The text in blue was not accepted: so I thought, as per the title of this section, stuff it!
So here it is in its raw form with a link to the editied version to show the media system at work.
------------
Input ===> to Media System
The news is not the news.
Today’s editorial (7 Sep) tries hard to justify newspaper existence. However, the question is: how do you add value? Many can easily focus in on their pet themes or stories via the world-wide-web of data and information. What is needed is more synergistic ‘sense-making’ of what this ‘noise’ means within the context of the greater and larger human issues – both globally and locally.
What I want access to (for payment) is informed intelligence displayed through reasoned debate so that I can test my thinking and prejudices with a view to change where required. However, mostly what I see these days is just a renamed story from somewhere else (usually from the internet), and political apologists and semi-propaganda for vested establishment interests, be they “left” or “right”.
The end of this slippery slop is well known. Pol Pot is just a recent example. Mao’s Cultural revolution another. Millions can be wrong. The government says so.
I don’t support the use of the term “terrorism” for what is actually organised crime. The “T” word is a symbol of social cowardice today. The rule of law must be defended and stand against this new form of barbarism, the surrendering reason to emotive reaction is not progress.
And what of top AFL players and sports heroes? Perhaps we should apply this new principle in the public interest to those athletes taking performance enhancing drugs? Why is cocaine ok for top football players? And why is it somehow in the public interest to not who about them, and their obvious connections with organised crime drug syndicates? Don’t these represent the same principles at work? Should we not do all to stop those same conspiracies that it is alleged cause a great cancer in the social fabric and bring misery and early death to youth.
The hypocrisy here is obvious and was well depicted some 2,000 years ago: those without guilt should throw the first stone. Who will this social mass psychosis turn on next? You maybe! Oh, you’re innocent are you? Prove it!
--------------------
Output <=== from the Media system
"Russell of Perth
07/09 at 02:53 PM
The end of this slippery slope is well known. Pol Pot is just a recent example; Mao’s Cultural Revolution another. Millions can be wrong; the government says so. I don’t support the use of the term “terrorism” for what is actually organised crime. The “T” word is a symbol of social cowardice today. The rule of law must be defended and stand against this new form of barbarism; the surrendering reason to emotive reaction is not progress." (See title link)
----------------
With this 'transformation' we might note that the Australian legal system has imposed a ban on publishing the names or identities of national football player heroes who recently were found to consumed cocaine. But it seems that it is "in the public interest" that these are not to be surfaced at the public level. This however, seems to have been, like in many previous cases of high profile people, including senior public servants on massive amphetamine habits (see below).
What is interesting is the way this type of event fades away from public debate. The establishment just don’t want to scare the horses. Why? What is the systems perspective?
(* - extracts from previous research)
The West Australian, 26 August, 2005 and The Weekend Australian, 27-28 August, 2005. Both papers carried front page stories on this case involving the leaking of phone tapping information by Ms Moira Rayner (Acting head of the CCC) to “an old friend” Mr Laurie Marquet who recently resigned in disgrace as the Clerk of the WA Parliament while facing “55 counts of corruption and theft involving $227,000 of taxpayers money” (West Australian 2005a, p.1). Rayner’s actions destroyed “a covert operation to trap a drug dealer who was supplying speed [amphetamines] to Western Australia’s top parliamentary officer” (Australian 2005, p.1). On September 1, 2005 it was reported that Ms Rayner admitted being aware that Mr Marquet was injecting drugs but claimed she had not seen him do it (West Australian 2005a, p.19).
This included “One count of corruption, two counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice, fifty counts of stealing as a servant involving more than $227,000; and two counts of possession of a prohibited drug namely methylamphetamine” (Crime and Corruption Commission 2005).
Mr Laurie Marquet stayed in “hospital for almost a year as a ‘dying man too ill to attend court’. The case never proceeded and the WA governance system was never exposed to the risk of other related matters being aired in a court of law. Funny that: how convenient. The public were also denied the opportunity to understand how his performance was enhanced by the use of these drugs. Performance enhancing claims are made by the US airforce that are, according to reports, mostly so ‘whacked out’ on this type of substance that other military systems work to keep distance due to the risk of death by ‘friendly fire’. (e.g. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/01/17/1042520778665.html) or google: {"US" and "air force" and "amphetamines"}.
-----------
References
Australian. (2005, November 26-27). ‘The Nation’, Weekend Australian, p.9.
Crime and Corruption Commission. (2005). ‘Senior State Parliamentary Officer Charged’, Media Statements, 8 August 2005. Available online: http://www.ccc.wa.gov.au/media_statements.php?id=52 (Accessed 11 November 2005).
West Australian. (2005a, September 22). ‘Opinion’. (Editor), West Australian, p.16.
No comments:
Post a Comment