If you haven't seen this column, let me get you up to speed on this:
Yesterday, Sunday Star Times columnist Andrea Vance did something that I would venture no other mainstream columnist has ever done in this country - she called a minister of the Crown a c-word in the newspaper.
She didn't write the c-word out, she wrote it as c....
The subject of it was the gender pay equity revamp, the minister was Nicola Willis and Andrea wrote - "turns out you can have it all, so long as you're prepared to be a C...."
Now, I don't even know how to start explaining to you how wild it is that that happened yesterday, that Andrea dropped the C-bomb in the Sunday Star Times.
That word is the 2nd most banned word on radio. We are not allowed to say it - and if we do, go to town on us and complain because somebody is going to get in a huge amount of trouble, and we will be saying sorry.
But at least on the radio, to some extent, I think we have the defence of being able to say - Hey, look, it was the heat of the moment and the words slipped out of my mouth.
That is not what happens in newspapers. Words don't just slip out onto the paper, you write it down, you consider it, you rewrite it, you reread it. You make sure that every single word is exactly what you mean to say.
Nothing about that is in the heat of the moment. And then you send it to your editors, and your editors read it, and they look at it and they go - yep, that's okay, they can go in the newspaper. And that it what happened.
Now, I'm not a prude. I am not offended by swearing, I swear myself, and I have also done exactly what Andrea has done. I have said things about ministers that I shouldn't have said, and I've regretted and I've apologized for it.
But this is out of hand, what has happened here. There has to be some decorum. I mean, we can hardly complain about anonymous trolls on social media attacking our female politicians when our very own columnists do it in print with their names attached to it.
And reverse this, by the way, if you're not offended by it:
Imagine it was Jacinda. Imagine that a columnist had written this about Jacinda, how much outrage that would have caused, how cancelled that person would have been. There were other c-words we weren't allowed to say about Jacinda. Cindy was one of them, communist was another.
And if you said either of them, people would flip out.
Well, imagine how people would have flipped out if we'd said the c-word. It is very hard to respect an argument about how Nicola Willis isn't a real feminist in a column that attacks her in the most un-feminist way, right?
It uses the most gendered putdown that you can think of. It uses terms like girl math to basically suggest that she can't balance the country's books because she's a woman.
Now for the record, I think Andrea Vance is a fantastic journalist and an incredibly incisive opinion writer, and I think that her editor Tracy Watkins is the best at what she does, but this was a mistake and it lets everyone down when we drag the tone down that badly.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show HERE - where this article was sourced.
23 comments:
And read the Finance Ministers response. Willis 10. Vance 0
Sorry Heather but I am unable to join the dots of a criticism of the article and its author to the belief that said author is a 'fantastic journalist'. Vance and Watkins have proven with the article that they just clearly are not. Adhominem insults are a sign of indolence and a lack of IQ. I hold the belief that these folk have shown their true self and they can never be believed again. Vance was once an employee with The News of the World was she not? We know how despised that rag was so can we now be surprised? Stuff have now quite literally bottom trawled at their lowest level.....
Andrea Vance was out to create controversy and draw attention to her article - it worked a treat!
I agree with Anna Mouse. The episode reminds me of a question once asked on a ship where the meals weren't great and the crew complained: "Who called the cook a bastard?" Came the reply: "Who called the bastard a cook?" In this case who called the c*** a journalist?
Irish activist debbie packer, also thinks dropping f bombs is the way to engage. All of the left are so similar in my opinion. The left has become more like a cult than a political party. As with other cults, the dim and the damaged are attracted to it. Can anyone name a left leader who is also a decent and good person?
Why am I not surprised ?
Vance has a track record of nasty vitriol against anyone whose politics are different from hers.
That article, with the c... word, etc is still on-line right now as I write this about 9:50 a.m.
Sid Vicious use of the word in a rendition of the song "my way" is worth hearing.
I think real issue here is Vance and fellow commentators on the issue have been "shooting from the hip" without reading and/or understanding the Bill and the changes made to the previous legislation.
Stuff’s Linguistic Low Point
————————————————
You know the media’s in trouble when Stuff, once a respectable national news outlet, starts acting like a chain-smoking teenage blogger trying to go viral with a half-baked Tumblr post from 2012.
This week, The Sunday Star-Times decided to give us something special with our brunch: a steaming, unfiltered dollop of schoolyard vulgarity, artfully camouflaged in a column that claims to champion feminism by casually calling a female minister the most gendered slur in the English language. Yes, Andrea Vance dropped the C-bomb — dressed it up in coy ellipses, handed it to Nicola Willis like a poisoned macaron, and the editor, Tracy Watkins, gave it a full ceremonial blessing. Bon appétit.
Let’s be clear: this was no typo. No late-night brain-fade blamed on long Covid. This wasn’t a slipped mic on live radio. This was crafted, edited, typeset, and printed. It passed through the editorial digestive system, presumably without anyone choking. That’s what makes it extraordinary. A moment so considered, so deliberate, it could only have been born of newsroom boredom, ideological self-righteousness, or the belief that outrage is now a valid content strategy.
What Stuff served up wasn’t journalism. It was the linguistic equivalent of tossing a pint glass in a bar fight and then hiding behind the jukebox.
And for what? To suggest that the Finance Minister can’t be both fiscally conservative and feminist — unless, of course, she’s prepared to become a C…. A progressive point, apparently. Just one that comes accessorised with misogyny. It’s almost poetic: weaponising a word historically used to degrade women in order to accuse another woman of not being pro-woman enough. That’s not just hypocrisy — it’s performance art.
Imagine, for one anarchic second, that this had been written about Chloe Swarbrick. The very same word. The very same tone. The same wink-wink formatting. How long before the column was pulled? Before a grovelling apology appeared, flanked by hashtags and a photo of the team at Stuff holding a sign that says “We Stand With Women”?
But alas, Nicola Willis isn’t in the right club. She doesn’t wear the right badge. So she’s fair game. C-word away. It’s fine. It’s journalism. It’s “edgy.” Next week: a four-page lift-out on fiscal policy, written entirely in emojis.
Vance is, or was, a serious journalist. Watkins is, or was, a serious editor. But this wasn’t serious. This was clickbait dressed up as conscience. This was the sound of a newsroom mistaking provocation for principle, mistaking vulgarity for voice, and mistaking a column for a tantrum.
There is a growing genre of journalism now that exists not to inform, enlighten, or debate — but to shock, offend, and trend. It is journalism that wears moral superiority like armour, but fights with playground insults. The Andrea Vance column wasn’t a moment of bold truth. It was a moment of surrender — to the algorithm, to the echo chamber, to the tired, empty belief that if people are angry, at least they’re reading.
But here’s the twist: they’re not angry because it was brave. They’re angry because it was lazy. Because at some point, calling someone a C-word — whether outright or in euphemism — stopped being journalism and started being just… noise.
Stuff, congratulations. You’ve officially become the thing you used to report on. The outraged headline. The Twitter storm. The click in search of content.
“I think Andrea Vance is a fantastic journalist and an incredibly incisive opinion writer, and I think that her editor Tracy Watkins is the best at what she does…”
I have an even lower opinion of Heather than I did previously after this…
Sorry for being old and dumb. I presume the 'c' word could rhyme with 'Bessie Bunter'.... which if so, the journo needs a few lessons in Engrish, and basic reading skills, and so might Ad Vance!!! .... Instead of digging deep and swimming in the cesspit. Was she not a close buddy of the PM nobody wants to know? The Left is shooting itself in the mouth daily.
Her column and sentiments will be endorsed in similar vein by ex-Stuff staff I know in Taranaki. The war continues until the 1926 election
“Imagine it was Jacinda. Imagine that a columnist had written this about Jacinda, how much outrage that would have caused, how cancelled that person would have been. There were other c-words we weren't allowed to say about Jacinda. Cindy was one of them, communist was another.”
It seems censorship is rife at Newstalk ZB. Jacinda is a communist.
We can complain all we like about Vance and the others in Stuff, but it is Luxon who is keeping this nasty little tabloid in business with his corporate welfare.
In my line of work now, several years after wrapping up 42 years in journalism here and abroad, i often get called a C among other things. By psychiatric patients (we accept that and ignore it as they are unwell) And by wannabe thugs . Vance will be more admired by her targeted readers
Aww...Heather still wants to be Andrea's friend. How cute.
Anna Mouse says it all.
We are indeed in trouble if we are waiting for that election!!
Poetry that wins the Gold!
It is extraordinary how much attention the old c word gets. A long time ago when the internet was trying to ban obscene words I recall Whaka being suspect if pronouned as an f. Pity the folk in Scunthorpe, England. Their locals wondered why Scunthorpe was rejected by Google. It was because an algorithm detected the c word in the name. Locals have to put up with vandals removing the S from Scunthorpe on signs in the town etc.
Yeah, I think you're right. Don't think she should have used it, but it's not crime of the century. If you're female and active online, you're likely to have been called it regularly, almost always by men. The first time I read the Free Speech Union's Facebook page back in 2022, a commenter was calling Jacinda Ardern a c... and the other commenters endorsed this rather than calling it out. A lot of hypocrisy in this arena.
Ok so a word is a word is a word. However there is no need to vulgarise a part of the female body then use it to describe a woman herself.
Ok so you don't like some one - be articulate by all means but not gross.
If you want to wear your gumboots inside then do so but clean them first.
It is about courtesy both for self and others not the lowest common denominator. What does the lowest common denominator truly achieve? In present case distaste for the journalists and an element of sympathy ( even if only nominal) for the recipient.
Post a Comment