There is a TV show on channel seven I have recently become hooked on called ‘Lost’. The storyline is based around an airliner on route from Sydney to LA, which crashed on a deserted island somewhere in the Pacific Ocean stranding the survivors with no hope of rescue. One of the things I find most fascinating about this captivating and very involved series is that the survivors of the plane crash soon discover that they are not alone on the island.
As the story unfolds there is great suspicion, fear and uncertainty about who these ‘others’ are. They even call them ‘the others’. Even before they get a glimpse of who these ‘others’ might be, they are fearful, defensive and suspect the worst in an encounter with the others. They, the survivors we the audience are supposed to identify with, begin to mistrust each other and turn on one another as fear levels reach it’s climax.
I get continually frustrated at the stars of the show thinking, if only they changed their attitude or approach to the others they may get a different response. They may even enter into a constructive dialogue. They I wonder about ‘the others’. They must be experiencing the exact same fear and suspicion.
I occasionally attend inter-faith gatherings where the intention is to meet for constructive dialogue about that which is foreign to us. Last week I attended a lunch where a Muslim woman came to share her faith story with a group of us Christians from various different Christian traditions. Talk about a gutsy move! So what are we doing listening to a Muslim’s faith story you ask? My best response is we’re doing just that – listening! It was a dialogue and as you do at these kind of things you always get those in the group who come with an agenda of fear of the other for whatever reason and become unhelpful voices in the conversation. There was one Christian there who seemed to come with the sole agenda of trapping this poor woman. His aggression was embarrassing and I thought to myself, ‘is this the Christian thing to do?’ A Christian friend of mine once said, ‘God gave me one mouth and two ears so I can do less talking and more listening.’ I also wondered in that moment who the ‘other’ really was. Was it the Muslim, was it the aggressor, was it me? I soon can to realize that I should never assume at I myself am excluded from otherness.
At the end of the afternoon I was profoundly moved by a moment that is like an image burned into my mind. One of our Christian leaders in thanking the Muslim woman for sharing with us physically embraced her with a hug. Having being deeply moved by that act of Christian love I have since continued to ponder what this means.
Jesus has called us to embrace the other in all contexts. I concluded from this experience that I cannot possibly embrace the other unless I am completely sold out to my own faith tradition. It is only then that we can sit down and discover and appreciate our differences. I’m not suggesting for a minute that I am to embrace the beliefs or traditions of the other but simply to suspend judgement and fear and embrace the other with the love and grace that can only come through Jesus.
Many conflicts in our world today would not be conflicts if we who call ourselves Christian could embrace this simple act. The conflict in the Middle East is a classic example of fear reaching boiling point. Quotes from world leaders of the 20th century following WW1 & WW2 will tell you that there are no winners in a war, everyone loses. Fighting for peace is an oxymoron, you would think that we would learn from our past but we haven’t.
Sojourners magazine this week said, ‘military muscle is always too hedonistic and narcissistic to listen to the voice of reason and history’. They also quoted a short story of a modern day Good Samaritan story at a mega scale. The story tells of Christians in Lebanon leading humanitarian aid embracing and caring for those war affected people who would otherwise be labelled as ‘the others’.
Embracing the other is the simplest yet most profound act of a Christian in today’s climate. It is infact the only road to peace. It is what Jesus has called his followers to do.
Shalom
Mark
P.S. Check out the Social Justice Network Blog for the full quote from Sojourners
Friday, July 28, 2006
Friday, July 14, 2006
What do you value?
Your family, your job, your friends, your car, your house, your status in society, your pet dog, your cable TV, your favourite chair, your freedom? In our current climate of political, social, economic and technological change, the things we value can come under threat and so we hold them closer to our chest, become more attached to them and they play an even more prominent role in how our lives are shaped and what we shape our lives around.
I wonder if we ever take time to reflect upon why we value these things, what motivates us to want to fight for them? Does it boil down to what we ultimately believe in? How do we react when they come under threat and we are at risk of losing them? Why do we value such things? Is it about self preservation and worth, about a
good feeling, is it because that’s what really matters to us?
When a friend of mine visited Australia after being away for a period of time, he was surprised to hear that there was a new federal political party initiated by Christians called ‘Family First’. He rattled his brain wondering why they would choose family, first as an agenda for a Christian voice in federal politics, and I heard him say, ‘because Jesus is quite clear about what needs to come first…’ He didn’t pad that response out for me but rather left me wondering.
I subscribe to ‘Sojourners’ online newsletter. Jim Wallis is a constant contributor to the newsletter and recently a speech he made n Washington D.C. was published. Here’s an excerpt I thought I’d leave you with to ponder. Part of a speech from Jim Wallis:
“We are gathering here in the season of Pentecost, as we have done now for 10 years. It is the season when we celebrate the church coming down from that upper room into the streets with the power of the Spirit to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ. The good news that he proclaimed in his opening mission statement in the little town of Nazareth: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor."
To a church whose mission statement hasn't always reflected his, we are here simply to say this: whatever else the gospel of Jesus Christ is able to change about our lives - overcome our sinful habits and addictions, save our marriages and families, make us responsible people - IF the gospel that we preach does not "bring good news to the poor," well then, it is simply not the gospel of Jesus Christ - and it is about time that we said that.
To the political leaders of this capitol city, and from the places you all live across this country, we are here to say something else: the days when you could win the support of the religious community by merely speaking the language of family values and the sacredness of life while ignoring the desperate plight of poor people in this wealthy nation and around the world are over. Because for a growing number of people of faith across the political spectrum, you will now be held accountable for how the leadership you offer and the policies you support impact the lives of those whom Jesus called "the least of these." You see for many of us, poverty is also a life issue and as our bumper sticker says "Poverty is NOT a family value!".”
Jim Wallis – ‘Sojourners Magazine 30/6/06’
Shalom
Mark
I wonder if we ever take time to reflect upon why we value these things, what motivates us to want to fight for them? Does it boil down to what we ultimately believe in? How do we react when they come under threat and we are at risk of losing them? Why do we value such things? Is it about self preservation and worth, about a
good feeling, is it because that’s what really matters to us?
When a friend of mine visited Australia after being away for a period of time, he was surprised to hear that there was a new federal political party initiated by Christians called ‘Family First’. He rattled his brain wondering why they would choose family, first as an agenda for a Christian voice in federal politics, and I heard him say, ‘because Jesus is quite clear about what needs to come first…’ He didn’t pad that response out for me but rather left me wondering.
I subscribe to ‘Sojourners’ online newsletter. Jim Wallis is a constant contributor to the newsletter and recently a speech he made n Washington D.C. was published. Here’s an excerpt I thought I’d leave you with to ponder. Part of a speech from Jim Wallis:
“We are gathering here in the season of Pentecost, as we have done now for 10 years. It is the season when we celebrate the church coming down from that upper room into the streets with the power of the Spirit to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ. The good news that he proclaimed in his opening mission statement in the little town of Nazareth: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor."
To a church whose mission statement hasn't always reflected his, we are here simply to say this: whatever else the gospel of Jesus Christ is able to change about our lives - overcome our sinful habits and addictions, save our marriages and families, make us responsible people - IF the gospel that we preach does not "bring good news to the poor," well then, it is simply not the gospel of Jesus Christ - and it is about time that we said that.
To the political leaders of this capitol city, and from the places you all live across this country, we are here to say something else: the days when you could win the support of the religious community by merely speaking the language of family values and the sacredness of life while ignoring the desperate plight of poor people in this wealthy nation and around the world are over. Because for a growing number of people of faith across the political spectrum, you will now be held accountable for how the leadership you offer and the policies you support impact the lives of those whom Jesus called "the least of these." You see for many of us, poverty is also a life issue and as our bumper sticker says "Poverty is NOT a family value!".”
Jim Wallis – ‘Sojourners Magazine 30/6/06’
Shalom
Mark
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
How far is too far?
One thing that has caused quit a stir in the media once again this week is the channel Ten show, ‘Big Brother’. The controversy involving human rights, freedom of speech and morality has even caught the attention and comment of our Prime Minister.
So what is it about this show that makes people want to watch it? Is it purely because they continually push the moral boundaries? Is it the naughtiness and daring nature of the show that attracts so many young viewers? Whatever the reason it is a huge source of influence to young people as young as 8 years old. Youth idolize certain contestants on the show and, like most celebrities young people idolize, they want to be like them.
Shows like this defend their right to broadcast what they like as long as it fits within the very broad boundaries of classification. So how far is too far and who are the voices who can speak against it and be heard? These days people pull the freedom of speech line as far as possible to be as vulgar and offensive as they like. It all comes down to the individual as to how you interpret my choice verbs. But beware, if you don’t meet the standard of what has been accepted as the ‘norm’ in society, you are labelled as conservative and out of touch.
So are we to relinquish all our morals so our young people can just pick and choose what they like according to the influences of the media, because aren’t the media now setting the standard as to what is normal?
I can’t help but reflect upon the Exodus story, when Moses left the community for a long period of time. The people get restless, created their own gods and fell into moral chaos and disrepair. Moses was so greatly angered by what he discovered that he smashed the first copy of the ten commandments. He later chiselled out a new copy. As for those who would not turn back to God, they met their death that day.
Now, did Moses go too far? How far is too far?
The Ten Commandments were never meant to be a set of rules, or set a moral high ground for the people of God to look down on others. They were commands from God to create the perfect balance for community life. The Jews who inherited this law used it in such a way as to look down on people and exclude them creating a rigid structure for community living. Jesus said he had come not to abolish the law but to fulfil it. Even Jesus in his interactions with people in the community stood up for what Moses began. He said, ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, al your mind and all your strength, and love your neighbour as you love yourself.’
So that’s how far we are to go, this is the perfect balance. It is how we show respect and reverence towards God and our fellow human beings. It would solve a lot of our social issues. But as Aaron points out to Moses, ‘You know how prone these people are to evil.’ (Ex 32:22) Aaron was weak in leading the people in Moses absence. So who will stand strong? Who will be the leaders in our community worth looking up to so our young people have a Godly voice shaping their vision for the future? Could it be you? Silence gives permission for our society to fall further and further away from the balance God intended here on earth.
Shalom
Mark
So what is it about this show that makes people want to watch it? Is it purely because they continually push the moral boundaries? Is it the naughtiness and daring nature of the show that attracts so many young viewers? Whatever the reason it is a huge source of influence to young people as young as 8 years old. Youth idolize certain contestants on the show and, like most celebrities young people idolize, they want to be like them.
Shows like this defend their right to broadcast what they like as long as it fits within the very broad boundaries of classification. So how far is too far and who are the voices who can speak against it and be heard? These days people pull the freedom of speech line as far as possible to be as vulgar and offensive as they like. It all comes down to the individual as to how you interpret my choice verbs. But beware, if you don’t meet the standard of what has been accepted as the ‘norm’ in society, you are labelled as conservative and out of touch.
So are we to relinquish all our morals so our young people can just pick and choose what they like according to the influences of the media, because aren’t the media now setting the standard as to what is normal?
I can’t help but reflect upon the Exodus story, when Moses left the community for a long period of time. The people get restless, created their own gods and fell into moral chaos and disrepair. Moses was so greatly angered by what he discovered that he smashed the first copy of the ten commandments. He later chiselled out a new copy. As for those who would not turn back to God, they met their death that day.
Now, did Moses go too far? How far is too far?
The Ten Commandments were never meant to be a set of rules, or set a moral high ground for the people of God to look down on others. They were commands from God to create the perfect balance for community life. The Jews who inherited this law used it in such a way as to look down on people and exclude them creating a rigid structure for community living. Jesus said he had come not to abolish the law but to fulfil it. Even Jesus in his interactions with people in the community stood up for what Moses began. He said, ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, al your mind and all your strength, and love your neighbour as you love yourself.’
So that’s how far we are to go, this is the perfect balance. It is how we show respect and reverence towards God and our fellow human beings. It would solve a lot of our social issues. But as Aaron points out to Moses, ‘You know how prone these people are to evil.’ (Ex 32:22) Aaron was weak in leading the people in Moses absence. So who will stand strong? Who will be the leaders in our community worth looking up to so our young people have a Godly voice shaping their vision for the future? Could it be you? Silence gives permission for our society to fall further and further away from the balance God intended here on earth.
Shalom
Mark
'Big Brother...we were only joking!'
It's ok everyone don't panic, I stand corrected, it was all just a big misunderstanding and the guys were just playing a practical joke...you little rascals.
So just so everyone knows, apparrently holding a girl down and your mate waving his crutch in her face is now classed as a practical joke, oh and by the way, according to the defense of Big Brother, this is also the way these young men respect women, since of course these to innocent young guys always respect the opposite sex. Thanks Big Brother for educating us and setting a new standard.
Last night while I was gearing up to watch one of my favorite Monday night programs on TV, I was so rudely interupted by Gretel Kileen (again! - she's everywhere!) on channel 10 around 9:40pm. 'Oh I see they're choosing a late night adults only segment to reveal explain themselves.' I begin to think naiively. So they recap all the mysterious stuff I posted last bolg then she interviews John and Ashley. Talk about beating around the bush. Not once did anyone mention what had actually occurred, it was almost like they were trying to lauch it off like it was a joke. They both said it was a practical joke that went wrong.
Well I would say yes, a girl who has to assert her objecion to what was happening, then try and wriggle free is something gone wrong indeed. I see no joke in that. It was obviously serious enough to get them kicked out of the house and for Big Brother to be so careful as to not mentioned what happened or ever show footage of what was recorded of the incident. Camilla was obviously in some sort of fear for herself in in some sort of uncertainty of their intentions, even for a second, to have objected and try to stop what was happening. At some point she must have felt she was not in control\, and that can be a scarey place for anyone to be.
Big Brother if this is a joke we're not laughing, in fact, the joke is on you.
Today Big Brother will find out if they themselves are in breech of breaking rules. Well Big Brother you know how it works when people break rules. I look forward to hearing, "It's time to go...(long pause for anticipation and suspense)...Big Brother.' The sooner the better.
Shalom
Mark
So just so everyone knows, apparrently holding a girl down and your mate waving his crutch in her face is now classed as a practical joke, oh and by the way, according to the defense of Big Brother, this is also the way these young men respect women, since of course these to innocent young guys always respect the opposite sex. Thanks Big Brother for educating us and setting a new standard.
Last night while I was gearing up to watch one of my favorite Monday night programs on TV, I was so rudely interupted by Gretel Kileen (again! - she's everywhere!) on channel 10 around 9:40pm. 'Oh I see they're choosing a late night adults only segment to reveal explain themselves.' I begin to think naiively. So they recap all the mysterious stuff I posted last bolg then she interviews John and Ashley. Talk about beating around the bush. Not once did anyone mention what had actually occurred, it was almost like they were trying to lauch it off like it was a joke. They both said it was a practical joke that went wrong.
Well I would say yes, a girl who has to assert her objecion to what was happening, then try and wriggle free is something gone wrong indeed. I see no joke in that. It was obviously serious enough to get them kicked out of the house and for Big Brother to be so careful as to not mentioned what happened or ever show footage of what was recorded of the incident. Camilla was obviously in some sort of fear for herself in in some sort of uncertainty of their intentions, even for a second, to have objected and try to stop what was happening. At some point she must have felt she was not in control\, and that can be a scarey place for anyone to be.
Big Brother if this is a joke we're not laughing, in fact, the joke is on you.
Today Big Brother will find out if they themselves are in breech of breaking rules. Well Big Brother you know how it works when people break rules. I look forward to hearing, "It's time to go...(long pause for anticipation and suspense)...Big Brother.' The sooner the better.
Shalom
Mark
Monday, July 03, 2006
Big Brother grows a conscience?!
Or did they? The moment Big Brother stepped in to intervene on an issue of morality, they cover it up!
If you like me don’t watch Big Brother then here’s an update on the hot topic that’s got everyone talking. Three contestants known in the Big Brother house as John, Ashley and Camilla were involved in an ‘incident’ in the very early hours of Saturday morning. Media outlets are describing it as ‘sexual misconduct’. The only reason this captured my attention is because in was a front page headline on Sunday’s Herald Sun paper.
I went out of my way then to watch Big Brother live eviction on Sunday night because I was interested as to how they might address this very serious allegation. The show began with replaying highlights of Friday in the house. I was then reminded why I don’t watch Big Brother. I would describe these adults in their 20’s and 30’s living in the house as nothing short of juvenile delinquents. The maturity levels of these adults is much to be desired, and it’s an embarrassment to think that I fall into that age group.
Then mystery falls over the show and if it wasn’t for what I read in the paper, I would have had no idea what was going on. Big Brother does some quality editing work here by the way. What I mean by that is, they lead us (the viewer) exactly where they want to lead us by the information they disclose and withhold.
It’s Saturday morning and Camilla is in the diary room very abstractly referring to an incident she was involved in with 2 other housemates just hours earlier. While it could be seen that she is submitting an official complaint, Camilla herself plays the incident down. Instead of hearing Big Brother’s response or further discussion the Big brother TV commentator says the incident is being taken under consideration by Big Brother. ‘Mmmm…thinks the viewer, what’s there to discuss?’ Then later that day the two housemates in question, who turn out to be John and Ashley are called to the diary room. For the first time you don’t actually see the diary room discussion, instead the commentator explains how they broke a fundamental house rule and they will be removed from the house because of it.
So after the advert, all the housemates are called into the diary room and the news is broken to them that the guys have been removed at which Camilla breaks down in tears. All the housemates are clearly upset, so Camilla suggests that either her or Big Brother explain why the guys were removed and full details of the incident. Credit to Big Brother for naming the seriousness of the incident and assuring Camilla that it wasn’t her fault. Camilla was left to explain to the housemates outside the diary room what happened. We will never know exactly what she told them I guess because the commentator gave Big Brothers own explanation over the top of hers. What we do hear Camilla saying is that she tried to wriggle free then the other one was going to have a turn. She describes it as a joke that went wrong. She found herself in a situation that got out of hand. While the 2 guys may only have been messing around, it is a serious game to be playing and in public would not be tolerated. From what can be understand one held Camilla down while the other thrust his crutch into her face. Then when they were swapping she said a stern ‘no’ and wriggled free. You could tell by the reactions of housemates that some did not approve of the actions of John and Ashley. What amused me the most was the comment of one housemate who was clearly upset, 'reality is just setting in now.' Um...this is a reality show. Even that's laughable.
What if her ‘no’ was ignored? What were the others in the house doing? What if she couldn’t wriggle free? What if there were no cameras? Could this have become rape? I would say this is pretty serious business Big Brother, sexual harassment in the least. There’s laws against that.
And here’s where the great cover up comes in. Enter Gretel Killeen with dazzling light and sound and celebration. Here’s how she opens the live eviction show, “It gives me great sadness to announce that John and Ashley are no longer housemates because they were removed from the house yesterday following a breach of the Big Brother rules. Today and presumably for the rest of the week you may be inundated with exaggerated, ill informed stories in the media which do nothing but perpetuate ignorance and hurt those involved. Ashley and John were fantastic housemates bringing nothing but joy not only to their fellow housemates but to Australia as a whole. And we are very sorry that one foolish incident on their behalf has led to them leaving. But the Big Brother house is a community and like all communities it must has rules and unfortunately the boys broke one of those rules and have consequently left the house. We wish them well. Now leys get on with live eviction 9.” Touching speech Gretel.
So do Big Brother think they have control over what happens in the house? That’s a laughable issue. Fine when rules are broken remove the contestant, but the deed has already been done. How far will Big Brother let things go before they step in. Will they step in if a law is broken? Are they above the law because they have 'rules'? Are Big Brother then the police when laws are broken? What's to stop something more serious from happening like rape, or even murder? It's possible, wherever there are people in community anything is possible. You might be able to tell I’m not a fan of the show, in fact I feel it’s a complete waste of space. Is there a point to it? Federal Liberal MP Trish Draper, also chair of Classification Issues Group in the Coalition, has called for the show to be taken off air. Senator Joyce says, ‘I don’t think the Australian people would lose much if Big Brother was evicted from our TV screens.” I agree, get rid of it.
It seems that now even the Prime Minister of Australia has stepped in and given his opinion to shut it down. Even the poloticians are divided as the Queensland Premier is keen to see the show continue because 'it's good for business'. The bottom line is, the future of Big Brother as a big rating, revenue raising program on channel Ten will be decided not on moral grounds and common sense but purely on financial viability which unfortunately works in it's favour.
So it's all come down to this senseless human vice; greed for power and money. Oh that's what this is all about. Why didn't they say that in the first place.
Get rid of it I say.
Shalom
Mark
If you like me don’t watch Big Brother then here’s an update on the hot topic that’s got everyone talking. Three contestants known in the Big Brother house as John, Ashley and Camilla were involved in an ‘incident’ in the very early hours of Saturday morning. Media outlets are describing it as ‘sexual misconduct’. The only reason this captured my attention is because in was a front page headline on Sunday’s Herald Sun paper.
I went out of my way then to watch Big Brother live eviction on Sunday night because I was interested as to how they might address this very serious allegation. The show began with replaying highlights of Friday in the house. I was then reminded why I don’t watch Big Brother. I would describe these adults in their 20’s and 30’s living in the house as nothing short of juvenile delinquents. The maturity levels of these adults is much to be desired, and it’s an embarrassment to think that I fall into that age group.
Then mystery falls over the show and if it wasn’t for what I read in the paper, I would have had no idea what was going on. Big Brother does some quality editing work here by the way. What I mean by that is, they lead us (the viewer) exactly where they want to lead us by the information they disclose and withhold.
It’s Saturday morning and Camilla is in the diary room very abstractly referring to an incident she was involved in with 2 other housemates just hours earlier. While it could be seen that she is submitting an official complaint, Camilla herself plays the incident down. Instead of hearing Big Brother’s response or further discussion the Big brother TV commentator says the incident is being taken under consideration by Big Brother. ‘Mmmm…thinks the viewer, what’s there to discuss?’ Then later that day the two housemates in question, who turn out to be John and Ashley are called to the diary room. For the first time you don’t actually see the diary room discussion, instead the commentator explains how they broke a fundamental house rule and they will be removed from the house because of it.
So after the advert, all the housemates are called into the diary room and the news is broken to them that the guys have been removed at which Camilla breaks down in tears. All the housemates are clearly upset, so Camilla suggests that either her or Big Brother explain why the guys were removed and full details of the incident. Credit to Big Brother for naming the seriousness of the incident and assuring Camilla that it wasn’t her fault. Camilla was left to explain to the housemates outside the diary room what happened. We will never know exactly what she told them I guess because the commentator gave Big Brothers own explanation over the top of hers. What we do hear Camilla saying is that she tried to wriggle free then the other one was going to have a turn. She describes it as a joke that went wrong. She found herself in a situation that got out of hand. While the 2 guys may only have been messing around, it is a serious game to be playing and in public would not be tolerated. From what can be understand one held Camilla down while the other thrust his crutch into her face. Then when they were swapping she said a stern ‘no’ and wriggled free. You could tell by the reactions of housemates that some did not approve of the actions of John and Ashley. What amused me the most was the comment of one housemate who was clearly upset, 'reality is just setting in now.' Um...this is a reality show. Even that's laughable.
What if her ‘no’ was ignored? What were the others in the house doing? What if she couldn’t wriggle free? What if there were no cameras? Could this have become rape? I would say this is pretty serious business Big Brother, sexual harassment in the least. There’s laws against that.
And here’s where the great cover up comes in. Enter Gretel Killeen with dazzling light and sound and celebration. Here’s how she opens the live eviction show, “It gives me great sadness to announce that John and Ashley are no longer housemates because they were removed from the house yesterday following a breach of the Big Brother rules. Today and presumably for the rest of the week you may be inundated with exaggerated, ill informed stories in the media which do nothing but perpetuate ignorance and hurt those involved. Ashley and John were fantastic housemates bringing nothing but joy not only to their fellow housemates but to Australia as a whole. And we are very sorry that one foolish incident on their behalf has led to them leaving. But the Big Brother house is a community and like all communities it must has rules and unfortunately the boys broke one of those rules and have consequently left the house. We wish them well. Now leys get on with live eviction 9.” Touching speech Gretel.
So do Big Brother think they have control over what happens in the house? That’s a laughable issue. Fine when rules are broken remove the contestant, but the deed has already been done. How far will Big Brother let things go before they step in. Will they step in if a law is broken? Are they above the law because they have 'rules'? Are Big Brother then the police when laws are broken? What's to stop something more serious from happening like rape, or even murder? It's possible, wherever there are people in community anything is possible. You might be able to tell I’m not a fan of the show, in fact I feel it’s a complete waste of space. Is there a point to it? Federal Liberal MP Trish Draper, also chair of Classification Issues Group in the Coalition, has called for the show to be taken off air. Senator Joyce says, ‘I don’t think the Australian people would lose much if Big Brother was evicted from our TV screens.” I agree, get rid of it.
It seems that now even the Prime Minister of Australia has stepped in and given his opinion to shut it down. Even the poloticians are divided as the Queensland Premier is keen to see the show continue because 'it's good for business'. The bottom line is, the future of Big Brother as a big rating, revenue raising program on channel Ten will be decided not on moral grounds and common sense but purely on financial viability which unfortunately works in it's favour.
So it's all come down to this senseless human vice; greed for power and money. Oh that's what this is all about. Why didn't they say that in the first place.
Get rid of it I say.
Shalom
Mark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)