๐ฉ๐ฉUPDATE
FORMAL COMPLAINT SENT TO NZ MEDIA COUNCIL - responding to Editor of @SundayStarTimesโs response to our initial complaint โคต๏ธ
There are a number of problems with the response:
* The word is offensive and abusive. The โwhoโ deploying it does not change that fact. Had it been anyone else (especially a male journalist or a politician from the Government coalition towards a female journalist or a female MP), there would - rightly - be an uproar rather than defence.
* the editor's response fails to address the issue of the claims of โmysogynistic abuse targeted at female MPsโ that these media outlets are normally so angry about - except when they do it.
Examples -
โReally, do we have to be called bitches?โ Female MPs open up about abuse in Parliament
stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360644โฆ
Research finds rape, death threats common for female MPs
thepost.co.nz/politics/36064โฆ
'Relentless' abuse against women MPs on the rise
stuff.co.nz/national/politโฆ
โProperly scaredโ: Kanoa Lloyd calls out the racist, misogynistic abuse and cyber-bullying she got, just for being on TV
stuff.co.nz/society/360673โฆ
Radio host Lana Cochrane-Searle calls out online abusers of women
thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360671โฆ
Did Tory Whanau cop worse abuse than most?
thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360669โฆ
* Stuff have tried to justify themselves by saying โweโve allowed the word beforeโ and our reporters are really good ones - which is no justification.
nzherald.co.nz/business/mediaโฆ
* female to female does nothing to justify its use
* contrary to Tracy's response, labeling a person presenting a contrary view by calling them the c-word is definitely not "a reasoned, and rational argument". To use that label especially against a woman is an aggravating factor, in our view.
* the argument that "Ms Vance, in particular, has been the target of this word, and even uglier social media smears and threats - and over a far longer period" is proof that it is unacceptable. Otherwise it wouldn't bother her. We should RAISE the standard - not sink to the gutter use of offensive language.
* the argument that "the more we colloquialise it in that way, in fact, the less power it will have as a word men can use to intimidate women" ignores the community view that it is and has been for over a decade one of the most offensive words. Rightly so. We could use the same argument for other highly offensive words such as n*gg..., and f*gg.... Should we use "colloquialise" those more also? (No!)
* We agree that men shouldn't use the word against women. But that actually reinforces the view that it is an unacceptable term, and offensive.
It's time the media raised the standard of the debate - not dragged us to an all-time low.
We reiterate our call for a public apology on the front page of the Sunday Star Times - and online also.
Thanking you
Kind regards
FORMAL COMPLAINT SENT TO NZ MEDIA COUNCIL - responding to Editor of @SundayStarTimesโs response to our initial complaint โคต๏ธ
There are a number of problems with the response:
* The word is offensive and abusive. The โwhoโ deploying it does not change that fact. Had it been anyone else (especially a male journalist or a politician from the Government coalition towards a female journalist or a female MP), there would - rightly - be an uproar rather than defence.
* the editor's response fails to address the issue of the claims of โmysogynistic abuse targeted at female MPsโ that these media outlets are normally so angry about - except when they do it.
Examples -
โReally, do we have to be called bitches?โ Female MPs open up about abuse in Parliament
stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360644โฆ
Research finds rape, death threats common for female MPs
thepost.co.nz/politics/36064โฆ
'Relentless' abuse against women MPs on the rise
stuff.co.nz/national/politโฆ
โProperly scaredโ: Kanoa Lloyd calls out the racist, misogynistic abuse and cyber-bullying she got, just for being on TV
stuff.co.nz/society/360673โฆ
Radio host Lana Cochrane-Searle calls out online abusers of women
thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360671โฆ
Did Tory Whanau cop worse abuse than most?
thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360669โฆ
* Stuff have tried to justify themselves by saying โweโve allowed the word beforeโ and our reporters are really good ones - which is no justification.
nzherald.co.nz/business/mediaโฆ
* female to female does nothing to justify its use
* contrary to Tracy's response, labeling a person presenting a contrary view by calling them the c-word is definitely not "a reasoned, and rational argument". To use that label especially against a woman is an aggravating factor, in our view.
* the argument that "Ms Vance, in particular, has been the target of this word, and even uglier social media smears and threats - and over a far longer period" is proof that it is unacceptable. Otherwise it wouldn't bother her. We should RAISE the standard - not sink to the gutter use of offensive language.
* the argument that "the more we colloquialise it in that way, in fact, the less power it will have as a word men can use to intimidate women" ignores the community view that it is and has been for over a decade one of the most offensive words. Rightly so. We could use the same argument for other highly offensive words such as n*gg..., and f*gg.... Should we use "colloquialise" those more also? (No!)
* We agree that men shouldn't use the word against women. But that actually reinforces the view that it is an unacceptable term, and offensive.
It's time the media raised the standard of the debate - not dragged us to an all-time low.
We reiterate our call for a public apology on the front page of the Sunday Star Times - and online also.
Thanking you
Kind regards
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
ใ
