logo
What was Chris Bishop thinking? An earnest attempt to figure it out

What was Chris Bishop thinking? An earnest attempt to figure it out

The Spinoffa day ago

It's an objectively crazy way to behave. But I kind of get it, writes Duncan Greive.
This time last week, Chris Bishop was having an awesome day. A massive NZ music fan, heading to the big awards show – a great night ahead of him. I saw him there, standing alongside his colleague Paul Goldsmith, next to the bar during the intermission. Bishop looked like he was having an excellent time, though to be fair everyone did – the awards are huge and informal and a great night out.
As we now know, the fun wouldn't last for Bishop. Within a couple of hours he'd muttered derisively during a performance by Stan Walker and had a confrontation with Don McGlashan, a singer and songwriter so universally beloved that both Newstalk ZB and RNZ, which agree on very little, describe him as a national treasure. By the following day, Bishop's comments had become the biggest news story to emerge from the awards in years, and Bishop no doubt deeply regrets not keeping his opinions to himself. In the week since, he has stood by his statements on the night but acknowledged, both to media and to the prime minister, that he 'should have kept my thoughts to myself'.
Bishop confirmed to RNZ that he'd said something about 'performative acclaim' during Walker's performance and referred to it as 'a load of crap'. It was poor timing. It was also just plain wrong. Walker's performance was one of the highlights of the night, a soaring ballad (he is becoming New Zealand's Celine Dion – a huge compliment, to be clear) which really took flight when the room filled with supporters waving Toitū te Tiriti flags, prompting an outpouring from the room. This seems an open and shut case, and I'm not here to defend Bishop – that would be almost as foolish as his behaviour – but there are mitigating circumstances which feel material to the current public prosecution.
1. Toitū te Tiriti is a complex organisation
Stuff political editor Luke Malpass once adroitly observed that the Green Party likely scoop up a non-trivial proportion of its votes from people who feel a general dread about the climate and environment, and feel marginally better by giving the party their vote, and don't look much deeper into the policy platform or what they most emphasise. There's a similar phenomenon at work with Toitū te Tiriti. It's both a phrase and an organisation, a sentiment and closely allied with a specific parliamentary party.
The phrase is well-supported, with more than seven in 10 New Zealanders endorsing the idea of 'harmonious race relations through honouring te Tiriti', according to polling by the Human Rights Commission earlier this year. At a guess, Bishop is one of them, as among the most prominent and unambiguous members of the liberal wing of the National Party.
However, Toitū te Tiriti is also an organisation, one which achieved an awe-inspiring level of support during the hīkoi mō te Tiriti earlier this year. The organisation created a vast, countrywide response to both the Treaty principles bill and what supporters perceive as a large number of policies which go against the spirit of te Tiriti.
But while the support for that general idea is broad and will necessarily include voters for a number of parties, the organisation Toitū te Tiriti has deep ties to Te Pāti Māori, most notably through one of its key organisers, Eru Kapa-Kingi, a teaching fellow at the University of Auckland who stood unsuccessfully for parliament in the 2023 election on Te Pāti Māori's list. Supporting the phrase is one thing, supporting the organisation another, and knowing how to practically apply it across society and politics is, to put it mildly, complicated. This is likely what Chris Bishop was trying and failing to express in the moment.
2. Arts and culture has a near total lack of representation for right wing politics
Labour's Willie Jackson is not wrong in his statement on the Chris Bishop affair. 'Look around the world, people have been doing that for years. Whether it's Bob Marley, Bono, whatever, it's been happening, it's not like something new. He should talk to his Shihad heroes, 'cause the lead singer there's got pretty good politics too.' The phrase 'good politics' is telling there, but likely to be something the vast bulk of the music awards crowd endorses.
I am old enough to have been to music awards since Helen Clark was prime minister. She received cheers and appeared on stage, with (mostly) undivided affection from the crowd. Over the years the likes of Chlöe Swarbrick and Jacinda Ardern, before and after their elevation to party leadership, have been largely lauded while in attendance. One notable exception was Homebrew's Tom Scott, who condemned Ardern for not visiting Ihumātao during the occupation – essentially a criticism of a centre left prime minister from the left, asking for a more explicitly leftist position.
Bishop is manifestly a very genuine fan of New Zealand music. He regularly goes to shows, buys t-shirts, advocates for it whenever he can. He attended multiple dates on the final Shihad tour. He is its most prominent and present champion within the National party, perhaps the biggest fan the party has ever had. He will also not be unaware of the general politics of not only musicians, but arts and culture makers and workers more broadly. But he shows up and attempts to present an acceptable face of a party and a broader worldview which is anathema to many fans and almost all makers in the rooms he frequents.
Where culture and politics collide
What likely boiled over in Bishop is the tension which is always present and rarely voiced in these discussions. Music, TV, film, arts and culture in New Zealand receives a significant amount of support from central and local government. It's not enough, and it's not a huge amount compared to some other countries. But it comes from all taxpayers and ratepayers, which naturally includes many people who hold differing political views. Who might believe in toitū te Tiriti (the sentiment), but not the particular ambitions and ties of Toitū te Tiriti (the advocacy organisation) as a microcosm of the broader goal.
So Jackson is right, music has always been political. And Bishop was wrong: neither Walker's performance nor the emotional heft of the arrival of the Toitū te Tiriti flags and supporters in the room was 'a load of crap'. It was the undeniable emotional heart of the evening. But the Aotearoa Music Awards are publicly funded, and streamed on both TVNZ and RNZ. To have something so close to a party political moment within them would rankle those who don't share those politics. To put it another way, imagine Groundswell or Family First, neither of which are as party aligned as Toitū te Tiriti, showing up and the reception they would receive.
It's part of an increasingly explicit and party political alignment of our cultural figures, particularly in these fractious times, where performers can feel contemptuous of the views of those who are elected to represent them. While arts funding does wax and wane according to different governments, the idea that it should exist has endured for decades. When it goes beyond statements to specific party-aligned organisations, the bipartisan support for such funding might become more contested. Not to mention its broad appeal, inside and outside of parliament.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

David Seymour defends role in Oxford Union 'stolen land' debate
David Seymour defends role in Oxford Union 'stolen land' debate

1News

time2 hours ago

  • 1News

David Seymour defends role in Oxford Union 'stolen land' debate

Newly minted Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour says his self-funded trip to participate in the Oxford Union is worth doing despite his growing workload back home, because the world can learn from New Zealand's experience. Seymour has followed in the footsteps of some of the world's most prominent people, speaking at an Oxford Union event in England. Oxford Union claims to be the "most prestigious debating society in the world'', on its website. Established in 1823 with a commitment to freedom of speech and expression, the union's members largely remain University of Oxford students. The Deputy Prime Minister has followed in the footsteps of some of the world's most prominent people, speaking at an Oxford Union event in England. (Source: 1News) ADVERTISEMENT Seymour was opposing the moot "This House Believes No One Can Be Illegal on Stolen Land" alongside United States immigration reform advocates RJ Hauman and Art Arthur. The proposing side are historian Aviva Chomsky, Palestinian peace activist Nivine Sandouka and Australian Senator and Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens Mehreen Faruqi. Both sides will also include a student speaker. "I believe we're one of the most successful societies that there are in a world that is very troubled in many ways," Seymour told 1News. "A country like New Zealand that does practise the rule of law, that has sought through treaty settlements to right the wrongs of the past, that does welcome migrants." Seymour said he thought the invite was a prank until he saw that Labour MP Willie Jackson had participated in a debate at the union last year. He is opposing the moot "This House Believes No One Can Be Illegal on Stolen Land" alongside United States immigration reform advocates. (Source: Breakfast) On now being linked to the group of distinguished people that have spoken at Oxford Union events, Seymour said humour was his best chance for standing out. ADVERTISEMENT "Albert Einstein's been here, so I'm not the smartest.,They've had people like Elton John, so I'm not the most famous and I don't know if I'll be the funniest, but that's probably the best area to compete," he said. Toitū Te Tiriti spokesperson critical of moot Toitū Te Tiriti spokesperson Eru Kapa-Kingi has criticised Oxford Union's debate topic of "This House Believes No One Can Be Illegal on Stolen Land," saying discussing topics like this under the principle of freedom of expression is "ultimately dangerous". Toitū Te Tiriti spokesperson Eru Kapa-Kingi. He says this principle creates "opportunity for more embedded stereotypes which will damage not only current generations but also future generations of indigenous communities who are in the process right now of reclaiming and reviving their own identity, culture and political authority". Kapa-Kingi helped lead the hīkoi to Parliament opposing the Treaty Principles Bill, which failed at the second reading in Parliament. He's also been critical of Seymour participating in the debate, saying it's problematic. ADVERTISEMENT "He has neither the qualification nor the lived experience to talk either about illegal immigration or the colonisation of indigenous cultures, particularly through the theft of land… "Also, given David Seymour's most recent track record in terms of the Treaty Principles Bill and most recently the Regulatory Standards Bill, direct attacks on indigenous rights, tangata whenua (Māori) rights in Aotearoa, this is a provocative move inviting him to partake in this debate concerning those exact rights.' Kapa-Kingi said he questions the integrity and credibility of the debate, perceiving the event as a "deliberate attempt to incite what will inevitably be hateful rhetoric, damaging rhetoric to indigenous communities". Parliament punishment, free money?, getting wicked again (Source: 1News) Kapa-Kingi said Māori with formal qualifications and lived experience would be a better pick to take part and 'carry the kōrero with respect, honour and in a way that's genuinely productive and genuinely thought-provoking". Seymour has rejected the comments, saying everyone is allowed to share their perspective on an issue. "I think that they need to start respecting each person's dignity and right to have views and share them, instead of trying to say that some people are less able to express a view which seems to be exactly what they believe.' ADVERTISEMENT Seymour claimed the protest group divides society "into victims and villains and we should each know our place". "Well actually I think that we all get a time on earth and should be able to make the most of it, share the ideas that are important for us, throw away the ones that we don't like." A long history of distinguished guests As well as debates, the Union has a long history of hearing from distinguished people from around the world. This has included Albert Einstein, Mother Teresa and Malcolm X. Controversial speakers have also been invited over the years, sparking dramatic protests. New Zealand's most famous Oxford Union debate moment came in 1985 when former Prime Minister David Lange responded to a student speaker that he would answer his question, "if you hold your breath just for a moment... I can smell the uranium on it as you lean towards me!" David Lange at the Oxford Union event in 1985. (Source: TVNZ) Lange won the debate, arguing that "nuclear weapons are morally indefensible" and drawing international attention to New Zealand's anti-nuclear stance.

The David Seymour ‘Bots' Debate: Do Online Submission Tools Help Or Hurt Democracy?
The David Seymour ‘Bots' Debate: Do Online Submission Tools Help Or Hurt Democracy?

Scoop

time3 hours ago

  • Scoop

The David Seymour ‘Bots' Debate: Do Online Submission Tools Help Or Hurt Democracy?

Article – RNZ The ACT leader's comments raise questions about how forms are changing the way people engage with politics. , (Ngāpuhi, Te Māhurehure, Ngāti Manu) Longform Journalist, Te Ao Māori A discussion document on a Regulatory Standards Bill is not, on the face of it, the sort of thing that might have been expected to prompt 23,000 responses. But in an age of digital democracy, the Ministry for Regulation was probably expecting it. The bill, led by ACT Party leader David Seymour, is controversial. It sparked a response from activists, who used online tools to help people make their opposition known. Of the 23,000 submissions, 88 percent were opposed. Seymour this week told RNZ's 'bots' generating 'fake' submissions. He did not provide evidence for the claim and later explained he wasn't referring to literal bots but to 'online campaigns' that generate 'non-representative samples' that don't reflect public opinion. Seymour has previous experience with this sort of thing. The Treaty Principles Bill got a record 300,000 submissions when it was considered by the Justice Committee earlier this year. Is Seymour right to have raised concerns about how these tools are affecting public debate? Or are they a boon for democracy? Submission tools used across the political spectrum Submission tools are commonly used by advocacy groups to mobilise public input during the select committee process. The online tools often offer a template for users to fill out or suggested wording that can be edited or submitted as is. Each submission is usually still sent by the individual. Taxpayers' Union spokesperson Jordan Williams said submitting to Parliament used to be 'pretty difficult'. 'You'd have to write a letter and things like that. What the tools do allow is for people to very easily and quickly make their voice heard.' The tools being used now are part of sophisticated marketing campaigns, Williams said. 'You do get pressure groups that take particular interest, and it blows out the numbers, but that doesn't mean that officials should be ruling them out or refusing to engage or read submissions.' The Taxpayers' Union has created submission tools in the past, but Williams said he isn't in favour of tools that don't allow the submitter to alter the submission. He has encouraged supporters to change the contents of the submission to ensure it is original. 'The ones that we are pretty suspicious of is when it doesn't allow the end user to actually change the submission, and in effect, it just operates like a petition, which I don't think quite has the same democratic value.' Clerk of the House of Representatives David Wilson said campaigns that see thousands of similar submissions on proposed legislation are not new, they've just taken a different form. 'It's happened for many, many years. It used to be photocopied forms. Now, often it's things online that you can fill out. And there's nothing wrong with doing that. It's a legitimate submission.' However, Wilson pointed out that identical responses would likely be grouped by the select committee and treated as one submission. 'The purpose of the select committee calling for public submissions is so that the members of the committee can better inform themselves about the issues. They're looking at the bill, thinking about whether it needs to be amended or whether it should pass. So if they receive the same view from hundreds of people, they will know that.' But that isn't to say those submissions are discredited, Wilson said. 'For example, the committee staff would say, you've received 10,000 submissions that all look exactly like this. So members will know how many there were and what they said. But I don't know if there's any point in all of the members individually reading the same thing that many times.' But Williams said there were risks in treating similar submissions created using 'tools' as one submission. 'Treating those ones as if they are all identical is not just wrong, it's actually undemocratic,' he said. 'It's been really concerning that, under the current parliament, they are trying to carte blanche, reject people's submissions, because a lot of them are similar.' AI should be used to analyse submissions and identify the unique points. 'Because if people are going to take the time and make a submission to Parliament, at the very least, the officials should be reading them or having them summarised,' Williams said. 'Every single case on its merits' Labour MP Duncan Webb is a member of the Justice Committee and sat in on oral submissions for the Treaty Principles Bill. He said he attempted to read as many submissions as possible. 'When you get a stock submission, which is a body of text that is identical and it's just been clicked and dragged, then you don't have to read them all, because you just know that there are 500 people who think exactly the same thing,' he said. 'But when you get 500 postcards, which each have three handwritten sentences on them, they may all have the same theme, they may all be from a particular organisation, but the individual thoughts that have been individually expressed. So you can't kind of categorise it as just one size fits all. You've got to take every single case on its merits.' Webb said he takes the select committee process very seriously. 'The thing that struck me was, sure, you read a lot [of submissions] which are repetitive, but then all of a sudden you come across one which actually changes the way you think about the problem in front of you. 'To kind of dismiss that as just one of a pile from this organisation is actually denying someone who's got an important point to make, their voice in the democratic process.'

Popular Labubu Dolls Being Swiped By Scalpers
Popular Labubu Dolls Being Swiped By Scalpers

Scoop

time4 hours ago

  • Scoop

Popular Labubu Dolls Being Swiped By Scalpers

Article – RNZ Labubu dolls have became a pop-culture sensation, but some are taking advantage of collectors., Morning Report producer Labubus are the latest collectable toy craze to hit the market. But frenzied fans are becoming increasingly frustrated by how much they are having to spend to get them. The dolls, sold by Chinese toy company POP MART, are being snatched up by scalpers and re-sold online for hundreds of dollars. Labubu dolls are roughly hand sized – they have nine teeth and look like a cross between a fluffy rabbit and a monster from the children's book Where the Wild Things Are. After K-pop star 'Lisa' was seen with her own Labubu late last year, the fluffy dolls became a pop-culture sensation. They've even featured in Lizzo's song 'WHIM WHAMIEE'. Kate Sabatin has six Labubus and explains her attraction to the dolls. 'They're ugly to the point that they are cute. Like they are so ugly they are cute' she said. Aucklander Sophia Ibbetson is the proud owner of 10 dolls, which she has been collecting since late last year. At first they were relatively easy to buy, but Ibbetson explained now it was nearly impossible. Last month she visited POP MART in Newmarket where she saw roughly 200 people queuing for a doll. 'There was a huge line that wrapped around Newmarket.' According to Ibbetson scalpers have quickly taken control of the market. 'They'll launch it at 1:15pm and then by 1:45pm they'll send a message saying it's sold out. 'You'll see just a bunch of resellers reselling the same collection that they just launched at Newmarket for like double the price,' she said. Speaking under the alias 'Adam', a self-described 'religious scalper', said he transitioned from sneaker flipping to Labubus when the hype peaked at the end of last year. He's part of a syndicate of around 12 re-sellers who call themselves 'Link', buying box sets to flip for profit. 'You can buy one box which is six items they retail for about $230 for the newest set – and you can flip them from anywhere from 5-to-600 bucks. Most of us will get, like two to three [boxes] each which is 12 to 18 [dolls].' Adam is a university student and he hoped to get out of scalping when he finished studying. 'You know, it's not exactly honourable, so I would hate to be doing it once I'm all qualified and everything.' Australian re-seller Jordan Caruccio believed the surprise factor was a major reason why the dolls were so popular. Rare dolls, known as secrets, go for big bucks. 'I think it's one in every 75 boxes they have a secret one, so you've got to be super lucky. 'But that secret one is worth like $500-$600, and if you have that, everyone looks at you like you're the Labubu god.' Ibbetson has given up trying to buy one of the newest Labubu releases and was collecting other POP MART figurines instead. 'It's kind of made it unenjoyable for someone like me, just fighting to enjoy them, because I can't, because I now have to pay the reseller price.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store