Herald-Sun Disgrace

Posted to Herald-Sun feedback

I don't think there is a strong enough word I can use that will accurately show my disgust at the Herald-Sun, its editor and anyone else who was involved in Thursday’s issue on the 10/07/08.
According to the Herald-Sun, it would seem, they hold the Olympics as a more important and newsworthy issue than the war in Afghanistan and Jana F#cking Rawlinson above the brave SAS digger who’s name you did not even mention on the front page.
Your headline reads, in case your moral and ethical standards temporarily blinded you: “Jana Out”, “Injury shatters champion’s Beijing Olympic dream”. To top it off, you plastered a picture of her sorry ass face draped in an Australian flag over two thirds of the page with an article underneath stating how heartbroken, numb and shattered she is. Did anyone, and I do mean ANYONE, give one seconds thought as to how the family and friends of Sean McCarthy (he is the digger that got blasted to pieces in case you didn’t hear due to Jana’s whinging) may feel? Did anyone consider they might be heartbroken, shattered and numb at the loss of their loved one?
Clearly that is a rhetorical question as we can all plainly see you did not. To have Jana draped in an aussie flag directly above shadowing a digger who has been KILLED defending our right to freedom and peace, was an even greater testament to your callousness.
Let me be the first to say, what an absolute f#cking disgrace and insult to Sean’s family and friends. Not to mention the rest of us. May I ask whose idea and decision it was? Was it the editor’s? Was it Jana’s? Or a collaboration between the two. Neither of these would surprise me as the all the editor cares about is making himself look good by selling papers and all that Jana cares about is herself.
Good to see our fallen digger made it to page three though along with tiny pictures of the other five brave souls who have given their lives serving this country on the ultimate platform. Unfortunately written words will not accurately portray my sarcasm in case you did not pick it up.
To follow it up, if that was not enough, on page four you continued by giving Jana more space to whinge and cry. First was her blatant arrogance in stating that, and I quote, “If the Olympics had of been last year, I would have been Olympic champion now. But it is not and that is fate. That’s sport”. And to follow, “I’m trying to remain positive and I’m looking beyond the Olympics to other challenges”.
For starters, it truly amazes me how one can assume that they will be world champion without even competing. The sheer arrogance and over confidence of this girl is astounding to say the least not to mention her talking about fate and looking beyond the Olympics to other challenges. How about the fate of Sean McCarthy? And if she wants a challenge, how about going to Afghanistan or Iraq and trying to come back alive? But I guess her sore toe and an accolade for sport is more important than the loss of a life, family member and friend.
In any event, it was a complete slap in the face towards Sean McCarthy, his family and friends and the armed forces who are risking their lives everyday for the sake of a better world. But hey, who cares? Lets just all go out and grab a box of tissues, take them around to poor little Jana’s place, dry her eyes, be a good listener while she whinges, embrace her selfishness and give her toe a massage in the sheer hope that we can get her back on her feet so she wins us aussies a gold medal in four years. I wonder how many more of our diggers will no longer be with us then.

An open letter to artists everywhere (reposted)

I originally posted this at my other blog. Although it wasn't sent to anyone in particular, it qualifies as a complaint.

Enjoy.


Oh man, this could be controversial. I risk being misunderstood, but, well, that's art for you.

Dear artists.

I've been reading avidly in the media about the Bill Henson affair, and realised that I don't like you very much.

Henson, I'm sure that you recall, may be charged with certain crimes for taking nude photos of young children and attempting to profit from them. Some people might call this porn, but Henson, and some of you, appear to think that because Henson did this as art, it's fully justified.

Personally, I'm staggered at the disingenuity of your assertion that Henson's photo's can be defended on the grounds of "art" or "culture", when you had a veritable arsenal of stuff that you could have used to defend this. Freedom of expression is one. Realism is another, given the fact that 13 year old girls are occasionally nude.

So strange as it may seem, you went and chose the one excuse that really shits me about art and artists, and the weakest and least defensible of the whole lot: Anything done in the name of "art" is apparently OK all round as far as you lot are concerned.

You are a pack of complete fucking idiots.

What's more, you are a fraudulent pack of complete fucking idiots. You're quite happy to defend Henson, because he seems to be well connected amongst the tortured artistic milieu. Yet for years, photographers in the porn trade have been ridiculed by you lot, mainly because they lack the airs and graces that define your artistic stereotype, which you only seem too keen to conform to.

And what's more, I'd say that there is someone busted for kiddie porn once every couple of months and sent to gaol in this state alone. When was the last time you defended their art? You disgusting hypocrites.

You defend Henson, because you contend that "art" was his intention. You complete bunch of nob ends.

It's quite possible that art was his intention. But so what? Society's laws and values, sadly in my opinion, aren't based upon intentions, with the exception of some. Like the ones in this case that mean that Henson probably will escape prosecution. Yet I don't see you campaigning to see other laws brought into line.

In France, a trader is awaiting charges based purely on the consequences, not the intentions of his actions. Where were you during this, eh? When did you speak out against his charges?

Thanks to you, we're now likely to get a barrage of kiddie porn thrown at us under the guise of "art". It doesn't take a genius to see that any porn photographer wanting to profit from exploiting nude kiddies will now just throw up a gallery somewhere and stick up their photos which might not only involve kiddies nude, but possibly "doing stuff" as well. Fuck you.

It goes further than that. I heard not long ago about people having their cameras confiscated on Australia's most famous beach, merely because they might have been photographing chicks in bikinis. I didn't hear a single one of you complain about this. Maybe if they'd uttered the word, "art" they would have been able to keep their cameras. You sanctimonious morons.

What, you don't like my "thin edge of the wedge" argument? Well, why the hell are some of you content to trot it out then? I watched the news tonight, and I saw some of you complaining about the potential for increased censorship across the board as a result of this.

Yet none of you complain about existing censorship regarding porn. For that is what Henson's art is.

I have to laugh, whenever I hear some of the lame excuses trotted out by you lot. So the children's parents consented. So what?

Ms Jones, I like your work. You paint nice. And your 15 year old daughter would be considered technically nubile in some cultures, but not here. So why are you defending Henson's work on the parental consent line? Didn't you tell me that you recently told your daughter to stop pleading with you to allow her to have sex with the young brickie next door who she's been flirting with outrageously? Why won't YOU provide consent? Because you can't legally?

Well then, Ms Jones. Why aren't you campaigning to have the laws changed so that you can? After all, you're happy to defend the parental consent line in Henson's case.

"But it's not sex," you say. So what, Ms Jones? You're still being inconsistent.

OK, so I made this scenario up. Let's call it "art" and that'll make it alright. I hate that. Why can't I just be an exaggerating idiot? Is there something wrong with calling something what it is? Why do Henson's nudie shots of 13 year old girls cease to be exactly that when they're called "art"?

Well fuck you, artists.

I hate the fact that you expect government grants and complain about businesses being provided with tax concessions.

I hate the fact that you hate intellectual property laws except where it's your copyright over your work.

I hate where you resort to defending bad taste, mistakes and half-baked concepts as "art", yet criticise fellow artists when they dare to do stuff that's entertaining.

I hate the fact that you sell your stuff in galleries for outrageous prices, yet criticise anyone deemed to have "sold out".

I hate the fact that you're so fluid with your definitions on what "selling out" actually involves.

I hate the way that you insist on being branded as "eccentric" and have the nerve to criticise anyone for pointless pigeonholing.

I hate the tortured artist thing with an absolute passion.

I hate public arts funding, and wish it would stop. I hate the way that our national broadcaster insists on foisting arts programmes on to the rest of us.

I hate the way that you believe that it's your right to profit from a hobby.

I hate most of your work.

I hate myself for liking quite a lot of your work.

I hate the fact that you're all so fucking hypocritical.

I hate the way that because I'm a musician and writer, this makes me one of you and therefore just as hypocritical as the rest of you.

And I hate the word "art". Seriously, it should be fucking well banned. The vast number of the rest of us do not want to hear you claiming that your latest unentertaining installation of questionable merit is good merely because it's "art".

Put jam on it and jam it up your arse.

Dikkii.

PS: I'm not deliberately being ironic - I know that this technically qualifies as art. Fuck you.

Believe it or not, people wonder why I get so frustrated with the term "art". I don't think that this is going to make it any clearer.

My Two Cents About Connex - Posted for Cam

I thought I'd also throw my two cents worth in with the latest incident that has occurred with Connex officers bashing a passenger.

What does one expect if you hire staff that have delusions of grandeur?! Not once have I ever been spoken to by a Connex officer in a polite manner, and I don't expect to now that you've hired a pack of thugs, who probably didn’t even complete basic education. Just because you wear a trench coat and have a plastic badge doesn't give you the right to take the law into your own hands like your auditioning for the show COPS. Surely by hanging around in packs of 3-5 is patronising enough without the need to wear army boots and other apparel likened to a battlefield. Perhaps you’ve forgotten who pays their wages…

Can Connex do anything right this year?.....I really doubt it. Soon I’ll have to wear a flak jacket and battle armour to get to work unharmed.

Yarra Bend Golf club and no refund policy

Not a particlarly harsh complaint but a worthy cause. This is one I really do want to work!!!

To whom it may concern,

I have enjoyed your golf course for a number of years now and have just recently played a round there with a couple of associates. The date I played was Sunday the 6th of April. I called initially on the Friday to book in and was advised that you required payment by close of business the next day which I thought was fair enough.
When asked how many would be playing I stated that it should be a foursome but possibly three as I was having difficulty contacting one person to confirm. The clerk then advised me that I could just book for three and if the fourth was to join us that all would be fine and he would be able to tee off with us. At that particular point in time I was almost completely sure that we would have a foursome, so to avoid any trouble, I decided to book for four.
Before close of business on Saturday I called and made the payment for all four and also managed to get an earlier tee off time due to others cancelling which was great. Unfortunately though, one of our group fell ill the night before and was unable to join us for the round and we had little or no time to offer his spot to anyone else. Either way, the three of us left were still happy to play our round and we proceeded to the course.
However, upon arriving and informing you that we only had three it was made known to us that the green fee for the fourth would not be returned. I find this extremely hard to swallow. I do not see why we should have to pay and extra $25 for nothing!!! I also do not see why this was never mentioned when I initially booked? Had I have known I would never have agreed to book for that many just in case something went wrong, as it did. Further more, when asking for the refund, the clerk advised me that to get it returned, we had to give them one days notice. This was a completely ridiculous statement due to the fact that it was impossible for us to do that as the fourth in our group pulled out that morning. Needless to say, our hands were tied.
I find this extremely unfair, not to mention a rip off and excessively bad customer service. I cannot see myself (or my golfing partners) playing at this course ever again simply due to this situation. It does not make sense to me why this should be occurring. I would be more understanding if all of us pulled out and you did not refund or gave us a cancellation fee, but for one person out of our group? Come on. And again, if we had of been advised of this I would simply have booked for three.
As a result, my friends and I have had to wear the extra cost and due to this inauspicious situation, played a round of golf which was not very enjoyable. As I stated before, I will not be frequenting your course any longer unless something is done to rectify this problem as I believe it is grossly unfair and a shocking way to treat your customers.
Any type of response to this would be greatly appreciated.

Yours regrettably,
Ross Hughes.

Gloria Jeans and Mercy Ministries part 3

This is part 3.

Part 1 is here.

Part 2 is here.

So this is a final response to Gloria Jeans. I don't expect a response back - Jean's have already indicated that they're not going to move on this.

I was absolutely mystified by the repeated Hillsong references - while I already know the nature of their Hillsong links (their founders Nabi Saleh and Peter Irvine are prominent members of this church and Saleh appears as a listed Elder on their website) it wasn't what I was complaining about.

Having said that, it wasn't beneath me to bag Hillsong in my email.

Dear Dianne,

Thank you for replying to my email.

I must admit to some confusion reading your email, and some anger as well, as it did appear to me that you cut and pasted a standard prepared statement that had minimal relevance to the email that I originally sent.

For example, you initially started by referring to Hillsong Church, which I did not refer to in my email. I should perhaps clarify that I am happy with Gloria Jean's statements up to this point regarding links, or lack thereof to Hillsong. I should further remind you that Hillsong was not the subject of my email - Mercy Ministries was.

The rest of your email appeared to be irrelevant guff, referring only obliquely to the points that I raised about your sponsorship arrangement with Mercy Ministries.

Somewhat strangely, you referred me back to the media statement made by Mercy Ministries which I will remind you, made me quite angry due to the fact that it, and I'll quote myself here, "doesn’t even contain a shred of sympathy for the women in question, nor does it suggest any action that the centre will take to ensure that such mistreatment doesn’t happen again."

Part way through this, you point out that you will only take action after due diligence has been undertaken. Dianne, organisations such as Bunnings, Rebel Sport and LG Electronics promptly cut off the organisation the next day after the allegations surfaced, and while everyone is entitled to a presumption of innocence, the fact that so many organisations have terminated their sponsorship arrangements suggests that your due diligence process is either deficient, or wilfully ignorant. Indeed, the loss of corporate sponsors appears so embarrassing for Mercy Ministries that they have deleted all mention of who their sponsors are from their website.

Then for no apparent reason, you mention Hillsong Church again, once again denying links with this church.

I'm reminded of a popular misquote from William Shakespeare's play, Hamlet, "Methinks the lady doth protest too much." I don't mean to sound blunt but I don't really care what kind of (non-)relationship you have with Hillsong Church, although for some reason, Hillsong reminds me of the goings on in a Californian church called Peoples' Temple, before their leader, Rev Jim Jones packed everyone up and moved to Guyana in South America. I'm sure that you don't need me to remind you how successful that turned out to be.

If I might quote you from the end of the email:

"The religious affiliation of our management, staff, Franchise Partners, charity partners has absolutely no relevance to how we operate our company."

If this is truly the case, then you will have absolutely no problems terminating your sposorship arrangement with Mercy Ministries forthwith. I expect that this is all talk but this much is clear: the ball is firmly in your court.

I would like to add to my initial complaint that I am unhappy that you chose to respond to my initial complaint with a prepared media statement bearing minimal relevance to my listed queries.

Yours sincerely, Dikkii.

So I'm going to completely avoid Jean's for my coffee requirements. I think you'll agree that I'm fully justified.

Gloria Jeans and Mercy Ministries part 2

This is part 2.

Part 1 is here.

I received a response to my complaint to Gloria Jeans. It's maddening to note that it's a standard response by numbers press release type thing that doesn't even address the points that I raised or the question that I was after an answer to.

I'll type a response a little later on. In the meantime, here is Hillsong's sorry, Gloria Jean's response:

Dear Dikkii,

Thank you for taking the time to contact us. We are deeply concerned with the recent media coverage related to our sponsorship of Mercy Ministries and association with the Hillsong Church and feel it is not reflective of what our business is all about.

Gloria Jean’s Coffees is a company built on family and community values with the vision: “To be the most loved and respected coffee company in the World.”

Our responsibility is to our Franchise Partners and our guests.

We are not religiously affiliated, or affiliated to any other beliefs or preferences. We are non-discriminatory and accept staff, franchise partners and guests from all walks of life.

We believe as a truly responsible corporate citizen, that we should have a positive impact on the communities from were we source our coffee and the communities we serve. Our values include: “Belief in people, building and changing lives”.

Our sponsorship of many international and local charities including Mercy Ministries is based on giving back to the communities who have helped us become the brand we are today, there are no hidden agendas.

We assessed Mercy Ministries along with many other potential charity partners several years ago now and found that their work transforming the lives of young women in crisis was a good fit with our vision, mission and values.

Our corporate donations amount to approximately $150,000 – $170,000 per annum plus the donations made by the public through the money boxes in stores.

Since then we have seen many young women’s lives transformed for the better. We have regularly visited Mercy Ministries homes to meet with the residents.

All our Franchise Partners in Australia have the opportunity to do this as well as all our Master Franchise Partners from the 29 other countries in which we serve coffee. We have several Mercy Ministries graduates working in and making a positive contribution to Gloria Jean’s Coffees both in our stores and support office.

We have been in direct discussion with Mercy Ministries and we will be working with them to understand what elements of their program could have given rise to these very concerning claims. We would encourage any member of the public that is concerned to review their response to these allegations on their website at www.mercyministries.com.au

Many of the issues facing these young women are not easily fixed. While the vast majority of young women succeed in the program, there are those few for which this program is not the answer. Clearly they have the right to give their views.

We believe this however should not outweigh the positive impact Mercy Ministries has had on the lives of many young women. By removing our sponsorship without due diligence, we would be removing our support for the many young women dealing with eating disorders, unplanned pregnancies, abuse and other life controlling issues that are in desperate need for help to turn their lives around.

We have no relationship with the Hillsong Church. Gloria Jean’s Coffees is an Australian-owned private company and there are no financial or legal ties between Gloria Jean’s Coffees and Hillsong Church. This remains unchanged.

The religious affiliation of our management, staff, Franchise Partners, charity partners has absolutely no relevance to how we operate our company. Our responsibility is to our Franchise Partners, our guests and the quality of our coffee.

Thank you for your concern, we really do take your thoughts & feelings to heart in trying to ensure we serve you in the best way possible and in our journey to become the most loved & respected coffee house worldwide.

Yours faithfully,

Dianne Baise Guest
Relations Officer

Gloria Jean’s Coffees

I may even blaze away at them with a fisking, but I'm undecided, yet.

Gloria Jeans and Mercy Ministries

Like most Australians, I was pretty disgusted with the whole Mercy Ministries saga. If you haven't read about it yet, I've stuck links into my complaint down below.

It's good to see that their corporate sponsorship has dried up. However, and this is hardly surprising, Gloria Jeans have indicated that they will not be changing their sponsorship arrangements. So I will not be having another delicious white chocolate caramellatte from them until they rectify this.

(Although in fairness, I usually get my coffees from the cafe at the foot of the building where I work, anyway. I can't recall the last time I went to Jeans', Hudson's or Starbuck's)

Here's the complaint I sent them:

To whom it may concern,

I have been following the Mercy Ministries story closely. It is a sad and harrowing tale involving weird cult-like activity and some disgraceful treatment in a facility which purports to help young women suffering “the effects of eating disorders, self harm, abuse, depression, unplanned pregnancies and other life controlling issues”.

Like most Australians, I was shocked and horrified by the goings on at the centre on the Sunshine Coast as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald on 17 March 2008
(http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/they-prayed-to-cast-satan-from-my-body/2008/03/16/1205602195122.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1) . I was even more amazed at the media response posted on their website
(http://www.mercyministries.com.au/pages/default.asp?pid=95 accessed 1 April 2008 at 13:26) which doesn’t even contain a shred of sympathy for the women in question, nor does it suggest any action that the centre will take to ensure that such mistreatment doesn’t happen again.

So I was pleased when I read in The Age on 18 March 2008
(http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/corporates-move-quickly-to-cut-ties/2008/03/17/1205602341992.html) that most of Mercy Ministries’ corporate sponsors had cut all ties with the centre.

Most but not all. In that same article, it reported that Gloria Jeans would not be terminating its sponsorship and would in fact not even be changing their sponsorship arrangement. I understand that this article is dated 18 March, so things may have changed since then.

However, I still notice that Mercy Ministries appears on your corporate website, which I am taking as evidence to suggest that Gloria Jeans is not only still associated with the organisation, but has continued to support Mercy Ministries in an undiminished capacity.

Given the above paragraph, I wish to strongly complain, and would like to know when Gloria Jeans will be terminating their arrangement with Mercy Ministries.

Yours sincerely,

Dikkii

Just simply disgraceful.