Shame on office sex perv purveyors

The silliest of sexual encounters ws overshadowed by the sleaziest of reactions – photographing it and spreading it around the Internet.

And the media joined in by promoting the story to a huge audience. Shameful, but unfortunately that’s what our media have become.

Sure if something like that happened in front of them would have a look. For a short time. But to perv, take pics and then purvey it around social media looks sleazy.

And there’s quite a lot who seem to think it was an awful insight into our modern modem linked society.

Pam Corkery at NZ Herald writes  Pub’s patrons took this way too far … shame on them

What a creepy display from the patrons of the Carlton pub in Christchurch who group-watched and broadcast a free live sex display to the world.

Obviously it must have been amusing. You’re having a few beers and a bit of a yarn then suddenly there’s horizontal folk-dancing happening right across the road in a well-lit office building.

Most of us would have nudged, winked, laughed and possibly even given words of encouragement. It’s just sex, it’s fun, and it’s a bit risque.

But after a few minutes it’s also fair to expect that at least one watcher would have raced across the road to alert the pair – even if it meant heaving a brick at their window.

If the man and woman having such public sex are exhibitionists they would have been spurred on, and grateful.

If they are private people, things would have been nipped in the bud, uncomfortably but still with gratitude.

If they are married people who are married to other people, or boyfriend and girlfriend – but not to each other – people, they would thank you for the rest of their lives.

Instead, the patrons of the Carlton bar filmed and photographed the pair and sent out images which will bounce around social media forever.

Pissed people often don’t give a stuff about how their actions might impact on others but even after the event there were people willing to laugh about it on national TV news.

Already the pair face grief at work. Jobs could be at risk. But there are far worse scenarios. This couple who surrendered to the age-old rush of blood to predictable extremities could be parents, partners, and certainly family members.

New Zealanders kid ourselves that we are good neighbours, Samaritans, and legends who do what a mate would do.

Friday night at the Carlton Bar gives the lie to that.

I can understand there will always be some people who will be pervy purveyors without any consideration for consequences for others.

The media is another thing – why did they pick it up and publicise it like they did? They publicised the perverts, which makes them a party to the shame that Corkery talks about.

The media were willing pervert publicisers, because that’s what promoting this on the internet will have achieved.

“Puffed up little shit”

The reviews of politics in 2014 continue in holiday fillers. Today NZ Herald has The year of speaking dangerously: the worst gaffe’s of 2014.

Their number one gaffe (and “quote of the year”) is Pam Corkery’s “puffed-up little shit” tirade.

Hot on the heels of the Dirty Politics scandal, Ms Corkery was steaming after a TV One reporter grew indignant when told Kim Dotcom would not give interviews at the party’s official campaign launch.

That’s a Herald gaffe. It was TV3’s Brook Sabin.

“You puffed-up little shit,” Ms Corkery said. “He doesn’t want to. He said three times, ‘I don’t want to give you an interview.’ He’s not a candidate. He doesn’t owe you anything.”

‘He’ is Kim Dotcom. He doesn’t owe the media anything. But he was a prominent part of the Internet-Mana campaign, so avoiding awkward media questions was not a good look.

And Corkery’s outburst was a worse look. She was Laila Harre’s media manager. This was major mis-management.

Media commentator Russell Brown called the Corkery outburst “ruinous and unprofessional”.

It was certainly very unprofessional. Corkery was obviously annoyed and frustrated but having been an MP and in media she knows how it all works. She lost her cool.

Was it ruinous? It certainly didn’t help the Internet-Mana campaign, but Dotcom’s omnipresence was a major turnoff as well, and Harre’s willingness to dump principles to become a paid promoter of Dotcom’s vanity/revenge campaign didn’t help either. Nor did Mana and Hone Harawira’s bizarre alliance with Dotcom.

In the One News coverage of Corkery’s outburst they included the reason for wanting to interview Dotcom from comments he made at his party’s campaign launch:

And I hacked out German credit rating system, and put our Prime Minister’s credit rating to zero because I didn’t like the guy.

And you have all figured by now there’s another Prime Minister I don’t like.

He had been saying that at meetings around the country. Promoting his hacking because “I didn’t like the guy” on it’s own was ill-advised. But this was just after the Whaledump release of hacked data so it hardly surprising media would have an interest in possible connections between Dotcom and the hacking news of the day.

There were obvious tensions within Internet-Mana, with Harawira not speaking at the launch.

The pressure of the campaign and lack of control of the media narrative resulted in Corkery’s comment.

But Internet-Mana’s main problem was how voters saw who was willing to dish out shit but tried to avoid being held to account.

“Puffed up little shit” was a reaction but highlighted bigger problems. It backfired badly, drawing more negative attention to the perception of Internet-Mana’s own puffed up big shit.

Dotcom on hacking and Corkery’s reaction

Most of the media attention on the Internet-Mana campaign launch yesterday  was on Kim Dotcom’s comments on hacking and Pam Corkery’s handling of media afterwards.

3 News report in Internet Mana launch ends in chaos that Corkery’s tirade included

“You puffed-up little s**t,”. He doesn’t want to. He said three times, I don’t want to give you an interview. He’s not a candidate. He doesn’t owe you anything. When will you glove puppets of Cameron Slater just piss off?”

This happened after media interest in this part of Dotcom’s keynote speech.

Dotcom denies he’s the hacker behind Dirty Politics, but at the party’s campaign launch today said this.

“I hacked our German credit rating system and put our Prime Minister’s credit rating to zero because I didn’t like the guy. You have all figured by now there’s another Prime Minister I don’t like.”

A comment like that was always likely to raise attention.

Dotcom has been boasting about his hacking history in the Internet-Mana meetings around the country. I heard him in Dunedin. I think this is different. This is the report on his Invercargill meeting at Stuff

He hacked Nasa “because I wanted to know if aliens really exist”. He hacked a bank “because I wanted to donate $20 million to Greenpeace because I really like what they are doing”. He also hacked to bring the German prime minister’s credit rating down to zero “because I didn’t like the guy”.

Being at their campaign launch is significant, where Dotcom was prominent –  ‘Super hero’ Dotcom kicks off campaign. And I think the direct connection with not liking our Prime Minister is different.

So Dotcom seems to have accidentally or deliberately linked his hacking nineteen years ago to the current hacking.

A comment at Kiwiblog on Corkery’s response:

Her ‘tirade’ still helped Internet Mana get headline news – so at election time how is this a bad thing?

And this at Public Address:

The outburst by Pam Corkery acheived the objective of getting the National Party launch out of the top spot on the news. I’ve been wondering whether it was a deliberate spoiling tactic. Or maybe all that happened was that Mr Dotcom or some other seniopr person in IMP asked Ms Corkery to go outside and distract the press so that he could make a getaway, and the rest was unscripted, but very very effective at getting the top spot on both TVNZ and TV3 news.

While it’s possible Corkery deliberately went off at the media (I doubt it) why would she deliberately want to highlight that particular issue?

That wouldn’t seem to be very smart. Surely it would be one of the last things Corkery would want to attract media attention to.

It could have been a slip by Dotcom. And it could have been over-reaction from Corkery because it is closer to the mark than Dotcom has usually admitted.