A satirical music video (above, the original was banned, HT to Mr H for sending us a link to a replacement video) depicting John Key strumming on a Maui dolphin against a backdrop of oil rigs is likely to be completely withdrawn in New Zealand. It has just been banned from radio stations.
Planet Key is currently at #24 on the iTunes singles charts. It costs $1.79 to download it. Here’s the link https://itunes.apple.com/nz/album/planet-key-single/id904476293 before it disappears for ever.
It’s already been banned from New Zealand’s airways for being ‘too political’ too close to next month’s election. That is despite anyone from the Electoral Commission having seen it.
Earlier today recording artist Darren Watson posted on his Facebook:
“Buy it while you still can, folks. Apparently we are about to be banned. Official word by the end of the week.”
There’s nothing like a ban to ensure a recording’s popularity and the track, which had started to slide down the iTunes singles chart stormed back up again. A victory for freedom of speech and expression, concepts dear to every New Zealander’s heart.
Watson’s status update attracted comments like these
Jack Yan “‘Planet Key’ is a decent song, and it reflects the mood of the times for some, which is what music is supposed to do. Biased and unfair editorial gets past the Electoral Commission. Your viewpoint is as valid as some of the bollocks I see in the media.
I guess some stations will just have to run a 30-second “story” about you before playing it then!”
Michel A Rowland “This wouldn’t ordinarily be my kind of music but I like what you’re saying, and I hope the Electoral Commission’s ban makes you an overnight internet sensation. It’s just ridiculous when people like Paul Henry with obvious political biases are allowed to front their own current affairs shows on national network television, but musicians can’t openly sing songs saying they don’t like their current government. Stick it to the man and all that. Go you.”
Key breached electoral commission law with pre election radio show in 2011
But what short memories people have. No one has mentioned RadioLive was found to have breached electoral rules when Key hosted a radio show prior to an election in September 2011.
At the time other party leaders were livid that Key had been given sole access to the state radio station’s network for a whole hour, a facility that had been denied to them.
The Electoral Commission gave a warning that the show should not turn into a political program.
After it aired it was leaked that the Commission ruled that the show was a breach of the Broadcasting Act. i.e. the public got to find out about the ruling because someone blew the whistle on it.
Police were said to be looking into the ruling, fines of up to $100,000 were talked about.
No prosecution was laid. The police decided to take no action due to lack of evidence. That was in spite of Key talking to Paul Henry about the downgrading of NZ’s financial ratings and his government’s approach to debt.
End of story…or was it?
Update 3 April 2015
Seven months later the High Court has ruled that the song and music video did NOT constitute an election advertisement or election programme, rather it was satire. The court also emphasized the importance of the rights to freedom of expression.
The court also decided even if the Song and the Music Video were election advertisements or election programmes, relevant exceptions in the Electoral Act and the Broadcasting Act applied so that their publication or broadcast would not be illegal.
Darren Watson took the court’s decision in good humour on his Facebook page
A late win for human rights, but this is probably a sad indictment on the government’s ability to influence the actions of the Electoral Commission.
Read the court’s press release here ‘Planet Key’ Judgment: Watson & Jones v Electoral Commission.
You may also like
National’s RadioLive jack-up | The Jackal
Commission Refers RadioLive, TVNZ OneNews to Police
8 thoughts on “‘Planet Key’ To be Banned in New Zealand, Get It Whilst It’s Hot – updated”
You are absolutely right. The “independent” complaints resolution entities only exist to create the facade that the public sector and regulatory agencies, which are supposedly above reproach, are regulated by equally transparent entities. In actuality, these entities are staffed by the most moronic and insipid bunch of Kiwi inbreds. Anyone using such agencies is wasting their time and potentially at risk of retaliation.
All that is required is to make a complaint through one of New Zealand’s faux regulatory entities, such as the Employment Relations Authority, the Health and Disability Commission, or any of the other co-opted institutions which act as surrogate venues for dispute resolution. New Zealand has bullying and oppression deeply-rooted in its cultural psyche, and it uses these entities to lure complainers into the open only to marginalise or crush them.
This is SO TRUE. I have seen this first hand, and it works just like /\ has said. You CAN use any of these, ERA, OSH… But be ready for the roof to come down on you if you do. They are not realy meant to be used, just good window dressing. You’ll be labeled a “complainer, whinger, softy…” and it’ll be VERY difficult to work, ever, again. People will go out of their way, break their “agreements [legaly binding ones, mind you]” just to get at you and make your life hard. Very vindictive and petty behavior. I have never seen so much effort spent on the “aftermath” aspect of such transactions. If they put that much effort on maintaining good employer/employee relations in the first place, they’d not have to go the extra mile to stab you in the back, ruin your reputation, torpedo your career… They’ll put the work in, after the incident, but not before to prevent it happening. Bass ackwards managerial style. But, as you’ll hear here, many times the upsidedown and backwards is “normal” in the Antipodes.
New Zealand is a nation of, by and for the plutocracy. All others live here to serve the ruling class.
Ah, New Zealand. Land of free speech, and (at the university briefing): “We don’t sue people. Lawsuits are something you do in America.” Ya right.
Musician threatened with prosecution over ‘Planet Key’
I’ve found Key to be a bit like Clinton [not that way] in that he goes about making decisions in the most benign and least polarizing way possible. So not so much as good decisions just not politicaly dangerous ones and relies on his popularity to get him through.
The part about ” It is simply not done, no matter what the subject matter and especially when the topic is corruption or fraud. It is not the New Zealand way and regarded as an act of treachery.” is SO TRUE. Open your mouth and point out a flaw or fault [even if you are 100% right] and you will get shut down. Small, petty, vindictive with a memory better than an elephant. They’ll track you and grab at any opportunity to stab you in the back, if you’ve peaked behind the curtain and are willing to or have told anyone about what you’ve seen.
You are to keep your mouth shut and don’t say “crap”, even if you’ve gotten a mouth full of it.
You are so right Carpentaro. The Kiwis often exhibit an ability to stick their heads in the sand that is akin to what one finds from people in Communist countries. It reminds me of when Dr Zhivago pointed out that a typhus epidemic had hit Moscow. His colleagues attacked him and accused him of undermining morale irrespective of the fact that Zhivago was right. This is how things operate in New Zealand and any migrant seeking the freedom to express his mind should reconsider going down there.
My warning to perspective migrants that wish to immigrate to Retardicon 6 (aka New Zealand) is that they realise that New Zealand is a no free speech zone. Saying anything that might “offend” the establishment will result excoriation and opprobrium. What amazes me is the passivity with which the population accepts this.
I remember running into a few arguments with Kiwis only to find that they hide behind no comment policies whenever one questions their BS. They exhibit the emotional maturity of a three-year-old when one confronts them with facts or says something they might not like.
Comments are closed.