The Blackbox Debate
Thu, 2 Nov 2006, 07:24 pmCassie_Dart30 posts in thread
The Blackbox Debate
Thu, 2 Nov 2006, 07:24 pmI write regarding the closure and censorship of the below thread - Blackbox Management: Good or Bad?
http://www.theatre.asn.au/node/5973
I recently had a young actress write to me and ask a question about her agency, so I sent her this link. It is a tradgic shame that dozens of people's comments have been censored, but I respect Theatre Australia for having posted that these messages were deleted as a result of one John W. of Blackbox Management. It is made clear to everyone what is really going on.
This young actress was, suffice it to say, not happy in her current situation. Will you delete my post for saying that?
I was wrong
Fri, 10 Nov 2006, 01:59 pmI shot my mouth off without checking the faulty memories of a twenty year ago course. Yes we do have a written constitution although apart from a few long ago repealed remarks about Indiginous Australians it says nothing about the relationship between the governed and the governors.
Should it? I think it should and if we do become a republic I hope our new constition will contain some sort of Bill of Rights. It seems to be becoming more important every day.
Stinger: I would love to engage in a debate with you one day about whether or not the Magna Carta is a constitution. I don't beleive it is. It was a document designed to preserve the powers that a mob of fuedal Barons didn't want to lose. It started England on the road to a constitutional monarchy because it actually curtailed and defined the powers of the king but if Simon De Montford had realised he was establishing the beginnings of democracy and power for the people he wouldn't have been happy.
Paul: Yes Corporations and other legal entities are limited in their ability to claim defamation but they can and they can win. The Maclibel case in England is a case in point even though MacDonalds were awarded the "lowest coin of the realm" as damages. A great number of legal entities have also successfully sued "Private Eye" magazine in the UK. In fact doesn't everyone who sues Private Eye win?
In addition to legal entities it can also be very difficult for certain public figures to successfully sue for defamation as the court can decide that it would not be reasonable to assume that people believed the defamation to be true. Pat Robertson versus Larry Flint in the US was a case in point. An evangelist was portayed as having sex with a stranger in a barn in an advert in Hustler Magazine and the court decided that it was unreasonable to assume that people believed the portrayal so therefore damage in the form of "shun and avoid" could not be proven.
The point that very little on the original thread was actually defamatory was lost in all this. Some of the remarks were down right unpleasant and insulting like the other thread about dance schools. but not much was defamatory.
Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing.
www.tonymoore.id.au