Hat tip: Waiology
Minacity – baleful; the action or process of threatening or menacing; ff a menacing or threatening nature; threatening or foreshadowing evil or tragic developments; a tendency to use threats; intimidation, menace.
A friend emailed these – they are supposedly true advertisements from a UK newspaper:
FREE YORKSHIRE TERRIER.
8 years old.
Hateful little bastard. Bites!
1/2 Cocker Spaniel, 1/2 sneaky neighbour’s dog.
Mother, a Kennel Club registered German Shepherd.
Father, Super Dog… able to leap tall fences in a single bound.
COWS, CALVES: NEVER BRED.
Also 1 gay bull for sale.
JOINING NUDIST COLONY!
Must sell washer and dryer £100.
WEDDING DRESS FOR SALE.
Worn once by mistake.
FOR SALE BY OWNER.
Complete set of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 45 volumes.
Excellent condition…..£200 or best offer.
No longer needed; got married last month.
Husband knows everything.
Chinese trade target sky-high – Hugh Stringleman:
Prime Minister John Key and Chinese President Xi Jinping have agreed to aim for $30 billion of bi-lateral trade between New Zealand and China by 2020.
That would be an increase of 65% over the total of two-way trade last year, when NZ sold China almost $10b of exports, mostly from the primary sector, and imported $8.2b.
In a meeting at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing they also agreed to modernise the free-trade agreement between the two countries.
“We have great confidence that the coming years will see trade between us increase at a very fast pace,” Key said. . .
No time to penny-pinch on TB – James Houghton:
Looking at the week that was, we have seen Fish & Game come out with a survey full of leading questions, three of our top agricultural science centers lose Government funding, and the Ministry for Primary Industries taking Fonterra to court. One might take that as a bad week, but this is a standard one for agriculture.
What is important to note is that we deal with a lot of negativity on a day-to-day basis and part of that is because we hold ourselves to a very high standard. However, looking at an average week you can get drowned in the negativity and lose sight of the bigger picture. All these things that are happening around us can seem like a blur of madness, some are but some things are for the big picture, for our children, and theirs.
Locally, we are dealing with the Waikato regional draft Annual Plan, which the council are looking to withdraw their direct funding from the national strategy of pest eradication. The National Pest Strategy, funded by the Animal Health Board, has been focusing on high-risk areas, such as Waikato, to rid the country of TB. The work is achieved by eradicating possums, with TB, from the province, and is spear headed by TB Free New Zealand and OSPRI. . .
The nitty gritty of the nitrate debate – Lynda Murchison:
We are a part of the water quality discussion in some shape or form, and we get our information from many sources. A major focus has been on nitrogen losses from farming. If nitrogen is one of the key ingredients in this national conversation, it ought to be explained beyond the notion that it is all about cows in streams. The science can be complex and the explanations mind-boggling; here’s my simple geographer-farmer take on it.
Why should we care how nitrogen loss is managed? Farmers care because their future flexibility and thus viability is at stake, and like most New Zealanders they want a sustainable future that allows for agricultural growth whilst enjoying healthy waterways. The rest of the population should care because the flexibility and productivity of farming, our ability to feed the world, is what makes New Zealand tick.
Recently, the Ministry for Primary Industries revised their projections for earnings in the primary sector for the 2013-14 year, up another $4.9 billion to $36.5 billion. From that, the direct economic contribution farmers make to the Christchurch economy is estimated at $750 million per year, an impressive feat. One can only assume that contribution is even more significant in smaller provincial cities and towns. . .
Let’s Broadcast Rural New Zealand – Jamie Mackay:
It was the only option available but watching the excellent on-line live stream of the Golden Shears Open final was yet another salutary reminder of how mainstream media in this country, most notably television, pays lip service to farming and rural New Zealand in general.
Country Calendar is an institution on New Zealand television, only bettered by Coronation Street for longevity. Heck, its most loved voice Frank Torley would probably give Ken Barlow a run for his money for length of tenure on the telly.
I don’t wish to sound dismissive about the iconic Country Calendar because it is a rural flagship and rates well in its 7pm Saturday spot. However, I would argue it’s a show designed more for townies than rural folk, as can be attested by the prevalence of quirky lifestyle stories it features.
But what Country Calendar does prove is there’s an appetite out there for television featuring rural New Zealand. However, this message is not getting through the solid craniums (euphemism for thick skulls) of television programmers. . .
Homewood Run – Lashings of meat right way to eat -Alan Emmerson:
Those who have read my columns will know my philosophy of not getting to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.
I can remember, as a relatively young journalist, of the panic over saturated fat, the health risks associated with eating meat and dairy products.
Back then the doomsayers were trying to convert the world to mung beans and the like, for the good of their health of course.
Fortunately few listened and we continued eating meat, butter, and cheese.
Now, according to an article in the New York Times, the myths have been dispelled. . .
The Peterson Farm Bros’ Beef with Chipotle (Part 1) – Greg Peterson:
Many have probably seen or heard about Chipotle’s commercial, “The Scarecrow” and their recent video series, “Farmed and Dangerous.” Chipotle claims these spots are shedding light on the “inhumane” and “unsustainable” nature of “industrial farming.” They try to use the videos to inform people of the perceived problems with the current food system, such as the difference between meat that is ethically raised and meat that isn’t. Their approach seems genuine and sincere at first and is attracting a lot of attention from consumers. I’m certain that Chipotle is doing a lot of positive things with their “food with integrity” approach and to be clear, I do agree with the general ideals Chipotle claims they are supporting:
- The consumer does deserve healthy meat from humanely raised animals
- The family farmer is who should be raising their food
- Ethical behavior should be of greater concern than profit.
What I don’t agree with is Chipotle’s definitions of family farmers, humanely raised animals, and ethical behavior. . .
8/10 in the Herald’s politics quiz.
One of those I missed was the one about Len Brown – my answer was wishful thinking.
A plethora of media makes it much harder for advertisers to get their message across.
Newspapers are losing readers and recording options give television viewers options that allow them to skip the ads.
When conventional advertisements don’t work, advertisers have to come up with something that does.
What works is cleverness and fun that gets attention and then spreads through social media, like the Unbelievable Channel on YouTube.
It’s been created by Pepsi and will be updated each week with people doing unbelievable things and of course it will spread through social media like this:
Hat tip: NBR
ACC Minister Judith Collins says respect is the key to tackling sexual violence.
“Sexual violence has a significant effect on victims and families, resulting in substantial physical and mental health issues as well as social problems like poverty, addiction and suicide,” Ms Collins says.
“Encouraging a culture of respect is one of the most effective ways we can help to prevent sexual and dating violence. This pilot programme will teach young people the value of having healthy relationships based on respect, negotiation and consent.”
Recently ACC has made sexual violence prevention part of its core business focus and its first initiative in this area is a school-based pilot programme focussed on fostering healthy and respectful relationships.
In 2012/13, ACC spent $44 million on services for about 15,000 sensitive claims – the majority of which are related to sexual violence.
“There is some great work already being done by the sexual violence sector in schools but there is also recognition that we need to ensure these programmes have better national coordination, are consistent in content and ensure the best coverage possible,” Ms Collins says.
The school based programme is being developed with an Advisory Group made up of sexual violence sector representatives, interested community groups, government agencies and specialist academics, with input from students, parents and teachers. The programme will be a part of a wider programme of work led by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett.
The programme is still in its early stages of development and there will be further announcements on the specific content, providers, and schools that will be piloted in the third school term this year.
This programme will have to work hard to combat the many media messages which teach people to neither respect themselves nor others.
It is designed to help prevent violence. Legislation is also underway to protect people after a crime has been committed with a Bill creating a new order to protect victims of serious violent and sexual offences passing its second reading in Parliament this week.
Justice Minister Judith Collins says the Victims’ Orders Against Violent Offenders Bill creates a new non-contact order to help reduce the likelihood of serious violent and sexual offenders coming into contact with their victims.
“This Government has made perfectly clear its commitment to putting victims at the heart of our criminal justice system. This Bill is one more way to ensure victims feel safe and protected from further offending,” Ms Collins says.
The order would prohibit the offender from contacting the victim in any way and could ban the offender from living, or working in a particular area.
“This Bill recognises that victims are forced to relive these serious ordeals and suffer on-going effects when they come into contact with their offenders. The proposed new order will help to safeguard and give peace of mind to victims and where necessary, place more restrictive conditions on an offender.”
The provisions added to the Bill today include:
- orders can be applied to a person who has been sentenced to more than two years in prison for a specified violent or sexual offence (rather than the five year threshold proposed in the original Bill)
- non-contact orders can be extended to cover an offender’s associates, where the offender encourages the associate to engage in prohibited behaviour that would harm the victim’s recovery
- victims can apply for an order at any time after sentencing.
Ms Collins acknowledges the Law and Order Committee and thanked those who made submissions on the Bill.
The Government expects to pass the Victims’ Orders Against Violent Offenders Bill by the end of 2014.