I wrote this post in response to a blog tittled Being politically correct
Subjectivity, I admit it’s extremely hard to avoid, especially when you haul around bundles of zealous opinions like me. It’s something as a writer and student I have to work on and in turn this post may seem contradictory to a few of my previous opinionated rambles. But I’m going to say it anyway. On November 13, 2006 an article by Deborah Coddington titled ‘Asian Angst: Is it time to send some back?’ was released in the North and South publication. The article adopted a biased tone when reporting issues of race relations in conjunction with what was given the dogma of the ‘Asian crime epidemic.’ Coddington fundamentally listed one Asian related crime after another ignoring all contrasting information speaking with only one voice representing only one discriminatory message. The title freestanding exudes hints of ethnic and moral battery.
Although there was evidence of some attempt to create a balanced argument there remain only two quotes from citizens of Asian descent and approximately 450 neutralising words in the entire 6600 word article which talked exclusively of Asian issues. Statements made in the article such as, Asian are seen in NZ to have “all-round fine citizenship,” are contradicted and unsupported by comments such as “The Asian menace has been steadily creeping up on us”, We can’t be seen as a soft touch. Personally my gut reaction is why the hell are taxpayers paying for these bastards.” and “as each week passes with news of yet another arrest involving a Chinese sounding name”
Following the realise of the article complaints flowed into the Press Council head courters. In a complaint by Tze Ming Mok a member of the Asia New Zealand foundation it was stated, “The article is offensive on several levels, and carried racist overtones. Further details maybe viewed in the original complaint letter, but in summary, the article contained descriptions that were objectifying and dehumanizing, which implied that Asian New Zealanders are not New Zealanders or are lesser New Zealanders than the rest of the population, and which included uncritical reproduction of anachronistic racial slurs such as‘Asian menace’and ‘Asiatic’.” Complaints not only against the racial bias but the reporting of inaccuracy were put forward. Dr Grant Hannis stated “To obtain a clear picture of Asian crime we need to calculate the crime rate – the number of reported crimes as a proportion of the population. This is the standard statistical measure of the incidence of crime. The crime rate did not appear in thearticle or in any of the subsequent discussion. I have calculated the crime rate, using data for the time periods and populations used in the article.”
On the 11th of June 2007 the New Zealand Press Council ruled that the ‘Article Asian Angst’s it time to send some back?’ breached principle codes numbers 1 and 8 on accuracy and discrimination. Code 8 states that Publications should not place gratuitous emphasis on gender, religion, minority groups, sexual orientation, age, race, colour or physical or mental disability. Nevertheless, where it is relevant and in the public interest, publications may report and express opinions in these areas. The council responded by stating that the language used was “emotionally loaded” and that “There are serious crimes committed by individual Asians is not at issue but the failure to set this in context, both of other sectors of New Zealand society and of the Asian communities as a whole, cannot but stigmatise a whole group.”
Coddington responded firmly to the complaints and denied all counts of inaccuracy and discrimination stating “Dr Hannis is not comparing like with like. I find it interesting that someone who leads a journalism school at a university noted for its journalism training does not seem to understand the basic concepts in constructing a relevant and balanced argument. I stand by my article and the use of the apprehension statistics in the article.” In a frenzied web media response to the article online bloggers criticised Coddington. Reactions were harsh and included comments such as the following, “You can see Coddington and Robyn Langwell examining the cake. How? How can we make sure that the racists eat the cake? But that no-one can prove that we fed it to them?” and “We can smell the weakness in your stats, Ms Coddington, and it smells like Poisson distribution that’s gone off.” One blogger noted that articles such as these had seem to be a recruitment from the past, not since the Asian Invasion article in 1996 had we seen such racial hammering. “When ‘Asian Angst’ was published last year, there was a widespread sense of disbelief that something like this was actually happening again – it seemed so anachronistic, a kind of journalism from another era, repudiated long ago.” Coddington ignored all interview requests concerning the public’s uproar but in a fleet to defend herself Coddington responded via her columns in the Herald on Sunday, calling the bloggers “insane,” and claiming that “heartland” New Zealand was behind her.
Asian stereotypes are deeply embedded into New Zealand’s social assumptions. The racial thread labelled “the yellow peril” is still holds a significant position in New Zealand society. Even citizens born in New Zealand whom ancestry arrived in the same period of early European settlers are told to ‘go home.’ Considering New Zealand’s racially stained attitude, it is widely believed that the figure heads of the publication formulated this article in an editorial quest to boost sales by connecting to their middle to upper class pakeha audience. Charles Mabbett stated “My information tells me that the editor wanted this angle, and found a journalist who would provide it. That was atrocious.” Deborah Coddington strengthens this theory when she revealed during a heated interview on national radio that the article ‘wasn’t even my idea.’ As a result, The Asian Angst article was tossed into the category of unethical journalism and although sales may have peaked short term, the vast controversy’s following the article achieved nothing but eradicating damaged to the North and South brand.
I feel this article ‘Asian Angst’ had some interesting information to communicate concerning the Asian crime rate and that New Zealanders deserve access to this information, this is almost undeniable. It was however the execution of these important messages that needed to entail a more fair and unprejudiced slant. Does this make me to PC? Most probably. Being politically correct may not be fashionable in today’s freethinking society, but if you were suddenly pushed into the minority group your views on this subject matter could inherit a new perspective.