Monday, November 11, 2013

Jackson and Tamihere gone for now

The show is over for the rest of the year.

I guess that's the market. Their detractors spoke and, in turn, the advertisers spoke. But it's still a disturbing example of the repercussions of thinking the 'wrong stuff' out loud.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can't stand Danny Watson. Radio NZ is boring. No Radio Live now. Afternoons are boring, boring, boring.

Brendan said...

Lindsay

This appears to be an example of group think prevailing over open debate.

It's an important subject, and if we throw a blanket of 'correct speech' over this topic, then we are going to exclude most Kiwi's from participating in the conversation.

I find this fascinating because it's the left who have shamelessly promoted throwing off our victorian sexual inhibitions since the early 60's, and now that our nakedness is exposed they don't want to talk about it unless it's in their proscribed terms.

Shame on them.

reed said...

What Brendan said.

I missed the controversial interview. What day/time was it?

reed said...

What's Paul Henry doing in the afternoons?

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Reed, It was last Tuesday but there is no audio available. Here's a relevant comment I left at No Minister:

"I was listening on the day in question. Jackson was looking for "other perspectives" and JT was reacting to what he calls "the thought police". The way the interview with 'Amy' developed was uncomfortable. I felt JT's question about her virginity was uncalled for and unwise, not however anticipating the blow-back that ensued.

I listen to this show reasonably regularly and have ambivalent feelings about it generally. But the current backlash isn't warranted. They were doing what I want media people to do inasmuch as they were trying to explore all angles. Albeit they can be quite unprofessional. But they aren't alone there.

I hope the advertisers who've pulled their business have listened to the full tape and aren't just reacting to someone else's version or interpretation."

Mark Hubbard said...

Hope you don't mind me quoting you Lindsay (I always let quotees know :)

http://lifebehindtheirondrape.blogspot.co.nz/2013/11/gender-politics-rape-culture-unbearable.html

Willie and JT's silencing doesn't sit right with me either.

Anonymous said...

Free speech is becoming ever-endangered in this country, and here is the proof.
How precious we have all become, people are entitled to their opinions, or should be.

Anonymous said...

They're not in gaol. They haven't been shot. The state (as far as I can see) has had absolutely to do with this.

There is no issue of free speech.

A couple of shock-jocks going on furlough because their advertisers don't like them suggesting that 13 year olds asked to be raped

CorrectGuy said...

This is not a free speech issue.

These two bozo's were either being pig ignorant, deliberately provocative, rating chasing whores, or some perverse combination of them all.

I spend alot of time defending people's right to say what they want (not in a legal sense, just generally against the thought police). Saying something along the lines of "many rape victims invite the attacks because of the way they dress and act in public" - that is free speech. I believe anyone has the right to hold that view, just as I have the right to hold an opposing view.

But Willie and JT undertook a virtual interrogation of the woman identified as Amy. She claimed to have been raped and they were insistent with the implication that she had invited the rape, through a variety of questions.

I've worked with people via Corrections and ACC, who have been seriously damaged due to sexual assault, so maybe I can see where the line is better than the two bozo's masquerading as "journalists". But that doesn't begin to excuse their actions.

Why is it that common sense isn't so common? Surely a little bit of empathy was called for, or just plain decency? Any of those filters would have prevented what happened next.

The outcry over their interrogation of "Amy" is absolutely justified, especially after their faux apology. They have only themselves to blame for what has come to pass.



Lindsay Mitchell said...

Correct Guy, I was unaware she had claimed to have been raped.I listen while working and regularly have to remove my earpiece to engage with someone. It is a shame (though totally understandable) that the actual interview is no longer accessible. I thought I heard them introduce her as someone who was a friend of or knew the Roastbusters. Did you hear the interview?

Lindsay Mitchell said...

CorrectGuy said, "But Willie and JT undertook a virtual interrogation of the woman identified as Amy. She claimed to have been raped and they were insistent with the implication that she had invited the rape, through a variety of questions."

This is the NZ Herald's report:

"RadioLive hosts Willie Jackson and John Tamihere have been accused of "victim-blaming" over their line of questioning of a young woman who is friends with a Roast Busters group victim.

The 18-year-old woman, who went by the name Amy, rang into their RadioLive show today to discuss what she knew of the activities of the gang, which boasted online about getting underage girls drunk and having sex with them before naming and shaming them on a Facebook page."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11151911

So what I heard was closer to the truth.

They raised what I think are legitimate issues which I canvas with my own kids, both son and daughter.

Being careful about sex is no longer primarily about avoiding pregnancy. It's about being as sure as you can be that both partners are unambiguously willing.

CorrectGuy said...

I heard it, but was only 'kinda' listening - it was when they started grilling her about her own sex life that I started actively listening. I'm sure I heard her state that she had been raped, but I accept that I may have misheard given the excerpts below from the Herald article.

"They also questioned why the girls, some as young as 13, had not made formal complaints to the police, asked "how free and easy are you kids these days?'', and asked Amy what age she had lost her virginity."

"[They] asked "how free and easy are you kids these days?'', and asked Amy what age she had lost her virginity."

However, I still believe the manner in which they choose to "discuss" the issues of sex, responsibility, etc, was in itself irresponsibile and the public reaction entirely predictable.