Word of the year, a study in Gotcha... it's all about justice!

For the second time in three years, the Macquarie Dictionary committee who looks after new words for the English language has cited a negative type of word as the "Word of the Year." In 2017, the word was "milkshake duck" and this year, the committee has awarded this phrase "cancel culture." I will translate both of those in a moment.

Although my favourite among the contestants was either anecdata or hedonometer, the winner again takes the form of exposure and resultant termination of privilege. So on to the definitions.

Milkshake duck was coined in June 2016 by Australian cartoonist Ben Ward, who tweeted the following sketch from his Twitter account @pixelatedboat: "The whole internet loves Milkshake Duck, a lovely duck that drinks milkshakes! *5 seconds later* We regret to inform you the duck is racist."

In other words, a milkshake duck is a seemingly innocent individual or thing that is initially embraced and beloved by the internet's mass audience, only to be brought crashing down when further investigation reveals them to possess a fatal flaw.

It's the 'aha' moment and the tumbling down of the thing that strikes me with the idea of justice, especially the liar/deserving-to-go-down individual.

Thus it's similar in my opinion to today's revelation about the 2019 word of the year: cancel culture. As an example of this, an Aussie comedian was prevented from performing in Melbourne this winter. Kate Hanley Corley (pictured above-- not the duck) was due to perform eight renditions of her show Aisha the Aussie Geisha: The Accidental Oriental, however, she pulled out after she was criticized for doing material that "borders on yellowface".

The dictionary defines cancel culture as "the attitudes within a community which call for or bring about the withdrawal of support from a public figure". Senior editor of the dictionary said, "In a way it's an attempt to wipe them out, as a punishment," said Victoria Morgan.

Today I'm wondering if these two phrases are part of a long-ranged reaction endemic to society about a kickback, which includes the #metoo thinking and desire to see the exalted brought down to our low(er) level. Think about Jeffrey Epstein or Richard Pratt. What about Prince Andrew. Think about Rene Rivkin or Bill Cosby. Those people, we say, should not have it so (easy/good/free and clear). We want a semblance of justice and social correction.

Back in our school days, we wanted the school bully who had his way, certainly against us, to 'get his.' We wanted a 'gotcha' moment to happen.

We still want bad guys to 'get theirs.'

And back in his day, even King David, who had significant privilege and far-reaching wrongdoing, desired justice. One of his offsiders, the leader of the choir, Asaph, wrote a serious song/ poem about this idea. (Psalm 73). He was languishing in bother, disgusted that those in power had all the privilege and seeming good. Asaph wrote about being disturbed and wondering why he shouldn't go over to the dark side.

Asaph wrote, "I was envious of the arrogant as I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For there are no pains in their death, And their body is fat. They are not in trouble as other men"

Maybe Asaph was hoping for a milkshake duck moment. If he had twitter, perhaps he would have tweeted about cancel culture when he discovered the wrongdoing of his king. And others.

Asaph continued: Waters of abundance are drunk by them. They say, “How does God know? And is there knowledge with the Most High? Behold, these are the wicked; And always at ease, they have increased in wealth."

But he did come to a conclusion after he went inside the sanctuary. He thought, "Until I came into the sanctuary of God; Then I perceived their end. Surely You set them in slippery places;  You cast them down to destruction. How they are destroyed in a moment!  They are utterly swept away by sudden terrors! Like a dream when one awakes,  O Lord, when aroused, You will despise their form."

Justice will happen. God will have his day and his way with those bullies and those who think they don't need him. Cancel culture will happen when God withdraws his (apparent) support for a public figure. Those bad guys will 'get theirs.' Justice will be served. Maybe not today, or tomorrow, but be sure of this. God will have the final words.  And that's not anecdata. That's a fact, Jack. 'Strewth.

Censorship (Michael Jackson, Amazon, Michael Brown, Professor Catherine Strong)

The documentary "Leaving Neverland" went live this week and the reaction online and in the radio stations went ballistic.  The ABC in Australia's comments are here. In this report, they cite the bias of the director/ producers in that none of the Jackson estate is represented. The report reminds us that one of the two accusers had a very different story to tell under oath not long ago. And the report shows the kickback of many of Jackson's faithful via social media. No surprise there.

Australian Damien Shields, the author of a book about Jackson's artistic process and a longtime fan who has come out against the documentary, said the MJ supporters felt motivated to protect the star's legacy.

"I've heard a lot of people say that the Michael Jackson fans are biased, and they don't see anything other than Michael is not guilty, and that they don't raise any points other than all the things that they believe exonerate him. And that's true," he said.  "But the reason we are in a position where that is necessary is because the other platforms that are telling this story are not telling that side of the story." (from the ABC article)

It's happening in New Zealand and up in Canada, "Michael Jackson isn't currently on any MediaWorks (NZ) Radio stations' playlists," Leon Wratt, the company's director for radio, said in a statement to the CNN.  "This is a reflection of our audiences and their preferences—it is our job to ensure our radio stations are playing the music people want to hear." “We [MediaWorks] aren’t deciding whether Michael Jackson is guilty of paedophilia, we’re just making sure our radio stations are going to play the music people want to hear.” In Canada, three major Montreal-based radio stations have also stopped playing Jackson's music. Even the Simpsons have pulled their Michael Jackson episode. Wow.

Michael L Brown is a trend-watcher, an honest critic of the press and a Ph.D. from New York University. His latest blog on censorship is here. He starts his commentary with "With the news last week that Amazon has banned Mohammed’s Koran: Why Muslims Kill for Islam, co-authored by British activist Tommy Robinson and Peter McLoughlin, Amazon has crossed a very dangerous and precarious line."

After Brown demonstrates the books one can buy on Amazon including some pretty horrible books for terrorists and anti-Semitic drivel, he wonders what is next. The issue for Amazon is clear. Brown says, "By banning this book, Amazon is opening up one of two possibilities: Either Amazon will not be consistent, thereby demonstrating extreme hypocrisy. Or Amazon will start banning many other books, leading to a very dangerous precedent. Which books and authors will be next? And what can conservative, Bible believers expect? Perhaps our books opposing LGBT activism or exposing the evils of abortion will be next?"

Censorship is the issue. I listened to a radio interview yesterday on International Women’s Day here on the ABC radio in Sydney. Catherine Strong, a professor from RMIT ( @hellharpy) was answering the question of censorship. She had written on the Jackson topic the day before. Her article in The Conversation is here.   She raised excellent thought questions, like, “More importantly, however, is the question of what happens to the stories of the victims. If we stop listening to Michael Jackson, does that simply allow us to avoid something uncomfortable, to not have to think about those little boys and what they allege happened to them?” She likens banning the music to “have put a tiny band-aid over a gaping wound.”

Let’s talk about morals; let’s talk about representatives. Let’s be honest about banning things which are ruinous to society if we can even do that in a free marketplace of ideas world.  But silence and silencing is not the answer. Is it?

I liked the placard in the Jackson piece. "Seek truth; think for yourself" I find so many of my Jewish people are keen underdog supporters. I find we have an innate concern to seek the truth and to follow that, no matter what others think. We are raised to think for ourselves. (Of course, within certain boundaries, of course) Maybe that's why I'm ever attuned to such matters as these. Many rabbis would have banned the Newer Testament (the story of Yeshua) to me when I was a lad. Censorship is not really the way to deal with things. It's best to allow people to read for themselves, to discuss, and then make up their own minds.  Think about this... have you ever read the story of Jesus? Honestly?

I'd be disappointed if every Kevin Spacey movie or "House of Cards" episode or Bill Cosby sitcom or repeats of "Billie Jean" were removed from our annals. Should we never visit a gallery and see a Toulouse Lautrec painting? Was what Mozart did in his mad-cap, out-of-bounds, libido-crazed life evidence we should turn off the radio when "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik" is played? Who makes those decisions for us?

Think for yourself.