« profile & posts archive

This author has written 377 posts for Larvatus Prodeo.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

292 responses to “Guest post by Glen Fuller: Kyle Sandilands, Jackie O as trauma jocks”

  1. Frank Calabrese

    And for Sydneysiders, as part of the National Launch of Digital Radio, Kyle & Jackie O, as well as every other Sydney Commercial Station and ABC Local Radio will be broadcasting live from Martin Place on Tuesday 6th August. There will also be TV and Print Media, so it would be an ideal forum for people to personally put their views to Mr Scandilands.

    More info here:

    http://www.digitalradioplus.com.au/files/news/Radio%20United%20Event%20July09.pdf

  2. patrickg

    Read this for the most pathetic attempt at a defence I’ve ever heard. What a dickhead. Hope he gets fired.

    http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/kyle-sandilands-girls-rape-revelation-stunned-me/

  3. Frank Calabrese

    Read this for the most pathetic attempt at a defence I’ve ever heard. What a dickhead. Hope he gets fired.

    And the comments from those “Defending” him are just as bad – it proves the general mentality of listeners to “Auspurile”

  4. glen
  5. Robert

    #sandilandsisadouche is the No 1 trending topic on Twitter right now.

  6. Fiona

    *sigh* I heard it this afternoon on jjj just as I was leaving work. poor kid :( no wonder she’s “troubled”

    I hope she and her family get support. I hear DoCS are going to help provide counseling etc.

  7. Frank Calabrese

    #sandilandsisadouche is the No 1 trending topic on Twitter right now.

    I Know :-) And to think that Kyle was once broadcasting in Perth on 96FM when it was Triple M and part of the Austereo network.

    I’ve since read on the punch page that the segment was pre-recorded and yet they STILL allowed it to go to air.

  8. Francis Xavier Holden

    I’ve only ever read about this guy in waiting rooms. I’d assume his listeners are male dickheads around 22yo?

    Do they have a real lie detector or is it just a name for a segment?

    What on earth are they doing quizing 14 year olds about their sex life on air unelss its an inane “fun” segment?

    What on earth is a mother doing wanting to know about a 14 year olds sex life?

    Having done radio I can accept that a host could blurt out a stupid response – however if it was live there should be a 7 second delay, time enough for a producer or even a lone panel operating host to hit the kill button. If it was recorded there is no excuse.

    And I suppose we’ll be able to hear this jerk in digital if we shell out $500?

    What does it say that people like this even have an audience?

  9. Frank Calabrese

    Having done radio I can accept that a host could blurt out a stupid response – however if it was live there should be a 7 second delay, time enough for a producer or even a lone panel operating host to hit the kill button. If it was recorded there is no excuse.

    On the Punch article there are conflicting reports of Kyle claiming he was in NZ with only a Microphone, a Computer Screen and a video link back to the Studio, and from others in comments asying it was pre-recorded. In both cases, the local panel operator had the power to dump the show as soon as the offending words were spoken, or in the pre-recorded case not air the segment at all.

    I wonder if the 2Day-FM legal team got their degrees from a Wheetes packet?

  10. Francis Xavier Holden

    Are they only in Sydney?

    What a strange radio place, shock jocks, payola. Alan Jones, Laws, and these two.

    From what I can see these two rate around 17 or so for their slot, which would put them equal top 3 or 4?

    Weird.

  11. Frank Calabrese

    Are they only in Sydney?

    I believe they also broadcast a National Nightly “Hour of Power” which consists of “Highlights” of their Sydney Breakfast Show.

    http://www.929.com.au/shows/hourofpower

  12. Frank Calabrese

    Oh and they’ve posted a “Statement”, including one from Management.

    http://www.929.com.au/shows/kyleandjackieo/blog/statement-from-2day-fms-kyle-and-jackie-o/20090729-50im.html

  13. Francis Xavier Holden

    I googled them – phew – what a non ironic sleazy pair of full blown, unconcerned, uncontrolled, and proud of it, narcisistic, amoral types they look.

    I’d just avoid them – but I’d arrest that mother quickly – appears as though she knew the girl had been raped.

  14. Ken Lovell

    Aw look surely the significant element in the story is that tens of thousands of people think it’s entertaining listening to a child being grilled in a lie detector test. It’s a more revealing commentary on our culture than anything that unexpectedly happened during it.

  15. Casey

    These people run a Jerry Springer type of format and they are sinking forever lower in their attempts to find new salacious scenarios to titillate their voyeuristic audiences. One of their favourite targets is their news reader who they subject to various humiliations on a regular basis. And that’s what this show is. A program which gets off on humiliation, mostly of unsuspecting women. Another segment I happened upon the other week involved a boyfriend telling his girlfriend that he had slept with someone else and had got her pregnant. Live to air. The girl wept and wept. The girl had no choice in hearing what she heard, live to air, and was unable to do anything but react instinctively, live to air, without any privacy or dignity to be found for her. It was a gross violation and it was heinous. And Jackie O’s good cop sympathies are as vile as Sandilands disordered inability to understand that it is pain he is inflicting upon people in the name of ratings. And this is the top rating breakfast show in Sydney. It shows up the vacuous shallows which lurk beneath this glittering city if you ask me, that they continue to rate as they do. Sandilands would, at the very least, going by top jock salaries, be earning $500,000 if not up to a million a year for this excrement. And yet he continues to rate with this peurile voyeurism. One wonders when the public will stop their love affair with disordered individuals like Sandilands and will cease reward him for inflicting hurt and pain on people who don’t stand a chance.

    Surely there are issues of consent surrounding the strapping of a 14 year old onto a lie detector machine. Clearly she was unhappy and articulated her fear and distress. The result was to be a psychologically abusive and traumatising experience. The retreat into silence where rape is concerned can at times serve to contain the fragmentation of the psyche, especially where no therapeutic intervention has been effected, as has been the case here. The choice not to speak is, for a time at least, a way to get through. The cornering of this child into a full admission in the most public of ways leaves her vulnerable and fragile and strips her of perhaps the only mechanism she has to survive with. With a mother ill equipped to understand or deal with the specific needs of her daughter (and people like this, who seem to display a jarring lack of empathy, or a curious absence of protectiveness, have often themselves experienced a victimisaton of one sort of violence or another which has left them disocciated and unable to nurture their offspring in appropriate ways), one can only hope that intervention is effected immediately and both mother and daughter are treated.

  16. Fran Barlow

    Nope … add me to the list of people repelled by the way these two and the station conducted themselves. Given the issues, the producer should have explained (pre-going to air) that sex/criminal behaviour was off-limits as a topic and if that wasn’t acceptable, no gig. When the question arose, if they’d ignored that, then on would ho the kill button.

    I teach kids of this age. It’s irredeemable. Everyone connected should be punted. And yes, that mother has unusually poor judgement.

  17. Jack Strocchi

    14 Ken Lovell Jul 29th, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    Aw look surely the significant element in the story is that tens of thousands of people think it’s entertaining listening to a child being grilled in a lie detector test. It’s a more revealing commentary on our culture than anything that unexpectedly happened during it.

    Thats Sydney for you. Its physical beauty attracts some brilliant foreigners, who tend to come and go. But its own soil seems to breed a certain kind of low-class bluster. It continually lowers the bar on triviality, vanity and vulgarity. As Oscar Humphries remarked:

    “This is a city that devotes an inordinate amount of space to, you know, launches for hair curling irons.”

  18. Nabakov

    From Sandiland’s “The Punch” not very mea culpa at all linked above.

    “To tell you the truth I was floundering around, signalling to the producers and Jackie – down the camera – indicating that we had to get it off air. I didn’t realise I had said “Have you had any other experiences?”

    A DJ not realising what they just said on air? During what must have been a pretty charged moment. Never mind the mare’s nest of ethical and moral issues, I’d sack the fucker for just being incompetent.

    Kyle, and Jackie O, are perfect examples of how you can rise without trace. Let’s hope they finally make a lasting impression by sinking out of sight.

    Though I doubt their resignation speeches could sound this cool.

  19. myriad

    what everyone else has said, particularly Ken and Casey

    Like Casey my horror actually started at the point where it was very clear that the girl had not consented and was clearly being compelled by her mother to take part in the test.

    Just repulsive all around and that mother needs some sort of intervention.

  20. Grahim Gilbert

    I’ve lived in 11 major countries and I am passionate about radio. This is the worst radio station, I must admit in the whole wide world I’ve ever come across.
    The lady host admits having sex at the age of thirteen on air. Nice example being set for our young kids and coming generations.
    The male host has no control over his mouth, and usually shit comes out when he speaks.
    Shame on The Australian Media & Broadcasting Authority to still let this be on air. UNBELIVEABLE.
    Grahim Gilbert – NSW

  21. aidan

    I’m not sure why, but I watched a fair bit of Denton’s interview with Sandilands. Not to excuse him in any way, but I reckon he has some sort of personality disorder. Possibly borderline psycopathic, but more likely something like dissocial or narcissistic.

    Again, this is not to excuse, but to help to understand why we .. well .. don’t understand WTF he was doing.

  22. Paul Burns

    Apart from occasionally listening to Late Night Live I don’t listen to much radio. I don’t know if we can get this jerk Sandilands in Armidale or not, but it seems the purpose of this programme is mental and emotional abuse, not just of this kid, but others as well. What kind of society are we that w accept this kind of mental and emotional rape as entertainment?

  23. adrian

    No doubt all this publicity will increase their already high ratings, so we’ll have spin-doctored excuses for apologies and then it will be business as usual, ritual humiliation disguised as good fun ‘pranks’.

    Interesting to compare the fallout of this with the reaction to the Chaser skit.

  24. tssk

    I’ve noticed in their tv ad they have an offsider who they make fun of not being allowed to say anything.

    And in that moment Kyle where Kyle says “Time’s up, roll music!” I’m always transported right back to high school, seeing one of the popular bullies get one over his victim again.

    I’m probably reading too much into it. And I doubt I’m part of the target audience anyway. The winners sitting in the local drinking their scotch and cokes and thinking back to their salad days when in school uniform they were the big punchy fish in a very small pond.

  25. Tony D

    Oh and they’ve posted a “Statement”, including one from Management.

    http://www.929.com.au/shows/kyleandjackieo/blog/statement-from-2day-fms-kyle-and-jackie-o/20090729-50im.html

    … which is now pulled.

    Even if you use their in-site search to locate it (I searched for “20090729 statement”), the link 404s.

  26. glen
  27. pre-dawn leftist

    This whole affair kind of puts the recent over-the-top criticism of the ABC Chaser crew in perspective. If the Chaser stunt over the Make a Wish foundation was “misjudged” what word is there for this? And what producer with an ounce of brains would take the risk of allowing this to go ahead when the daughter (who is, after all, a MINOR)was clearly unwilling? It was an obviously risky situation and the only conclusion I can come to is that this was a cynical exercise in ratings grabbing – quite calculated actually.

  28. chinda63

    pre-dawn leftist – yes, the child was clearly unwilling to participate, which adds another layer of horror to this horrific story.

    The worst part of this all is that the producers – and the shock jocks – knew the mother wanted to quiz her minor child about her sex life, and yet it seems that no-one had a ‘red flag’ moment. WTF not?

    Putting aside the MORALITY of using a lie detector test on a child, why didn’t this throw up any LEGAL question marks? Are they all a complete bunch of dunderheads? And, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t radio stations have legal staff on retainer for precisely this sort of situation anyway?

    Monumental FAIL on the part of everyone involved.

  29. Sean

    That has made me angrier than anything I’ve read in the paper in quite a while. Why is this bitch with the plagiarised name getting off so lightly compared with the fat botoxed tool? Because she’s not on Australian Idol?

    Talk about corporate peadophilia. They knew exactly what they were doing FORCING a frightened kid to discuss this sort of stuff, broadcast, strapped to a bloody machine. The radio people did that for the money, which makes them worse than those of their fellow child abusers who are driven by errant sexualities. And my bet is that the mother just wanted her dopey self on the bloody radio. Well you’re famous now, you evil shitbag.

  30. Bilko

    what sort of mother would allow such a thing, at least Jackie O came to her senses and closed it down but the damage was done, all this for ratings, I cannot wait for media watch’s reaction.

  31. mediatracker

    28 comments so far and no condemnation of Lavartus Prodeo for allowing the “Guest Post” by Glen Fuller? What’s happening here? First the shock jocks, then the trauma jocks and now the blog jocks. Should we ignore the fact that this happened or can we examine what is it about our lives now that an event like the inhumane treatment of another person only becomes “content” for media and blogs.
    Not good enough Lavartus Prodeo.

  32. Sean

    Well, since it appears it’s gonna take a while for my first comment to be moderated, I defer to Mr Birmingham

    Except insofar as the female accomplice keeps getting off so much more lightly:

    Jackie: Alright, we have her hooked up to the Lie Detector! She’s not happy! I just saw her listening to that [bleep]

    Daughter: I’m scared. It’s not fair.

    Jackie: It wouldn’t be fair on any kid, I tell you.

    She’s not happy! Continue the torture! Giggle!

    Jesus Mary and Joseph.

  33. Casey

    “what sort of mother would allow such a thing”

    A mother who, for whatever reasons, whatever past experiences of her own, is unable to empathise, nurture or protect her child. Probably someone who has her own demons, her own abuse issues and has not worked through them. Hence the persecutory nature of her interaction with her child. The most poignant aspect of this whole thing was seeing how the failure of successful attachment between parent and child works itself out. And how that failure transmits itself from generation to generation.

    I would not make this about the mother. This program preys on the dysfunctional to get their titillating little kicks. There is always someone who is willing to inflict pain on someone else in these scenarios and this show excels at finding them.

    Did you know this was about winning tickets to a Pink concert?

  34. Debbieanne

    Absolutely disgusting. The statements made by the DJ’s and management only make things worse, as far as I can tell.
    Fits in with the current obsession with ‘reality TV’, what I call humiliation TV. I am utterly flabbergasted by its’ popularity.

  35. thewonderer

    Never realised this was about Pink tix. She’d be mortified!

    Of course they will make it about the more about the mother, and less about Sandilands! Nothing new here!

    And, Aidan, re: mental illness.. I have thought that he does have some sort of personality disorder. Do you think it’s the rabid dog look in the eyes that may just give away the sociopath within?

  36. Fine

    The radio station is already loading the blame onto Mum, of course. I find it irritating that some people are excusing Jackie O. She happily went along with this. The tiniest bit of brain power would let you work out that hooking minors up to a ‘lie detector’ will end horribly, even if you can’t pick the exact horridness which will occur. This reminds of Judith Lucy’s reminiscences about her stint on commercial radio. She failed because she wasn’t crass enough.

  37. dj

    In my opinion the only thing that will get such people off the air is if station is going to lose advertising revenue. Complaints to the station or the broadcasting regulators are likely to produce little result if advertisers think they are going to get their ads heard by the right demographic and not suffer any significant backlash by being associated with such a program.

    This may set a new low for the pair but it is not much lower than some of the other things I am aware of them being involved with or saying (amongst others, Sandilands saying that car drivers should be able to ‘clip’ cyclists who get in their way) and I have only a passing acquaintance with their show. The station knows exactly what they are paying for and nothing will change until their financial position is threatened.

  38. Frank Calabrese

    It appears the pair are getting support from their “Listeners”

    The pair discussed the controversy briefly at the start of today’s show – which airs daily on 2Day FM from 6-9am – and pledged to dissect the incident during the program.

    “Look at what happened yesterday … there’s many people involved that would rather forget it,” host Kyle Sandilands said at the top of the show.

    “It was difficult for everyone … not just the mother and daughter … quite a weird experience.”

    Jackie O said: “It was such a weird day … it wasn’t the best day yesterday.”

    Callers to the show expressed support for the pair, most arguing the girl’s mother was to blame for the incident and that the hosts could not have known what was coming.

    But Sandilands said he had spoken to the mother and did not blame her.

    “The mum is devastated, I don’t want to blame the mum or the daughter .. for any of that.”

    He believed calls for him to be sacked were mainly because of his initial reaction to the girl’s revelation.

    “In hindsight, I wish I hadn’t asked if that was your only sexual experience,” he said.

    Sandilands disagreed with a caller who said the show was too focused on people’s misfortune, and said airing people’s unsavoury experiences was not done for entertainment purposes.

    “This is real life stuff … what I didn’t want this show to be is just jokes and contrived humour.”

    http://www.watoday.com.au/entertainment/kyle-and-jackie-o-radio-rape-case-to-be-investigated-20090730-e2ak.html?page=-1

  39. glen

    “28 comments so far and no condemnation of Lavartus Prodeo for allowing the “Guest Post” by Glen Fuller? What’s happening here? First the shock jocks, then the trauma jocks and now the blog jocks. Should we ignore the fact that this happened or can we examine what is it about our lives now that an event like the inhumane treatment of another person only becomes “content” for media and blogs.
    Not good enough Lavartus Prodeo.”

    Mediatracker, you have the opportunity to make a comment that begins the examination of “what is it about our lives now that an event like the inhumane treatment of another person only becomes “content” for media and blogs” instead you post some meta-level tosh. Congratulations for being Captain Irony.

    If you have some insight into the reactionary popular culture that Sandilands et al are part of, then please enlighten everyone else who finds it beyond repulsive. The traumatic event was not the content of my blog post, my brief analysis of the mother’s actions and Sandilands’s persona were. If you have something to add about the audience, then go for it. I don’t know, and don’t want to know, anyone who would choose to listen to this peanut.

  40. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Sean: got this from Birmo’s thread you kindly linked – comment from “pdxgretch”.

    I will be voting with my dollars. I will be finding out who sponsors this disgusting and reprehensible idiocy and will be advising them that their continued support of this show means my absolute refusal to support their products.

    The reaction from Kyle and 2Day shows a clear lack of understanding of what has transpired. Perhaps losing sponsor dollars can clarify the situation for them.

    Excellent idea. So how does one find the sponsors?

  41. Frank Calabrese

    Excellent idea. So how does one find the sponsors?

    The 2DAYFM Website for starters :-)

  42. adrian

    “Excellent idea. So how does one find the sponsors?”

    Apart from having to listen to this crap of course.

  43. jane

    I think it is about this abusive mother, more than the shock jocks. She was the one who set her daughter up, knowing that she’d been raped 2 years before. Her response; wait 2 years and then bully her 14 year old daughter onto this show as a form of counselling!!

    She knew her daughter had been raped at the age of 12, she knew the type of show it was, and still she went ahead with another dose of abuse for this unfortunate girl!!

    She has had 2 years to seek counselling for them both, but apparently couldn’t be bothered either to get professional help or to understand that her daughter’s behaviour after such a terrible experience would become erratic and self-destructive.

    The show sounds tacky in the extreme, but the chief responsibility lies with the parents. If that creature hadn’t set her child up, the two shock jocks would never have heard of either of them.

    I have absolutely no sympathy for this woman, the stocks and a big pile of rotten fruit should be her reward.

  44. FDB

    Jane, we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

    I say lynch the lot of them.

  45. Gummo Trotsky

    If I lived in NSW, I’d be writing to my local member to suggest that the matter should be investigated by the Police and the DPP, t see what charges, if any, should be laid against Herr Sandilands, Fraulein O and the management of 2Day FM.

    If no charges can be laid, or prosecution isn’t feasible – so be it. The law has its limits. But on-air child abuse just isn’t defensible; not even on the grounds of ‘freedom of speech’.

  46. tssk
  47. tssk

    (Above link from the SMH. Sorry about the missing citation)

  48. Fine

    Yet another reason to be pissed off with Hetty Johnston. Does she not think that this is a case of the girl being abused again? I bet 2DAY FM did quite a lot of ringing around before they got that comment. This from a woman who wanted Bill Henson tarred and feathered last year.

  49. Frank Calabrese

    However, child protection advocacy agency Braveheart praised the girl for telling the truth.

    ‘‘Sexual assault is disempowering…,” founder Hetty Johnston said in a statement today.

    ‘‘But this little Braveheart reached into her ’self’ and found potentially, the last shred of ’self’ power she possessed, and told everyone the truth…

    From the same Hetty Johnston who had no qualms about recieving Campaign donations for her failed Senate bid from the EROS Foundation.

    Mr Pot meet Mrs Kettlecomes to mind.

  50. FDB

    Oh Hetty, you foolish fool.

    She already spoke out, and her mum did fuck all.

  51. PDAA

    Jane @ 41 has finally laid the blame where it rightly should be in this case.

    A question for NSW LPers, does that state have some form of mandatory reporting laws? What is the mother’s obligations under those laws, if they exist?

    Frank, care to elaborate on your comment @ 47?

  52. Frank Calabrese

    Frank, care to elaborate on your comment @ 47?

    The radio station website has various ads and their competions usually have who the sponsors are and usually these same people advertise on the station.

  53. Durutticolumn

    Let’s say the girl had had what she thought to be consensual sex she is still under 16 and according to the law not able to give informed consent. So what were these clowns doing asking a young person this?
    The response of these two airheads confirms they are beneath contempt but sadly their behaviour seems to be what is required in modern day media. I think the outrage is much less than followed The Chaser boys.
    Isn’t it good we have the choice to not listen to this crap?

  54. glen

    PDAA, nonsense. The mother’s actions were only possible because of the 2DAY FM radio show and the reactionary popular culture of which Sandilands is a hero for thousands of weak-willed sheep. Did 2DAY FM turn the parent and child away through a sense of ethical obligation not to exploit the sex life of an underage child? No, they did not. Imagine what the best case scenario of this stunt would’ve been! Adults interogating a child about what sexual experiences the child has had. Would any other right-minded adult in Australia think this appropriate for public broadcast?

    I can’t believe the Chaser got pinged for its alleged lack of judgement, and yet we have people trying to defend 2DAY FM and the ‘talent’.

  55. FDB

    I repeat.

    There is no need to choose between the mother and the broadcasters. All are in dire need of a stroll down the hall of mirrors.

  56. Ambigulous

    late to this thread

    Ken Lovell wrote Aw look surely the significant element in the story is that tens of thousands of people think it’s entertaining listening to a child being grilled in a lie detector test. It’s a more revealing commentary on our culture than anything that unexpectedly happened during it.

    I agree. Just when you think Australian radio, newspapers, TV have hit rock bottom, some charmer arrives to show you how wrong you were. Sick, disgusting and verging on the criminal I would have thought. Even before the girl’s blurting out.

  57. thewonderer

    FDB, yes indeed. Absolutely. Now that the situation has been illuminated, the focus will be moved by those whom Glen calls ‘weak willed sheep’ (bravo! they freaking are…) from Sandilands and Jackie O (what IS her real bloody last name?) to the mother. BOTH parties are responsible.
    *same bloody weak-willed sheep getting on the ‘Clare is a slut’ bandwagon not so long ago?

  58. Sean

    FDB, I believe it was Dennis Miller who made a comment about “Fine, get an electric couch.” Back when he was funny. Of course he actually believes in the death penalty, whereas I would only use it as a metaphor.

    That seals it for me in re Hetty Johnston. I refer to the greatest retirement speech of all time:

    Proposals for law reform these days normally start with people who are single issue obsessives; or people who have an unwholesome ambition for personal power and aggrandisement; or people who, to speak frankly, are plainly, not to say floridly, unstable.

    Emphasis mine, though the whole passage applies. Of course she can excuse this if it’s part of f___ing celebrity culture.

  59. Ambigulous

    Yes, the young “braveheart” just didn’t have her heart in it, as is clear from the transcript.

    Andrew Bolt is correct about this.

    By what right does a radio station broadcast the answers of a 14-year-old [strapped to a "lie detector" with a "lie detector technician" reporting her alleged lies] on ANY topic???

    And then to move on from ‘wagging school’ to ‘sexual experiences’… godallfunkingmighty :-(

    Does this radio station have a current licence? or is it a pirate station broadcasting from an old trawler anchored off the NSW coast?

  60. myriad

    so who’s speech was it Sean?

  61. FDB

    Ambi – no. A pirate station would play decent music.

  62. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    I’ve got three online advertisers so far: ANZ, Optus, and Stayz Holiday accommodation (a Fairfax front). But that’s different from what is advertised on radio. Any easy way of finding the latter info out?

  63. Frank Calabrese

    Does this radio station have a current licence? or is it a pirate station broadcasting from an old trawler anchored off the NSW coast?

    2DAYFM is part of the Austereo Network which has 2 radio stations in each of the major Capitals, of which 2DAY is part of the “Today” stable of Top 40 type stations.

    Unfortunately our gutless ACMA has never had the balls to either suspend, nor revoke a Commercial Radio Station for this type of conduct – yet goes to great lengths to breach Community Stations for realitely minor breaches such as Sponsorship Announcements not being correctly tagged etc.

    It seems Money Talks.

  64. jo

    Sydney radio listening in the younger demographics has been declining at the rate of approximately 5% per annum for the past five years and if today’s radio ratings are anything to go by that trend shows no signs of slowing.

    The average audience in the 10-17 year old demographic is only 32,000 across all radio stations in Sydney, both commercial and non-commercial, and in the music hungry demographic of 18-24 years it is 47,000. With Nova’s focus on youth it’s no wonder that they are struggling to obtain a share in the double digits.

    http://www.streetcorner.com.au/news/showPost.cfm?bid=10455&mycomm=WC

    These figures seem awfully low and if so, you wonder why advertisers would pay a thug like Sandilands a red cent. It was Sandilands who finished off Big Brother…thankfully, once he was exposed to the wider general public.

    If you look at the radio audience share/breakdown demographic via Nielsen – 2DayFM scores in the younger demographic who then desert them as they age.

    http://www.nielsenmedia.com.au/files/sydney109.pdf

    Kyle & Jackie O are the most popular Sydney FM breakfast show – it’s an older more experience boofheads in Alan Jones (currently sick) & then Ray Hadley at 2GB who gets the gold with ABC702 – silver with…. 2Day number 3 with average of 10%……but 10% of what?

    I’m with Casey – the mother is also a victim, albeit a very, very unsympathetic one – ie. any mother who would coerce her daughter into this situation has enormous psychological issues of her own.

    2DayFM otoh, are a commercial radio station – they don’t have personal issues, they have responsibilities under various broadcasting acts which they have breached (hopefully).

  65. Sean
  66. Frank Doric

    Kyle Sandilands is another of a host of right wing philistine shock jocks that poison our society with their vile brand of misanthropic and often racist bile. The problem lies in the fact that the government and the media are controlled by the likes of Murdoch and Packer, who utilize their stranglehold on the media and government to promote their personal agendas. This means we are inundated by right wing propaganda and philistinism,inluding the garbage they attempt to pass off as entertainment.

    It’s all part of dumbing down and desensitizing the masses in an epoch of war and economic crisis as they are sticking to us.

    Look at shows like the biggest looser and masterchef. These shows are just an excuse to put people under extreme pressure by putting them into difficult situations and watch the explosions. Its all about vilification degredation and shock treatment.

    Kyle Sandilands is one of a host of intellectual and moral bankrupts (Andrew Bolte, Janet Albrechsten, Michelle Grattan and Clive James)they we are to believe represent mainstream thought.

    As long as finance capital controls our lives nothing will change. Name a single politician that isn’t a grasping moral and culture bankrupt.

  67. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Bloody hell, Jo. Good link. Now let’s match it up against the ABS breakdown by Age and Sex for Sydney.

    About 4.2 million people in Sydney, of which 20% (840,000) is between 10 and 24. And radio stations can only pick up a measly 79,000 listeners from this demographic? They’re fucked.

  68. Frank Calabrese

    About 4.2 million people in Sydney, of which 20% (840,000) is between 10 and 24. And radio stations can only pick up a measly 79,000 listeners from this demographic? They’re fucked.

    Actually they’ve changed the methodolgy of Surveying listers – before this year it was 1 Diary per radio listener per Householder, but they’ve since changed it to 1 Diary per Household, hence the lower rating figures – check out ratings for last year and see the difference :-)

  69. AdamTucker

    Listening to that felt like being party to the very worst of child abuse, rape story or no rape story. Jackie O is as culpable as Kyle – in fact, she was relishing the child’s distress more than Kyle before the questioning started. The reference to “Charles” being within hitting distance of the child was sickening as well, and serves to illustrate just how frightened the kid was already.

  70. Frank Calabrese

    Interesting Revelations from Undercover’s Paul Cashmere about some of the tacky stuff he was forced to do when he worked at Austereo.

    http://www.undercover.com.au/News-Story.aspx?id=8887_I_Know_Rob_Thomas_Had_Nothing_To_Do_With_Austereo_Stunt

  71. Lynda Hopgood

    I gather from the transcript that the mother has NOT known about it for 2 years; in fact, it appears she only found out about it recently. I suspect that the perpetrator may have been a family friend or relation and that she doesn’t belive her daughter’s claims; that would certainly fit with her unwillingness to take the issue seriously and, well, to want to strap her daughter to a lie detector test in the first place.

    Casey is right; any mother that is so lacking in empathy clearly has her own issues and until we know what they are, deserves at least the benefit of the doubt.

    For Kyle, Jackie O and the producers there is no excuse. They came to the situation unencumbered by any prior knowledge or personal baggage vis a vis this child and they should have recognised this situation for what it was – child abuse – in which they were not only willing, but enthusiastic participants.

  72. glen

    Article in The Age:

    A GROUP of 15 high-profile psychologists, academics and child advocates have called for the axing of an FM radio show that interviewed a 14-year-old about her sex life.
    In a scathing letter to The Age, the group, including a former Family Court chief justice, say the Kyle and Jackie O Show committed ‘‘child abuse’’ and a ‘‘gross violation of human rights’’.
    The experts’ letter to The Age said the ‘‘radio stunt’’ was a ‘‘gross violation of her human rights’’.
    ‘‘Dragging a child on to the media stage to be interrogated with a lie detector about her sexuality is a horrific invasion of her rights,’’ it said.
    ‘‘There is a well-founded legal assumption of vulnerability and a need for protection of children at this age, which the station has ignored.’’

  73. Adrien

    As much as I think Sandy-Land is a class #A creep I think Legal Eagle’s point is a good one:

    what the hell was the mother doing questioning her daughter about her sexual experiences when she apparently knew about her daughter’s allegation that she had been raped at the age of 12? How could a mother do that to her daughter?

    Lie detectors? On the air? We are entering the territory of Jerry Springer land here. It’s only a matter of time before privacy is a quaint historical concept, dignity is a word that doesn’t make and sense…
    .

    In cities, mutinies; in countries, discord; in palaces, treason; and the bond crack’d ‘twixt son and father.

    Well maybe not that bad. Maybe. It seems to me however that if the mother of this lass has to put her daugher on a polygraph machine on air then something is seriously wrong.

  74. ALP are Liars

    What a tosser. If anyone is confused about whether Kyle did something wrong just ask the young daughter of a friend or passer by about their sex life in front of their parents. The parents will let you know the answer.

  75. adrian

    As many have said before, focusing on a mother who clearly has serious issues of her own, merely serves to reduce the responsibility on those who should and probably do know better – the hosts, their producers and the managers of the station.
    The lame excuses and self justifications only reinforce what a morally bancrupt bunch of tossers these people are.

  76. Brendon

    I give Jackie O excactly no credits for sounding all concerned AFTER the revelation. Kyle is an oaf. I wouldn’t trust him to look after waste. The mother is obviously impaired in some way.

    Both Jackie and Kyle were immediatley aware they may have landed in legal trouble. That was their concern. Is their show so bad that they need counsellers on stand-by for their guests: yes, and they do. Get them off the air.

  77. FDB

    “any mother that is so lacking in empathy clearly has her own issues and until we know what they are, deserves at least the benefit of the doubt”

    If she’s clinically insane, then maybe. Anything short of that, and I’m afraid she deserves a massive boot up the arse. Her daughter clearly thinks so, and who am I (or any of us) to gainsay her?

    Once again, apportioning blame need not be a one-dimensional affair.

  78. Casey

    “Once again, apportioning blame need not be a one-dimensional affair.”

    But you are making it one dimensional with the “boot up the arse” schtick. I want to clarify why I have taken the angle of “don’t focus on the mother”.

    I say this firstly because very few mothers are pure evil. But some mothers have no idea how to mother and cause irreparable damage. And this mother’s actions were particularly reprehensible. She made fun of her kid and this shows a distrubing lack of empathy. I note that Leagle Eagle goes on to suggest that the mother may be in denial about the rape. Which I agree with. She probably does not believe her child. And this, more than anything else, suggests she has her own stuff impacting here.

    To look at it another way, without intervention, without making some conscious decisions to do things differently, and if and when this 14 year old girl becomes a mother – how do you reckon she will go with her own kid? She is a victim now, will she be one then? What if she does her mothering by this learned example? Which is how most people parent. By the example of their parents. Without intervention now, on what inner resources will she draw upon when things get tough?

    As to your solution – “A boot up the arse” – FDB, this lies along the spectrum of solutions this mother has just applied to her child. It is a kind of reactionary rhetoric which helps no one. Given I do not believe you are advocating violence against the mother, or an eye for an eye, then what are you saying exactly? What is achieved by “excoriate the mother, mother bad, mother bad”? So what? The mother was very bad. Everyone knows that.

    It’s an inadequate answer to a transgenerational problem. If intervention does not occur with mother or her child, this sort of gross negligence will continue to the next generation. What possible good does the rehetorical gesture to violence as a solution do to help the child?

    There are plenty of people who are happy to play out their dysfunctions on a public stage. There would have been plenty of inadequate mothers who would have agreed to it. The drama of it all is, after all, the nature of dysfunction. As I also said before it’s the Jerry Springeresque mode of the program which titillates and dehumanises without consequence. So let’s just do what Glen suggests and make a formal complaint regarding the exploitative nature of the Kyle and Jackie O show rather than gesturing to violence, even if rhetorical, which does nothing to help this girl or indeed the next person who will be done over by these dubious radio personalities.

  79. FDB

    Hey, it ain’t no schtick – this is the real me!

    But seriously, if you read up-thread I have previously advocated for a “stroll up the hall of mirrors”. If you could ignore the violent implications of my rhetoric that would be cool – I’m DEFINITELY not a fan of violent solutions, being a past sufferer of long-term, entrenched physical abuse.

    But enough about me – how do you explain your assertion that my assertion that the mother deserves some comeuppance equates to letting the broadcasters off the hook?

    Frankly, if I might be permitted a dash of gross hypocrisy, I’d like nothing better than to ram Kyle’s head up Jackies arse – although this feeling predates the current brouhaha by some years.

  80. Casey

    “But enough about me – how do you explain your assertion that my assertion that the mother deserves some comeuppance equates to letting the broadcasters off the hook?”

    Well, there is never enough of you. My answer lies in the answers to these questions. Be careful to answer correctly or you will miss the answers.

    a)Who is served by the mother getting a comeuppance? And once you go there, who necessarily has to disappear from view? You know, “if the mother didn’t…, it wouldn’t…”

    b) Who was served by staging a situation where the mother publicly subjected her daughter to an accusatory and persecutory mode of information extraction? What did the mother gain? A comeuppance maybe? Who knew what they were doing and courted the controversy? Who used damaged people to do their dirty work? Who does this on a regular basis? So who was exploited exactly? Was there more than one person being exploited? Who was doing the exploiting while hiding behind the spectacle of dysfunction on display?

    c) Finally, who or what gains from a simplistic condemnation of the deficient maternal on a discursive level that is?

  81. Sean

    What did the mother gain?

    Tickets to a Pink concert, according to commenters above. And CELEBRETEH!

    I tend to agree, Casey, that the consequences for the mother should be some COMPULSORY education, with further consequences is she blows it off. You can always argue that the victim doesn’t gain anything tangible from the punishment of their persecutors. The young girl would see, though, that her dignity is valued by civil society.

  82. JillS

    Great questions and analysis from Casey. Bravo sister.

  83. Frank Calabrese

    It seems Vile and Tacky O’s jobs are safe and the Advertisers aren’t going to pull their ads – for now.

    The top-rating radio station 2Day FM and its owner, Austereo, are standing behind breakfast shock jock Kyle Sandilands after this week’s controversial lie detector stunt, as advertising executives said the incident was unlikely to cost the station sponsorships over the longer term.

    The broadcaster continued to defend itself against a storm of criticism yesterday after a 14-year-old girl revealed in a live-to-air lie detector test on the Kyle and Jackie O Show on Wednesday that she had been raped at the age of 12.

    There have been calls for the sacking of its controversial co-host, Sandilands. But a spokeswoman for 2Day, Kate Whitby, said yesterday ‘‘that’s not in question’’, declining to comment on what measures the network would take to avoid such controversies, or say whether the segment would be used in the future.

    Media experts said the station, which makes an estimated $15 million in advertising from the show, was running a fine line trying to boost ratings and attract advertising dollars with such controversial, publicity-attracting stunts.

    ‘‘Advertisers always want to be associated with a wholesome product, so broadcasters have to be very careful,’’ said Harold Mitchell, Australia’s most influential media buyer. He expressed confidence in Austereo’s handling of the issue.

    Fusion Strategy’s Steve Allen said advertising clients viewed the FM breakfast program as the ‘‘lynchpin of 2Day’,’ generating most of its reach and delivering a coveted young audience of more than 550,000 listeners.

    ‘‘The continuing controversies are actually part of why it rates so well,’’ he said.

    Greg Fraser, an analyst with Fat Prophets, said Kyle and Jackie O were known for political incorrectness. ‘‘Advertisers may chose to temporarily remove their support but they would have a reasonable idea that this is what the show is about. And if they want that audience, the show is still delivering what they want, as abhorrent as it is.’’

    http://www.watoday.com.au/national/sandilands-job-not-under-threat-says-2day-20090731-e3ga.html

  84. FDB

    “there is never enough of you”

    On that at least we can agree.

    “My answer lies in the answers to these questions. Be careful to answer correctly or you will miss the answers”

    And the spirit of concerned enquiry, I will go on, albeit somewhat confused.

    a) The daughter. I’m not sure what the second half of your (is it a question or answer?) means, but nobody need disappear from view. The raped girl, however, might want those responsible for broadcasting her misery held to account, and that would include her mother. Maybe not – and if not then fine, let it drop.

    b) Cripes! That’s a lot of questions to put under one dot point. My generalised answer to all of them is that horrible, cynical, gratuitous and macabre fuckwit voyeurs think that this sort of thing is worth putting to air. I strongly disagree with them, and would happily join in strapping them into the stocks, waiting for the eggs to rot, &c &c

    c) I dunno… me? I like to express my opinion. In my opinion, this mother has done VERY wrongly by her child. It’s not a comment on mothers generally (having an awesome one myself, I’m not disposed that way), it’s a comment on this mother putting her child through what was only ever likely to be hell, or thereabouts.

  85. Helen

    FDB, we’re not disputing that the mother was a dead-set shocker – did you miss the bit where Casey said that. It’s a question of why CackyO and Vile should take the majority of the responsibility here.

    Whether the mother was slightly ABI, impaired in some other way, or simply screwed out of shape by an abusive background (one she’s busy now passing onto her offspring), Vile and Cacky were the professionals. No-one forced them to take this particular entrant and go through with here segment, the premise of which was clearly untenable even before the rape revelation.

    They are the ones who are supposed to be the professionals, but there’s a word for what they did: they were enablers. And they enabled this behaviour for profit. They weren’t alone in this. So it is the presenters and the producers as well as anyone up the line who helped develop and present this “concept” who needs professional discipline.

    The mother is more in need of personal counselling. She sounds full of self-justification. I pity her if she ever achieves the insight necessary to really realise what she did.

  86. James Dean

    I’ve lived in 11 major countries and I am passionate about radio. This is the worst radio station, I must admit in the whole wide world I’ve ever come across.
    The lady host admits having sex at the age of thirteen on air. Nice example being set for our young kids and coming generations.
    The male host has no control over his mouth, and usually shit comes out when he speaks.
    Shame on The Australian Media & Broadcasting Authority to still let this be on air. UNBELIVEABLE.

  87. Adrien

    Adrian – As many have said before, focusing on a mother who clearly has serious issues of her own, merely serves to reduce the responsibility on those who should and probably do know better – the hosts, their producers and the managers of the station.
    .
    No I don’t think so.

    I think that’s the application of a double standard by which the powerful are culpable and the ‘powerless’ not so. Of course it also goes the other way.

    But still just because Sandy-Land and his crew at Radio Smooth n Bland are class #a arseholes doesn’t make the mother blameless. She does have power and she appears to’ve done nothing when her child was raped and then subjected her to public ritual humiliation. She sucks too.
    .
    Helen – It’s a question of why CackyO and Vile should take the majority of the responsibility here.
    .
    Should they?
    .
    Whether the mother was slightly ABI, impaired in some other way, or simply screwed out of shape by an abusive background (one she’s busy now passing onto her offspring), Vile and Cacky were the professionals.
    .
    That’s a whole bunch of assumptions about the mother. Does it matter? Sandy-Land etc are not professionals (another word that’s becoming smudged to meaninglessness). A professional is a practioner of a profession. You know a profession because of the high penalties for doing a bad job. Radio is a trade. Sandy-Land is one of those unfortunate rodents that demonstrate the down side of a market economy: he gets paid well for being a nasty wanker. Designer shoes at work doesn’t make you a professional.
    .
    That said this is this girl’s mother. A mother is higher on the vocational scale than a professional. If I knew a kid that’d been raped and told her mother and this is what happened….
    .
    MMMmmmph!

  88. Casey

    FDB, in response to my third question, I always suspected you believed you were a discourse in your own right, and now I know you think you are. It must be interesting, you lucky son of a gun, to live in your brain.

    That said, I was not referring to FDBian discourse but to a patriarchal one with a great financial interest in what is going on.. If we say at the simplest level that a discourse is a system of statements by which the world comes to be known, with rules about what can be said and what cannot be said, then what am I doing by resisting what seems to be a ‘natural’ statement, an automatic response to condemn the mother and leave it at that? Well, I’m not falling for let’s blame the bad mother game which seems the ‘natural’ thing to do. It’s not ‘natural’ though. It’s learned, it’s a shock jock tactic directed simplistically at the mother (the deficient maternal) without taking into account the complexities of intergenerational neglect and abuse.

    So I am resisting on an ideological level, FDB, what seems to be the natural response. By doing this, I can look into who is gaining from this. Into who has power in this discourse. And who has remained invisible in all of this. By staying with the outrages of bad mothering, certain interests continue to gain financially while remaining out of sight. 2Day FM have backed Kyle Sandilands and have ruled out sacking him. Of course they would. All this publicity is gold. You say you can condemn the three and critiquing one does not elide criticism of the other. But it’s not Sandilands I’m really interested in. It’s who is gaining from this exploitative conduct at the very top. Who owns 2DayFM? Austereo. Who owns Austereo? Village Roadshow. Who runs and owns Village Roadshow? The Kirby brothers and Graham Burke. There’s some pretty powerful media interests right there. The company was started by Roc Kirby in the 50′s and Burke has been with them since then. What do they have to say? Has anyone asked them? Does anyone know they are there? Has anyone mentioned this in any kind of analysis? This sort of exploitation of damaged people has to do with ratings. Ratings bring money into the corporation. This format was introduced to combat Nova’s dominance and it worked. It’s about a few men at the top making money FDB.

    Interestingly, this morning the SMH reports Sandiland’s Idol gig is under threat. Why? Simon Cowell is not happy. Seems all the complaints in the world about the ethics of the program do nothing to get Austereo to shift. But a greater power abroad whose media interests may be affected by Kyle Sandiland’s peurile antics is making its move. While Austereo may not shift, Channel 10 may well. These two people were bit players. Let’s see what happens when media interests begin to affect each other.

  89. Frankie V.

    It’s all part of dumbing down and desensitizing the masses in an epoch of war and economic crisis . . . As long as finance capital controls our lives nothing will change.

    Doric, I also heard the subliminal messages in Biggest Looser and MasterChef. At first I just thought the CIA chip in my head was faulty but now you’ve set me straight – it’s all part of the big right-wing conspiracy.

    When the revolution comes we’ll outlaw incorrect thought, and start putting stuff in the water to ‘make people better.’ Until then, do you have any suggestions on more culturally appropriate programming, for Channel Ten’s line-up, to help smarten-up the populace?

  90. Adrien

    If we say at the simplest level that a discourse is a system of statements by which the world comes to be known
    .
    I thought that was known as an ideology. Discourse simply refers to the sum of what is said, written etc.

  91. Mark

    No, it doesn’t, Adrien. That’s not how it’s described in Foucault’s work (who incidentally doesn’t use the concept of ideology). There’s a context and a form to what is said and written and a set of practices and norms which give it meaning and sense, and as Casey rightly says, a set of implicit prohibitions which prevent some statements from carrying meaning.

  92. adrian

    Well said, Casey.

  93. JillS

    Casey – …look at it another way, without intervention, without making some conscious decisions to do things differently, and if and when this 14 year old girl becomes a mother – how do you reckon she will go with her own kid? She is a victim now, will she be one then? What if she does her mothering by this learned example? Which is how most people parent. By the example of their parents. Without intervention now, on what inner resources will she draw upon when things get tough?

    It’s sad and very telling that only one person on this thread, on this blog seems to understand this. Depressing and upsetting.

    Let’s hope not many people, women or men, young or old, parents or children who might need assistance in understanding this incident are reading any of this apolitical, nonempathetic blame the girl, mother, radio station schlock.

  94. tigtog

    But it’s not Sandilands I’m really interested in. It’s who is gaining from this exploitative conduct at the very top. Who owns 2DayFM? Austereo. Who owns Austereo? Village Roadshow. Who runs and owns Village Roadshow? The Kirby brothers and Graham Burke. There’s some pretty powerful media interests right there. The company was started by Roc Kirby in the 50’s and Burke has been with them since then. What do they have to say? Has anyone asked them? Does anyone know they are there? Has anyone mentioned this in any kind of analysis? This sort of exploitation of damaged people has to do with ratings. Ratings bring money into the corporation. This format was introduced to combat Nova’s dominance and it worked. It’s about a few men at the top making money

    This.

    By the way, I spent $13 and registered http://www.sackkyleandjackieo.info – you can point anyone who wants to know who to complain to in that direction, folks. Any useful links to add to the blog section gratefully received, and comments are welcome.

  95. Helen

    Great post from Crimitism, as always.

    For the benefit of the uninitiated, Kyle Sandilands is the worst human being Australia has yet produced in its 40,000 years of human habitation. I’m aware that there’s a strong case to be made for Rupert Murdoch but, for all his sins, he’s at least indirectly responsible for broadcasting Futurama; Sandilands is so beyond redemption that he can’t even do something good by accident… Even Zoo Weekly, Australia’s foremost celebration of hate-fueled idiocy, a magazine that isn’t above celebrating serial killers and eroticising corpses, think he’s a useless prick.

    …[Edit…But such venom always proves futile, because Sandilands is a shock jock and general-purpose irritation whose public persona is that of a man who wants people to hate him, and therefore any criticism he receives, regardless of its actual substance, simply becomes part of his endless, ego-driven publicity campaign. His belief, a sadly common affliction among men of his background, is that as long as someone is angry with him, he must logically be fightin’ the powers that be, getting under the skin of populace and frustrating the fuddy-duddies with his politically incorrect shenanigans.

    Read the whole thing.

  96. Adrien

    That’s not how it’s described in Foucault’s work
    .
    Only two points.
    .
    #1 Michel Foucault does not have authority to alter the meaning of words. If his influence does so, and it has to a certain extent, then fair enough. But discourse still denotes “written or spoken communication or debate” or “a formal discussion or debate”. In a broader sense it can be the sum of what is said, hence allowing talkback radio noise a place in the discourse.
    .
    #2. Foucault did not refer to a ‘system’ of discourse but a formation. I’ve always had the impression that he’s talking about a self-organizing system that expresses, creates and reinforces relations of power thru the structure of knowledge. Structure in the sense of the structure of the cell as opposed to the structure of a building. If you can appreciate the distinction. I think the idea of the feeback loop pertains.
    .
    Just sayin’.

  97. Adrien

    Kyle Sandilands is the worst human being Australia has yet produced in its 40,000 years of human habitation
    .
    Surely that can’t be right. We must’ve produced someone worse. Um….
    .
    Um……

  98. tigtog

    What about Jackie O? Why isn’t she getting more share of the opprobrium?

    Isn’t the one who plays “good cop” in the classic good/bad cop duo the one who is being the more manipulative towards the target? The one who sets them up to be bullied by the “bad cop”? The one whose fake sympathy tricks the target into saying more than it is wise for them to say?

    Sly and exploitative bullies who get loud obvious bullies to do their dirty work are at least as bad as the loud obvious bullies, and in my opinion are far worse because they are deceitful.

  99. Phil

    Why the urge to apportion blame to one or other of the known parties to this affair?

    No one really knows the truth of this story. And dissing the mother even wishing violence against her is gross, and not in the least helpful to the daughter whose mother will forever remain her mother and all that such a relationship means and entails, not least that the mother will always be the girl’s primary female parenting role model.

  100. Adrien

    Good point.
    .
    What about Jackie O? Why isn’t she getting more share of the opprobrium?
    .
    Cause people really hate Sandy-Land. Which proves the point viz the sly bully. Seeing as how polygraphs are passé maybe it’s time to perform some brain scans viz empathy response on Sandy-Land and Jackie Omigod.
    .
    And members of parliament and corporate suits….

  101. Fine

    Agree totally Tigtog. She gets to play the sympathetic one, but is just as bad.

  102. Mark

    @96 – Adrien, I’m not saying that it’s compulsory to use ‘discourse’ in Foucault’s meaning, just that I think that’s what Casey was doing. So your objection was somewhat beside the point.

  103. sublimecowgirl
  104. Adrien

    So your objection was somewhat beside the point.
    .
    Ad it’s off topic too. I’m a bad widdle boy. I’m not labouring it. I’m dropping it. Cool?

  105. thewetmale

    The statement released form Austereo says that the show has gone into ‘recess.’ Personally, i might be a bit too cynical, i don’t feel that equates to it being ‘suspended’ as so much of the media is reporting. The statement also indicates that this has come about because Sandilands’ management have informed Austereo that he is unable to go on. I really think this should be the other way around.

  106. Mark

    Yep, cool, Adrien.

  107. Adrien

    And don’t we think now that Sandy-Lad and Jackie Ohmigod’ve got the boot that’s it’s a damn shame…
    .
    That they haven’t brought back flogging. :)

  108. glen

    awesome outcome

    suspended, then sacked please

  109. Helen

    Adrien@87, I seem to not have expressed myself clearly enough. I am not describing their conduct as professional. I’m saying that in the dynamic there, they are the ones who are in the professional position. In loco Professionalis you might say. But not behaving as such. While the mother, no matter how dysunctional she was, would not have got to abuse her daughter on national radio had those two not enabled her.

    “Designer shoes don’t make a professional” – If you must put words in my mouth, please don’t put stupid ones.

  110. Helen

    Glen – agree!

  111. glen
  112. Bird of paradox

    What with the identical posts from ‘Grahim Gilbert’ at 20 and ‘James Dean’ at 86, both with usernames linked to a dead URL?

  113. Adrien

    Helen – “Designer shoes don’t make a professional” – If you must put words in my mouth, please don’t put stupid ones.
    .
    It wasn’t my intention to put words in your mouth. I didn’t mean to be ascerbic. Apologies for any abrasion.
    .
    The word professional is misused these days. Professionals are people who’re held to a certain higher standard of conduct at work. But in society these days ‘professional’ refers to anyone who dresses in office clothes or has some impressive sounding nonsense on their business card or a glamourous job.
    .
    I’ve read into your comment that misunderstanding. You imply that the radio people are more culpable than the mother. I disagree.
    .
    While the mother, no matter how dysunctional she was, would not have got to abuse her daughter on national radio had those two not enabled her.
    .
    No and for that reason , and many others, they are to be despised and, I hope, there’s a price they’ll have to pay. But this girl’s abuse appears to’ve started earlier than that. I’m asking myself if you actually mean to suggest that this woman is somehow incapabale of understanding what she is doing when subjecting her daughter to this.
    .
    I assume 2Day FM didn’t force the girl to appear. Who did?

  114. tigtog

    I’m asking myself if you actually mean to suggest that this woman is somehow incapabale of understanding what she is doing when subjecting her daughter to this.

    Only Helen can answer for herself, but is there something that strikes you as implausible about the idea that the mother could be so damaged herself that she is actually incapable of understanding what she was doing in subjecting her daughter to this?

    I don’t know the specific facts of this family, but on the evidence of people I have personally known the only ones I could imagine ever subjecting their kids to such a thing were already stupendously damaged and only just coping as parents. This was thirty years ago, and back then I knew of several times these parents attempted to involve kids in stunts that seemed like a good idea to them but would have been horribly humiliating to the kids, and responsible people stepped in and said “no, you are not suitable and we will not let you participate”.

    Compassionate and ethical people respond to damaged people with concern, assistance and attempt to prevent the damaged person harming themselves and others. They don’t put them up on a virtual parade float to display their damage just to titillate the vacuous.

  115. FDB

    I wonder if, had the girl’s father brought her in to be humiliated thus, there would be so much detailed examination of the possible mitigating circumstances for him.

    I hope so.

  116. tssk

    This suspension has some potential for Kyle to remake himself. Assuming that he might have felt himself trapped within a bullyboy persona he could use this as an opportunity to move forward anew. The cynicical might even view this as an opportunity for a Henry the Forth:Part one style transformation.

    Either way, transformed or not he will be back.

  117. Katz

    Sydney radio … says it all, really.

    Presumably, this sordid little episode of audio grand guignol didn’t drop out of a clear blue sky.

    Yet folks kept listening and sponsors kept sponsoring and the authorities kept turning a deaf ear until a gross-out threshold was crossed…

    … with predictable, and self-exculpatory, reactions from all involved.

  118. Casey

    “I wonder if, had the girl’s father brought her in to be humiliated thus, there would be so much detailed examination of the possible mitigating circumstances for him.”

    Some people, including you, suggested upthread that some sort of comeuppance for the mother (and what did you have in mind anyway?) might make the girl feel better, might make her see that society was upholding her dignity in its condemnation of her mother. If she is feeling any sense of vindication, it will last just about as long as it takes for this story to become fish and chips wrapping. And then she still has the rest of her life to deal with her mother, long after the peanut gallery has lost interest see?. Her persecutor is not a stranger. It’s her mother. Good or bad, every child imprints from a parent. And as such, her mother carries enormous psychic power in the girl’s world. Every child needs a validating relationship with their parent/s. What she really needs is affirmations from her mother of her value and goodness and uniqueness over many years. This will go a great way to counteracting the mother’s actions last week. Now that may not be possible but it is worth a try with an intervention where she learns new skills and perhaps some self acceptance of her own which she can then extend to her daughter.

    There are other ways to get over abusive starts, but reconciliation and ongoing intervention will be by far the best thing for the girl. I believe it is the mother who is the primary caregiver so that is where the interest of the many feminists who have commented here lies, not in hypotheticals, wondering if they would extend such concessions to the father.

    It’s pretty disappointing to read the inference in your comment, that the concern stems from an impulse to protect the sisterhood and not for the welfare of the child. Or something. Why do you wonder? You think feminists just care about women? Give me a break FDB.

    If it was the father who was the sole caregiver, and he was not completely toxic to her (as I suggested with the mother) I would say the same thing. Intervention, intervention, intervention. Every time. She needs a parental relationship which works if she is to become an integrated functioning human being. Or if that does not work, she can wait till she grows up and goes into therapy, if by then she is not so damaged that she will be blind to what she has to do.

  119. Casey

    On other matters, driving into town today I switched on what was the Kyle and Jackie O Show to listen to it and who were they playing? Kyle and Jackie O. Whole collages of segments which went over five minutes of Kyle and Jackie in caring mode, doing loverly things for poor disadvantaged people, interspersed with a segment where Kyle drinks breast milk from a glass and makes Jackie vomit. Interspersed with Kyle reading a love letter to his wife. And on. And on. Then followed by the presenter saying how there was a lot of misinformation about Kyle circulating and urging people to go to the Austereo website to get the right story.

    Coming back from town, this was continuing with the other presenters. Urging listeners to not believe the ‘incorrect info’ being peddled about Kyle.

    There is a determined campaign to defend and rehabilitate Kyle and Jackie O’s reputations. This is no disbanding of the show. They are coming back to Austereo soon.

  120. Adrien

    There is a determined campaign to defend and rehabilitate Kyle and Jackie O’s reputations. This is no disbanding of the show. They are coming back to Austereo soon.
    .
    Yes. It’s interesting how so many people seem to be shocked by this tactic. After all it’s standard operating procedure. These people are assets.

  121. JillS

    What she really needs is affirmations from her mother of her value and goodness and uniqueness over many years.

    Excellent points again, Casey. And she also needs affirmation that her mother is not a totally wicked woman and have to witness her reflexively denounced on high and very publicly by holier-than-thou types who know nothing of her history, mental state or any of the circumstances that led to this incident.

    If this young girl is told by other adults that her mother is destructive trash, perhaps roughed up a little, and she should be taken away from her, how do you think that is going to make her feel for the rest of her life about herself, she who is the daughter of this woman?

  122. FDB

    “It’s pretty disappointing to read the inference in your comment, that the concern stems from an impulse to protect the sisterhood and not for the welfare of the child”

    Actually I was only inferring that if your desire to delve into mitigation and justification of the mother’s behaviour is something you wouldn’t be just as ready to do for a hypothetical father in the same position (or say, for Vile and Spacky O, or Austereo, or their listeners, to really test you), this would be strange – but only in the context of your avowed desire to look at the whole picture in a throughgoing and “discursive” fashion.

    Now if you can really look me metaphorically in the eye and say that you’d be leaping just as acrobatically to defend a father in the same position, then power to you.

    This, though:

    “If it was the father who was the sole caregiver, and he was not completely toxic to her (as I suggested with the mother) I would say the same thing.”

    confuses me. Are you saying that you believe the mother is not completely toxic to her? On what basis if so?

    And are you then saying that if the mother WAS completely toxic to her, you wouldn’t be saying what you’re saying?

    This is genuine confusion, BTW, not snarky inference.

  123. tigtog

    @FDB,

    I suggest that family dynamics being what they are, a father would be more likely to be subjecting an intransigent son to such a humiliation, but yes, I would still conclude that the father is probably damaged rather than evil.

  124. JillS

    FDB’s comments just get worse.

    Where did Casey or anyone seek “justification” of the mother’s behaviour?

    Why is so hard to understand that a feminist could offer the same level of understanding to a father in this picture, as to a mother?

    Why would anyone presume or rush to believe that the mother here is “completely toxic” to the daughter? This is the most bizarre and “toxic” comment of all.

  125. Katz

    interspersed with a segment where Kyle drinks breast milk from a glass and makes Jackie vomit.

    And then

    followed by the presenter saying how there was a lot of misinformation about Kyle…

    The above method was designed to achieve the latter objective?

    How strange.

  126. sublimecowgirl

    HUman Breast Milk has gotta be better than Bovine Teat Milk.
    Just saying.

  127. FDB

    JillS – you are right on one thing, the word ‘justification’ was utterly unwarranted, and I retract it unreservedly.

    “Why is so hard to understand that a feminist could offer the same level of understanding to a father in this picture, as to a mother?”

    It’s not at all hard to understand that they could. The problem I have is in believing that they would; when so much of the discourse is about male privelege and power. But as I’ve made clear, I’m prepared to take Casey’s (and your own) word for it. Really. I thought it might challenge some people to examine how they usually view and respond to such situations, but it appears everyone is ideologically right-on to the max, so fine.

    Perhaps one day Casey (or any feminist commentator) might actually follow through and suggest possible mititgating circumstances for a man who has sexually humiliated his teenaged girl on national radio – or defend him from others making sweeping condemnations – that would really remove any doubt. I hope the opportunity doesn’t arise though, natuarally.

    w/r/t your last para, if you read my comment with any care you’ll see I was quoting Casey’s use of the phrase “completely toxic” and genuine trying to comprehend what I saw as an ambiguity in meaning.

  128. FDB

    ‘Naturally’, naturally.

    And I genuinely meant ‘genuinely’.

  129. Grumphy

    You really are being poisonously disingenuous here, FDB. Why not man up (if you’ll pardon the pun) and simply declare that you think the feminist commentators in here secretly hate men? Especially fathers of teenage girls!

    After all, you’re the one who brought up this side topic in the first place – completely out of the blue, at that, and in response to losing quite a bit of rhetorical ground to people who you’d already cast as being in opposition to you unnecessarily.

    Pretty ridiculous display :|

  130. desipis

    After all, you’re the one who brought up this side topic in the first place

    To be fair to FDB it pretty much stuck out that people were rushing to vilify the man involved and either not focus on or sympathize with the primary instigator of the emotional abuse, who happened to be a woman.

    Pretty ridiculous display.

    Is it always ridiculous to question perceived disparities in the way people of different genders are treated?

    Where are all the people pointing out that maybe Sandilands was the product of a dysfunctional childhood?

  131. FDB

    I’m sorry you think so grumphy.

    I repeatedly tried to assert my actual position, which is that we don’t need to choose between criticising the mother, Vile and Spacky, Austereo, the listeners, the patriarchy – all have, in different ways, brought about this horrendous state of affairs for this poor girl.

    What the mother did was

    a) fail (apparently) to act on her daughter’s earlier report of rape [extremely poor form]
    b) think it would be a bit of a larf to get her daughter on the radio to talk about her sexual experiences strapped to a lie detector [bizarre and disgusting]
    c) totally forget (apparently) about a) when following through on b) [almost beyond belief]

    Of course, I made the mistake of using the term ‘boot up the arse’, which some have disingenuously chosen to take as a literal call for violent retribution. Of course they know it was no such thing. I had previously said ‘a stroll down the hall of mirrors’ would be in order, but further than that I genuinely think that the relevant authoritites should have a close look at whether charges should be laid, and whether it is appropriate to leave this girl in her mother’s care.

    Casey’s excursions into theory and ideology are interesting, but not pertinent to what I was trying to say – simply that this mother has done extremely bad things to her child. Vile, Spacky and Austereo have too – to both mother and child. And yes, they are professional exploiters in it for money, so their actions have a different character and so must any analysis of them. There’s also a man out there who raped a twelve year old girl – if you and others really think we need to play who-is-the-most-blameworthy, my vote goes there. Not a very fun or useful game I’d have thought, but now at least I’ve had a play.

  132. FDB

    To clarify, charges are worth considering w/r/t the mother AND the radio station people.

  133. su

    FDB I think you are confusing explaination with mitigation and it is something I think that always causes people to feel ambivalent about delving into the reasons why people behave abusively. I am firmly in the camp that believes there are always reasons but if I can offer an explaination for say, the rapists behaviour that is not mitigation, any more than it is mitigation to point out that this mother’s behaviour has its own causes.

    What this child needs is to be believed, and although it is something to be believed by a counsellor, she really needs her mother to come through for her. Shaming the mother only satisfies our own self righteousness, it doesn’t give the child what she needs, if anything it will delay that process because people in a spiral of self hate are really terribe at empathy. The vast majority of children who are sexually victimised come from families just like this one. The parents don’t immediately believe and support them, they emotionally abuse their child instead. Setting up scenarios which are in themselves abusive as this radio segment did, is in another category of action entirely from that of the mother.

    BTW on LP somewhere there is a thread where feminists do exactly as you wish – I think it may have concerned an Enough Rope segment about an abusive footballer (can’t remembber who exactly) and revelations about his own family background.

  134. FDB

    “Setting up scenarios which are in themselves abusive as this radio segment did, is in another category of action entirely from that of the mother.”

    My point precisely. So why compare parenting apples with commercially exploitative oranges.

    Fuck it, I give up.

  135. Grumphy

    desipis @130, I’ve seen that pointed out about Sandilands several times, most notably early on in this very thread. And while the gender and relative treatment of the responsible parties is interesting, the manner in which FDB is choosing to address it is hardly constructive. Nor is it consistent, since several people whom FDB are accusing of ideological shenanigans are the same people pointing out that Jackie O is getting off too easy. Reading the difference in response to the actions of the various actors in this sorry place as purely gender-based is at best a massive oversimplification*.

    I also don’t see anyone but FDB claiming that only one party should be primarily held responsible for this whole sorry stoush. Certainly no-one is contesting his central claim (that the mother is Very Bad News) and in fact Helen in particular has made several attempts to move the conversation on from belabouring the obvious. The army of strawmen in post 131 just don’t hold up to more than a cursory examination of this page.

    *by which I mean complete rubbish.

  136. FDB

    “I also don’t see anyone but FDB claiming that only one party should be primarily held responsible for this whole sorry stoush.”

    And where, pray, do you see me doing this? And what strawmen have I erected in #131? All I’m saying is that ALL parties should be held to account for their actions. The mother should show good reason why she should remain in custody of her child. Kyle and Jackie should be sacked and never work in broadcasting again (although this won’t happen of course). Austereo should immediately can any similar segment for ever, issue a genuinely contrite and broad-reaching public apology, donate huge sums to child protection services generally, fund this girl’s (and her mother’s) counselling and care in full (although none of these will happen either). The rapist should receive the treatment/punishment he needs (and protection from people like me who, to briefly contradict my earlier disavowal of violence, would probably smash his face in given half a chance).

  137. su

    FDB our posts crossed, I hadn’t seen 131 when I posted but in any case, your suggestion that the mother be charged is really counterproductive. Way to ensure that even fewer children disclose.

  138. FDB

    Sorry, I got sucked in again.

    I can’t really see anyone changing their reading of what I’ve said, and I don’t think I can put it any clearer. I have let my dismay at being misunderstood run riot and made the thread about what I think, which as Casey eloquently pointed out is of no consequence to anyone but me.

    I shall tug my forelock and retire for real now.

    Please direct any further comments on FDB and What He Said to that brick wall over there.

  139. silkworm

    Well done, Tigtog, on your Sack Kyle and Jackie O site. Following the links, I came to an article from today (Aug 3) by Holly Byrnes, who zeroes in on the role played by Jackie O in this sordid affair.

    As she has strenuously insisted all these years, Jackie O is every bit Kyle’s equal in chasing the notoriety that comes with their Jerry Springer-style show.

    Or, as her 2DayFM program director Craig Bruce so eloquently revealed last year: “While Kyle makes the headlines, it’s Jackie who drives the planning meetings with, ‘Right, guys, what do we do to get noticed?’.”

    Really?

    So then, was it the all-powerful Jackie who sat in a planning meeting with producers earlier this week and gave the OK for a segment in which a child was set up to be humiliatingly probed about her alleged drug use and non-consensual sex life?

    One girl’s distraught confession about being raped at 12 later and planner Jackie must have realised she’d got exactly what she’d wished for.

    Predictably, the spin from Austereo was that neither Kyle nor Jackie could have foreseen what the child would say and that it was Jackie who contained loose-cannon Kyle by cutting short the girl’s agony as he floundered desperately in the wake of her shock admission.

    But what audio of that segment also revealed – loud and clear – was Jackie O laughing as she introduced the segment, handing over the inquisitorial duties to a mother clearly out of her depth, in a situation without defence.

    I also looked up Jackie O’s Wikipedia page, and found that last year she held the lead at one stage in PETA’s World’s Sexiest Vegetarian competition, yet on her radio show Jackie O boasted that she ate chicken. I wonder what PETA’s response to this current fiasco is?

  140. PDAA

    I also don’t see anyone but FDB claiming that only one party should be primarily held responsible for this whole sorry stoush.

    Grumphy @ 135, that was exactly the point I made in my post @ 51. The mother should be taking responsibility for the welfare of her child, we or she shouldn’t be abrogating that responsibility to corporate Australia, otherwise we’re in real trouble. I haven’t laboured the point through the thread because I could see where it was going and I’ve learnt to avoid the kind of ambush that FDB has bravely soldiered into. :)

  141. jo

    FDB/Adrien/PDAA and so on, the police and DOCs were called in almost immediately, or maybe you all neglected to read that last week. There were immediate repercussions for the mother and family and hopefully due to privacy laws ‘we’ won’t find out the extent of investigations/family counseling/charges etc in respect of this family.

    And I don’t think conjecturing about potential charges or whether this mother is “fit” and whether the child should be removed etc. is worth the pixels due to no-one knowing nuffin more than what was disclosed on radio.

    But FFS, there are people in jails, in the court system, in counseling, on control orders, children in foster care, children homeless and so on where all in cases, we could sit here and ask what apparently LE was unhelpfully quoted by Adrien as asking – How could a mother do that to her daughter???

    Some bloke was charged just last week for banging his toddler’s head into a wall/bench etc. How could a father do this to his son!!!???

    So unless you want to talk intelligently and generally about the psychological and family dysfunction that ‘allowed’ this mother to put her daughter forward, then all we are left with, is a just another bunch of random people saying – “omg, that mother iz the bad isn’t she!…. (and the same for the father mentioned above.)

    And after the seeing and hearing 100,000 times, it does get…. a little tedious.

    Casey’s & many others’ points about the way 2DayFM and Vile/Tacky’s show solicited for damaged goods for ratings and profit was the topic…

  142. adrian

    Well said, jo. That is exactly the point.

  143. tigtog

    @PDAA

    The mother should be taking responsibility for the welfare of her child, we or she shouldn’t be abrogating that responsibility to corporate Australia, otherwise we’re in real trouble.

    Asking real live people who happen to be employed by corporations to act ethically and compassionately instead of falling back on some free-market version of the Nuremberg defence is hardly abrogating child welfare responsibility to corporate Australia. Excusing anything that corporate Australia does in the name of the Holy Profit is abrogating everyone’s social responsibility to object to the maltreatment of the vulnerable.

    Yes, the mother was not acting responsibly in respect of her child’s welfare. That is already being investigated by the relevant authorities, as it should be. What is there further to be gained by pillorying her? The proper course of action is already being taken.

    Austereo’s star enablers though? They are not being penalised. At the moment they are having a paid holiday while Austereo’s K&J website is being sanitised and their reputations sent to the dry-cleaners, and probably expecting to come back to higher ratings than ever. No mention of any action taken towards the producers of this sorry stunt has been mentioned as yet.

    So yes, I have no problem directing my opprobrium at the people who have not properly apologised, are not in any way ashamed, have not been penalised or even investigated by any authority. There’s no point in diverting any energy towards the mother, because people with far more experience and expertise than I have in the area of child protection are already full on the case.

  144. tigtog

    Jo, I was writing my comment while yours went up, but yes – that’s it, exactly.

  145. FDB

    Oh alright, just a final note in my own defence.

    I first ran my “why choose? why not blame everybody?” argument in response to Jane at #43, who was attempting to blame the mother more or less entirely and let the station off with a mild rebuke for being “tacky”.

    I have been very consistent in sitting on this fence, but the palings are becoming uncomfortable in my botty.

    I do agree that there is nothing to be gained from anything public being done to the mother, whereas in the case of other culpable parties the repercussions should be as high profile as possible.

  146. Elise

    tigtog @143: “No mention of any action taken towards the producers of this sorry stunt has been mentioned as yet.”

    This, I reckon, is a VERY valid point.

    Do those twerps on the mike have guidelines on ethical modus operandi? If not, why not?

    Reminds me of Abu Graib, where the morons at the bottom of the pecking order copped a bollocking, as they should have, for gross mistreatment of prisoners. However, the clever swinging dicks that sanctioned and encouraged it… got off scott free.

  147. Adrien

    Jo #141 – I’m not sure why the… um, hostility isn’t the right word but it feels like hostility. So the police’ve been called. Well cool. But speaking as one who had people tell me when I was the kid’s age that yes you’re psyche’s gonna be pried wide open and everyone’s gonna look and you have no choice…
    .
    Well let’s just say it sucks. And it didn’t happen on air.
    .
    There’s an assumption of victimhood here. It’s generally agreed that the radio crew were villains. But so was the mother. And so are basically everyone who buy, listen or watch this shit. And that means heaps of us. :)

  148. To the Brick Wall Over There

    “Casey’s excursions into theory and ideology are interesting, but not pertinent to what I was trying to say – simply that this mother has done extremely bad things to her child.”

    Yes, yes Tonto. Why do you have to keep on saying it? Way upthread, the first time you brought that up I said:

    “As to your solution – “A boot up the arse” – FDB, this lies along the spectrum of solutions this mother has just applied to her child. It is a kind of reactionary rhetoric which helps no one. Given I do not believe you are advocating violence against the mother, or an eye for an eye, then what are you saying exactly? What is achieved by “excoriate the mother, mother bad, mother bad”? So what? The mother was very bad. Everyone knows that.

    It’s an inadequate answer to a transgenerational problem. If intervention does not occur with mother or her child, this sort of gross negligence will continue to the next generation. What possible good does the rehetorical gesture to violence as a solution do to help the child?”

    So, then, stoushy, you moved from that bad mummy thing to questioning whether feminists would treat a father the same way. What father? Have you heard from a father?? And you say MY excursions into theory and ideology are interesting but not pertinent? Pfft.

    I said upthread, during my irrelevant incursions into theory, that when teh patriarchs’ interests start to clash, then we will see action.

    Well Kyle Sandilands has been sacked from Idol. Qantas has pulled its ads from 2Day FM.

    Things are indeed shifting and there is Simon Cowell to thank for getting the ball rolling. Simon Cowell and the family show. Isn’t it ironic? I mean Kyle learnt his bad cop judge antics from Simon…

  149. To the Brick Wall Over There

    “I do agree that there is nothing to be gained from anything public being done to the mother, whereas in the case of other culpable parties the repercussions should be as high profile as possible.”

    This is good. I could go with this. Is the mother toxic? Though I have never said I thought she was or wasn’t, the truth is I don’t know for sure. If she was, if all she had to offer the child was abuse and pain for the rest of her life then the kid should be removed. Metaphorically eyeballing you now, same deal if it was the father. Why do you find that hard to believe?

    Look, what this mother did was terrible. In effect she exposed her child to a retraumatisation. Her antics prior to the rape admission suggest that she does not believe her kid about the rape. I have been through this with someone I know. It causes much damage and fractures self belief at the profoundest levels. But listen, the mother was not the rapist. She was not the rapist. And there is a difference.

  150. tigtog

    Things are indeed shifting and there is Simon Cowell to thank for getting the ball rolling. Simon Cowell and the family show. Isn’t it ironic? I mean Kyle learnt his bad cop judge antics from Simon…

    Minor nitpick – Simon Fuller is the creator of the Idol concept, not Simon Cowell, and it was Simon Fuller who expressed concern about Sandlilands based on the radio stunt. Easy confusion to make, I know.

  151. Ambigulous

    Channel 10 has sacked Mr KS from some show. About time.

    silkworm informed us: “I also looked up Jackie O’s Wikipedia page, and found that last year she held the lead at one stage in PETA’s World’s Sexiest Vegetarian competition”

    Who cares what PETA thinks???

  152. To the Brick Wall Over There

    No Tigtog I did not know. I honestly thought it was Simon Cowell and the media this week was reporting it was Cowell putting the pressure on. Well well, it seem behind every man is …another man. What do you know?

  153. bridget

    really?
    i do not believe that they should have ever been talking about a fourteen year old sex life anyway. i am fourteen years old and i know that i would find that extremely embarrassing. Although i say that the fault does not lie on kyle sandilands, i believe that the person who is in fault in this situation is the fourteen year olds mother.
    i understand if a mother has these questions to been asked of her daughter, but to ask these questions of her on live radio is simply disgusting. I do feel for the young girl,i realize that i would hate something like that to happen to me.although i also realize what it is like to be a teenager looking for some attention.

    And truth be told i think the mother deserves what ever i headed her way.

    well, now i don’t know how to finish this in the correct manner. today i will say that Kyal does not deserve what he is getting and does not deserve anymore.

  154. Ambigulous

    Media Watch did KS & JO slowly. What a pair of creeps, with producer accomplices.

  155. tigtog

    Casey, I think so few people have ever heard of Simon Fuller that when they hear/read his name in conjunction with Idol it is transformed to Cowell subconsciously. I’ve seen several reports accurately use Fuller”s name yet have comments refer to Cowell.

  156. Liam

    Can’t find anything of tonight’s Media Watch yet. Only 2004:

    Whalley: Okay, now for a start, I’d just like to say, Jackie – … were you aware that one of your security guards threatened our guitar tech with the threat of violence – as you’re doing now Kyle, “it would have been on for young and old” as you say.
    Sandilands: Yeah, yep.
    Whalley: Did you know about that?
    Jackie O: Yeah.
    Whalley: That security guard came up and threatened us with actual violence? Do you endorse that?
    Jackie O: What, what was…
    Sandilands: Yes, well I do.

  157. Helen

    These people are assets.

    There’s one T too many here, Adrien.

  158. James Rice

    I think FDB made his main point early on at comment 55:

    There is no need to choose between the mother and the broadcasters. All are in dire need of a stroll down the hall of mirrors.

    That’s a pretty clear statement, which he’s reiterated consistently since. It seems like a fairly uncontroversial statement to me. The original post makes a similar point. It’s true that FDB did express himself more violently a few comments earlier, but he did quickly and clearly distance himself from this earlier violent rhetoric (although I see Casey manages to bring it up again even a few comments ago, for some reason). What followed were some fairly over-the-top reactions, some of which were written by people who don’t even seem to have bothered to read the earlier discussion.

    Just on the topic of shaming, I’m certainly no expert, but it’s not obvious to me that shaming cannot play a constructive role in these kinds of situations, that is, in the prevention of harmful parenting. The role of shaming in the prevention of crime has been studied, although not by me… One the key works here – possibly the major key work – is Australian sociologist John Braithwaite’s book Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Here’s a description of the book from Cambridge University Press:

    Crime, Shame and Reintegration is a contribution to general criminological theory. Its approach is as relevant to professional burglary as to episodic delinquency or white collar crime. Braithwaite argues that some societies have higher crime rates than others because of their different processes of shaming wrongdoing. Shaming can be counterproductive, making crime problems worse. But when shaming is done within a cultural context of respect for the offender, it can be an extraordinarily powerful, efficient and just form of social control. Braithwaite identifies the social conditions for such successful shaming. If his theory is right, radically different criminal justice policies are needed – a shift away from punitive social control toward greater emphasis on moralizing social control. This book will be of interest not only to criminologists and sociologists, but to those in law, public administration and politics who are concerned with social policy and social issues.

    I haven’t read this book, but it sounds like an interesting read! (And I have to say, they may not be as celebrated as Australia’s athletes, but Australia does produce some world-class academics.) Braithwaite does seem to argue that shaming can play a constructive role in the prevention of crime “within a cultural context of respect for the offender”.

    Perhaps there is an important difference between the prevention of crime and the prevention of harmful parenting, but these ideas might still be relevant. If shaming is to play a constructive role in the prevention of harmful parenting, however, presumably it must be stated – clearly and unambiguously – to the harmful parent that his or her practices as a parent are wrong, or shameful. This, however, probably needs to be done within the context of a culture of respect for the harmful parent.

    (Of course, a culture of respect is also an asset in the blogosphere.)

    It’s also true that the harmful practices of the executives, producers, and presenters who run radio stations should be dragged out of the darkness and into the light. Effective shaming could also (at least potentially…) play some role in dealing with these people.

  159. Lefty E shocks punters, blames Howard

    I for one blame John Howard.

    Only in a kulcha that had ceased trying to improve itself in any way – and was, instead, encouraged to sit around lazily in its own post-KFC farts and gawp incestuously at itself – could a militantly ignorant douchebag like Sandlilands have found a mic on any national media.

    Its no surprise to me that he contretemps post regime change.

  160. James Rice

    I think FDB made his main point early on at comment 55:

    There is no need to choose between the mother and the broadcasters. All are in dire need of a stroll down the hall of mirrors.

    That’s a pretty clear statement, which he’s reiterated consistently since. It seems like a fairly uncontroversial statement to me. The original post makes a similar point. It’s true that FDB did express himself more violently a few comments earlier, but he did quickly and clearly distance himself from this earlier violent rhetoric (although I see Casey manages to bring it up again even a few comments ago, for some reason). What followed were some fairly over-the-top reactions, some of which were written by people who don’t even seem to have bothered to read the earlier discussion.

    Just on the topic of shaming, I’m certainly no expert, but it’s not obvious to me that shaming cannot play a constructive role in these kinds of situations, that is, in the prevention of harmful parenting. The role of shaming in the prevention of crime has been studied, although not by me… One the key works here – possibly the major key work – is Australian sociologist John Braithwaite’s book Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Here’s a description of the book from Cambridge University Press:

    Crime, Shame and Reintegration is a contribution to general criminological theory. Its approach is as relevant to professional burglary as to episodic delinquency or white collar crime. Braithwaite argues that some societies have higher crime rates than others because of their different processes of shaming wrongdoing. Shaming can be counterproductive, making crime problems worse. But when shaming is done within a cultural context of respect for the offender, it can be an extraordinarily powerful, efficient and just form of social control. Braithwaite identifies the social conditions for such successful shaming. If his theory is right, radically different criminal justice policies are needed – a shift away from punitive social control toward greater emphasis on moralizing social control. This book will be of interest not only to criminologists and sociologists, but to those in law, public administration and politics who are concerned with social policy and social issues.

    I haven’t read this book, but it sounds like an interesting read! (And I have to say, they may not be as celebrated as Australia’s athletes, but Australia does produce some world-class academics.) Braithwaite does seem to argue that shaming can play a constructive role in the prevention of crime “within a cultural context of respect for the offender”.

    Perhaps there is an important difference between the prevention of crime and the prevention of harmful parenting, but these ideas might still be relevant. If shaming is to play a constructive role in the prevention of harmful parenting, however, presumably it must be stated – clearly and unambiguously – to the harmful parent that his or her practices as a parent are wrong, or shameful. This, however, probably needs to be done within the context of a culture of respect for the harmful parent.

    (Of course, a culture of respect is also an asset in the blogosphere.)

    It’s also true that the harmful practices of the executives, producers, and presenters who run radio stations should be dragged out of the darkness and into the light. Effective shaming could also (at least potentially…) play some role in dealing with these people.

  161. Katz

    Media Watch did a good job demonstrating that the unspeakable Sandilands and JackieO were in direct apostolic descent from the Tonsils and the Parrot.

    And Media Watch didn’t need to say it themselves. They let Neil Mitchell say it.

  162. To the Brick Wall Over There

    Yes right. Listen James, that comment was brought up to show what I thought of the mother, given FDB misrepresented me completely by asserting that I was mitigating and justifying her actions which I have never never done.

    And while continually asserting the unremarkable view that all three are equally responsible, FDB has also managed to infer that feminists, or me that is, have dubious motives in advocating against a “comeuppance” for the mother, that it is unlikely that the same sentiments would be extended to a father as feminists spend their all time banging on about male privilege (like yeah, and feminism exists because….) and that while he accepts me at my word he then casts doubt on it by writing this tripe:

    “Perhaps one day Casey (or any feminist commentator) might actually follow through and suggest possible mititgating circumstances for a man who has sexually humiliated his teenaged girl on national radio – or defend him from others making sweeping condemnations – that would really remove any doubt. I hope the opportunity doesn’t arise though, natuarally.”

    Like what? He accepts me at my word but a real life follow through would remove any doubt but he hopes that doesn’t happen. Eh?

    In other words FDB has said a whole lot of things in between that fairly consistent statement you raise.

    And while we are at it, in regards to violence which FDB was at pains to assure us he was completely against, he is quite happy to do a volte face and downthread, seems to think it would be ok towards the rapist natch. Again – who would FDB be helping here? What does it mean to threaten to hit the rapist or assert it on a thread that one would like to hit the rapist? How is it a solution? Are we grown ups? Or do we do reactionary neanderthal bullshit and try to pass it off as serious critique or analysis.

    I am sorry I engaged with FDB in the first place.

  163. Nabakov

    “I am sorry I engaged with FDB in the first place.”

    You’re not alone in thinking that. Think how much time you all spent arguing at cross purposes over a central issue you all agree with. Which that everyone directly involved in this, except the poor bloody girl herself, behaved at best irresponsibly and at worst like total sociopaths.

    They all deserve a boot up the bum.

  164. Casey

    Nobody disagrees with how the three behaved, you are right. But this has been a tussle over how to deal with what the mother did and how to frame it within a context of intergenerational abuse, or not. Some people want to condemn her, some want to shame her, some want the girl removed, some want the mother charged. And some think that, for the sake of the child, the mother needs assistance, care and ongoing therapy and not retribution nor condemnation.

  165. Casey

    And this is a conversation about the mother that has been going on on television, on talkback, in print and online for – is it a week now?. And it has been a heated conversation. It’s not a waste of time to talk about how to deal with people who hurt their kids. It’s an important conversation.

  166. Nabakov

    Right, so we’re all in agreement now?

    Group hug!

    Not you though. Yes, you know who you are. Last time you joined a group hug here, my Visa debit card went missing.

  167. nasking

    “I also looked up Jackie O’s Wikipedia page, and found that last year she held the lead at one stage in PETA’s World’s Sexiest Vegetarian competition”

    lol…

    Opportunism & money/fame seeking have a strange way of creating BS.

    N’

  168. JillS

    FDB still doesn’t get it, and nor does the author of comment #164.

    A world of ignorance, complacency and anti-woman, anti-feminist bigotry separates them from us.

    Well refuted, Casey.

  169. jo

    I was only borrowing it…

    to download this

    and buy this

  170. JillS

    Interestingly, the best, unsurpassed in my view take on mother-daughter-mother interactions and the various hideous paths they can take remains that of a feminist, (gasp, not just any feminist either, but uber-feminist) Simone de Beauvoir. She examined all these issues and more inThe Second Sex.

    I always recommend this unrivalled IMHO book to teenage girls suffering individuation problems with their mothers, and mothers aghast at their behaviour towards their teenage or older daughters, for it does examine in depth and in a very helpful and insightful way these and other longstanding social, sexual and familial relationship issues and permutations for girls and women at every stage of their lives.

  171. su

    @James Rice. As far as shame goes there is a difference between shame that is processed in such a way as to allow acknowledgement of responsibility/guilt and shame that remains as a perpetual and unacknowledged sense of worthlessness. The latter was the shame I was talking about and it is the one that is associated with inability to empathise and in offenders, the impulse to violence. Parents who themselves were violated are frequently carrying a lot of unacknowledged shame and no amount of shaming from the outside world will force them to face the plight of their own child, it is too costly, it threatens their entire self. For them the only possible route to empathy is a long and circuitous one that involves compassion for self and only then for others. Vast oversimplification but there is a lot of literature about shame-guilt versus long-term unacknowledged shame around. I’ve danced this dance with my own mother for many years and it just isn’t as simple as pointing out to them what is wrong about actions or a lack of action. If only it were.

  172. sublime cowgirl

    Great comments Casey et al. Thanks to Tig Tog for all the work on this too.

  173. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Ambigulous and Liam: caught yesterday’s Media Watch this morning. Didn’t do them slowly enough for my liking. And if I didn’t loathe Kyle and Jackie O enough already.

    They promised to unite two Cambodian women (an aunt in Oz and her niece in the US) who had never met each other because of the Khmer Rouge. And then they decided to have some headfuck games at their expense.

    BTW, the aunt’s real name is Saveth Chorn. But 2DayFM said that name was too complicated for their listeners, so they foisted the name Sally on her.

  174. Liam

    DaOoSG, count me in on your list waiting for more slow-doing. And let’s not forget the often-forgotten part of Keating’s riposte (italics mine):

    JOHN HEWSON: If you are so confident about your view of Fightback, why won’t you call an early election?
    PAUL KEATING: The answer is, mate, because I want to do you slowly. There’s gotta be a bit of sport in this for all of us.

    Watching the self-destruction of something so repulsive as the K&JO Show really is fine, satisfying entertainment, but for the most value, it’s gotta be communal. Let’s all share the blaming.

  175. Brick Wall

    *remains stonily [masonarily?] impassive, but inwardly revels in seeing Vile and Tacky twist in wind*

    *crosses fingers, toes*

    *touches wood*

  176. adrian

    Haven’t had time to post much before today, but surely the point about focusing attention on the mother is that it doesn’t get anyone anywhere to direct our self-righteous ire in her direction. She isn’t the one with the power in this situation, and she is in all probability as much a victim as her daughter.
    So as the sensible comments above have pointed out, the rape allegations need to be investigated, the family requires support and counselling, and hopefully the relationship between mother and daughter can be repaired. The rest might make some people feel better, but in the end is just pointless speculation.

    A much more interseting avenue of discussion would focus on the misuse of power, and the reasons why ritual humiliation disguised as entertainment has become so popular. Also aren’t we supposed to have a regulatory body overseeing broadcasting? Oh yes ACMA. Anybody like to nominate an organisation that is a bigger waste of space?

  177. Sean

    I agree with everyone – except JillS.

    As Adrien asserts, the mother had by far the greater duty to the child, the shock jocks being strangers to her and having no professional ethics to bind them. Then again in the real world, the mother probably doesn’t have her own in-house lawyer. As said above, I agree with Casey’s ideas on the suitable response to the mother, unless the mother fails to take that intervention seriously.

    Sanctions against Austereo have to take into account freedom of speech, then again that is certainly not an absolute freedom. You can be convicted for child p__n if you have in your possession unillustrated fictional accounts of the underage getting carnal. Think about that in the context of what happened here. I’d like to see Austereo fined so much that it actually hurt. As one judge or another once said in a shock-jock contempt of court case, the fines are generally less than they’d spend on a dinner party.

  178. Sean

    Adrien our posts crossed -

    the reasons why ritual humiliation disguised as entertainment has become so popular

    I was considering this the other day. Would we say that this happens when the populace at large are politically disempowered? The cruelties of entertainment in Rome seem to have been inversely proportional to the amount of democracy on offer, for eg. Might be time for a re-reading of “Entertaining Ourselves to Death”.

  179. Liam

    Continuing my train of thought on the Kyle & Jackie pileon, I’m currently reading John Gray’s Black Mass, which has a wonderful sentence on the pleasure of creative destruction in pursuit of impossible dreams of perfection:

    Barbarism has a certain charm, particularly when it comes clothed in virtue.

    Oh yes.

  180. karl

    i agree kyle should be sacked but I believe Jackie O should be too, prior to the lie detector being turned on Jackie O makes a comment that the 14 yr old girl looks nervous and uncomfortable about being asked personal questions regarding the 14 yr old’s sex life and alleged drug use. surely this sent off warning bells to everyone in the studio. whether the girl had consential sex or not it is still statutory rape. further more whether a child is a virgin or not should not be asked so publicly there is social stigma attached and they will be forever teased at school. The station should be sued over violation of the childs rights without an appropriate adult there looking after her interests.
    If a show such as a current affair etc was to get such an interview they would have paid the family a couple of hundred thousand not just apologize and pay for $500 worth of counseling.
    I hope people show there disgust by boycotting any of the stations sponsors products.

  181. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Be careful, Liam. I can see this thought bubble from a completely different state.

    Je prononce à regret cette fatale vérité… mais Kyle et Jackie doit mourir, parce qu’il faut que la patrie vive…

  182. tssk

    @ 172, saw that on Media Watch last night. I actually felt ill to the stomach when I saw the edited version of the events. Playing with people like that is insane. Who would get their kicks out of that?

  183. Liam

    Heh. Alternatively:

    La terreur contre Kyle et Jackie O n’est autre chose que la justice prompte, sévère, inflexible; elle est donc une émanation de la vertu; elle est moins un principe particulier, qu’une conséquence du principe général de la démocratie, appliqué aux plus pressants besoins de la patrie.

  184. Sean

    Can you pretend French people do that in private? It shits me.

  185. Casey

    Well I would like to also thank Tigtog, Su, Jill, Phil, Helen, Grumphy, Sean and all the others for making this such a compelling discussion. I think it is one that needs to occur if we are ever to have a chance of stopping child abuse. I hope it continues. As for me, I shall be withdrawing from commenting at LP. Sometimes the convos take their toll for various reasons, and anyway, far better people than me say it with much more precision. Tigtog and Helen and Su you guys are amazing. Keep up the good work. Many thanks for all the convos.

  186. FDB

    I for one consider that a terrible shame Casey. You are plenty precise enough for this reader – perspicacious, provocative and playful to boot.

    Please reconsider. Or start your own blog.

  187. sublime cowgirl

    I wonder what, if anything, would have happened had the child not disclosed anything?
    Would it make the scenario more palatable if the mother, child and audience all were comfortable with segment?

  188. FDB

    SC – the scenario is completely horrible regardless of the rape story surfacing, but if it hadn’t, I’m sure nobody but the listeners would ever have heard about it.

    So, if anyone’s desperate for a silver lining in the the whole disgusting, traumatic, exploitative affair, I guess that’s it.

  189. glen

    wow this thread has gone melodramatic

    My first impression of the segment was that the mother in some twisted way though she was doing the right thing. Does anyone believe that the mother sounded like she knew she was doing the wrong thing but did it anyway?

    Kyle and Jackie O, on the other hand, knew that the discomfort experience by the 14yo would translate into listener satisfaction. Don’t forget that their core audience are teenagers. They wanted to capture the feeling of discomfort so other teenage girls would go to school that day and talk about how traumatic it would be to be interrogated about those aspects of their lives they want to keep from their parents.

    Teenagers are right in the middle of trying to create an autonomous space away from the famialial home and familial social structure. That this is a very stressful and anxiety producing time for many teenagers is a truism. Ok, and the teenage audience they are attempting to capture by tapping into the particular anxious affective disposition (and schadenfreude) of most teenage girls.

    The 14yo meant nothing on her own. It didn’t have to be ‘that’ 14yo for the segment to function like it was supposed to. She was merely another in a pattern of presenting exploitative media stunts for the sake of capturing an audience. The intersection of motherly incompetence and exploitative media has shed light on this differentially repeating cycle of exploitation.

    Everyoen seems to be arguing about who we should ‘really’ focus on. I think the mother and daughter should be pitied. Kyle and Jackie O should not be pitied if they get what they deserve.

  190. Roger Jones

    Casey,

    FWIW, I think you’re a very good writer, so I read your last post with disappointment (selfish, I know)

  191. joe2

    Driver, follow that broom. Caseeeeeeeeeeeewhyyyyyyyyyy?

  192. Mark
  193. JillS

    It’s always a problem when certain male bloggers unthinkingly act out their unresolved hostility issues towards women, in this case mothers, in whatever topic comes to hand, especially one as triggering and traumatising for many women as this one.

    More of a duty of care could be taken, but that would necessitate the presence of sufficient adults willing and able to counter the damage down by persistent destructive remarks.

  194. glen
  195. sublime cowgirl

    Ok then FDB – now what if the scenario was more high brow, say, an art gallery promotional nude photograph of the girl, and the creator, audience, child and mother all participated with consent. Could the ramifications truly be understood by all party’s? Can a child give truly informed and perpetual consent? Can a mother get it wrong, with unforeseen or ignored consequences for a child?

    Would society have a fair and justifiable concern to scrutinise the circumstances around this?

  196. sublime cowgirl

    I know i’m going to regret bringing that last issue up, so will seg over here with link to Kyle Sandilands talking about being bullied and being a streetkid on Enough Rope: http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:Qy8-XP15aNoJ:www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s2022643.htm+kyle+sandilands+streetkid&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-a

    As they say ‘Damage begets Damage’.

  197. Liam

    Lord that’s awful, SG. I never thought I’d be able to entirely fail to sympathise with someone who was a 13 year old streetkid.

    ANDREW DENTON: Some of the stuff you do sails pretty close to the wind. A couple of years ago you ah bought a nineteen-year-old staff member into the studio, demanded to know he was gay …
    KYLE SANDILANDS: Yes.
    ANDREW DENTON: And, and outed him on air before he’d had a chance to think about telling anyone. Couldn’t something like that have gone horribly wrong?

    What a cockknuckle.

  198. Liam

    Excuse me—SC. And further class from the link:

    The real life dramas that are going on in people’s lives and a lot of the times radio station management will hate that cause they say no one wants to go to work in the morning and hear a woman crying her eyes out cause her husband’s cheated on her. But I do. I, I’d like to hear it.

  199. desipis

    Would we say that this happens when the populace at large are politically disempowered?

    I think it’s less to do with political (dis)empowerment, and more to do with the increasing monotony of life. One of the similarities between the Roman empire and the current civilisation is the widespread enforcement of law and order, and the relative safety of the general population. With everyday life being so safe and predictable, the publics appetite for risk and excitement is satisfied with spectacles of artificially imposed risks on a few (un)lucky individuals. Or by taking risks at the society level (e.g. starting wars). Or something.

  200. desipis

    It’s always a problem when certain male bloggers unthinkingly act out their unresolved hostility issues towards women, in this case mothers, in whatever topic comes to hand, especially one as triggering and traumatising for many women as this one.

    It’s always a problem when certain feminist bloggers unthinkingly blame any critical comments about the particular actions of a woman on some form of unresolved general hostility towards women, especially where there is ample cause to criticise.

  201. Fine

    Yes, SC At 194 you should regret bringing that up. It’s a despicable comparison and the last last thing we need to do now is rehash the Bill Henson saga in this context.

  202. Ambigulous

    Liam

    your examples are apt, and make my skin crawl.

    Would you mind providing us with the origins of the bits of French cited earlier? Robespierre? Some bloodthirsty monarch? not Jean Paul Satire, I hope.

    au ‘voir

  203. klaus k

    I’m inclined towards glen’s interpretation. What he calls the confessional mode of parenting is at work here, and I think the mother felt at some level that she was doing the right thing, ultimately, by her daughter. But that’s not really grounded in anything much other than an assumption that people are generally misguided rather than evil.

    The same probably goes for Kyle et al to an extent. I doubt they intentionally or consciously wanted to harm anybody. Perhaps unconsciouly. But they had power, position, influence etc and thus we can expect more than the immediate and limited awareness of responsibility granted to an individual parent. Quibbling over professionalism obscures the distinction.

    I reckon, though, that we ought to do as the lady says and follow the money. There’s some more responsibility to be distributed across the whole edifice of Austereo and beyond.

    As for the JillS/Philmaro attempt to reduce the exchanges on this thread to an FDB-led anti-feminist attack on Casey: we’ve heard this before and it’s getting boring. Whatever the contours of the exchange, precisely nothing of value is added by deforming them to fit the story you want to tell.

  204. Droits de la 2Day Femme

    Ambigulous, Down & Out appears to be an admirer, as I am, of the bloodthirsty and ruthless (but incorruptible, honest, and scrupulous) Maximilien Robespierre. And I will not apologise for alluding to him in French in public. Jamais!
    I have to speculate though that Robespierre would have concluded that Australia’s commercial radio audience was probably unfit for Republican self-government, being so deficient in public virtue.
    While I’m commenting; Casey, please reconsider.

  205. Ambigulous

    Merci “Rights of the Woman” and greetings with doffed plumage to your cousins, “Rights of Women” and “Rights of Man”, so crudely misrepresented nowadays as ‘Human Rights’.

    (Ya see, that’s the problem. They’ve brung the Kiddies into it. Simpler when it was “Rights of Man and ‘is Missus”.)

    Good to hear that Robespierre still has his admirers. The blades went snicker-snick and many an evil wrongdoer was publicly dissected. You have to worry though. No chance of a re-trial. Kind of final.

    CUT !!!

  206. Sean

    Sublime Cowgirl isn’t Sublime Cowgirl in the Sand, eh? If you’d spent more time on the beach you’d probably have a better understanding of the difference between nudity and sex.

  207. Stop Revive Survive

    Here’s a styrofoam cup of lukewarm nescafe, a satchel of reconstituted orange juice and a plastic-wrapped scotch-finger biscuit.

    See you back on Highway 010001000 soon, Ms Casey.

  208. su

    Come back soon Casey, if or (more hopefully), when you are refreshed and ready for the fray.

  209. sublime cowgirl

    FIne and Sean and whomever else wants to have a go at me. I’m not sure why you’re so defensive about it. Go back and trawl through all my Henson comments. Its not about sex or nudity, both of which are perfectly lovely, but the capacity for vulnerability/inexperience/naivety to be exploited intentionally or otherwise.

    As you will know if you followed my BH comments, my concern lay in the area of informed and perpetual consent and whether a parent should or could give such with the potential for negative ramifications (as well as the context of the creation of the work – supervised by an adult with the childs best emotional and legal interests at the fore?), rather than the artistic merit of the hauntingly beautiful images.

    And I think there remain some very interesting juxtapositions between high and low culture, intent, audience reactions and outcomes that could be explored through the respective situations, in that both concern the public exposure of pubescent girls, questions around parental consent, older more powerful men in the arts/entertainment field, and explosive and divided commentary from the public, experts and even our morally conservative PM.

  210. Adrien

    But that’s not really grounded in anything much other than an assumption that people are generally misguided rather than evil.

    The same probably goes for Kyle
    .
    I have never listened to this show. I was only dimly aware of it before this issue. But having read the Media Watch transcript and some of the history of it, it’s pure sadism. If I met someone who liked this show I’d hesitate to shake their hand, it’s that bad.
    .
    Viz all this schtick about Sandiland and Mummy needing therapy. I mean really. A couple years back a bunch of nasty little shits in Werribee sexually abused a girl, videotaped it and sold the DVD. They got therapy!
    .
    I mean this is an act of sadism that will probably colour that girl’s life a darker shade for ever. And what do the courts do? Oh poor things they’re victims.
    .
    Bollocks. There are cases where people are so damaged that they’re totally incapable of functioning. But most of us are able to tell right from wrong. And this is wrong. The mother is wrong. Sandiland and O are wrong. The whole Ausstereo bunch are wrong. Everyone who listens to this shit is wrong. And everyone who makes excuses for ‘em is wrong too. Wrong.
    .
    Bad monkey. Spanking time.

  211. JillS

    Yeah, come back Casey and don’t let the bedbugs bite.

    I know they really don’t in the end, as do you.

    We just keep on swatting them away, don’t we babe.

  212. James Rice

    adrian at comment 175:

    A much more interseting avenue of discussion would focus on the misuse of power, and the reasons why ritual humiliation disguised as entertainment has become so popular.

    Sean at comment 177:

    Would we say that this happens when the populace at large are politically disempowered? The cruelties of entertainment in Rome seem to have been inversely proportional to the amount of democracy on offer, for eg. Might be time for a re-reading of “Entertaining Ourselves to Death”.

    desipis at comment 198:

    I think it’s less to do with political (dis)empowerment, and more to do with the increasing monotony of life. One of the similarities between the Roman empire and the current civilisation is the widespread enforcement of law and order, and the relative safety of the general population. With everyday life being so safe and predictable, the publics appetite for risk and excitement is satisfied with spectacles of artificially imposed risks on a few (un)lucky individuals. Or by taking risks at the society level (e.g. starting wars). Or something.

    One way to approach this issue might be to look at differences between class groups.

    People from “lower class” families (ie, most family members are labourers) are: (1) more politically disempowered; and (2) less safe and more exposed to crime. People from “upper class” families (ie, most family members are managers or professionals) are: (1) less politically disempowered; and (2) more safe and less exposed to crime.

    If the popularity of ritual humiliation disguised as entertainment is shaped by political disempowerment in the way suggested by Sean, you would expect ritual humiliation to be more popular with lower class families than upper class families. Alternatively, if the popularity of ritual humiliation is shaped by safety and exposure to crime in the way suggested by desipis, you’d expect ritual humiliation to be more popular with upper class families than lower class families. The question then is: is ritual humiliation more popular among lower or upper class families?

    (Of course, in the real world both of these factors might be operating at the same time, and there may be other significant factors as well.)

  213. klaus k

    Nice selective quotation Adrien. I assume you didn’t read any further in my comment, and why would you when the perfect set up for your screed was sitting there at the top of the second paragraph?

  214. Fine

    SC, I think you’re way off topic and I chose the adjective ‘despicable’ to describe your comment with great care. I’m not the slightest bit interested in opening up another Henson discussion, especially on this thread. So stop baiting.

  215. glen

    http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25885071-5012980,00.html

    apparently sandilands is in a lot of debt, which in itself means nothing, but should be interesting to see what happens

  216. skepticlawyer

    Over at our place I made the (only slightly tongue in cheek) comment that Vile and Tacky managed the daily playbill for the Colosseum in their past lives. I’m glad other people have made the same connection. This kind of ‘entertainment’ is on a slippery slope that has what the Romans got off on at the bottom.

    FWIW I think people who enjoy listening to their show (11.4% marketshare in Sydders) need to take a really good long look at themselves. In the last however many years it’s become unfashionable to criticize other people’s tastes. As part of the great rush towards making popular culture ‘acceptable’, we’ve created a world where it’s become very difficult to say, ‘sorry mate, your taste is rubbish’.

    Of course, telling someone that their taste is tripe doesn’t mean that they are less of a human being. I do think it’s very dangerous when criticism of what a person likes spills over into an assessment of their worth. The distinction may be a fine one, but it’s important to bear it in mind.

    That said, the ability to make a taste and judgment call is an important one, and to be encouraged. Some things are better than others. Some cultural products are better than others. Dealing with that — and then working out why — has now become a matter of urgency.

  217. Sean

    apparently sandilands is in a lot of debt

    As God is my witness I swear it, three million bucks a year would be enough for me.

  218. glen

    skepticlawyer, I am not sure this a criticism of the listeners’ tastes so much as a critique along political economy grounds of the ‘trauma jocks’ in relation to the audience. There is little utility in critiquing the tastes of 10-17yo youth as this is precisely the period of one’s life where they are trying to figure out what their tastes are. 2DAYFM is run by adults who are continually calculating new ways to capture audience share amongst youth. They want to deliver exactly what will capture the biggest slice of the market. Their version of ‘car crash’ radio has the same diabolical stupidity as Jackass and to a lesser extent Sacha Cohen’s characters.

    On the other hand, Triple J cops a lot of criticism for being ‘out of touch’ with their audience, I would be quite happy for Triple J to remain ‘out of touch’ if being ‘in touch’ means becoming something really nasty along the lines Kyle and Jackie O. Triple J not only offers content that is deliberately not what is played on mainstream radio, but they also educate listeners and other consumers (tv, internet content, etc) about having a discerning disposition and the capacity to make distinctions between different cultural artefacts/commodities.

    ‘Freedom’ to make cultural distinctions is only useful if the person making the distinctions has the capacity to do so. 2DAY FM and the like do not want an educated and culturally literate audience, they want their listners to have a wilful ignorance of other cultural options.

  219. adrian

    A very good point skepticlawyer, and part of what I was alluding to above.
    To state the obvious, these grubs would have zero power or influence if nobody listened to them.

  220. desipis

    James Rice:

    The question then is: is ritual humiliation more popular among lower or upper class families?

    In trying to find the answer i came across this paper on a study which has some interesting conclusions:

    http://nisonger.osu.edu/papers/Reisswiltz_2004.pdf

    The results showed that status is the main motivational
    force that drives interest in reality television. The more status-oriented people are, the more likely they are to view reality television and report pleasure and enjoyment.

    Reality television viewers are more motivated by vengeance than are nonviewers. The desire for vengeance is closely associated with enjoyment of competition

    The finding that viewing reality TV shows is negatively associated with the extent to which a person embraces morality (honor) is not surprising because many reality television shows champion expedience over ethics.

    Some have questioned the intellectualism of reality television viewers, and others have questioned the physical laziness of people who like to watch television. No support was found for either of these hypotheses.

    So basically people watch reality TV because they’re immoral vengeful egomaniacs.

    Back to the points Sean and I made, I think we both had valid points. Sean’s point about political power appears linked to the ‘status’ motivation, while mine point about law and order is linked to limited opportunities for (legal) vengeance.

  221. Liam

    Speaking of the political economy of Austereo, I can’t believe nobody’s posted Judith Lucy’s article from 2006.

    This bubble-like environment means that some nutty behaviour can wind up looking normal and you can wind up feeling like you’re the person with a few kangaroos loose in the top paddock. I am currently doing a one-person show about my experience on radio, and the most annoying part of it is that I know a lot of the audience simply doesn’t believe me when I say that they wanted us to do some shows from Baghdad, doesn’t believe me when I say a program director asked if we could do something ‘light-hearted’ about rugby players sexually assaulting women, and most certainly doesn’t believe my celebrity sperm story.

  222. klaus k

    “The distinction may be a fine one, but it’s important to bear it in mind.”

    This is something I like about the thinking of early cultural studies people like Richard Hoggart and Raymond Williams. Now that is a different time and a different place, but there is a strong sense of discernment in their discussions of cultural products. However, they can also criticise the assumption that ‘poor taste’ reflects the inner lives of its consumers. I think, if I’m reading you correctly skepticlawyer, you’re saying something not dissimilar.

    I think glen is also making an important point about cultivating an audience. Given the demographic, this is obviously an important factor. Discussions of taste and choice struggle to articulate this idea without it seeming like a top-down ‘blame the media’ argument. I guess what I’m saying is that I like what both of you have said here, and reckon there may be a way of linking arguments about audience cultivation and poor taste that doesn’t lapse into either ‘blame the media’ or ‘blame the audience’.

  223. skepticlawyer

    desipis, great find there. People want to know where they are on the totem pole, they want to get one up on everyone else, and they want to get their own back on everyone else. What lovely people we are.

    Glen: it may be that authority figures (parents, teachers, etc) have to do the work of shaping taste. That means not blithely endorsing whatever it is little Johnny or little Julie say they like.

  224. klaus k

    “That means not blithely endorsing whatever it is little Johnny or little Julie say they like.”

    Obviously, but disendorsing, especially at 10-17, has to be done very cleverly given that awareness of peer expectation and the broader culture are emerging factors. You can play right into the hands of Kyle et al, with their valorisation of poor taste and popularity, offering that up to kids as a site of resistance.

    Still, if you take the whole Bronfenbrenner thing seriously in child psych, then it is the ‘microsystem’ of family, peers, teachers etc that mediates that stuff, and I wouldn’t endorse outright abdication of responsibility for that mediating work. Anybody who does that is, at best, misguided.

  225. anthony

    As God is my witness I swear it, three million bucks a year would be enough for me.

    For tints alone, maybe. But for tints AND hilights

  226. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    FWIW I think people who enjoy listening to their show (11.4% marketshare in Sydders) need to take a really good long look at themselves. In the last however many years it’s become unfashionable to criticize other people’s tastes. As part of the great rush towards making popular culture ‘acceptable’, we’ve created a world where it’s become very difficult to say, ‘sorry mate, your taste is rubbish’.

    There’s aesthetic rubbish, and then there’s ethical rubbish. We’re talking about the latter.

    Maynard F# Crabbes (remember him ?) was a very daggy DJ from JJJ about 15 or so years ago. Liked his Wierd Al Yankovic, and playing along to DK’s Too Drunk To Fuck with a trombone live on air. All very trashy, I know, but did he hurt anyone doing his thang? No, he didn’t.

    Nor does anyone else at JJJ. Rosie Beaton may be a little too repetitive in musical tastes for my liking, but she’s always sounds sympathetic and respectful to the listeners who phone him. That’s a good thing, especially when many of the listeners are teens and pre-teens. She knows what boundaries are.

    Kyle and Jackie (and the rest of 2Day management) don’t get this “boundaries” thing.

  227. tssk

    I think the tide might be turning for revenge based reality TV programs. I watched a lot of Masterchef and it seemed to be less competitive and more cooperative in some ways. (In fact the Friday episode resembled a Tafe style cooking class which was more devoted to teaching rather than competition.)

    And we all know how Masterchef rated. I’ve also noticed the adverts for Australian Idol have pretty much dropped Kyle totally.

  228. tigtog

    @Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    There’s aesthetic rubbish, and then there’s ethical rubbish. We’re talking about the latter.

    That distinction is the crux of the matter. Point well made.

    Also wish to echo SL’s fascination with the paper that desipis found. Hadn’t read anything about the 16 motives and related joys, and how that plays out sociologically. Lots to chew on there.

    One aspect very relevant: it shows that the diversity of personal orderings of the motives explain liking reality shows better than education or social class. In some forums there’s been a bit too much glibness about bogan attitudes etc with respect to K&J and the mother. I’d be willing to bet folding money that a representative proportion of K&J’s audience is middle and upper-middle class kids who get off on seeing Others tormented – has anyone got the demographics?

  229. su

    What constitutes “ethical rubbish” though? SC’s original question above about whether the segment would have been any less unethical had there been no revelations and the girl had been completely willing is a good one.

    Some people have said that quizzing a girl about her sex life on air is in poor taste, is it also unethical? Does the addition of the polygraph make it in poorer taste or more unethical? Is her consent relevant to the ethics of the situation or not? If a scenario is harmless in one case but could be projected to be harmful in another, how do we determine where the ethical line should be drawn?

  230. tssk

    Well everyone has differnet standards. For me the question is one of consent. It was clear pre the confession that the girl was stressed and not really consenting. Sure she wasn’t physically resisting as such but she did make it clear to her mother (if you can stand listening to the interview) that she didn’t want to be there.

    Context and consent. Last week JJJ on their Hack program interviewed someone who had been sexually assualted. The key differences were that of her age (21), her consent to the interview and the respect shown by the interviewer.

    Both interviews were on radio but the difference was night and day.

  231. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    What constitutes “ethical rubbish” though?

    Well, I was replying to this comment of skepticlawyer’s:

    In the last however many years it’s become unfashionable to criticize other people’s tastes. As part of the great rush towards making popular culture ‘acceptable’, we’ve created a world where it’s become very difficult to say, ‘sorry mate, your taste is rubbish’.

    My experience has been that it is more futile than unfashionable to criticize other people’s aesthetic tastes. Take it from me. Teaching English in other countries, you want to show the most interesting and credible parts of your culture. I’ve even made language games using Hoodoo Gurus and Lou Reed. And what do the kiddies listen to anyway? Backstreet Boys and Britney Spears.

    On the other hand – no harm done. Now if they were into – say – cockfighting, I’d have no problem decrying the matter. And what’s the big difference? Creatures getting hurt.

  232. desipis

    klaus k,

    Obviously, but disendorsing, especially at 10-17, has to be done very cleverly given that awareness of peer expectation and the broader culture are emerging factors.

    Assuming we take the study we linked to as accurate, I think any disendorsing needs to be done at an earlier age. Rather than focusing on how tastes are formed in the adolescent years, I think the focus should be on discouraging the personality traits (status, vengeance, etc) that cause individuals to form undesirable tastes.

    The more liberal nature of early childhood over the last couple of decades may have resulted in more variance in the balance of these 16 motivations. Additionally the reliance on medication to manage behaviour, or more specifically a lack of disciplined training for children could also have resulted in the afore mentioned variance. This variance would mean higher numbers of people with strong desires for status, venegence, etc and thus an appetite for “ethical rubbish”.

  233. FDB

    First, they came for the voyeuristic ghouls; but I’m a nice boy who keeps to himself.

    Then, they came for the cockfighters; but my cock’s a lover, not a fighter.

    Then, they came for the shock jocks; and there was much rejoicing.

    The End.

  234. klaus k

    “I think any disendorsing needs to be done at an earlier age.”

    Of course. My response was to skepticlawyer’s response to glen.

    As for the liberalisation of early childhood: this refers to a very interesting trend, and I’ve heard it stated in these terms in lots of places, but I don’t think it amounts to a liberalisation precisely. I think it is a shift that is both a narrowing and a broadening over different aspects of early childhood, inconsistency being the main feature of both ‘strict’ and ‘liberal’ approaches to child-rearing. This means the micro-management of some aspects of children’s lives, alongside a total lack of concern over others. I’m not an expert, but that’s my theory, and it does explain the increase in those traits.

  235. tigtog

    I think the focus should be on discouraging the personality traits (status, vengeance, etc) that cause individuals to form undesirable tastes.

    I’m entirely with you there. How much success do you think we are going to have convincing all the socially-conservative religious groups to fall into line? Because most of them seem to be heading in the other direction, especially the megachurches that preach the Prosperity doctrine?

  236. desipis

    How much success do you think we are going to have convincing all the socially-conservative religious groups to fall into line?

    When it comes to which basic traits to encourage/discourage there will be disagreements between those of “left” and “right” persuasion; reaching any form of consensus would be challenging. However, I’ve always thought the notion of raising kids without any negative signals was something pushed from the left.

    [Admin note: dead link there, desipis ~ tigtog]

  237. Adrien

    Klaus – You and others here may disagree with me and/or find me personally a tad odious but I make every effort never to distort or selectively quote to my advantage. I did read your whole comment. The sentence to which you refer, I don’t believe, rebutts my ‘screed’. On the contrary, it inspires it. People are responsible for their actions.
    .
    In The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Tomas, in response to the Czech politburo’s protestations that they are innocent because ignorant of the true nature of Stalinism, writes an article about Oedipus. Oedipus did not know what he was doing. And yet he accepts the responsibility because the consequences of his actions brought calamity on Thebes.
    .
    I believe that the adults responsible for traumatising this girl can be reasonably expected to understand what it is they were doing and thus are to be chastised for it. That is justice. And to excuse their behaviour on the basis of assumed trauma, trauma for which I’e seen no evidence, is the sort of thing that leads to cultural collpase. It happens again and again and again.
    .
    We modern people have not the excuses of our ancestors. We can see full well the consequences of our actions.

  238. tigtog

    However, I’ve always thought the notion of raising kids without any negative signals was something pushed from the left.

    Misrepresentation much? Positive parenting is not the same as laissez-faire non-discipline. The idea is that you don’t tell the kids that they ARE horrible/nasty brutes when they do something wrong, you tell them that they’ve DONE something horrible/nasty (hate the sin rather than the sinner, if you will – it’s exactly the same notion), plus the punishments are meant to be withdrawal of privileges they enjoy rather than the infliction of pain or degradation. The idea is that you also watch them to catch them doing something right, and praise them then, so that they don’t only hear loud parental reactions to wrongdoing (some kids in those families end up wrongdoing regularly just to get some attention, even if it’s negative). Positive parenting has been shown to be immensely effective in raising children who fully understand consequences of actions/choices rather than children who just fear authoritarian dictates, by the way.

    The problem with many children is that many parents who are not particularly left or right in ideology are inconsistent in discipline – and this is the worst possible way to raise a child.

    In any case, with respect to the motives/joys that are alleged to indicated a propensity for enjoying reality TV – reinforcing status and realising vengeance motives to invoke the joy of self-importance and the joy of vindication – instilling either of those motives/joys as major character aspects involves a judgemental atmosphere, so in a house that’s deliberately non-judgemental how exactly is that supposed to work?

  239. tigtog

    I believe that the adults responsible for traumatising this girl can be reasonably expected to understand what it is they were doing and thus are to be chastised for it. That is justice. And to excuse their behaviour on the basis of assumed trauma, trauma for which I’e seen no evidence, is the sort of thing that leads to cultural collpase. It happens again and again and again.

    Strawman: I don’t see anybody advocating that any adult involved should not face any consequences, Adrien.

    All I see is people advocating that a rush to judgement that the girl’s mother must necessarily be evil and monstrous is both premature and very unhelpful to the girl, for reasons well explained upthread.

    Experts in child protection are now examining the case and will sort out consequences according to their judgement of the personalities and circumstances involved. Because of privacy laws, it is right and proper that we should never know what their judgement and those consequences will be. So can we stop casting slurs at a woman that we will probably never know enough about to make our own informed judgements?

  240. Adrien

    Glen – There is little utility in critiquing the tastes of 10-17yo youth as this is precisely the period of one’s life where they are trying to figure out what their tastes are.
    .
    One I think could argue the exact opposite. Different generations will always kick against the establishment. That is natural. The media knows this better than anyone. It’s one of their main riffs. They convince you that buy doing what they want you’re rebelling. How many products are sold to people because they’re supposedly the mark of the unique?
    .
    I believe the culture’s moved to a point where, probably because we’re more aware of the phenomena of adolescence, we indulge youth overly much. And at their expense. You cannot cultivate good taste without being challenged. One of the best writers at that time of my life was Ian Penman who wrote on film for The Face. He made you feel like a total moron if you liked anything.
    .
    Bit of a sourpuss but he made me think. It brings to mind the dedication in The New Rock n Roll by Stuart Coupe and Glenn A Baker: This book is dedicated to Lester Bangs who knew who the best were, hated the rest, and always knew why.

  241. Adrien

    Klaus – I don’t think it amounts to a liberalisation precisely.
    .
    Two anecdotes. #1 Mother and three year old boy on tram. 3 yr old throwing tantrum. Does mother scold? No. Mother bribes kid with chocolate as bribe. Lesson?
    .
    #2 16 year old girl at bus stop on phone to mother. Said kid is demanding that mother drives out to fetch her. Missed her bus she says. Mother agrees finally and kid doesn’t even thank her. Friends of kid arrive, talk, say: you catching the bus? She says yes. Bus arrives. She catches it and never calls her mother.
    .
    There are many more. What obtains here. An exces of narrowing or its opposite. Or just sloveness?

  242. JillS

    Adrien, you’re starting to sound like a grumpy old man.

  243. glen

    DaOoSG @ 226 “Kyle and Jackie (and the rest of 2Day management) don’t get this “boundaries” thing.”

    One of the points I tried to make in the original post was that these people evidently do know where the boundaries are, because they use the boundaries as a resource to titillate an audience, create controversy, etc over and over again.

    su @ 229 “Some people have said that quizzing a girl about her sex life on air is in poor taste, is it also unethical?”

    Yes. For a number of reasons: 1) The power relations involved in the social situation. The 14yo did not want to participate, she was coerced into taking part by her mother and the cajoling of KaJO (which reminds me of KuJO, the dog, hmmm, there is a lol motivational in there). 2) The awareness by the main adults involved that the girl did not want to take part; hence the active prodding by KaJO to smooth over the 14yo’s anxieties. 3) I agree with tsssk @ 230, the 14yo needs a guardian or parent to be able to provide consent. Consent was granted by the mother. 4) The ‘attraction’ of the segment was her discomfort. Therefore the situation was designed to make her feel uncomfortable, purely for the purposes of alleged entertainment. Making someone else feel actually uncomfortable, as compared to the performance of an actor, for your own entertainment is not concerned with, in this case, the 14yo’s welfare.

  244. Adrien

    Jill I’m not a young man. I’m old, tired and full of no coffee. :)
    .
    I am a bit. But this kind of stuff really gets my goat.

  245. desipis

    tigtog@238,

    I agree with most of what you’ve said, in that positive reinforcement of good behaviour and ensuring an understanding of the consequences of ones actions are both important factors in inducing ethical behaviour. However I don’t think it’s enough to educate children on the difference between right and wrong, rather they need to be trained to want to do right and not want to do wrong.
    Coming back to the 16 motivations, we need to adjust the strength of these motivations in children to ensure what they want to do is compatible with our society. Where motivations need to be weakened, and this will obviously be dependent on the person, strong negative enforcement would be needed.
    Additionally, I’m not convinced that ‘programming’ a child’s brain at this level could be done efficiently with rewards/punishments that require higher level cognitive processing. Particularly at an age where they are only just developing the social and cognitive skills to comprehend the situation. That is, banning a young child from watching tv or rewarding them with ice-cream will train their high level behaviours and not their underlying instinctive desires.

    Essentially with kids who have a strong natural desire for status and vengeance, I think you’ll end up with law-abiding citizens, who see listening to other people’s suffering as an guilty yet acceptable pleasure.

  246. Helen

    So, what do you recommend, Desipis? A good beating?

  247. desipis

    To link this back to the ancient Rome idea, it could be that the notion of a avoiding any pain for children is only really possible with a safe and prosperous society. In attempting to provide the ‘ideal’ childhood for their children they deny them important lessons in life, resulting in them growing into adults who gain pleasure from the suffering of others. This safety and prosperity is common to the ancient Romans, those living in the present day first world, and all the sadistic aristocracy in between.

  248. skepticlawyer

    Additionally, I’m not convinced that ‘programming’ a child’s brain at this level could be done efficiently with rewards/punishments that require higher level cognitive processing. Particularly at an age where they are only just developing the social and cognitive skills to comprehend the situation. That is, banning a young child from watching tv or rewarding them with ice-cream will train their high level behaviours and not their underlying instinctive desires.

    This strikes me as a very true observation, along with the one distinguishing between ethical and aesthetic shite. Cue the libertarian: I don’t think you’ll stop people from liking this stuff; there will always be a section of the population who gets off on it. I suspect the reasons for that may well be biological. I do think we can have a fair stab at confining it to the private sphere, however, and have started thinking out loud (all very tentative of course) over at our place on that point.

  249. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    One of the points I tried to make in the original post was that these people evidently do know where the boundaries are, because they use the boundaries as a resource to titillate an audience, create controversy, etc over and over again.

    Glen, I think we are talking about two different sets of boundaries. You are talking about the boundaries of good taste; I’m talking about personal psychological “no-go” areas, especially involving children. Kyle knew about the first; he didn’t and doesn’t seem to have a clue about the second.

  250. desipis

    Helen, I’m suggesting that targeted use of pain (physical or emotional) can be used to train the brain to shift its desires. This will be more effective at changing behaviour than using punishments that operate at a higher level. A child with anti-social desires who is punished in a way to change behaviour will always be able to find new, not-yet punished, behaviours to play out the underlying desires.

    Once you have an acceptable limit on anti-social desires (or if it becomes too late to shift them), then you can start to use cognitive reasoning to show how better behaviour with result in greater satisfaction of the more social desires.

  251. glen

    DaOoSG @ 249 aha, different boundaries, fair enough. They are related though, hence philsophies like Felix Guattari’s ethico-aesthetic paradigm, or even Kant for that matter. This requires more think/write space (and time! sheesh) than here.

    Adrien @ 240 “You cannot cultivate good taste without being challenged.” Adrien, I agree 100%. Part of my dissertation examined the ontology of challenges when looking at enthusiasm. I defined enthusiasm less in terms of the objects, than the challenges faced by enthusiasts. Cultures of cultural appreciation have in-built challenges that are rely on and are distributed across different dimensions of situations that are partially social (communities and more discreet social groupings) and partially technological (technology only in the mode of distribution/exposure or enframing/access of cultural works).

    The sort of challenge I was suggesting was not the productive challenge you are referring to. The productive challenge would force an indvidual to use their power of imagination to grasp at something they can only intuitively comprehend (to mashup Kant and Bergson), this is how I talk about enthusiasm and the way bodies are mobilised into action. I originally meant (in the comment you replied to) ‘challenge’ as negative differentiation that so many games of cultural distinction become (ala Bourdieu).

  252. silkworm

    Helen Demidenko has sought to defend Vile and Jackie Zero by reasserting the lame libertarian maxim that markets are merely responding to demand. Yeah, just like tobacco companies are merely responding to smokers’ demands.

  253. skepticlawyer

    Silkworm: a supply-sider, I see. I do think there is something to supply-side economics, but not in this case (unless bad radio is addictive in the same way as cigarettes undoubtedly are).

  254. Helen

    Despisis: So, pain first, then an appeal to cognition? So if the pain comes “first”, you’d use it on newborns and babies, right? I seek only to understand.

    How did that go with your offspring?

  255. desipis

    Helen: seriously, when was the last time you saw a new born exhibiting anti-social desires? Sure they might cry a lot, but I doubt it’s because they’re trying to enact vengeance on their parents. It’s a behaviour which is motivated by “acceptable” desires of eating, sleeping, etc. and caused by a lack of communication skills. Given it’s a behavioural issue and not a desire issue, pain would be inappropriate.

    But just go on and ignore what I’m saying and keep trying to paint me as someone who recommends bashing children every time they step out of line.

  256. Adrien

    Silkworm – Helen Demidenko has sought to defend Vile and Jackie Zero by reasserting the lame libertarian maxim that markets are merely responding to demand.
    .
    Her name’s Dale and that comment’s so distorting as to be totally misrepresentative. She is not defending them, on the contrary. And there’s more to her argument than supply and demand.
    .
    I have no idea what it is about Skweptic that bring bullies out of the woodwork. But I wish you’d pull your heads in. Or at least refrain from lying.

  257. tigtog

    OK Desipis, you are fine with standard operant conditioning for newborns because their wants are behavioural issues rather than anti-social desires.

    So at what age do you believe that a child is capable of exhibiting anti-social desires that require aversion conditioning through pain rather than behavioural issues that respond to operant conditioning through rewards/no rewards?

  258. Fine

    I don’t know much about the getting the behaviour you desire from kids, but I know what to do when it comes to dogs and horses. It can’t be too much different seeing as we’re all mammals. You get much better results with dogs and horses through rewards for good behaviour and ignoring bad behaviour. Not by inflicting pain. It’s also useful to set up situations in which getting the behaviour you want is the easist thing to do for the beast.

  259. desipis

    tigtog: No idea. I’d imagine that different desires would start at different stages of development, but you’d have to do some sort of study to work out all the detail (and you know, verify my hypothesis).

  260. Adrien

    You get much better results with dogs and horses through rewards for good behaviour and ignoring bad behaviour. Not by inflicting pain.

    What wussy tripe. It’s time for some serious and radical action. The obvious way is to reform the school system. From now on the way the little monsters will learn is this.

  261. Adrien

    at what age do you believe that a child is capable of exhibiting anti-social desires

    2.
    .
    Not pain necessarilly. Altho’ I don’t think spanking should be ruled out if he’s a very willful little boy. :)
    .
    But from the age of 2 the ego starts asserting itself. Y’know like bringing out the pots and pans and getting into the 1970s thirty minute drum solo vibe. It’s at that point that the superego asserts itself: Knock it off you’re driving me nuts!!!!!
    .
    Repeat for 15 years.

  262. tigtog

    @desipis,

    Rather tentative for someone who seemed very sure upthread that the cognitive processes at play in the operant conditioning used in positive-parenting couldn’t possibly work at the tender age that “anti-social desires” allegedly kick in.

  263. desipis

    You get much better results with dogs and horses through rewards for good behaviour and ignoring bad behaviour. Not by inflicting pain.

    When you have a dog that has such a strong “anti-social” tendency (such as a territorial nature or whatever the base dog motivations are) that it’s repeatedly bitten people, it’s typically put down. Do you suggest doing the same to the humans that have such strong tendencies?

  264. tigtog

    @desipis,

    I call goalpost-shifting shenanigans. Goalposts stuffed with strawmen.

    The article to which you linked was talking about a normal distribution of 16 motivations across the population, and didn’t label any of them as inherently anti-social. You were the one who introduced the term into this thread seemingly from nowhere.

    So what proportion of the population of either dogs or people are you referring to as having strong anti-social tendencies, and on what evidence?

    Also, most psychology textbooks state that anti-social tendencies tend to result from an infancy/childhoold full of inconsistent and arbitrary behavioural consequences including harsh physical punishment. Do you have any evidence otherwise? Do you have any evidence at all that there is any trend for those dogs or children whose trainers/parents/carers have used the positive reinforcement of operant conditioning consistently to exhibit strong “anti-social” tendencies?

  265. desipis

    Assuming we take the study we linked to as accurate, I think any disendorsing needs to be done at an earlier age.

    The more liberal nature of early childhood over the last couple of decades may have resulted in more variance in the balance of these 16 motivations.

    I’m not convinced that ‘programming’ a child’s brain at this level could be done efficiently…

    …it could be…

    …I’m suggesting…

    Yep, very sure of myself. Not speculating at all.

  266. David Irving (no relation)

    desipis @ 263, I believe you’re onto something! I have a list …

  267. tigtog

    @desipis,

    Once you have an acceptable limit on anti-social desires (or if it becomes too late to shift them), then you can start to use cognitive reasoning to show how better behaviour with result in greater satisfaction of the more social desires.

    By the way, you seem to be entirely unacquainted with the actual principles of operant conditioning, which work very well in training animals at any zoo or amusement park you care to name. But apparently those animals all operate at a higher cognitive level than a child who is old enough to display “anti-social tendencies” – who knew?

  268. desipis

    tigtog, that whole comment was contextualised with “I’m suggesting”.

    By the way, you seem to be entirely unacquainted with the actual principles of operant conditioning, which work very well in training animals at any zoo or amusement park you care to name.

    I don’t think I said anything which suggests it wouldn’t. A few choice quotes from wiki:

    Positive punishment (also called “Punishment by contingent stimulation”) occurs when a behavior (response) is followed by an aversive stimulus, such as introducing a shock or loud noise, resulting in a decrease in that behavior.

    OMG pain!

    Extinction occurs when a behavior (response) that had previously been reinforced is no longer effective.

    Are you planning on babying your kids forever?

    Skinner’s construct of instrumental learning is contrasted with what Nobel Prize winning biologist Konrad Lorenz termed “fixed action patterns,” or reflexive, impulsive, or instinctive behaviors. These behaviors were said by Skinner and others to exist outside the parameters of operant conditioning but were considered essential to a comprehensive analysis of behavior.

  269. Helen

    Well, what works for you, Desipis?
    And how does this fit into the topic again? I think we may have lost the thread.

  270. desipis

    Helen, I thought LP covered the fact that personal anecdotes aren’t a good basis for scientific arguments a few weeks ago.

    Also, I attempted to link back to the main topic in comment 245.

  271. Liam

    God, what a thread, desipsis. And like all good threads it ends with me, probably drunk, quoting wildly off-topic some long-dead General in French.
    Back on topic: let’s all agree that a dose of severe operant conditioning is what’s required for Kyle, Jackie O, commercial radio and society. They needed to lose their jobs, after all, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un présentateur pour encourager les autres.

  272. Helen

    Fine, one famous horse training blogger put it thusly: make the right thing easy and the wrong thing more difficult.

    Doesn’t have to involve pain as such, does it.

  273. Fine

    Too true, Helen. Desipis, anti-social animals are usually such because they’ve been buggered up by someone who didn’t know what they’re doing. Most of the time it’s very fixable, but people don’t have the time, skill, patience etc to do so. Perhaps kids work in the same way.

  274. JillS

    Hate to break this to you so brutally fine, but kids are animals.

  275. Fine

    That’s exactly my point, JillS.

  276. desipis

    Tigtog,

    The article to which you linked was talking about a normal distribution of 16 motivations across the population, and didn’t label any of them as inherently anti-social. You were the one who introduced the term into this thread seemingly from nowhere.

    Missed this earlier; “anti-social” was probably a bad term to use. This concept I was aiming for was the link between certain motivations and the undesirable (according to the general consensus in this thread anyway) pleasure from listening to others go through emotional suffering.

  277. Desipis

    Liam, keep up the drunkenness. And the French, any excuse to practice my fading high-school French.

  278. su

    The problem with punishment and the strength of +reinforcement is intermittent scheduling. Rewarding desired behaviour intermittently strengthens that behaviour faster than rewarding it every single time. If you only intermittently punish, it takes far longer to extinguish the undesired behaviour than if you punish each instance. It is not feasible to observe and punish every single occurrence of an undesired behaviour outside of a psychology lab. This is undoubtedly why I see so many adults picking their noses in freakin’ public, no cookies were awarded during those brief seconds when their fingers were disengaged from the nasal cavity.

  279. glen

    “anti-social animals”

    Humanist, much? Seriously…

  280. glen

    good summary and analysis here:

    http://raws.adc.rmit.edu.au/~s3228795/blog2/?p=4

  281. Fine

    “anti-social animals”

    Humanist, much? Seriously…

    Sorry, Glen – don’t understand what you mean.

  282. Mandy

    As a writer on sexuality, I had been approached by Kyle & Jackie O to be interviewed on their station.

    A producer emailed me. I asked what sort of questions will Kyle & Jackie be asking. The questions were tacky and inappropriate.

    I emailed back, saying that I was not going to answer such inappropriate questions, and that I don’t care ‘who’ they were.

    To spare my dignity, I declined the interview.

  283. Helen

    Mandy, fantastic. If this debacle makes a few more people react in this way then something good may have been salvaged from it. But more power to you for reacting like… well, a normal grownup. Ausstereo please note!

  284. glen

    Fine, all this talk about sociality and the assumption that anti-sociality is a bad thing. The daughter should have told her mother to fuck off. There should have been more ‘anti-sociality’, not less of it.

    For example, whether or not animals are ‘social’ doesn’t preclude there ability to bite you if you piss them off. We need more animal and less social, because animals fully understand the import behind biting (and different kinds of biting).

    I don’t know, maybe this is what everyone has been discussing above, but it seemed like animals were being used as models for social programming to understand how audiences could be programmed, or something.

  285. su

    I think Desipis said something about the vengeful orientation of people who love the reality show format and that had something to do with not being spanked enough.

    Doesn’t make sense to me either.

    All sing! Speak roughly to your little boy and beat him when he sneezes. He only does it to annoy, because he knows it teases.

  286. furious balancing

    no, sing this:

  287. Mandy

    Kyle is just getting worse by the minute, and the sad thing is, is that the public love it and buy it!

  288. Socratease

    If anybody thinks there’s a shred of worth in Sandilands, other than as a freak show spruiker, read on:

    http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,28383,25935591-10388,00.html

  289. sublime cowgirl
  290. glen

    good link sublime cowgirl

    when I meet people who say they like the Kyle and Jackie O show I either get up and go somewhere else or if constrained by social circumstance I look at them like they stink

  291. Socratease

    @ 289, Herald Sun says: “They will not be back for up to two months until a current advertising cycle ends, the Herald Sun believes.”

    There’s insufficient finality in that for my liking.

  292. Avoiding Kyle Sandilands

    Link now corrected

    But finally there is a website that tells us which companies to avoid and boycott and complain to.http://AvoidingKyleSandilands.tk