Slashdot Mirror
NZ MPs Outlaw Satire of Parliament
mernil writes "New Zealand's Parliament has voted itself far-reaching powers to control satire and ridicule of MPs in Parliament, attracting a storm of media and academic criticism. The new standing orders, voted in last month, concern the use of images of Parliamentary debates, and make it a contempt of Parliament for broadcasters or anyone else to use footage of the chamber for 'satire, ridicule or denigration.' The new rules are actually more liberal than the previous ones, but the threat of felony contempt is new."
``make it a contempt of Parliament for broadcasters or anyone else to use footage of the chamber for 'satire, ridicule or denigration.''
Huh? I thought the whole point of Parliament was to be ridiculed and denigrated?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
First, despite what the evidence found around Bondi Beach might suggest, New Zealand is not officially part of Australia.
Second, draconian privacy laws are a good thing. That would mean harsh penalties for companies breaching individuals' right to privacy. I don't think this is what you meant... But it's actually pretty accurate.
Third, on the internet laws... If you host a porn site in Australia, and someone complains, and the complaint is upheld, your site can be taken down. You are completely free to host the same content outside Australia. Australians are free to view the content wherever it's hosted. That, really, is about it.
(Until last November I was head of tech support at a small Aussie ISP, so I have some familiarity with the laws involved.)
As democracy weakens, states clamp down on their critics and introduce more extreme punishments for transgressors.
This sounds like a good example of this kind of action - sadly it seems to be getting more common across the world, not just in NZ.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
laws are never made to be ignored nor unenforcable. they will pull this one out when it suits them mark my words.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
> Satirisation and ridicule are useless and unconstructive. Valid criticism in any democratic state should not be done with insult to the human dignity.
/.) think it's mean to them.
Hey, napkin-arse, guess what? You're so wrong with your statement, it almost overflows into the "Correct statements" category! Were you by chance on a re-education trip to Russia, China, or North Korea recently? That would certainly explain you idiotic attitude to the whole "freedom of expression" thingie, the whole concept of which has apparently has been erased from your memory in the Paycheck/Spotless Mind style.
Even if satire is useless, which it is not, people in a free society are expected to be free to satirize as much as they want, even if some dumbasses in the parliament (or on
> Insulting people is not equal to criticism.
No, but a lot fun can be had when both are done at the same time, and there ain't a goddamn thing you can do about it!
It's true that a free press _is_ dangerous. He was right about that much. It causes all kinds of trouble.
However, a free press is nonetheless less dangerous than a government that controls the press -- as he himself proved to anyone who was paying any attention whatever.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
I think it's way too simplistic a gambit for you to play the "race" card in this discussion in order to imply the other side does. Certainly in some contexts, one might say that US immigration laws are: "ignored" by unscrupulous sweatshop companies; and "unenforceable" when poor immigrant workers sneak in and are hired by these companies, and the sheer number of these workers makes it impossible to deport them. Failing to enforce the law is not a retreat from cries of racism, it's laissez-faire economics combined with a surrender to the magnitude of the problem. And it's convenient for the governments of the day to look the other way and let the companies (and consumers) benefit from the situation, instead of providing legal status to these workers.
I would argue that the real racism here is the exploitation of undocumented immigrant workers, not any attempts to enforce the laws and deport them.
To agree with parent, but with a bit more politesse, insulting people and organisations is not only criticism, but it's one of the most effective forms of public criticism known to man -- which is, of course, why the NZ gov't seeks to control it. Think about why they want image satire not to happen, and you will have your answer as to why the critics love to use it: IT WORKS! The government has all the tools at its disposal to influence the public. Satire is one of the few tools the public has that is actually strong enough to fight back. Start to place controls on it, and indeed what you have is censorship that is against the public good.