The Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras has lost its political and activist roots, preferring alliances with corporations rather than community. And the queer media is no better, writes Peter Hackney.
The modern queer rights movement was born on June 28, 1969 in New York City.
That night, NYC queers endured one too many police raids on a gay bar, the Stonewall Inn. For once, they fought back, in what became known as the Stonewall Riots.
Stonewall gave succour to the queer rights movement worldwide, including here in Australia where in 1978 the first Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras was held to commemorate the riots.
With origins like this, you’d expect New Mardi Gras (NMG) – the company that runs Sydney’s Mardi Gras – to be all for freedom of expression. But as events of last week show, it is anything but.
If there was any doubt that Australia’s largest queer event had become a monolith that exists for its own sake – instead of the queer community it represents – it was dispelled last week when NMG took the extraordinary step of banning queer people from this year’s Mardi Gras Parade.
As The Scavenger first revealed, queer members of Animal Liberation NSW (ALNSW) – who first marched in the parade fourteen years ago, and received a Most Creative Entry nomination for their ‘Vegetarians Taste Better’ float in 2007 – were no longer welcome.
The reason? According to communication from NMG to ALNSW, they “weren’t queer enough”.
It didn’t matter that most of those involved in ALNSW’s entry were actually queer, or that the entry was renamed ‘Sydney Queers for Animal Rights’ to placate Mardi Gras. Apparently all participants, and their message, had to be 100 per cent queer.
“Mardi Gras is first and foremost a gay pride event,” NMG CEO Michael Rolik ‘explained’ several days later. “There is definitely a feeling amongst both staff and volunteers that on occasion it has been co-opted by groups who see it first and foremost as a vehicle for their own separate agenda.”
Yes, Michael, like Ikea – who will be allowed to ‘co-opt’ the parade this year to help them sell cheap kit furniture that takes five days to assemble.
Or ANZ, whose NMG-approved ‘co-opting’ no doubt relates to an agenda of getting more of us to take out hefty bank loans.
Or Foxtel, who – colour me cynical – are in it with the hope that more queers pay for the privilege of watching US reality shows and re-runs of The A-Team.
Clearly, it’s OK to ‘co-opt’ Mardi Gras if you cough up enough dough, or if the NMG honchos approve of your message – and some in the community are of the opinion that NMG does have issues with Animal Lib’s message, especially after last year’s ‘Cows are Cool, Leather is Cruel’ float which sent many of our gay male leather aficionados into a queeny flap (macho men that they are).
The result is a parade that’s little more than a shopfront for corporations chasing the pink dollar, and those select queer groups who get the tick of approval from our self-appointed Gay Government, the ranks of which are made up of unelected ‘politicians’ from NMG and other ‘gaystream’ organisations.
The situation would be slightly more palatable if our community could at least discuss these issues freely and openly, but NMG isn’t keen to engage: to date it has not responded to any critical posts on its Facebook page, including those about the Animal Liberation float and complaints by Tasmanians that their state-based GLBSGDQ-owned businesses were denied a stall at the Mardi Gras Fair Day.
And sadly, the queer media has been ‘co-opted’ into the culture of censorship. What should be a forum for recourse has become little more than a queer K-Mart catalogue; endless advertorial urging its ‘readers’ to buy something (such as Mardi Gras tickets) instead of investigating or questioning anything.
Shortly after The Scavenger story on the Animal Lib float broke, I wrote a piece on the matter for Sydney gay weekly, SX, and uploaded it on the magazine’s website. The following day, the story was removed by order of the publisher. But not before the world’s largest gay and lesbian magazine, The Advocate; Europe’s largest gay news website, Pink News; and popular gay blog Queerty picked up the story, all referencing the SX article (which now leads to a 'page not found' link).
A couple of days later, the story was flagged by the mainstream media, appearing throughout Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation titles, and on the Austereo radio network’s morning news bulletins. Sydney’s other gay weekly, the Sydney Star Observer, also ran a piece.
Exactly why the story was scuppered by SX is unclear – there’s no doubting its newsworthiness, as its viral spread through other media showed. Could it be anything to do with the fact that Evolution Publishing (publishers of SX) is the official media partner for NMG?
On her blog, Sequins & Sands: A 2010 Mardi Gras Behind the Scenes View, NMG Co-Chair Steph Sands makes the claim that, “Mardi Gras is for all of us. Not just a chosen few.”
Wrong, Steph. The Mardi Gras of 2010 is an overly spin-doctored, egotistical, dollar-driven corporation that exists largely for itself.
It has learned nothing from its 2002 crash and burn, the direct result of dancing too close to the corporate devil. Now, it’s dancing with that devil again, and the result is corporate inclusion at the price of community exclusion.
Unless Mardi Gras changes dance partners, and deigns to get down with its community instead of faceless corporations, history will likely repeat and the organisation will again crash and burn.
In fact, without the watchdog role of a vital, enquiring and uncensored GLBSGDQ media – I’m betting on it.
SEE ALSO: Fresh Mardi Gras scandal: actors paid to march in community parade
Peter Hackney is a freelance journalist and the former news editor of SX.
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entry
Comments (61)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Colin, 05 March 2010
Peter, it’s no use trying to get through to some people. they’re like gay Stepford Wives – programmed to toe the gay establishment line.
Brendon, as for people ‘making stuff up’ ... the content of your copy/paste email from Media Watch looks like a prime example.
Brendon, as for people ‘making stuff up’ ... the content of your copy/paste email from Media Watch looks like a prime example.
written by Peter Jackson, 05 March 2010
Brendon no one here can quite make out which bit you either don’t get or remain stuck in denial about – Media Watch has no interest in a free street corner queer ad catalogue – why not? Because there is no ‘reporting’ or ‘news’ for an entity like Media Watch to cover.
The advertorials from places like NMG, ACON, BGF etc are composed at their respective organisations and sent in to be published by our gay media, who are interested in little more than taking those loft corporate advertising fees and keeping themselves and their readers mum in terms of critical comment. If you think that this blatantly clear to see picture is somebody ‘making things up’ then it’s your own IQ that’s challenged.
The advertorials from places like NMG, ACON, BGF etc are composed at their respective organisations and sent in to be published by our gay media, who are interested in little more than taking those loft corporate advertising fees and keeping themselves and their readers mum in terms of critical comment. If you think that this blatantly clear to see picture is somebody ‘making things up’ then it’s your own IQ that’s challenged.
written by unkown, 02 March 2010
Gay Sydney mardi gras website features a little boy on 2008 Sideshow, Removes - We took SNAPSHOT check it out ► http://twitpic.com/15qy8l
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 01 March 2010
Well said, Kathy.
Peter, you miss the point. Media Watch say they plan their content based on "stories as it sees them at the time, in the context of all the media stories which are around". You and Colin claim respectively that they do it based on a distinction between "journalism rather than advertorial" and that "MediaWatch did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’". Prove it or admit you're just making stuff up. Can your high IQ manage that?
Happy Mardi Gras, all
Peter, you miss the point. Media Watch say they plan their content based on "stories as it sees them at the time, in the context of all the media stories which are around". You and Colin claim respectively that they do it based on a distinction between "journalism rather than advertorial" and that "MediaWatch did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’". Prove it or admit you're just making stuff up. Can your high IQ manage that?
Happy Mardi Gras, all
written by Kathy Sant, 21 February 2010
Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Parade is the world’s most glamourous protest It is about GLBT visibility and celebration as well as delivering overt political about our need for equality to a large audience. It must remain a queer event or become completely meaningless. NMG is right to point out it is not a vehicle for every good cause or every leftish cause. But it has got this decision wrong. The AR float is organised by queers and the organisers were willing to make that clear by calling it Sydney Queers for Animal Rights. The Parade should be made up of primarily of members of our community marching as lesbians, gay men, trannies, bis or queers but it should show that community in all its diversity: queers for animal rights; lesbian parents and their kids; gay Olympic champions; lifesavers for pride, the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby; lesbian lawnbowlers; gay Kylie look-alikes and yes dykes and gay men who wear leather.
written by Peter Jackson, 20 February 2010
Brendon, I’ll repeat for one last time as you seem incapable to understanding all our posts: The complaint about SSO is years out of date. MW showed no interest in covering it or anything else from that free street corner infomercial rag.
If you want to take SSO to MW do it – but first you’ll need to find anything in the SSO that constitutes journalism rather than advertorial. On this week’s front page alone, only one news item shares space with an advertorial for a travel expo.
This is not samesame, we have a little more IQ here, suggest as Shayne says you stay put on the queer Dolly site.
If you want to take SSO to MW do it – but first you’ll need to find anything in the SSO that constitutes journalism rather than advertorial. On this week’s front page alone, only one news item shares space with an advertorial for a travel expo.
This is not samesame, we have a little more IQ here, suggest as Shayne says you stay put on the queer Dolly site.
written by shayne chester, 19 February 2010
I don't think anyone can be bothered Brendan, take it to samesame.
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 19 February 2010
Colin, no. I said "[the mere making of a complaint does not prove] that the complaint was sound or substantiated". You wrongly inferred me to be saying that your complaint "was not sound or substantiated".
Criticising spelling? How old are you, five? And perfect example of how what you claim to "know" and what is actually true are two diametrically opposite things. I don't care about your misspellings, nor mine. You are the one making a fuss about it, you funny man.
Just to recap, Media Watch said:
Media Watch doesn’t have a policy regarding coverage of the Sydney Star Observer nor any non-mainstream media. In short, the program covers the stories as it sees them at the time, in the context of all the media stories which are around. We also don’t believe there was such a policy in 2007. Please feel free to send us any stories you think we might be interested in.
But Colin, in his infinite wisdom and superiority - yet who apparently thinks that misspelling the names of others goads them and that this is somehow clever - is the very last word and authority on what this "really" means. Ok, sure. Whatever you say, Colin. You are right. Always
Criticising spelling? How old are you, five? And perfect example of how what you claim to "know" and what is actually true are two diametrically opposite things. I don't care about your misspellings, nor mine. You are the one making a fuss about it, you funny man.
Just to recap, Media Watch said:
Media Watch doesn’t have a policy regarding coverage of the Sydney Star Observer nor any non-mainstream media. In short, the program covers the stories as it sees them at the time, in the context of all the media stories which are around. We also don’t believe there was such a policy in 2007. Please feel free to send us any stories you think we might be interested in.
But Colin, in his infinite wisdom and superiority - yet who apparently thinks that misspelling the names of others goads them and that this is somehow clever - is the very last word and authority on what this "really" means. Ok, sure. Whatever you say, Colin. You are right. Always
written by shayne chester, 19 February 2010
'Another boycott, Shayne? ' Yeah, I like to wear my gonads on the outside.
written by Colin Burrough, 18 February 2010
PS Brendon, try to spell people’s names correctly, we know you can’t tolerate yours being spelt with an a.
written by Colin Burrough, 18 February 2010
Brendon, no ‘inference’ on my part, it was a direct statement based on factual events, nor anything ‘patently incorrect’. MW don’t have a ‘policy’ (how typically naive of you) about covering the SSO, but you try getting MW to cover SSO’s content. I can guarantee it will not be taken on board.
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 18 February 2010
Relatedly, on Same Same:
http://www.samesame.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=14602
http://www.samesame.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=14602
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 18 February 2010
Another boycott, Shayne? Whatever floats your boat. Stick it to the man. Yeah.
Colin, not my insinuation but your patently incorrect inference. Meanwhile, your assertion that "MediaWatch did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’" also appears to be incorrect. Upon what independently verifiable facts and evidence do you base that claim? Here is what MediaWatch have to say:
------Original Message------
To: Brendan
From: Media Watch
Subject: Major Mardi Gras media sponsor censors critcism?
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:57:00 +1100 (AUS Eastern Daylight Time)
Hi Brendan,
Thanks for your email.
Media Watch doesn’t have a policy regarding coverage of the Sydney Star Observer nor any non-mainstream media. In short, the program covers the stories as it sees them at the time, in the context of all the media stories which are around.
We also don’t believe there was such a policy in 2007.
Please feel free to send us any stories you think we might be interested in.
Kind regards,
------Original Message------
From: Brendan
Sent: Thursday, 18 February 2010 12:17 AM
To: Media Watch
Subject: Major Mardi Gras media sponsor censors critcism?
Dear Media Watch,
I write to note a growing controversy involving one of the most prominent Australian alternative (gay & lesbian) media publications, SX News, of whom it has been alleged that they censored critical analysis of the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras organisation ("New Mardi Gras") and that this was due to them being a commercial sponsor of Mardi Gras. See http://www.thescavenger.net/gl...10357.html
Relatedly, commenter Colin Burroughs on that page claims Media Watch takes no interest in scrutinising the actions of non-mainstream media. He claims that Media Watch said this to him in 2007 when he made contact about Australian Press Council Adjudication 1362 http://www.presscouncil.org.au.../1362.html relating to Sydney Star Observer. Can you confirm what MediaWatch's policy was at the time, and is now, in relation to tipoffs about the conduct of non-mainstream media; and whether the claim being made about Media Watch, that " Media Watch was on the list of authorities informed of the matter at the time. MW did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’ – nor does MW see such a publication’s advertorial content and censorious renown as being of interest to its television audience.", is accurate (or was in 2007)?
Colin, not my insinuation but your patently incorrect inference. Meanwhile, your assertion that "MediaWatch did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’" also appears to be incorrect. Upon what independently verifiable facts and evidence do you base that claim? Here is what MediaWatch have to say:
------Original Message------
To: Brendan
From: Media Watch
Subject: Major Mardi Gras media sponsor censors critcism?
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:57:00 +1100 (AUS Eastern Daylight Time)
Hi Brendan,
Thanks for your email.
Media Watch doesn’t have a policy regarding coverage of the Sydney Star Observer nor any non-mainstream media. In short, the program covers the stories as it sees them at the time, in the context of all the media stories which are around.
We also don’t believe there was such a policy in 2007.
Please feel free to send us any stories you think we might be interested in.
Kind regards,
------Original Message------
From: Brendan
Sent: Thursday, 18 February 2010 12:17 AM
To: Media Watch
Subject: Major Mardi Gras media sponsor censors critcism?
Dear Media Watch,
I write to note a growing controversy involving one of the most prominent Australian alternative (gay & lesbian) media publications, SX News, of whom it has been alleged that they censored critical analysis of the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras organisation ("New Mardi Gras") and that this was due to them being a commercial sponsor of Mardi Gras. See http://www.thescavenger.net/gl...10357.html
Relatedly, commenter Colin Burroughs on that page claims Media Watch takes no interest in scrutinising the actions of non-mainstream media. He claims that Media Watch said this to him in 2007 when he made contact about Australian Press Council Adjudication 1362 http://www.presscouncil.org.au.../1362.html relating to Sydney Star Observer. Can you confirm what MediaWatch's policy was at the time, and is now, in relation to tipoffs about the conduct of non-mainstream media; and whether the claim being made about Media Watch, that " Media Watch was on the list of authorities informed of the matter at the time. MW did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’ – nor does MW see such a publication’s advertorial content and censorious renown as being of interest to its television audience.", is accurate (or was in 2007)?
written by shayne chester, 18 February 2010
Today was the deadline to deliver my work for the Mardi Gras Gallery. I told them to screw themselves, I want nothing to do with them, btw., Katrina and Tobin, how's the 'infiltration' coming along? 
written by amused, 18 February 2010
How hilarious! Just got the new SX and both the animal lib float and Rodney Croome's Fair Day ban have got major column inches! Looks like the massive bad publicity for SX has shamed them into action. Too late SX - you're like the latecomer who arrives when the party's winding down and the trash is being cleared up. But better late than never, I guess.
written by Colin Burrough, 17 February 2010
Brendon, as Peter Jackson points out, the complaint to the APC was complex and is out of date by aeons, but YOUR insinuation (that my complaint was not sound or substantiated) is unsubstatiated.
We actually have no gay ‘media’ as such that can be taken seriously by such entities as MW – hence the comments on this blog that this is what is lacking from our community as a platform for healthy debate and consequent progress of solidarity.
Further, I made no ‘insinuation’ about the current SX/NMG censorial ‘conspiracy’ – Peter Hackney acknowledged it as fact in this very article on which I was commenting.
PS
Yes indeed, Media Watch was on the list of authorities informed of the matter at the time. MW did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’ – nor does MW see such a publication’s advertorial content and censorious renown as being of interest to its television audience.
We actually have no gay ‘media’ as such that can be taken seriously by such entities as MW – hence the comments on this blog that this is what is lacking from our community as a platform for healthy debate and consequent progress of solidarity.
Further, I made no ‘insinuation’ about the current SX/NMG censorial ‘conspiracy’ – Peter Hackney acknowledged it as fact in this very article on which I was commenting.
PS
Yes indeed, Media Watch was on the list of authorities informed of the matter at the time. MW did not and does not seriously recognise the Sydney Star Observer as ‘media’ – nor does MW see such a publication’s advertorial content and censorious renown as being of interest to its television audience.
written by Peter Jackson, 16 February 2010
Brendon, the article at the centre of the complaint to the APC about the Sydney Star Observer was years ago, since which the editor and staff of that publication has changed – a process cited by the incoming editor at the time of negotiating settlement.
The important thing is not the final outcome of that particular complaint but that that publication is on official record as having been the subject of official complaint for its censorious editorial modus operandi.
Community comments on this and other blogs such as the www.koaia.net one are a reliable gage that things have not improved since that time in our local gay media, plus the fact that two news editors of two local gay media (SX and samesame) have resigned within weeks of one another following ongoing community outrage and debacles about censorship of comment on corporate advertisers (e.g. ACON, BGF, NMG, etc).
The important thing is not the final outcome of that particular complaint but that that publication is on official record as having been the subject of official complaint for its censorious editorial modus operandi.
Community comments on this and other blogs such as the www.koaia.net one are a reliable gage that things have not improved since that time in our local gay media, plus the fact that two news editors of two local gay media (SX and samesame) have resigned within weeks of one another following ongoing community outrage and debacles about censorship of comment on corporate advertisers (e.g. ACON, BGF, NMG, etc).
written by shayne chester, 16 February 2010
Brendan, let us all know how you get on with MediaWatch - we'll be very interested. And thanks for your support.
written by shayne chester, 16 February 2010
News is viral; it needs an entry point.
With the CAAMA campaign, we were very indebted to the support of Brad Johnson at SX who ran our letters or articles every week. I also recall Ms. Fox did a few pieces on the campaign too. That is how other publications picked up on it and we went mainstream, even being invited onto SBS Insight to debate the reailties of crystal meth as opposed to the preception by the 'we mustn't stigmatise the drug' facory that it was just another party drug. Over that 12 months, the SSO did not run one of our comments or letters, preferring instead to publish a couple of media releases from the desks of Stevie or Adrian as news.
Gary Burns' litigations against homophobes also gained quite a bit of attention, particularly the fight against The Footy Show and the 'Sydney gay Convicts' appearance which has since been used by Nine in their defence before the ADB. SX, and the mainstream outlets have shown him much interest and support. SSO has not run one article on the case. Burns is 'not one of us.'
If adding up numbers gives an indication of media bias, then I think the history of persons or groups being stonewalled by the prejudices of that 'illuminati/oligarchy/cabal' that runs gay Sydney is 'crystal' clear.
With the CAAMA campaign, we were very indebted to the support of Brad Johnson at SX who ran our letters or articles every week. I also recall Ms. Fox did a few pieces on the campaign too. That is how other publications picked up on it and we went mainstream, even being invited onto SBS Insight to debate the reailties of crystal meth as opposed to the preception by the 'we mustn't stigmatise the drug' facory that it was just another party drug. Over that 12 months, the SSO did not run one of our comments or letters, preferring instead to publish a couple of media releases from the desks of Stevie or Adrian as news.
Gary Burns' litigations against homophobes also gained quite a bit of attention, particularly the fight against The Footy Show and the 'Sydney gay Convicts' appearance which has since been used by Nine in their defence before the ADB. SX, and the mainstream outlets have shown him much interest and support. SSO has not run one article on the case. Burns is 'not one of us.'
If adding up numbers gives an indication of media bias, then I think the history of persons or groups being stonewalled by the prejudices of that 'illuminati/oligarchy/cabal' that runs gay Sydney is 'crystal' clear.
written by Brendan, 16 February 2010
Colin, lemme explain. My point was twofold.
First, the fact that you and Shayne made a complaint to the APC in 2006 does not, of itself, prove your implicit assertion that the complaint was sound or substantiated - the adjudication explicitly makes no finding either way about that - nor, contrary to your further insinuation, does it show an ongoing conspiracy in relation to the current NMG / SX controversy.
Second, in the context of the alleged recent censoring by SX, my suggestion to any concerned party was to avail themselves of MediaWatch instead of the APC given the evident lack of success you and Shayne had with the latter in the past. And I'm pretty sure media is media as far as Media Watch is concerned - well may you pre-emptively dismiss them as having no interest in controversies involving potential conflicts of interest between editorial content and sponsorship dollars ("cash for non-comment", if you like) involving a prominent Australian queer news media publication. But maybe it would be more useful to know from MediaWatch whether MediaWatch is interested. But it was just a thought, that's all.
First, the fact that you and Shayne made a complaint to the APC in 2006 does not, of itself, prove your implicit assertion that the complaint was sound or substantiated - the adjudication explicitly makes no finding either way about that - nor, contrary to your further insinuation, does it show an ongoing conspiracy in relation to the current NMG / SX controversy.
Second, in the context of the alleged recent censoring by SX, my suggestion to any concerned party was to avail themselves of MediaWatch instead of the APC given the evident lack of success you and Shayne had with the latter in the past. And I'm pretty sure media is media as far as Media Watch is concerned - well may you pre-emptively dismiss them as having no interest in controversies involving potential conflicts of interest between editorial content and sponsorship dollars ("cash for non-comment", if you like) involving a prominent Australian queer news media publication. But maybe it would be more useful to know from MediaWatch whether MediaWatch is interested. But it was just a thought, that's all.
written by shayne chester, 16 February 2010
Ah dear, corruption, cons and cover ups, NMG, BGF and acon...it's all enough to make me want to be ungayed. I wonder if I can swap my ghey card for a discount at Bunnings.
p.s. ' I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage. '
p.s. ' I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage. '
written by Katrina Fox, 16 February 2010
Brendan, Gary and Shayne: Please read the terms of service and comments policy and kindly refrain from turning this discussion into personal attacks and snarky comments about each other. Happy for you to discuss the issues passionately - but play nice kiddies!
Thank you.
Katrina Fox
Editor-in-chief, The Scavenger
Thank you.
Katrina Fox
Editor-in-chief, The Scavenger
written by Colin Burrough, 16 February 2010
Brendan, the issue is, as the title of the article clearly explains: "The corporatisation of Mardi Gras and queer media censorship."
As I made perfectly clear, those entirely missing the excellent points made by Peter Hackney – yourself included - of queer media censorship apparently perceived the theme of this article to be about nothing other than Mardi Gras parade entrant selection protocol – it is not.
As for your quote from the Australian Press Council - did you have a point? The link was posted several times down the page and this was why I mentioned it, being the complainant in question.
As Peter Jackson rightly points out, the APC found that, irrelevant to whether there was an obvious bias in that publication, the editor has the right to publish - or not, whatever he/she chooses. This is how the journalitic fraternity operates - not that much differently to the gay corprorate/media fraternity i.e. it's all a tad parochial LOL:
This was my point. Nobody seems sure what yours was.
As for your suggestion people go to ABT TV's Media Watch with complaints about a free gay street corner advertorial rag ... ??
I think this quote from John Pilger passed on to me this morning sums up my point about many of our current journos (Peter Hackney excluded), queer or not:
"Many journalists now are no more than channelers and echoers of what George Orwell called the 'official truth'. They simply cipher and transmit lies. It really grieves me that so many of my fellow journalists can be so manipulated that they become really what the French describe as 'functionaires', functionaries, not journalists. Many journalists become very defensive when you suggest to them that they are anything but impartial and objective. The problem with those words 'impartiality' and 'objectivity' is that they have lost their dictionary meaning. They've been taken over... [they] now mean the establishment point of view... Journalists don't sit down and think, 'I'm now going to speak for the establishment.' Of course not. But they internalise a whole set of assumptions, and one of the most potent assumptions is that the world should be seen in terms of its usefulness to the West, not humanity.”
As I made perfectly clear, those entirely missing the excellent points made by Peter Hackney – yourself included - of queer media censorship apparently perceived the theme of this article to be about nothing other than Mardi Gras parade entrant selection protocol – it is not.
As for your quote from the Australian Press Council - did you have a point? The link was posted several times down the page and this was why I mentioned it, being the complainant in question.
As Peter Jackson rightly points out, the APC found that, irrelevant to whether there was an obvious bias in that publication, the editor has the right to publish - or not, whatever he/she chooses. This is how the journalitic fraternity operates - not that much differently to the gay corprorate/media fraternity i.e. it's all a tad parochial LOL:
This was my point. Nobody seems sure what yours was.
As for your suggestion people go to ABT TV's Media Watch with complaints about a free gay street corner advertorial rag ... ??
I think this quote from John Pilger passed on to me this morning sums up my point about many of our current journos (Peter Hackney excluded), queer or not:
"Many journalists now are no more than channelers and echoers of what George Orwell called the 'official truth'. They simply cipher and transmit lies. It really grieves me that so many of my fellow journalists can be so manipulated that they become really what the French describe as 'functionaires', functionaries, not journalists. Many journalists become very defensive when you suggest to them that they are anything but impartial and objective. The problem with those words 'impartiality' and 'objectivity' is that they have lost their dictionary meaning. They've been taken over... [they] now mean the establishment point of view... Journalists don't sit down and think, 'I'm now going to speak for the establishment.' Of course not. But they internalise a whole set of assumptions, and one of the most potent assumptions is that the world should be seen in terms of its usefulness to the West, not humanity.”
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 16 February 2010
I think C Moore was onto a winner. Add a pinch of unpredictability. Subvert until well done. Get an Animal Libber in as many floats as they can be squeezed into, for starters..
written by shayne chester, 16 February 2010
As it's relevant to the discussion of the 'strong-arm tactics used to censor content, positive editorial coverage in exchange for advertising revenue, and the publication of media releases verbatim to the exclusion of alternative viewpoints' that I mentioned earlier, Brendan, I'll respond to your comment.
In law, if a communication is not technically false but is still misleading, then a tort of false light is said to have have occurred. Your implication that the Press Council did not find The Star to be at fault is such a communication. In fact the ruling was that while there was clearly no right of reply given to the charge by the paper against the CAAMA group that they were 'a bunch of ex-crystal users," and that there was indeed a bias in that paper which refused to tell both sides of the story. "The 'newspaper has the right to determine its editorial content." In fact Ms. Farrar, then editor, wrote to me, "why should I give coverage to you and you nasty friends when you attack our hard working community leaders?" Of course, since then, both she and the 'hard-working community leader' have moved on and the graphic education campaigns that we fought for are now everywhere.
Also, in fact, Mr. Burrough and I did meet with the incoming editor, who explained he'd spent a busy week clearing out the more reactionary elements of that paper and that he hoped to create a more liberal publication wich included the voice of community lobbyists.
Of course, as Gary Burns will tell you, that never happened. I haven't seen such a quick flip since I had breakfast Pancakes on the Rocks. While every other paper in the country ran stories on our crystal meth campaign, or on GB's battles with homophobes, The Star remained the exclusive broadsheet of that industry with a large advertising budget and a tentacular grip on what was once the Sydney glbqti COMMUNITY. (As one of their writers, now board member and senior editor once commented online, "Gary Burns is not representative of this community,' a disturbing echo of the 'they're not one of us' attitude to the animal libbers that we now read about coming from NMG.)
In law, if a communication is not technically false but is still misleading, then a tort of false light is said to have have occurred. Your implication that the Press Council did not find The Star to be at fault is such a communication. In fact the ruling was that while there was clearly no right of reply given to the charge by the paper against the CAAMA group that they were 'a bunch of ex-crystal users," and that there was indeed a bias in that paper which refused to tell both sides of the story. "The 'newspaper has the right to determine its editorial content." In fact Ms. Farrar, then editor, wrote to me, "why should I give coverage to you and you nasty friends when you attack our hard working community leaders?" Of course, since then, both she and the 'hard-working community leader' have moved on and the graphic education campaigns that we fought for are now everywhere.
Also, in fact, Mr. Burrough and I did meet with the incoming editor, who explained he'd spent a busy week clearing out the more reactionary elements of that paper and that he hoped to create a more liberal publication wich included the voice of community lobbyists.
Of course, as Gary Burns will tell you, that never happened. I haven't seen such a quick flip since I had breakfast Pancakes on the Rocks. While every other paper in the country ran stories on our crystal meth campaign, or on GB's battles with homophobes, The Star remained the exclusive broadsheet of that industry with a large advertising budget and a tentacular grip on what was once the Sydney glbqti COMMUNITY. (As one of their writers, now board member and senior editor once commented online, "Gary Burns is not representative of this community,' a disturbing echo of the 'they're not one of us' attitude to the animal libbers that we now read about coming from NMG.)
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 16 February 2010
Instead of the Press Council, try letting these folk know about it instead:
MediaWatch Tip offs
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/tipoffs.htm
MediaWatch Tip offs
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/tipoffs.htm
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 16 February 2010
Further to Colin's comment, see Press Council Adjudication No. 1362 ( http://www.presscouncil.org.au.../1362.html ):
"The Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint by Colin Burrough and Shayne Chester, co-founders of the Community Action Against Methamphetamine (CAAMA) lobby group, against the Sydney Star Observer newspaper." .
"The Australian Press Council has dismissed a complaint by Colin Burrough and Shayne Chester, co-founders of the Community Action Against Methamphetamine (CAAMA) lobby group, against the Sydney Star Observer newspaper." .
written by Colin Burrough, 15 February 2010
For me the thing that stands out is not NMG’s parade entrant selection protocol but the fact that NMG had the editorial influence to get that news about itself censored from the gay media. We’ve known for a long time that our ‘own’ media is not an impartial, objective or reliable source of local gay news issues but a check-out catalogue for Corporate Queerdom. I have friends under the delusion they are up to date with local community issues because they read the gay papers. They’re so not.
I stopped writing my own regular columns for the gay media on principle because of this.
This has not happened suddenly but has been worsening over the last decade or more. A few years ago a friend and I took the Sydney Star Observer to the Australian Press Council for its biased protection/censorship of critical community comment on the HIV sector. People in the community were astonished by this at the time, but now few are so surprised and take this sort of media malpractice for granted. I think it’s time we had a change/addition from the current staple intellectual diet of corporate advertorial content.
I stopped writing my own regular columns for the gay media on principle because of this.
This has not happened suddenly but has been worsening over the last decade or more. A few years ago a friend and I took the Sydney Star Observer to the Australian Press Council for its biased protection/censorship of critical community comment on the HIV sector. People in the community were astonished by this at the time, but now few are so surprised and take this sort of media malpractice for granted. I think it’s time we had a change/addition from the current staple intellectual diet of corporate advertorial content.
written by shayne chester, 15 February 2010
I've been thinking about your point, "perhaps we should think about infiltration and trying to change things from the inside," Katrina. I've decided a boycott is the way for me to go. I was wondering how, ethically, you can differentiate between glbqti rights and the rights of animals, (or of women, children, political prisoners, ethnic minorities, religious rights and so on...) So I wrote to NMG two days ago to ask them. Sadly no response has been forthcoming, so I guess that's answered it for me.
written by Garry Burns, 15 February 2010
I think NMG has gone off.
Every time I check the "use by" date on my milk I think of New Mardi Gras.
I think we need to start our own Mardi Gras Parade.
A Mardi Gras Parade that stands for more than just a good night out.
I could find time between my legal cases and the supporting of our new celebration.
A GLBT celebration based on inclusivity.
Ms Sands is a good person but she seems to be sitting on her 'cross stitching" and doing nothing on this issue .
Every time I check the "use by" date on my milk I think of New Mardi Gras.
I think we need to start our own Mardi Gras Parade.
A Mardi Gras Parade that stands for more than just a good night out.
I could find time between my legal cases and the supporting of our new celebration.
A GLBT celebration based on inclusivity.
Ms Sands is a good person but she seems to be sitting on her 'cross stitching" and doing nothing on this issue .
written by Brendan of Wollongong NSW, 15 February 2010
I'll admit to initially wondering what all the fuss was about the Animals Lib group not getting a run.
But three years ago, I went in my first Parade as part of a float organised by a mate. The "Love Justice, Love Freedom" float was a political statement for human rights and against Guantanamo prison, unambiguously themed around the incarceration of David Hicks. We were were a mix of queer and queer-friendly marchers with a political message about freedom, justice and the fair rule of legitimate law. We had a number of vocal critics saying we should not have been in the Parade along the same sort of lines that we weren't "a gay issue" or because they had strong personal views against David Hicks. To their credit, the Parade Committee accepted our entry. Moreover, as first time entrants, we even won a Parade award for Most Outstanding Political Comment. I wonder if the rules of Mardi Gras 2010 would even have let us in the Parade.
So I can't shake the feeling that it is deeply wrong for one group of queers to seemingly arbitrarily pick and choose which political opinions of their queer compatriots are unacceptable at an event that is meant to be for us all; and to subject entrants to a degree of scrutiny that exceeds the essential level needed for safety, logistics, and broad fit with the inclusive community ideals Mardi Gras is supposed to be all about.
Mardi Gras shouldn't ban some queer views just because they are controversial or because some people won't agree with them. We lose something when that happens.
But three years ago, I went in my first Parade as part of a float organised by a mate. The "Love Justice, Love Freedom" float was a political statement for human rights and against Guantanamo prison, unambiguously themed around the incarceration of David Hicks. We were were a mix of queer and queer-friendly marchers with a political message about freedom, justice and the fair rule of legitimate law. We had a number of vocal critics saying we should not have been in the Parade along the same sort of lines that we weren't "a gay issue" or because they had strong personal views against David Hicks. To their credit, the Parade Committee accepted our entry. Moreover, as first time entrants, we even won a Parade award for Most Outstanding Political Comment. I wonder if the rules of Mardi Gras 2010 would even have let us in the Parade.
So I can't shake the feeling that it is deeply wrong for one group of queers to seemingly arbitrarily pick and choose which political opinions of their queer compatriots are unacceptable at an event that is meant to be for us all; and to subject entrants to a degree of scrutiny that exceeds the essential level needed for safety, logistics, and broad fit with the inclusive community ideals Mardi Gras is supposed to be all about.
Mardi Gras shouldn't ban some queer views just because they are controversial or because some people won't agree with them. We lose something when that happens.
written by Emilia Lawonski, 14 February 2010
Most refreshing article i've read in a while from the queer press - no wonder it was censored! Mardi Gras should be for the community and a way for the community to express itself and it's ideas and don't forget our political agendas! NMG has long been censoring certain political views such as in 2008 when orders were passed down to confiscate a large banner calling on queer refugee Ali Humayun to be freed from Villawood detention centre. The banner contained a photograph of Humayun and a slogan which read 'Free Ali Humayun'. The banner was actually forcefully taken out of the hands of a former detainee. Change needs to happen. Mardi Gras could be used much more effectively to achieve our common goals. ps.Tobin I'd love too see some NMG infiltration
written by Liz Forcault, 14 February 2010
Wow, great article! This really needed to be said, thank you Peter Hackney and The Scavenger. And I just want to say to Truth Please - yes SX is an embarrassment to our community but it wasn't always that way. I recall many in-depth, interesting articles in SX in the past. Peter Hackney was the last one left from the days when SX had some integrity - Katrina Fox and Brad Johnson also come to mind. I hope your talents are put to better use elsewhere, Peter.
written by shayne chester, 14 February 2010
I'm not sure that anyone is of the belief that chickens were banned from the parade, Mike Hannah. I understand the issue is that a group of queers who see a paralell between animals rights and our rights (see my first post below) have been banned. And that all it took was a call from NMG to SX for them to pull an article on it. Just as a word from Bev or Nich saw the article on the state of our AIDS Industry disappear. And that someone has the arrogance to tell another in our community they are "not queer enough" to march with those deemed by the oligarchy as 'suitable.'
Traditionally, the parade has been stacked with more than just the stereotypes, there are entries from Jews, Muslims and other religious groups, Alcoholics and Addicts in Recovery, parents, children and police and military, nudists, lifesavers, twats, political parties, the witty, the titty, the ethnic groups, aged and etc etc...hundreds of floats.
The MG I knew was a model for acceptance of diversity, it was always politics with camp, an empty shell that people fill up with their own creativity and difference. It challenged mainstream ideas, created a social avant garde, pushed parameters, pissed on the status quo.
Sadly, it seems to be coralled more and more into a sideshow for Kev and Kylenes and some confused tourists from Hong Kong unsure what a Mardi Gras is and wonder when Santa Claus will appear.
And yes, misguided fool that I am, I did believe that, "I've got the right to march just 'cos I'm Queer." Btw., what's an 'Amanda Lepore'?
Traditionally, the parade has been stacked with more than just the stereotypes, there are entries from Jews, Muslims and other religious groups, Alcoholics and Addicts in Recovery, parents, children and police and military, nudists, lifesavers, twats, political parties, the witty, the titty, the ethnic groups, aged and etc etc...hundreds of floats.
The MG I knew was a model for acceptance of diversity, it was always politics with camp, an empty shell that people fill up with their own creativity and difference. It challenged mainstream ideas, created a social avant garde, pushed parameters, pissed on the status quo.
Sadly, it seems to be coralled more and more into a sideshow for Kev and Kylenes and some confused tourists from Hong Kong unsure what a Mardi Gras is and wonder when Santa Claus will appear.
And yes, misguided fool that I am, I did believe that, "I've got the right to march just 'cos I'm Queer." Btw., what's an 'Amanda Lepore'?
written by Mike Hannah, 14 February 2010
oh please, this is such a beat up story by so called "progressive queers". Were the chickens members of the GLBT community? Were they being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation? Bravo Mardi Gras, the "I've got the right to march just 'cos I'm Queer" lobby needs to be put on notice. Mardi Gras isn't about chickens rights. To many groups want to use the parade as a platform to raise their causes profile and aren't ashamed to exploit their GLBT membership to do it. Soon every car yard in auto alley with a poof on staff will have them driving the new Prius up the parade route. You'll all be howling protests if that comes to pass. Whats the difference?
written by Katrina Fox, 14 February 2010
@Tobin: I like your idea of the lunatics taking over the asylum!
You are one of the few drag queens I know who can see the bigger picture outside of the gay ghetto and it's great that you're involved in MG. A friend recently said she was taking part in a float and was now feeling guilty and thinking of pulling out. But I don't suggest people boycott it because then there will be even less diversity. A few weeks ago I was asked to chair a Queer Thinking event, and unless I"m uninvited, I plan to still do this. We could just wash our hands of the whole thing and start something new (alterna fringe Mardi Gras has a Facebook group which is a list of events not listed in festival guide but taking place during that period), but perhaps we should think about infiltration and trying to change things from the inside, as Tobin suggests. It's unlikely to be easy, and how many of the 'gaystream' will vote us in? Certainly some food for thought and a good practical suggestion. What do others think?
You are one of the few drag queens I know who can see the bigger picture outside of the gay ghetto and it's great that you're involved in MG. A friend recently said she was taking part in a float and was now feeling guilty and thinking of pulling out. But I don't suggest people boycott it because then there will be even less diversity. A few weeks ago I was asked to chair a Queer Thinking event, and unless I"m uninvited, I plan to still do this. We could just wash our hands of the whole thing and start something new (alterna fringe Mardi Gras has a Facebook group which is a list of events not listed in festival guide but taking place during that period), but perhaps we should think about infiltration and trying to change things from the inside, as Tobin suggests. It's unlikely to be easy, and how many of the 'gaystream' will vote us in? Certainly some food for thought and a good practical suggestion. What do others think?
written by shayne chester, 14 February 2010
Tobin Saunders, interesting thoughts. I did consider, instead of pulling out of the MG Gallery, entering something by way of a protest. Of course NMG would remove the work, and as with other persons, orgs, events removed from our festival by NMG, the papers would not carry a mention of it. So you can see, with the media so tied up by this 'illuminati', we are effectively disempowered and voiceless.
written by truth please, 14 February 2010
SX is a truly embarrasing publication. Always has been. Peter HACKney, you've done the advetorial thing for so long now, why change now?
written by Tobin Saunders, 13 February 2010
I’ve been an active participant in many aspects of Mardi Gras over the past 26 years, and - along with most - have watched its decline. I have written complaints, suggestions and criticisms in regard to NMG (and our culture in general) that have been published in both gay rags. It was often fascinating to hear the un-constructive and defensive retorts from vested interests. Criticism and debate is rarely fostered in the small, cloistered GLBTIQ “world”. This “world” is mainly a few tawdry pubs, some car dealers, real estate agents, gyms, beauty clinics and a couple of infomercial-tabloids. We know there is a bigger world out there with plenty of talented and committed artists, activists and educators.
I am involved as Vanessa Wagner in several NMG events during this year’s festival. Some of these events are independent of NMG but come under the festival umbrella. The Drag Race is an official NMG event which I gifted over from the now extinct Sydney Fringe Festival. I'm hoping that through my involvement I can bring some integrity to the festival. If we agree that Mardi Gras is still an important event then maybe we need to organise a group of artists and activists to take over the organisation through slow infiltration! Most artists and creative types don't want to sit on a board but I think it may be the only way to raise the quality. The longer we leave a vacuum for corporate sullying the worse things will get! Any thoughts?
I am involved as Vanessa Wagner in several NMG events during this year’s festival. Some of these events are independent of NMG but come under the festival umbrella. The Drag Race is an official NMG event which I gifted over from the now extinct Sydney Fringe Festival. I'm hoping that through my involvement I can bring some integrity to the festival. If we agree that Mardi Gras is still an important event then maybe we need to organise a group of artists and activists to take over the organisation through slow infiltration! Most artists and creative types don't want to sit on a board but I think it may be the only way to raise the quality. The longer we leave a vacuum for corporate sullying the worse things will get! Any thoughts?
written by shayne chester, 13 February 2010
Hmmm.... this story seems to have evolved into two questions: the influence of sponsors on Mardi Gras and other community organisations, and the influence of advertisers on our media. Or perhaps it suggests an elitist plutocracy who believe THEY shall decide who is community, and how that community will be manipulated. Perhaps it is a little of both.
Regarding the former, our media both online and in paper, the question is: do major advertisers think their editorial influence is acceptable because it is their financial backing that allows the news organization to operate? I recall SX ran an article questioning the acon 'safe sex code' banner flying over an orgy room of a Sydney sex on premises venue with no lights, lube or condoms. The SOPV promptly removed all its advertising to The Star.
The credibility of a 'news' organization and the integrity of its 'journalists' that acquiesce to such influence seems clear from the stories on this page. Its a concern because the community service function of our media must be insulated from market pressures, otherwise they should stop calling themselves 'the voice of the community'. Strong-arm tactics to censor content, positive editorial coverage in exchange for advertising revenue, and the publication of media releases verbatim to the exclusion of alternative viewpoints (or even the truth) is nothing new..we've seen the self-censorship of vital stories within our news organizations for years. In fact the CAAMA lobby for honest education about crystal meth, was forced to take one local gay media outlet before the The Australian Press Council. http://www.presscouncil.org.au.../1362.html
And regarding the latter, the influence of sponsors on our community organisations, that comes as no surprise either. Even in the AIDS Industry, pharmaceutical companies sponsor HIV education: (From the AFAO briefing Paper* :"In the last several years, pharmaceutical companies developing or marketing HIV related drugs have begun to offer/negotiate with several HIV/AIDS organisations including AFAO around funding of certain aspects of the work of community based organisations....Gifts and gratuities should only be accepted subject to approval by the AFAO Executive Director...The increased response to HIV information needs could not have been funded within the existing AFAO budget, and was made possible in some cases by contributions from drug companies.") http://www.hivpolicy.org/Library/HPP000642.pdf http://www.hivpolicy.org/bib/HPP000642.htm
Which is rather akin to the tobacco industry running the quit smoking campaigns. No wonder we've has the HIV virus described as 'glam' and the silly 'bananas in condom pyjamas' campaign as a substitute for a little honest education about why we need to practice safe sex.
Anyway, pardon my rant. I'll be examining the fine print of the contract I signed to exhibit my art in the Mardi Gras gallery, and withdrawing it. Its not a festival I want anything to do with.
Regarding the former, our media both online and in paper, the question is: do major advertisers think their editorial influence is acceptable because it is their financial backing that allows the news organization to operate? I recall SX ran an article questioning the acon 'safe sex code' banner flying over an orgy room of a Sydney sex on premises venue with no lights, lube or condoms. The SOPV promptly removed all its advertising to The Star.
The credibility of a 'news' organization and the integrity of its 'journalists' that acquiesce to such influence seems clear from the stories on this page. Its a concern because the community service function of our media must be insulated from market pressures, otherwise they should stop calling themselves 'the voice of the community'. Strong-arm tactics to censor content, positive editorial coverage in exchange for advertising revenue, and the publication of media releases verbatim to the exclusion of alternative viewpoints (or even the truth) is nothing new..we've seen the self-censorship of vital stories within our news organizations for years. In fact the CAAMA lobby for honest education about crystal meth, was forced to take one local gay media outlet before the The Australian Press Council. http://www.presscouncil.org.au.../1362.html
And regarding the latter, the influence of sponsors on our community organisations, that comes as no surprise either. Even in the AIDS Industry, pharmaceutical companies sponsor HIV education: (From the AFAO briefing Paper* :"In the last several years, pharmaceutical companies developing or marketing HIV related drugs have begun to offer/negotiate with several HIV/AIDS organisations including AFAO around funding of certain aspects of the work of community based organisations....Gifts and gratuities should only be accepted subject to approval by the AFAO Executive Director...The increased response to HIV information needs could not have been funded within the existing AFAO budget, and was made possible in some cases by contributions from drug companies.") http://www.hivpolicy.org/Library/HPP000642.pdf http://www.hivpolicy.org/bib/HPP000642.htm
Which is rather akin to the tobacco industry running the quit smoking campaigns. No wonder we've has the HIV virus described as 'glam' and the silly 'bananas in condom pyjamas' campaign as a substitute for a little honest education about why we need to practice safe sex.
Anyway, pardon my rant.
I'll be examining the fine print of the contract I signed to exhibit my art in the Mardi Gras gallery, and withdrawing it. Its not a festival I want anything to do with.
written by Peter Hackney, 13 February 2010
@ Mark: thanks for your link to the story in "UK Gay News" about Rodney Croome and the way his publication has been banned from Mardi Gras Fair Day. This is yet more evidence that NMG is now more interested in corporate cronies than community members. Few people in Australia have done more to advance the cause of LGBT rights than Mr Croome and in my opinion NMG treating him this way is outrageous. And again, I note that this story first broke in the queer media overseas, instead of here in Australia where it is most relevant. I wonder why that is?
@ Sam/SamBack: I believed the footnote "Peter Hackney is a freelance journalist" made it clear that I no longer worked for SX. However, your feedback has been taken on board and the words "and the former news editor of SX" were added. I hope this makes it sufficiently clear for you. I note with interest that despite three posts, you have so far failed to comment on the issues raised in my article, i.e. corporate sponsorship and queer media censorship. Would you care to share your thoughts on these issues? I'd be interested to hear your views. And since identity and attribution are so important to you, perhaps you would also care to attribute your posts to your full name, as I did, instead of 'Sam' and 'SamBack'?
@ Sam/SamBack: I believed the footnote "Peter Hackney is a freelance journalist" made it clear that I no longer worked for SX. However, your feedback has been taken on board and the words "and the former news editor of SX" were added. I hope this makes it sufficiently clear for you. I note with interest that despite three posts, you have so far failed to comment on the issues raised in my article, i.e. corporate sponsorship and queer media censorship. Would you care to share your thoughts on these issues? I'd be interested to hear your views. And since identity and attribution are so important to you, perhaps you would also care to attribute your posts to your full name, as I did, instead of 'Sam' and 'SamBack'?
written by shayne chester, 12 February 2010
Sam, excuse me while I ignore you.
PH, I remember the parades in the beginning when we didn't need to get a 'license' to go in our own parade, or pay for the priviledge of showing our gay pride, everyone was welcome. We'd truck along on the night and join the parade wherever and whenever we felt to. Of course those days are gone and now we need someone to tell us if we are the right sort of queer to join Mardi Gras. Personally, if I was one of the Animal Libbers, I'd turn up and try to join anyway, I'm sure NMG would love the publicity of queers being dragged kicking and screaming out of their parade. Oh wait, we don't get publicity anymore either, do we?
PH, I remember the parades in the beginning when we didn't need to get a 'license' to go in our own parade, or pay for the priviledge of showing our gay pride, everyone was welcome. We'd truck along on the night and join the parade wherever and whenever we felt to. Of course those days are gone and now we need someone to tell us if we are the right sort of queer to join Mardi Gras. Personally, if I was one of the Animal Libbers, I'd turn up and try to join anyway, I'm sure NMG would love the publicity of queers being dragged kicking and screaming out of their parade. Oh wait, we don't get publicity anymore either, do we?
written by Peter Jackson, 12 February 2010
Sam, your comment:
“The only queer media co-opted into such censorship is the company Hackney works for” is untrue.
The SSO and samesame.com.au are equally as caught up in this culture of community censorship to protect their advertisers. (The SSO was taken to the media tribunal a couple of years ago for this very purpose.
http://www.presscouncil.org.au...1362.html
Of course the ADB found there was an obvious bias in that publication but ruled that the editor has the right to publish - or not, whatever he/she chooses.
Note, as with the AIDS industry heads, the editor “offered to meet” with complainants – this is interpretable as “offered to check out their faces and talk around the issue OFF record, but never on record, as is the current case with BGF's CEO.)
“The only queer media co-opted into such censorship is the company Hackney works for” is untrue.
The SSO and samesame.com.au are equally as caught up in this culture of community censorship to protect their advertisers. (The SSO was taken to the media tribunal a couple of years ago for this very purpose.
http://www.presscouncil.org.au...1362.html
Of course the ADB found there was an obvious bias in that publication but ruled that the editor has the right to publish - or not, whatever he/she chooses.
Note, as with the AIDS industry heads, the editor “offered to meet” with complainants – this is interpretable as “offered to check out their faces and talk around the issue OFF record, but never on record, as is the current case with BGF's CEO.)
written by Sam, 12 February 2010
Appreciate your altering the attribution of the author - despite this being after the fact.
written by Peter Jackson, 12 February 2010
What a relief to see someone else say what so many queers with social consciences been on about for a. Both SX and the SSO are padded out every week with advertorials straight from the desks of ACON, BGF, NMG.
We at KOAIA ( ‘Keeping Our AIDS Industry Accountable’ http://www.koaia.net/) have long been fighting to get the gay media to run something, only to be constantly gagged, from feature articles to letters to editors to comments online.
It’s immensely frustrating when a genuine gay community lobby works night and day for a genuine cause, only to be treated this way by our ‘own’ media.
The exact same happened with previous grass roots community efforts such as CAAMA (Community Action Against Meth) which, in the face of total rejection by the gay media, nevertheless achieved public awareness on a nasty community problem a few years. It had been the same story with SASSTERS, which fought for the rights of HIV+ pensioners to stay in their rented homes and not be shipped into homophobic housing ghettoes. That fight too was won against all odds with not an ounce of gay media support, all because what we had to say threatened the gay media’s corporate advertisers' PR profiles. .
I’ve given years of my life to causes like these and had to battle time after time, winning against all odds when marginalised by an elite and exclusive clique that holds the reins on what our community gets to know about.
If we want any true community backbone and any platform for intellectual choice, freedom of speech or healthy debate, we need something other than these despicable commercial enterprises which operate on business nepotism and $$$.
http://www.koaia.net/
http://www.koaia.net/
We at KOAIA ( ‘Keeping Our AIDS Industry Accountable’ http://www.koaia.net/) have long been fighting to get the gay media to run something, only to be constantly gagged, from feature articles to letters to editors to comments online.
It’s immensely frustrating when a genuine gay community lobby works night and day for a genuine cause, only to be treated this way by our ‘own’ media.
The exact same happened with previous grass roots community efforts such as CAAMA (Community Action Against Meth) which, in the face of total rejection by the gay media, nevertheless achieved public awareness on a nasty community problem a few years. It had been the same story with SASSTERS, which fought for the rights of HIV+ pensioners to stay in their rented homes and not be shipped into homophobic housing ghettoes. That fight too was won against all odds with not an ounce of gay media support, all because what we had to say threatened the gay media’s corporate advertisers' PR profiles. .
I’ve given years of my life to causes like these and had to battle time after time, winning against all odds when marginalised by an elite and exclusive clique that holds the reins on what our community gets to know about.
If we want any true community backbone and any platform for intellectual choice, freedom of speech or healthy debate, we need something other than these despicable commercial enterprises which operate on business nepotism and $$$.
http://www.koaia.net/
http://www.koaia.net/
written by Mark, 12 February 2010
Came to this page via link on UK Gay News which adds to this "sorry" story of Gay Prides/Mardi Gras chasing corporate cash and forgetting the grass routes. They have a story on how a booklet written by the Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group has been banned from distribution at Mardi Gras in Sydney all becaue of a major sponsorhip from Events New South Wales - http://www.ukgaynews.org.uk/Ar...b/1202.htm . With the incidents repoted on this page as well, it is a sad reflection of how big companies are "taking over" Pride/Mardi Gras all over the world (just look at Manchester in UK where younger LGBT people are rebelling against the organisers).
written by Hal, 12 February 2010
Very sad all round. A Mardi Gras that bans gays and lesbians from their own parade and a gay media that covers their butt. Thank god for sites like this where the truth can be told. Magazines and newspapers don't seem to realise they're signing their own death warrants with stuff like this. In 2010, you can't get away with it anymore. Like John Gilmour said:
"The internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
"The internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
written by shayne chester, 12 February 2010
Three years ago, I interviewed Dan Mathews, vice president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). I asked him, "If we don't care about animals' rights, then why should anyone care about glbqt rights?" OK, it was a leading question, but his response truly moved me, "As gays and lesbians who have often grown up feeling a bit misunderstood and persecuted ourselves, I think we can open our minds to recognise that others have a similar suffering. My organisation, PETA, has always had a lot of gay supporters because they are able to make that connection. People that have a dog or cat will know their undying love and devotion and many will want to return that kind of respect and defend animals. We‘re all neighbours on this planet, it‘s just a matter of being better neighbours.”
I must say I am equally moved by the banning of Animal Liberation float from Mardi Gras, but to the other extreme and for two reasons.
First, NMG have totally missed a parallel that must surely be obvious to any modern queer with the least political sensibility.
Second, in banning SOME gays from OUR parade they assume a proprietorship on community that says, 'you are not one of us, we now own community.' Its an attitude that sadly I see reflected in all of our glqt institutions and in their treatment of those they consider to be 'others.'
IT is not the Mardi Gras or the community that those of us who have been here since the 70's fought long and hard to build.
Matthews ended the interview with this, “I think that everybody makes a choice, but it should be an educated choice. Causing harm to animals is pretty easy to avoid once you learn.” Obviously NMG, like a few other of our organisations with whom I have done battle in my time, do not see the right to honest education as being a gay right.
I must say I am equally moved by the banning of Animal Liberation float from Mardi Gras, but to the other extreme and for two reasons.
First, NMG have totally missed a parallel that must surely be obvious to any modern queer with the least political sensibility.
Second, in banning SOME gays from OUR parade they assume a proprietorship on community that says, 'you are not one of us, we now own community.' Its an attitude that sadly I see reflected in all of our glqt institutions and in their treatment of those they consider to be 'others.'
IT is not the Mardi Gras or the community that those of us who have been here since the 70's fought long and hard to build.
Matthews ended the interview with this, “I think that everybody makes a choice, but it should be an educated choice. Causing harm to animals is pretty easy to avoid once you learn.” Obviously NMG, like a few other of our organisations with whom I have done battle in my time, do not see the right to honest education as being a gay right.
written by John Frame, 12 February 2010
The near identical comments from "Sam" and "SamBeck" (same person?) are pitiful. The article is openly credited to "Peter Hackney is a freelance journalist and the former news editor of SX." When he's telling the uncensored truth as it ought to be revealed, what possible difference does his employment history make?
My experience with queer community organisation is that it is a constant battle to resist commercial interests compromising a group's integrity. All the commercial entity wants is increased profit. The last hope for the truth being able to be dispersed is in our own media having the courage to publish due criticism of their paying advertisers, and daring to be "political" and community relevant rather than just advertising everything from cars to sex workers, wrapped around buff bodies and fashion fluff.
BTW: my own disclosure is that I wrote (at no cost) the cover story for the current February edition of Queensland Pride. The article is a no holds barred view on Queensland being the only place in Australia youth are actively oppressed by an unequal age of consent. I have nothing but praise for Peter's courage and determination in making sure that equal rights for youth are seen to be just as important as equal rights for adults.
My experience with queer community organisation is that it is a constant battle to resist commercial interests compromising a group's integrity. All the commercial entity wants is increased profit. The last hope for the truth being able to be dispersed is in our own media having the courage to publish due criticism of their paying advertisers, and daring to be "political" and community relevant rather than just advertising everything from cars to sex workers, wrapped around buff bodies and fashion fluff.
BTW: my own disclosure is that I wrote (at no cost) the cover story for the current February edition of Queensland Pride. The article is a no holds barred view on Queensland being the only place in Australia youth are actively oppressed by an unequal age of consent. I have nothing but praise for Peter's courage and determination in making sure that equal rights for youth are seen to be just as important as equal rights for adults.
written by Garry Burns, 12 February 2010
I have never got in bed with the devil.
Most people in this town don't like me because of it.
But I can walk into any venue and know my integrity has never been impinged.
My head can always be held high.
I disagree Ms Moore because mardi gras must not forget where it came from.
Mardi Gras belongs to its community and not big corporate company's.
You may not know this Ms Moore but I am a homosexual.
Most people in this town don't like me because of it.
But I can walk into any venue and know my integrity has never been impinged.
My head can always be held high.
I disagree Ms Moore because mardi gras must not forget where it came from.
Mardi Gras belongs to its community and not big corporate company's.
You may not know this Ms Moore but I am a homosexual.
written by c.moore Hardy, 12 February 2010
Nothing new really, and Peter Hackney has valid points... but doesn't anyone remember when the graffitti was printed over the workshop in Erko...when MG joined hands with Telstra. It is inevitable that Mardi Gras will seek partners that will end up in the parade. What about that VIRGIN Bus last year!!
Back in the old days (yes folks I was at there @ the meeting when they fought to include the word LESBIAN in the title SGLMG not inclusive even then...sorry Ed.) there was much more subversive behaviour... My suggestion is SUBVERT the heirarchy - enjoy yourselves and join in. In the old daze- people had no trouble jumping the parade fence and joining in with homemade banners and messages. Whatever happened to subverting the parade...? Re the sponsors---When have queers ever shopped according to the 'supporters/advertisers' who sponsor MG???? where is that research). Sorry gang, but I believe the NMG monolith needs financial support. We got into bed with the devil a long time ago, and its not going 2 stop now.... its no longer a SMALL community org... its a BIG 'small c' ommunity org. Bloody hell do people still read street rags?
Back in the old days (yes folks I was at there @ the meeting when they fought to include the word LESBIAN in the title SGLMG not inclusive even then...sorry Ed.) there was much more subversive behaviour... My suggestion is SUBVERT the heirarchy - enjoy yourselves and join in. In the old daze- people had no trouble jumping the parade fence and joining in with homemade banners and messages. Whatever happened to subverting the parade...? Re the sponsors---When have queers ever shopped according to the 'supporters/advertisers' who sponsor MG???? where is that research). Sorry gang, but I believe the NMG monolith needs financial support. We got into bed with the devil a long time ago, and its not going 2 stop now.... its no longer a SMALL community org... its a BIG 'small c' ommunity org. Bloody hell do people still read street rags?
written by David Urquhart (1978er), 12 February 2010
I was on the 1981 Mardi Gras Organising Task Force. The group comprised mainly gay liberation activists, many of whom were participants in the events of 1978. Argument raged about moving the parade from its politically appropriate date in June to a summer date. It would be warmer and therefore 'bar queens' would be more likely to participate. Our battle for political relevance was lost.
For many years commercial entries were not allowed in the parade, Nonetheless, the idea of corporate entries lay dormant since 1981. It was at one of the Task Force meetings that the late Michael Glynn, founding Publisher and Editor of The Star (now SSO), implored one and all to "go for the pink dollar". No longer merely an idea, the quest for the pink dollar in all its corporate and capitalist ugliness is firmly embedded in the NMG ethos.
For many years commercial entries were not allowed in the parade, Nonetheless, the idea of corporate entries lay dormant since 1981. It was at one of the Task Force meetings that the late Michael Glynn, founding Publisher and Editor of The Star (now SSO), implored one and all to "go for the pink dollar". No longer merely an idea, the quest for the pink dollar in all its corporate and capitalist ugliness is firmly embedded in the NMG ethos.
written by Garry Burns, 11 February 2010
Talk about hypocrisy.
Mr Hackney & Ms Fox have integrity,and I respect both of them for that.
Mardi Gras stemmed from a gay civil rights demonstration way back in 1978.
A-lot of you were probably not born or were at home crapping your nappies.
So before you attack good people by calling them hypocrites.
Look at yourselves first.
Ms Clifford is right what has Ms Lepore got to do with our parade ?
I can say these things because I am viewed as an outsider of this community.
At least by being viewed as an outsider I can maintain my integrity.
Mr Hackney & Ms Fox have integrity,and I respect both of them for that.
Mardi Gras stemmed from a gay civil rights demonstration way back in 1978.
A-lot of you were probably not born or were at home crapping your nappies.
So before you attack good people by calling them hypocrites.
Look at yourselves first.
Ms Clifford is right what has Ms Lepore got to do with our parade ?
I can say these things because I am viewed as an outsider of this community.
At least by being viewed as an outsider I can maintain my integrity.
written by Linda Dicmanis, 11 February 2010
Mardi Gras lays an Egg
I am appalled that Mardi Gras has banned the Animal Liberation float themed ‘Chicks and Cocks agree – set the chickens free’ from this years parade. Animal lib has taken part in Mardi Gras for the past three years and won most creative float in 2006. This year’s float focussed on the cruelty inflicted on battery hens confined to a space of an A4 piece of paper, often mutilated and crippled, standing on wire, unable to exhibit any natural behaviours, only seeing the light of the sun the day they are sent for slaughter when their production line lays less than the quota required.
So, why should the Animal Liberationists be allowed to march?
Over 80% of the participants identified as gay, lesbian, bi etc.
The march is about a marginalised group standing together against discrimination. But now the Mardi Gras committee are actively discriminating against vegans and animal advocates in their own ranks. One wannabe marcher stated, “I get more insults for being vegan than for being a lesbian.”
These marchers want to express who they are and what they believe in. But more so, in standing up for all animals, they are standing up for all groups of humans.
Marginalised groups throughout history are subject to “animalization” by powers that be, including Nazis and Communist regimes – the denial of the victim’s humanity through a process of dehumanization. Demonizing animal rhetoric, referring to enemies as ‘subhuman, rabid dogs, vermin, lice, scorpions, bloodsuckers, abject animals’, allowed ordinarily decent people to desire the death and oppression of their fellow human beings. By raising the status of animals, we simultaneously prevent the lowering of the status of humans.
Chickens are intelligent, social, sentient beings who, like humans, deserve to be free from pain, fear, exploitation, discrimination, and death. Their advocates, the gay, lesbian, bi, vegan animal activists, should be allowed to march in this year’s Mardi Gras. These are people who are concerned about ending oppression and exploitation wherever they occur, and in seeing that the basic moral principle of equal consideration of interests is not arbitrarily restricted to members of our own species.
I am appalled that Mardi Gras has banned the Animal Liberation float themed ‘Chicks and Cocks agree – set the chickens free’ from this years parade. Animal lib has taken part in Mardi Gras for the past three years and won most creative float in 2006. This year’s float focussed on the cruelty inflicted on battery hens confined to a space of an A4 piece of paper, often mutilated and crippled, standing on wire, unable to exhibit any natural behaviours, only seeing the light of the sun the day they are sent for slaughter when their production line lays less than the quota required.
So, why should the Animal Liberationists be allowed to march?
Over 80% of the participants identified as gay, lesbian, bi etc.
The march is about a marginalised group standing together against discrimination. But now the Mardi Gras committee are actively discriminating against vegans and animal advocates in their own ranks. One wannabe marcher stated, “I get more insults for being vegan than for being a lesbian.”
These marchers want to express who they are and what they believe in. But more so, in standing up for all animals, they are standing up for all groups of humans.
Marginalised groups throughout history are subject to “animalization” by powers that be, including Nazis and Communist regimes – the denial of the victim’s humanity through a process of dehumanization. Demonizing animal rhetoric, referring to enemies as ‘subhuman, rabid dogs, vermin, lice, scorpions, bloodsuckers, abject animals’, allowed ordinarily decent people to desire the death and oppression of their fellow human beings. By raising the status of animals, we simultaneously prevent the lowering of the status of humans.
Chickens are intelligent, social, sentient beings who, like humans, deserve to be free from pain, fear, exploitation, discrimination, and death. Their advocates, the gay, lesbian, bi, vegan animal activists, should be allowed to march in this year’s Mardi Gras. These are people who are concerned about ending oppression and exploitation wherever they occur, and in seeing that the basic moral principle of equal consideration of interests is not arbitrarily restricted to members of our own species.
written by Rachel Evans, 11 February 2010
Wonderful wonderful piece Peter!
Thank you for articulating so much of what progressive lgbti community members are thinking. Corporations were NOT been bashed by cops in 1978. Queers were. IKEA didn't foot legal bills for Aboriginal people bashed and charged at Canberra's Tent Embassy. Activists and community members (queer, indigenous, straight) did. ANZ didn't build 356 coffins for the drowned refugees on SIEV X and march with them to protest the governments murderous refugee policy. Foxtel didn't cover the Animal lib rally outside a chicken farm. They only care about profit margins. And that SX refused to print an article is am added outrage. Hats off to bold Peter Hackney and Katrina Fox for sticking their necks out. Thank you!
www.caah.org.au
Thank you for articulating so much of what progressive lgbti community members are thinking. Corporations were NOT been bashed by cops in 1978. Queers were. IKEA didn't foot legal bills for Aboriginal people bashed and charged at Canberra's Tent Embassy. Activists and community members (queer, indigenous, straight) did. ANZ didn't build 356 coffins for the drowned refugees on SIEV X and march with them to protest the governments murderous refugee policy. Foxtel didn't cover the Animal lib rally outside a chicken farm. They only care about profit margins. And that SX refused to print an article is am added outrage. Hats off to bold Peter Hackney and Katrina Fox for sticking their necks out. Thank you!
www.caah.org.au
written by Penny Clifford, 11 February 2010
To Sam & Sam back... at least this journalist ( who might earn $ writing for the media that is discussed in this article) has the gumption to criticize the hand that feeds him...
His take on MG is one that is true and they are dancing with the devil again.
Amanda Lepore as Chief of Parade is an obvious sign, By having her as our 'Chief" MG are doing NOTHING but trying to create a 'straight' media frenzy, sadly Ms Lepore who graced our shores only 6 months ago really didnt do just that.
Lets face it not even KAK ( Morning with Kerri Anne) wanted her..
MG look in your own backyard, and watch your stpes.
His take on MG is one that is true and they are dancing with the devil again.
Amanda Lepore as Chief of Parade is an obvious sign, By having her as our 'Chief" MG are doing NOTHING but trying to create a 'straight' media frenzy, sadly Ms Lepore who graced our shores only 6 months ago really didnt do just that.
Lets face it not even KAK ( Morning with Kerri Anne) wanted her..
MG look in your own backyard, and watch your stpes.
written by Sam, 11 February 2010
I think the piece should also include the disclaimer *Peter Hackney is the news editor for SX and editor of the same company's QLD title, Queensland Pride.
And the line "And sadly, the queer media has been ‘co-opted’ into the culture of censorship" is also incorrect. The only queer media co-opted into such censorship is the company Hackney works for.
And the line "And sadly, the queer media has been ‘co-opted’ into the culture of censorship" is also incorrect. The only queer media co-opted into such censorship is the company Hackney works for.
written by Garry Burns, 11 February 2010
Mardi Gras is irrelevant.
It's just about a good night out these days.
In 1978 it meant something more to many of us.
Todays mardi gras a make up of young kids running it who have no understanding of pioneering activists like me or others who had the crap kicked out of us all those long years ago.
It's just about a good night out these days.
In 1978 it meant something more to many of us.
Todays mardi gras a make up of young kids running it who have no understanding of pioneering activists like me or others who had the crap kicked out of us all those long years ago.
written by SamBack, 11 February 2010
The hypocracy of the writer of the piece knows no bounds. A quick look at the current home page of SX shows three articles written by Peter Hackney. It is quite alright for this 'journalist' to live off the filthy money generated by the exact same organisations he seeks to destroy the reputations of ... Methinks something is rotten here and therefore this whole debate is compromised by bullsh!t agenda politics.
written by Michael, 11 February 2010
So appalling that NMG is acting like this. It's the 'Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Parade' not the 'Sydney Marketing Parade'. How DARE they cut queer community floats for being "not gay" and keep banks and furniture stores in there. As for SX, I'm so not surprised, it's just an advertising catalogue these days, I hardly bother picking it up anymore. NMG and SX are the perfect fit, no wonder they're "partners".
Write comment
Anyway, I was editor of SX when Evolution Publishing got the NMG media partnership deal and expressed my concerns at the time. To put it bluntly, I knew it was the kiss of death, editorially speaking – I was never going to be able to run anything even vaguely critical of the organisation. I couldn't even take the piss out of anything (I found this part most infuriating).
But all that money! Those advertisers! Oh frabjous day.
The commercialisation of Mardi Gras began long ago; the media partner ball-gag was merely passed from SSO to SX.
I just hope they washed it first; I still feel grubby after running all that party drivel.
Disclaimer: I was sacked for telling another organisation, with whom Evolution also had a media deal, exactly what I thought of their concept of "gay culture". I suspect this has become an oxymoron.