the ALP government?
It’s not going to stop me promoting this particular petition, as I think emphasising the fact that the ALP’s National Broadband plan is far superior to what the LNP is offering is important. Nor is it going to stop my desire to whack people over the head with a helium balloon because they are too lazy to find out who they are hiring to do the job of governing the country. After all, who wouldn’t review a résumé before employing someone? And it’s not going to stop me writing to my local representatives and senators to tell them what I need in my country, and how well (or poorly) I think they are doing in representing me.
I am going to give young Nick a jellybean though, for having the gall to actually believe that the Liberal and National parties would listen to him, change the pathetic offering they currently have and build something that would last into the future a bit longer (and may even cost less over the long-term). I just hope that at the next election, he and others in his situation, will remember to evaluate the people who want to represent us in a similar way to hiring someone for a more mundane management/representative position.
What to do next?
If what this newspaper article is suggesting is happening within the Australian Labor Party, and the factions and union bosses are ‘stitching up a deal’, then Australia will miss out on the possibility of returning a left of centre government any time soon.
Not because the Labor Party has abandoned its left of centre policies, though I sometimes wonder at some of the things I’ve heard recently from some Labor politicians;
Not because it has been exposed to be harbouring individuals in NSW that were less than salubrious in their conduct, just that the lines of corruption have never been rooted out all the way and into whatever other parties may be involved;
Not because it has been baled up and pilloried by one of the most egregious and obvious newspaper power plays of all time.
I think it is because the Australian Labor Party and the unions that are closely bound to it have forgotten that they are first among equals – that the people they are there to represent are of just as much value (the old “one man, one vote” thing) and that today there are ways of counting that vote that are not reliant on someone using the postal service telegraph.
This whole factional thing that the press like to play on to scare people is one that needs re-examining, because people (it does not matter which party or organisation) tend to fall into cliques that then try to garner more power for themselves. The trouble is, that by allowing factions to develop, it is forgotten that the power-over someone on your side of politics means that the people on the other side of politics have a free hand to demonize and ridicule and misrepresent the “fair go for all” concept that the ALP supposedly promotes.
Mind you, me standing on the outside yelling at the ones making the decisions, with no knowledge of how the ALP may be sorting itself out, is to succumb to the sieve of hysteria that the main stream media think is their right to force people through.
So to that end, I hope that the ALP considers the recommendations that Sen. John Faulkner and others have put forward in the last few years and find a way to include more people in deciding who leads the party, who represents Australian citizens at the left of the political spectrum. And remember why it is important that workers, small businesses (including sub-contractors), and the disadvantaged have a voice in choosing who represents them in parliament.
Actually, I don’t think I can stand on the outside for much longer … I’ll probably have to become the change I want and join the ALP – least ways that could mean I might make a difference in how those changes I want to happen. You never know, perhaps the ALP will get its shit together and all its progressive policies re-polished and clearly explained to us voters, so that instead of standing still or (heaven fore-fend) moving culturally backwards again, Australians won’t be among the last nations in the world to accept a twenty-first century view-point!
Curi-Oz Corner 
In the last three weeks I’ve handed out How to Vote cards (HTV) six times.
I’ve had three overt Liberal supporters be blatantly rude to both myself and the Greens volunteer standing the requisite six metres from the polling booth door.
One of the Liberal volunteers got a little hysterical when I wouldn’t back away from quoting facts about Mr Abbott’s record compared to the “BISONS” that the previous government achieved. I’m getting too old to be intimidated by people who think shouting can substitute for reason.
Yesterday it was picked up by the local online and broadcast MSM that Joe Bullock, who was placed ahead of Louise Pratt on the ALP ticket due to ‘it being his turn’ or some such factional flummery, had once been a playmate of Mr Abbott and encouraged him into taking over the Young Liberals at Sydney Uni as they were an easier pushover than Young Labor at the time.
It has long been known that Mr Bullock is a dreadful old dinosaur when it comes to things like abortion, homosexuality and equal marriage, but he has also spent many years working for the Shop Workers Union and standing up for workers conditions generally. So why does it matter that, as a youth, he was not a “Labor man”? He has worked for “Labor” and labour ever since! I would suggest that he has had a far more positive result on working conditions and income of retail workers for whom he was responsible than some who came from a similar background!
Mind you, the timing of the ‘discovery’ that Mr Bullock is a “dinosaur” I find most intriguing, as it suggest that the Liberal strategists may be concerned that they won’t get their senatorial rubber stamp.
I have heard some grumbles about ‘wasting $20million’ on this ‘by-election’ process because the AEC stuffed up – and the stuff up in Merriwa hasn’t helped either. Reports today about boxes splitting will not assist in repairing the reputation of the AEC. But the booth I attended was well regulated and the boxes were exchanged well before they got full. My impression is that the AEC staff are really trying hard to ‘get it perfect’ to restore their reputations.
There is also some confusion as to why some of the micro parties are not fielding WA based candidates, and a lot of people are confused about the whole micro-party preference deal thing that has been highlighted in the last few weeks. I think there could be a lot of support for finding a way to clear both those points up in the near future. There is also a deal of resentment about some of the micro-parties putting up candidates who reside out of Western Australia and have admitted that if they were elected, would not even move to the state they represent. That I find both disrespectful to the people they would be representing, and arrogantly rude. Not something that is desirable in someone whom I am employing to represent me!
In the main, I would suggest that most West Australians are well and truly ‘over it’ with regards to politics, muttering frequently about ‘a pox on both their houses’. The more experienced volunteers I spoke to on the pre-polling booth did comment that there seemed to be more people using the pre-poll option this time though. However, attendance at the actual booth (in a quite Liberal area) was quite steady all day. I asked the AEC Booth Officer as I was picking things up after the poll closed, if he thought that the turn out had been lower than expected. He responded that he thought that turn-out on the day may have been slightly down, but there were already a large number of postal votes and pre-polled votes ready to be counted next week, so was reasonably sure that it might be better than expected.
We will most likely get two Liberals and at least one Labour returned. Scott Ludlam may get re-elected, but I fear that WA feels quite beholden to the mining companies, so may well vote more Liberals up, or Liberal leaning candidates at least. I’m just hoping that Ms Pratt and Mr Ludlam get re-elected so that there is a need for Mr Abbott to learn how to negotiate!
I voted today, and then stood outside my local polling station with HTV cards, hopefully encouraging some voters to vote at least below the line so it is all their own preferences. After pressing ‘publish’ I shall be retiring to the couch with a nice cup of tea and some excellent chocolate. Because now we have to wait for all those ballots to be counted.
And for the record: Yes, I volunteered for the ALP.