I have once again been irked by an arrogant journalist, bemoaning the fact that the media has been denied access to a coronial report, until such time as the coroner has made findings. “After all it’s our right” he expostulated to smarmy nods from news anchors.
These are the vultures who pitch up on the doorsteps of grieving families for a tragic 
news bite and travel to other States when there’s no house fire, road accident or crime of sufficient horror to merit news in their own state.
They apparently have the right to pronounce on evidence before judicial officers and the right to demand statements from accused criminals, family members and supporters.
The Police do little to prevent these leeches from swarming around these stressed people, seeking some blood or tears. It was likely this ilk of journalistic parasite that hounded Princess Diana into her tragic fatal flight. They are the ones that intrude and pursue public personalities exaggerating their lifestyles and often their own opinions of themselves.
Editorial discretion and journalistic integrity have been lost in the fight for ratings and first headlines. Now anything people will pay for is media fodder: “if it bleeds it leads”!
Then there are the reality shows … scripted productions where people mimic courtship and marriage to the detriment of those once hallowed and personal treasures.
Not to mention the ‘fake news’ phenomenon which has cast doubts on the veracity and reliability of every media publication, because some spray extreme and sensationalist stories without rigourous research and scrutiny to verify them or consider the impact on society at large. Thus the total output has become contaminated and should be treated with great scepticism, which most fail to do, so they become affected by the ‘fake news’ disease.
Television especially has an exceptionally privileged position in society: they have access to nearly every household. Their output is available to all at the click of a button. 
It is reasonable to expect some awareness of and responsibility for the material they broadcast.
They have the opportunity to build the appropriate culture and values which show people how to behave. Instead, they promote false and distasteful realities which many unsuspecting viewers are unable or unwilling to discern and base their dream worlds and behaviour upon.
It and the internet have replaced the traditionally revered positions in our society that judges, priests, doctors and bank managers held. These figures and their images have been lampooned and trivialised by media series.
Where are the heroes and models of good behaviour. 
Government regulations require us to barricade swimming pools to prevent danger to children, but they don’t require barriers to television or internet to prevent access by children.
The ordinary voter is not inclined to the exercise of judicious or temperate thoughts and deeds. Just like the political and economic systems, the freedom of the press needs curtailing and review, because democracy has failed.
However, the attempts to evade responsibility for the decision to execute Jesus, suggest some uneasiness.
In the book of Zachariah it was written: “The Coming of Zion’s King – See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey”. It suggests that Jesus was declaring he was the King of Israel to the anger of the Sanhedrin when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, to great popular acclaim.
Now these are acts which are of a political consequence. Here was a potential challenge to existing authority. The claim to be the Son of God was surely false.
fts by an African tyrant, did not even attract condemnation from the same military overlord who had installed the tyrant in years gone by.
company of those that dislike such language. I always regret it, but this little streak of perversity persists.
ism, feminism and anti-feminism. Vitriol and profanity spew out!
d
Generally speaking, I believe that, if used, profanity should not be spoken in the presence of parents or children (or by them) or indeed, anyone who would be offended by it
Two farmers in South Africa recently paid R4.9 million (A$490K) for a racing pigeon. A few years ago the Deputy President bid R18 million for a buffalo.
Vitamins, insurance, bullet blenders, carpet cleaners, supermarket value, lawyers, housing developments, cruises, charities… the subject is endless and of unlimited creativity.
I remember the riots and looting in London a few years ago; with speculation that the have-nots were so driven and manipulated by marketing that they quickly resorted to 
theft when mayhem let them off their leashes. I thought then and think now that it is bad and immoral to dangle steak in front of hungry dogs, knowing that only the very few top dogs will be able to enjoy it.
anges and complexities of our world today.
Cognitive therapy is all about learning about how our thoughts create our moods; I can recommend it.
auses.
Pluto? Or how long it would take to get there?
This is a form of corruption whereby people in office unfairly enable favourable access to state resources for their benefactors and abandon their duty to protect the state’s interests.
ots the government revenue intended for all citizens, inflates project costs and denies fair competition.
One wonders who is pulling the strings and for what purpose? Are the unions aware of the groundswell of opinion swaying to the right? Is the government allowing these infrastructure breakdowns to stimulate electorate outrage and thus justify smothering the unions?
ment revenue, expenditure and the benefits to be derived from the awarding government contracts, (read “backhanders”).
sillysocksonfriday 