
Dr Zahi Hawass the Egyptian archaeologist is well known to those who enjoy historical documentaries. He is highly respected in his field and is the current Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities. I have always found his manner rather abrasive and have tended to avoid his offerings. However, his new TV show program on the History Channel: ‘Chasing Mummies‘ is quite a different affair; this is actually riveting and addictive television. The producers of ‘Chasing Mummies’ seem to have recognised the potential of Dr Hawass’ explosive temper and have harnessed it to great effect.
In one incident, Dr Hawass’ assistant Casey Fitchner gets completely blasted by the good doctor for being late to work. Later, while exploring inside the Stepped Pyramid, Fitchner asks if there is somewhere she can go to the bathroom. Dr Hawass informs her in no uncertain terms that the pyramid is a holy place and of course she can’t go. Later, she can no longer resist the call of nature and wets herself on camera. Dr Hawass’ outbursts make Gordon Ramsey look kindly and avuncular.
The History Channel has kindly provided a preview of Dr Hawass’ temper tantrums in this promo:
The tantrums, the discoveries, the on camera urination are of course all staged. The acting is not particularly convincing and the situations are not completely plausible. Would a respected Egyptologist, aware that he is on camera risk his reputation by going berserk? Would an assistant risk ruining her career by allowing herself to be filmed showing up late for work or wetting herself inside a famous historic life. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) real life just isn’t quite as dramatic as that, and when it is a camera is seldom conveniently running. This is not to say that the scripted nature of the program make it any less enjoyable. I found it hysterical and by far the most interesting presentation by Dr Zahi Hawass that I’ve seen.
Still, the question must be asked; why is a figure recognised as a leading authority in this field involving himself in a blatantly sensational reality TV show? The Pharaohs must be turning in their tombs.
Tags: Archaeology, History Channel, outburst, reality TV, Supreme Council of Antiquities, tantrum, Zahi Hawass
Before rushing to the conclusion that the election of Julia Gillard as Labor Leader and Prime Minister of Australia is the dawn of a new age of enlightenment and gender equity, it might be as well to consider the legacy of a few other female leaders.
Indira Ghandi: Prime Minister of the Republic of India for three consecutive terms from 1966 to 1977 and for a fourth term from 1980 until her assassination in 1984. During the state of emergency she imposed (1975-77) Ghandi attempted to restore order by ordering the arrest of most of the opposition including the leader. She was later found guilty of electoral corruption and jailed. Ghandi also implemented a family planning program which forcibly imposed vasectomy on thousands of men. This policy was (understandably) particularly unpopular. Being the first woman Prime Minister of India, and an influential leader, in a prevalently male-dominated society, Indira Gandhi is considered by some a symbol of feminism in India but for reasons among those mentioned, she is not remembered kindly by many.
Sarah Palin faced criminal charges for embezzlement during her term as mayor of Wasilla. Her her husband, Todd, was also indicted for misappropriating construction materials meant for the town sports complex to build the Palin’s home. source An independent investigator for the state Alaska Personnel Board found that there may have been evidence suggesting that a trust fund created to pay Palin’s legal expenses is in violation of state ethics law. source It was also alleged that Sarah Palin abused her power by letting her husband press for the firing of a State Trooper Michael Wooten, who was involved in a divorce and custody battle with Palin’s sister, a legislative probe found, while adding that she acted within her authority when she dismissed the state’s public safety commissioner. source
Palin has also become well known for her many assaults on the English language, her most recent being: “Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn’t it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate.” -a Tweet by Sarah Palin, which she quickly removed after being ridiculed for inventing the word “refudiate,” (July 18, 2010) Read more Sarah Palin quotes here: Dumb Sarah Palin Quotes, Gaffes and Lies
Is it unfair to ridicule Sarah Palin? It is perhaps a little too easy. As a public figure and possible contender for US President in 2012, Palin must accept all the scrutiny she is subjected to. Palin may not be a national leader yet but is being touted by many as a strong possibility. She remains highly popular; perhaps her supporters do not think that a firm grasp of the English language and a strong grasp of national affairs and foreign policy are necessary qualities in a world leader. Again, Sarah Palin is a committed conservative and anything but a feminist.
Of course, not all female leaders have been right wing conservatives. Notable exceptions are Benazir Bhutto, Prime Minister of Pakistan (1988–1990; 1993–1996) and first woman to lead a Muslim state and Corazon Aquino, 11th President of the Philippines and the first woman to hold that office. Nevertheless, a great many female politicians seem to gravitate to the conservative side of politics. Why is this?
Could it be that the perception of politics as a male field and women’s lower status in society in general makes it easier for female politicians on the conservative side to be successful? Credibility is perhaps easier to come by when you are a supporter of the status quo rather than as a radical agitator. This is perhaps the same reason why the few indigenous politicians who have been elected to office, such as Neville Bonner also chose to represent the conservative side. Political parties have been accused of tokenism for promoting women and minorities to office. It would seem that as long as you don’t rock the boat, it doesn’t really matter what gender or colour you are. If those who are committed to reform are consistently denied, the current dearth of female politicians (in Australia at least) is nothing more than tokenism. The glass ceiling it would seem, remains firmly in place.
Julia Gillard, so far at least, is no exception to this rule. She may be Labor leader but Labor has been anything but left wing for a number of years. She has made her ‘tough’ position on border protection and asylum seekers clear by appealing to the more xenophobic sections of the community. She has given multinational mining a feeble compromise which has allowed them to walk away with most of what they wanted. She has also come out against gay marriage. Perhaps the Herald’s Peter Hatcher summed up Gillard’s leadership to date best in his article: No numbers, no substance, no solutions – just populist platitudes So far, Gillard’s main M.O. seems to be: make my leadership look like a grand vision while actually doing as little as possible. Until leaders like Gillard risk losing a few votes by implementing a few possibly unpopular reforms, nothing is likely to change.
Tags: female leaders, female prime minister, forcible vasectomy, Indira Gandhi, Julia Gillard, Margaret Thatcher, Sarah Palin
NSW would now appear to be a female dominated state in a female dominated country. It boasts a female Governor (Professor Marie Bashir AC, CVO), a female Premiere (The Hon. Kristina Keneally MLA), a female Deputy Premiere (Carmel Tebbutt MLA) a female Governor General (Her Excellency Quentin Bryce), recently a female Prime Minister (The Hon. Julia Gillard) and of course a female head of state (Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II). The number of women in leadership positions would seem to attest to the fact that the Women’s Movement has come of age. These figureheads surely herald a brave new world where women really can do anything. While these brilliant careers do signify some progress in the cause of gender equity, these women remain largely nothing more than figureheads; a concession on behalf of the real powerbrokers lurking behind the scenes.
How so? Everyone is aware that The Queen holds no political power. No monarch since Queen Victoria has seriously been involved with affairs of state and even she did little more than carry out the wishes of the male establishment. Likewise, the Governor General is nothing more than the Queen’s representative in Australia. Apart from a slight constitutional hiccup in 1975 the Governor General is just another rubber stamp, as are the state Governors. Furthermore, despite being Head of State, the Queen has always represented a very conservative view of the place of women in society. The same might be said of other female leaders such as Margaret Thatcher; hardly a feminist by any stretch of the imagination.
Kristina Keneally has been unable to rescue the floundering NSW Labor Government despite her best efforts. NSW Labor has been on the nose for too long and too many are aware that Keneally was installed by the even more unpopular right faction. Despite the fact that she is Premiere and Labor leader, she retains those titles only as long as the powerbrokers allow her to. She is in other words, just another figure head and is now likely to preside over the greatest electoral debacle in NSW history.
Julia Gillard also largely owes her leadership to the machinations of the behind-the-scenes numbers men. She may be talented, driven and sharp. Her oratory gives every impression of a strong will with strong convictions. Gillard now has a wonderful opportunity to put her convictions into practice, but we are becoming increasingly unsure of just what her convictions are. Since assuming the leadership, Gillard has continued to espouse the populist policies of her mealy mouthed predecessor. The back pedal on the mining super profits tax might have been politically astute but little more. Work Choices was never truly dismantled but watered down. Why; supporting unions too closely might lose votes. Climate change remains ”the great moral and economic challenge of our time” as long as it doesn’t mean doing anything that might lose votes. She continues to pander to xenophobic sections of the electorate with tough policies on border protection and asylum seekers. Julia Gillard might have been an agent for change, she might have heralded a return to traditional Labor values. It seems modern Labor values are concerned only with getting re-elected at any cost. Getting re-elected is of course a desirable outcome for any government, but what’s the point of winning government if you no longer stand for anything?
Well may we applaud the current generation of female leaders as harbingers of a new age of equality. This is after all what the suffragettes threw themselves under race horses for, isn’t it? Perhaps we shouldn’t be too hasty to accept these appearances for what they seem. The real power remains in the corporate board rooms and political factions. Puppet leaders are only useful as long as they serve a purpose. In actual fact, they may actually conceal a step backwards in the cause of gender equity rather than any real progress.
Tags: gender equity, Julia Gillard, Kristina Keneally, Margaret Thatcher, Quentin Bryce
In the aftermath of a succession of what must have been some of the most awful refereeing decisions in football history, FIFA President Sepp Blatter has issued a statement saying that FIFA will re-open the debate on the use of video technology later this year. Well, he had to respond in some way; the poor decisions have been highly embarrassing and have surely compromised what has otherwise been a very entertaining World Cup. In actual fact, FIFA remains resolutely opposed to introducing any kind of technology. FIFA has said it wants to maintain ‘the traditions of the game’. If the current mess is the outcome of staying with tradition, perhaps the tradition of the referee as absolute judge isn’t all it might be.
FIFA’s stubborn stance harks back to a time when people mostly accepted authority almost without exception. Once a decision has been made, referees obviously feel they have to stick to it whether right or wrong or risk having their authority undermined. This might have been easy to get around in the past, but with half the world watching on high definition TV, persisting with this position has become untenable and really, completely farcical.
At least FIFA has sent home some of the worst blunderers.
Anyone who watched any of these games could clearly see a monumental error had been made. If players have the temerity to complain about a decision they run the risk of being sent off for dissent. FIFA clings to the futile notion that referees are infallible and the ultimate authority on the field. While we might call these referees blunderers with incredulity, FIFA must bear at least as much responsibility.
Referees, selected by FIFA have been under pressure to crack down on fouls. The flood of yellow and red cards attests to this. The stakes are incredibly high and diving and cynical professional fouls are a problem that do need to be dealt with, but handing out cards at the drop of a hat is hardly a solution. The natural course of the game is compromised and results are effected. FIFA is not following this policy out of any respect for the traditions of the game; it is motivated by the huge amounts of money involved in TV distribution rights and they want a product that looks as good as possible. Unfortunately for FIFA, this policy has had exactly the opposite effect. The rules should be applied consistently; decisions should be no more harsh than they are at division level.
Any of the teams knocked out by bad decisions might well have gone on to the final. The outcome of the tournament has been compromised and we can now only wonder what might have been. It’s true, FIFA don’t need a high tech solution to this problem. Any fool with an old black and white TV and a video recorder could have easily reached the right decision. Surely the benefits of some kind of video 3rd referee would massively outweigh any loss of tradition.
Perhaps the only technology required are new glasses for the referees in question.
Tags: FIFA, Frank Lampard, Jorge Larrionda, Roberto Rosetti, Sepp Blatter, Soccer, sport, World Cup
The period known as ‘Golden Age of Piracy‘ lasted from the 1650s until the 1720s. Colourful characters such as Henry Morgan, Captain Kidd, Blackbeard, Sam Bellamy, Calico Jack Rackham and Anne Bonny (yes, there were even female pirates!) perpetrated outrageous deeds on the high seas with near impunity until the authorities finally cracked down using a divide and conquer approach. During the Golden Age, pirates posed a serious threat to shipping and even held whole towns to ransom. An increased Royal Navy presence in the Caribbean and the the offer of pardons for pirates seriously reduced their numbers and by 1725 pirates no longer posed a serious threat.
The early 21st century may well have seen the Golden Age of Computer Piracy come and go. Those that argue for a free internet have many supporters. Wasn’t the internet originally set up to allow a free exchange of ideas and information between individuals? Surely Tim Berners-Lee never envisioned the commercial juggernaut it has become.
Colourful organisations like The Pirate Bay and other file sharing sites have come and gone (remember Napster?). It’s interesting to note that even The Pirate Bay’s logo is not covered by copyright. Under ‘permission’ on Wikipedia Commons, the following is listed:
This work is labeled as Kopimi, meaning that the copyright holder of this work does not only release it, but specifically requests that this work be used and copied for any purpose, including unlimited commercial use and redistribution. It is believed in good faith that a work classified as Kopimi is free to use in any way, including modification and the creation of derivative works.
Given The Pirate Bay’s free internet position, they could hardly copyright their logo. Specifically requesting that the content be copied for any purpose might well be a novel and successful promotional strategy. Making your brand as visible as possible might well be enough of a benefit to offset all that illegal file sharing but this, of course, is never likely to happen.
The game is up for The Pirate Bay and their brethren, just as it was for Blackbeard and co. back in the 1720s. The stakes are simply just too high. The large content corporations are circling and pumping an ever increasing stream of financial and legal resources into crushing digital piracy. NEC has created a pirated film detection algorithm with a 96% success rate. More and more control will be taken from the user until any use of digital media will be strictly monitored and restricted. Using the internet will be subject to just the same level of control. If the odd 13 year old girl is dragged through the courts for downloading a few Justin Bebier tracks so be it; just collateral damage.
It has never been reasonable for corporations to target little people like this but it has happened often enough. Many have argued that corporations that make their content accessible via the internet for profit bear the responsibility for safe guarding their products. If products are not copy protected, should individuals be prosecuted for copying them? Before very long, copy protection technology will develop to the level that will only allow us to use digital media in the precise manner intended by the providers and will render all these arguments obsolete.
Brave idealists might try to oppose the corporations but it is a battle they can never win. Soon the golden age of the internet might well be nothing more than a dim memory.
Tags: Anne Bonny, Blackbeard, Copyright infringement, Filesharing, Golden Age of Piracy, Pirate Bay, Royal Navy, Tim Berners-Lee