Blogging: the poison pen

While discussing internet trends, a work colleague said: “have you seen all these blogs; they can say just anything! It’s terrible!” I of course admitted that I too was a blogger, and that I too say just about anything. While there may be problems associated with a democratisation of media, the pros far outweigh the cons.

As the established media struggles to deal with the transition to online publication, an ever expanding army of bloggers relentlessly pumps out material that was once the exclusive domain of professional journalists. While some of the material may be erroneous, poorly researched, biased, or plagiarised the same indictment could be levelled at many professionals.

Professional journalists are no strangers to bias and have been often guilty of plagiarism or using dubious or misquoted sources. While professional journalists may have more highly developed writing skills than the average blogger, anyone who has watched the ABC TV’s Media Watch program would have chuckled at many examples of journalistic ineptitude and malpractice. Media Watch has highlighted many examples of items masquerading as news which are little more than blatant advertisements. Journalists are also bound by editorial policy and the interests of advertisers and shareholders.

Bloggers of course are influenced by no such constraints. Are the views of a professional journalist any more valid that those of anyone else? While a certain proportion of the blogosphere may include dubious material, there is undoubtedly a great deal that is worthwhile and interesting. Anyone with a connection can now easily publish their views to a mass audience; this would seem the ultimate expression of free speech.

The final responsibility comes down to the user. A vast increase in information also increases the need to use that information wisely, cross reference and read between the lines. In this respect, nothing has really changed; you can’t believe everything you read.

the netnanny state

The Australian government is planning to introduce internet filtering at the ISP level. This will make the internet up to 87% slower, more expensive, and will accidentally block up to one in 12 legitimate sites, while missing the vast majority of inappropriate content. Anyone who has worked in a government department behind an overly aggressive firewall will know what this is like: incredibly frustrating, inefficient and largely unworkable.

The government will allow users the opportunity to 'opt out' of the scheme, although they obviously won't have the option to opt out of the slow connections and increased cost. The average user has no desire to view offensive material on the net, but then, definitions of what constitutes offensive material varies widely. (e.g. the recent Bill Henson scandal/fiasco). This draconian proposal by the government is an insult to the average user's intelligence.

The government obviously thinks people are incapable of making responsible decisions for themselves. If they did they might offer users the opportunity to opt in to such a scheme, rather than making them opt out. This is a flagrant and ill conceived attack on civil liberties and personal freedom.

Australian internet connections may soon be like Ned Flander's cable TV: 99 channels and all blocked except the weather... okely dokely? NO!

Sign the getup.org petition to Communications Minister Senator Conroy, against "draconian government restrictions on the internet that will hold back the digital economy and miss the vast majority of unwanted content."

Miss Naked Beauty: Judgement of Gok

Miss Naked Beauty purports to promote the cause of ‘real women’. It’s contestants are supposedly vying for the opportunity of being ambassadors for ‘natural beauty’ and the idea that a woman doesn’t have to be young and thin to be beautiful; in the winner’s immortal words (in fact, I think all the girls said it) everyone is beautiful. We are invited to believe that the winners of this reality TV contest will form the grass roots of a movement in defiance of the odious fashion industry, which incessantly promotes impossible ideals of feminine beauty.

Do the women who flock to view this contest, and the millions more who tune in to it on TV really imagine that the fashion industry is going to start showing their latest Spring collection on the Paris catwalks with models that look like the contestants? Miss Naked Beauty is in actual fact just as exploitative as any other beauty contest. The bikini and nude sections which are presented as a means of forcing the contestants to accept their own unadorned ‘natural beauty’ are just an excuse for an exercise in voyeurism.

After the humiliating process of elimination it’s really quite sad (and really quite pathetic) to see the final two contestants putting their hearts and souls into their final speeches. They truly do seem to believe in the cause that has been so shamelessly sold to them by Channel 4 and the incredibly creepy Gok Wan.

Miss Naked Beauty has put a new spin on the reality TV formula but don't be fooled; the bottom line is not social justice but only this: you don't have to be beautiful to be a sex object.

Breasts : does size matter?

It is undeniable that to some men, size really does matter and the bigger the better. The inventor of soft porn, Russ Meyer was evidently obsessed with highly well endowed women such as Helen 'kitten' Natividad and Pandora Peaks. Meyer's trashy 60s movies like UltraVixens made an art form of the over sized booby, and these were all natural; no surgical enhancement here.

Similarly, Howard Hughes also harboured a large breast fetish. He was so obsessed with Jane Russell's breasts he custom designed bras for her. In the 1930s, the torpedo look was in vogue, and Hughes bra was designed to enhance this effect without showing a trace of nipple. It didn't really work and Russell attained the same effect by putting tissue paper inside a standard bra.

These guys are however, the exception rather than the norm. Hughes in particular had a bizarre relationship with his mother and his breast fetish is very likely an expression of this. In my experience, size really doesn't matter to most guys.

Put a pair of boobs in front of a guy and he is biologically incapable of ignoring them, no matter what size, no matter how many he's seen before.

a cautionary tale

Caution: do not swallow chewing gum before an aerobics class...

Contemporary art goes down the gurgler

"I Give You All My Money" by Scottish Artist Cathy Wilkes

A naked mannequin draped in horsehoes sitting on a toilet is one of several art works nominated for Britain's Turner Prize this year. Scotland-based Cathy Wilkes, who has also positioned a mannequin with her head in a bird cage in the work, is one of four artists nominated for contemporary art's most prestigious prize at London's Tate Britain museum. Brisbane Times

Photos: the nominees

Also on display are old porridge bowls and a clip from The Simpsons cartoon. There is sculpture, installations and film – but no figurative painting. What would the great Joseph Mallord William Turner (for whom the prize is named) have thought? Very little one would imagine; he's likely to be furiously turning in his grave. The Turner Prize has established a reputation for pushing the boundaries and usually manages to spawn outrage and debate on what constitutes art. The questionable merits of this year's nominees beg a larger question: is this the end of Western Art?

Over the last 20 to 30 years, western modern art has become increasingly obscure and inaccessible. It has seemed to deliberately alienate the general public and to become increasingly elitist. Only an exclusive circle of dilettantes pretend to understand what the contemporary art scene is all about and it has become all but irrelevant to the average person.

After the second world war, the old order having ground itself into the ground due to the ravages of two world wars, the epicentre of the 'art scene' moved from Paris to New York. Abstract Expressionism established itself as the new cutting edge with artists like Pollock, Rothko and De Kooning the new messiahs. This change coincided with the establishment of America as the new super power.

Due to the current economic crisis, America now stands to fall off the pedestal as a super power. Just as China seems set to assume the mantle as the new super power, an explosion in creative energy has come from the Chinese contemporary arts after years of isolation. The centre of creative innovation is shifting inexorably eastwards.

Works like Wilkes "I Give You All My Money" can hardly even claim to be original; Marcel Duchamp exhibited a toilet bowl (Fountain) as early as 1917. A naked mannequin on a toilet is a fitting death knell for western contemporary art.

Men on a leash: reverse sexism?

Several years ago a passing trend emerged in advertising; using sexualised images of men. In 2002, Voodoo produced an ad featuring a woman in a mini-skirt "walking" two naked men wearing collars - an image strangely prescient of the prison abuse images which have come out of Iraq. Is there such thing as reverse sexism? Who cares, as long as it creates a controversy that generates sales.

Voodoo's "men-on-leash" ad generated about 60 complaints to the Advertising Standards Bureau. All were dismissed. The ABS apparently appreciated the humour, reasoning: "This ad clearly intends to depict a tongue-in-cheek view of the well accepted right of a woman to be in control of her choices and her 'accessories'."

Censors in England were not so open minded. A very similar ad showed Jerry Hall holding men on a leash with the tagline: "Twelve get trained, only one gets kept". The ad was banned by London Underground Rail on grounds that it "breaches our advertising code relating to the depiction of men, women and children as sexual objects." A series of bans also saw the ad removed from television.

The fact that this kind of ad was only a passing fad indicates that they do not resonate with women and are not effective advertising. In fact, they probably attract more of a response from men. Is this kind of image offensive and exploitative? Clearly advertisers could not get away with using women in the same way. An image of a man walking naked women on a leash would certainly create an outcry. However, considering the rarity of this kind of image in mainstream advertising, they can be seen as redressing the imbalance to some extent.

There is never a shortage of advertising using exploitative images of women. Putting the boot on the other foot certainly makes commuting a great deal more interesting.