Certain sense of irony

SA Attorney General, Michael Atkinson, doesn't like nasty comment. Who of us does?

We now seem to have laws, leading up to our state election (see here) which will (as usual) require people who make electoral comment in letters to the ed to identify themselves with an appropriate name and an address. The new laws particularly extend this to internet weblogs...in particular I guess news ltd's Adelaide Now which gone into conniptions about it today. And rightly so.

I am not averse to people being encouraged to speak out in their own name rather than hiding behind pseudonym or anonym...but

The Attorney thinks that the new provisions will extend to Facebook and Twitter. And that political commentators in such would/should be required to divulge addresses.

One would have thought that at a time when a man has just been convicted for murder of a girl he allegedly stalked on the internet, that we should be discouraging people from putting personal information out there like that. But you know, the aim is maybe not to get the information out there but to stifle debate. This at least is the press's story and they are sticking to it.

There are other ironies too, when pollies are allowed to say what they like under so-called "Parliamentary Privilege" in order that they may be able to speak without fear or favour...I wonder where the ordinary person may be encouraged to speak with such boldness.

And when politicians can be indemnified at taxpayers' expense, even when they are found to have spoken inappropriately or innacurately...why this dogged pursuit of the little blogger.

Fortunately the Electoral Commissioner does not seem to think the law reaches as far as the Attorney thinks.

My issue is not that vile slanderers should be allowed to say what they like, but that this sort of tactic scares people into being overly cautious. Few amongst us, could afford legal action against one who is highly paid and/or indemnified. It borders on bullying the little chap into silence.

I blogged on this only a few days ago (here) in regard to another matter. Again I say it, it is so often those who are outrageously outspoken themselves who want to intimidate others into being quiet

On death and dying (iii)

I did say I would review My Sister's Keeper (especially I think for you Vicky!).
I dislike the novels of Jodi Picoult the more I read them, sentimental and mawkish and not very complex.
Now, one thing I know about death is that it is complex. And this may seem trite, but it is also important.
My Facebook review is here (I think if you click it it shoudl take you to my Flixtster page, but this may only work if you are on Facebook)
The plot has been modified so it is a bit better than the book, and the acting is great.
The basic tenet of the plot is a girl dying of cancer has a sister who was probably conceived so that there might be " compatible genetic material" . Anyway at age twelve, or so, that child petitions the court (it could only happen in America) to prevent her parents using her body any more.
It is a good twisty plot.
The question that might well be asked is do parents have the right to continue to save their children when their children have had enough!! Ms C Diaz is forceful as the mother, and leaves you without a doubt that parents will, can and should prevail. But fails to see that this is not onlky killing her daughter(s) but also her family. (Not too subtle...but a not unimportant point about what can happen during grieving)
In the midst of this a dying person has had enough.
It's worth a look.

One thing I know after 30 odd years of helping people with death, is that most people chew it up. And come out of the experience of grieving, as difficult as it is for anyone, better people.
We were warned in our early training that some people who "get stuck" need help...and that's true. But most people don't get stuck and can process it.
The worst thing, it seems to me, that you can do is to refuse to engage with it.
This is probably because death and grief are likely to be the most authentic experiences we will ever have.

In the midst of this my brother-in-law's Mama, Teresa, (who has been declining for some weeks now) died last night. She made the tenderest calamari in the world!

30 years later

Had lunch yesterday with friend S, who I hadn't seen (we worked out) for over 30 years. It is an interesting experience, on the one hand there is much to talk about, and on the other there is nothing because it is all sort of behind us.
I get the impression that he is making the transition into the last journey that I sensed in myself some years ago. My first comment to him (maybe a mistake) Gee you look like your dad! Which he did, but it rather reminds us that we are now the older generation (both in our late 50s!!!)
It was pleasant enough, we connected about a year ago on Facebook, he now lives overseas and so our contact has been slight.
I cannot make my mind up whether this encounter was profound or slight!

Facing the Book

The other day there was a special Facebook  event, called a "Day without Facebook".
It is an interesting concept, what is of particular interest to me is that our youngest daughter was the one who was keenest on it. She explained to me the reasons for ti as she had discovered them...that Facebook collects information about its users, that it then uses it to target advertise.....so she will always have lots of things about High School Musical and the Jonas Bros. To my mind this is not so invidious but she understood something of its significance...what we don't know can in fact be rather suspicious, may in fact be malicious and is almost certainly something more than we bargained for.
I rather think this is the nature of the world we live in, and has ever been so, it is called propaganda. It is not necessarily a bad thing. But we are right to be suspicious.
Dear old S did, I think, have a day without Facebook,  she spent it on My Space instead!

Blogged with the Flock Browser