| |
(Open Letter to the Chief Executive and Editor-in-Chief of Radio New
Zealand)
Dear Peter Cavanagh,
I am writing to call for the resignation of your
deputy on the grounds of incompetence and bias. The bias I am
talking about is anti-male bias. This is not news.
However, what is news is the gross incompetence revealed in a telephone
conversation I had on 19 August 2008 with someone who identified themself
as the second-in-command, although I have forgotten his name.
At about 9:15 AM I phoned Radio New Zealand News to ask that I, as
the long-standing principal New Zealand advocate of a pro-male position
on Domestic Violence, be reported on the issue of broadcaster Tony Veitch's
arrest on Domestic Violence charges. As soon as the woman who answered
the phone had heard enough to know what I wanted, I was put through
to the above-mentioned male employee -- without any prior notification
that this was about to be done. This, of course, was rude and unprofessional,
but Radio New Zealand makes it clear, in so many ways, that it can do
whatever it wants.
This second-in-command of yours refused to let me be interviewed, but
he listened to the two points which I wanted to put across on air, which
were that:
- One offence he was charged with (Assaulting a Female) was discriminatory,
and the Police should be taken to court for using their discretion to
charge him (or anyone) with that sexist offence, which carries a higher
maximum penalty than Common Assault.
- A man has no realistic option other than retaliation, in the case
of female violence, since state propaganda never paints a picture of
Domestic Violence which encourages male victims to seek help against
female perpetrators.
- He stated that the matter was now sub judice, since it was
going to trial, and that the issue of the charge was one that Veitch's
defence counsel could raise. I have a Law degree, and I doubt that that
issue could be made to count in the trial itself. It was a separate
issue, and therefore did not involve a potential contempt of court.
However, I did not argue the point, which was a reasonable one -- even
if wrong.
- He said that his sources said that Domestic Violence was mainly a
male problem. He denied being biased. Then he said that "the research"
showed that Domestic Violence was mainly a male problem. I said, "What
research?," and he did not reply. I said, "You are incompetent.
You are incompetent, you are discriminatory, and you are sexist."
He hung up at that point.
There is an enormous amount of research that shows that:
"...women are as physically aggressive,
or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses
or male partners." Professor Martin S. Fiebert, Annotated
Domestic Violence Bibliography http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
Incompetence
This incompetent employee is a mere journalist, like yourself. He
has no expertise in the field of Domestic Violence. He has to rely
on sources. But, where issues of Feminist propaganda are concerned,
he (like you, I am sure) has his favourite sources, and those are
the ones he chooses to use, because he agrees with what they say.
On top of that, he (like you) is paid by our taxes. I think you both
should do the country a favour and take up street-sweeping as an occupation.
There I was, on the telephone to him. I was a source. Did he use
this source? Of course not -- because I was saying things that he
disagreed with! And then he said he wasn't biased!!
I have been a part-time journalist. I went to interviews and wrote
articles based on knowledge that was little more than what the interviewee
had said at the interview. You apparently do not understand the first
thing about journalism, which is that journalists are not usually
experts in the subjects they are writing about. Their job is to garner
information from sources.
If you do not understand that, resign!
|
