Sunday 21 January 2018

Standard regular McFlock not too good at being civil (Oct. 19, 2013)

19 October 2013 at 12:29 pm
Standard regular McFlock not too good at being civil
Failure to be gracious makes for an unpleasant little exchange
Chris (“Haw Haw”) Trotter is something of a left/liberal icon in this country, and a political north star for many Standardisti, who clearly set their own bearings by what he says and writes. Generally Trotter writes well and contributes valuable insights. However, like all of us, he is certainly not perfect. In 2007 he suffered a public dressing down from John Minto after he (Trotter) had made some ignorant comments backing the police raids in the Urewera country. Minto damned his comments as “shallow”, “pompous”, “weak” and “potentially damaging” to the victims of the raids….
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0710/S00415.htm
Since then, Trotter has got worse, not better. As a regular guest on Jim Mora’s Panel, he has slotted in seamlessly with that show’s glib and casually cruel zeitgeist; Trotter has been one of the more heartless taunters of political dissidents like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden….
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-14062013/#comment-648511
But such irresponsible, craven behaviour, such gross misjudgements and failures of empathy have done little to shake the faith of Trotter’s most dedicated followers. They stayed on board, even after he delivered a windy and pompous admonition of those who might dare to criticise the infamous jury verdict in the Trayvon Martin case.
In shock and horror at what I heard, I provided a rush transcript of Trotter’s fustian lecture. Of course, not having a working tape recorder, and not being an expert in shorthand, I didn’t get it one hundred per cent correct. That’s all that the Trotteristi needed; they piled on with the ferocity of Red Guards going after a capitalist running dog, hammering on the fact that I hadn’t captured the great orator’s words perfectly…..
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-25072013/#comment-668899
Despite that, this writer (i.e., moi) is always willing to concede that his critics have a point, and in a spirit of reconciliation, I acknowledged that. One of my critics has been our friendMcFlock, and after he took the trouble to actually provide a transcript of Trotter’s infamous words, I acknowledged his efforts….
MORRISSEY: Thanks for transcribing that, McFlock. I can see that I missed a lot, and you have a valid point in disagreeing with my interpretation of Trotter’s comments. I did render his words a little more pointedly than they actually were. However, I think that even when you compare my admittedly imperfect rush “transcript” to your word-perfect transcript, I have captured the essential pomposity of his speaking style and the gist of his admonition to the lesser mortals in the studio to respect that outrageous verdict in Florida. Trotter was speaking slowly and sententiously, as if he was defending the Western system of justice; what he was actually doing was defending a grievous miscarriage of justice. His suggestion that there were “items of evidence which would raise reasonable doubt I think in most people’s minds” was not backed up at all, and disappointingly, Noelle McCarthy failed to demand he did so.
You are right to time the silences; they’re not as long as I recalled them in my mind, but they are significant nonetheless. Noelle McCarthy was, I believe, genuinely lost for words after listening to that. So was I.
The response, however, did not burnish our friend’s diplomatic credentials….
McFLOCK: oh fuck off. So let’s say you “captured” trotter’s pompousness (personally, I think you overstated it). That means that you are (at best) a dadaesque caricaturist of discourse. So are all the claims as to near word perfect accuracy simply self-delusion, or are you trying to mimic Sacha baron Cohen’s immersion satire?
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-16102013/#comment-712089
Readers with an IQ above room temperature will note that McFlock attempts to derail and inflame the discussion by comparing my serious (and admittedly imperfect) criticism of a media commentator with the behaviour of a callous and brutally dishonest propagandist/comedian.
But let’s save the discussion of provocative hate-comedians like Bernard Manning, Andrew Dice Clay and Sacha Baron Cohen for another day.
  • Lanthanide12.1
    19 October 2013 at 12:32 pm
    Woah, way to take things personally, Morrissey.
  • McFlock12.2
    19 October 2013 at 5:26 pm
    And another thing: your excuses about not having a tape recorder are pretty fucking stupid when you quite obviously have an internet connection, and all the natradio broadcasts are online.
    And I chose SBC because he is known for constantly staying in character, much in the same way that you stay in the character of stupid dickhead.
    • Morrissey12.2.1
      19 October 2013 at 8:54 pm
      And another thing: your excuses about not having a tape recorder are pretty fucking stupid when you quite obviously have an internet connection, and all the natradio broadcasts are online.
      My transcripts—occasionally a little too slapdash and impressionistic for some tastes—-are done quickly and published very soon after the offending broadcast. I am more than happy for you or anyone else to provide a word-perfect transcript for people to compare and contrast with mine. As we saw with my rendition of Chris Trotter’s infamous defence of shonky Deep South juries, my version is usually pretty much spot on. Of course people can quibble about whether I described the timbre of his voice fairly, or whether I effectively evoked the horrified silence that fell over the people he was admonishing, but the determined effort by a few hardline Trotteristi was, and remains, an exercise in attempted political assassination. In a non-frightening, Standard sort of way, of course.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)