You know what I didn’t expect to see at today's peace protest in Maui? A whole contingent of retired citizens armed with truly epic signs and an unwavering commitment to protecting democracy. The creativity, the humor, and the sheer determination were incredible! It was a powerful reminder that age is no barrier to activism, and that hope can be found in the most unexpected places.

Full Flickr Album

Link → https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjCi2iF

Gallery 1 of 2

Gallery 2 of 2

About the Wehena Makahiki Celebration

The Makahiki Festival is a traditional Hawaiian event celebrating harvest, peace, and joy. In this contemporary version, the ʻAha Makahiki ceremony marks the start of the season. Schools from preschool to college come together to pay tribute, not just to the spiritual essence of Lono, but to collective efforts in Hawaiian education and cultural revitalization.

ʻAha Makahiki Ceremony

• A sacred space is created for the ceremony, despite using temporary locations.
• Schools from across Maui gather to offer tributes and open the festival season.
• Lono, representing the spirit of harvest and abundance, is honored for guiding sustenance and abundance.

Lono

• Lono embodies the essence of harvest and sustenance, guiding planting and abundance.
• Traditionally, Lono represented disciplined farming practices in tune with nature and the cosmos.
• In contemporary times, Lono symbolizes liberation and spiritual guidance for healing and abundance.

Wrap

• The Makahiki Festival holds deep cultural significance, with more aspects to explore.
• The celebration continues with various traditional games and activities.

Please note, several discrepancies were found between the Wikipedia articles, such as the formation date and founding members of the 'National Colonisation Society', this article says that Wakefield was a 'founding member' , whereas this article says that  (Wakefield) 'joined the' association. Please use your own critical analysis when reviewing.

Who is Karl Marx?

Karl Marx was a German philosopher, economist, historian, and journalist who lived from 1818 to 188312. He is best known for his work as a radical political theorist and socialist revolutionary, and for his collaboration with Friedrich Engels in publishing "The Communist Manifesto" in 184823. Marx's ideas about capitalism, socialism, and communism have had a significant impact on political and economic thought3. He also wrote "Das Kapital," which discussed the labor theory of value3. Marx was born in Trier, Germany, and spent much of his life in London3.

Who is Edward Gibbon Wakefield?

Edward Gibbon Wakefield (1796-1862) was a British colonial reformer and promoter who played a significant role in the establishment of the colonies of South Australia, New Zealand, and Canada123. He was also a member of the New Zealand Parliament2. Wakefield was born in London and worked as a secretary to the British minister in Turin, Italy, before becoming involved in colonial policy14. He was known for his theories on systematic colonization and was involved in the drafting of the Durham Report on Canadian colonial policy14. Wakefield was a controversial figure and was convicted of abduction in 18261.

What is the overlap between Karl Marx and Edward Gibbon Wakefield?

Karl Marx and Edward Gibbon Wakefield lived at the same time, shared London as a residence and were interested in the study of capitalism.

Summary from Merlin (a tool using GPT-4)

While Karl Marx did not specifically mention Edward Gibbon Wakefield in his works, it is important to understand the broader context of their respective ideas and theories to further analyze the relationship between their thoughts on colonization and capitalism.

Edward Gibbon Wakefield's theory of systematic colonization aimed to create well-structured and successful colonies by promoting a balance between laborers, artisans, and capital. Wakefield believed that the sale of land in small quantities at a sufficient price would encourage immigration and help establish economically viable settlements, ultimately benefiting both the colonizers and the colonized.

On the other hand, Karl Marx, a critic of capitalism and colonialism, argued that these systems led to the exploitation of labor and resources from colonized nations. According to Marx, colonization served as a means for capitalist nations to expand their markets and secure raw materials, which in turn, generated greater profits for the ruling capitalist class. As a result, Marx viewed colonialism as a mechanism for perpetuating inequality and furthering the interests of the bourgeoisie at the expense of the working class.

Considering their differing perspectives, it is possible that Marx would have criticized Wakefield's theories on colonization as an extension of capitalist exploitation. Wakefield's focus on land sales and the establishment of profitable colonies could be seen as aligning with the capitalist interests that Marx critiqued. Additionally, Wakefield's ideas may have been perceived as promoting the expansion of British imperialism, which Marx viewed as a driving force behind global inequality.

Summary

In conclusion, although Karl Marx did not directly address Edward Gibbon Wakefield's ideas on colonization, their respective theories on capitalism and colonialism suggest that Marx would likely have been critical of Wakefield's approach. Wakefield's systematic colonization theory, with its emphasis on land sales and the creation of economically viable settlements, could be interpreted as perpetuating the exploitative nature of colonialism and capitalism that Marx staunchly opposed.

Tips: According to the experts don't put any expectation on yourself or others, let the moon come into illumination before you plan being productive. Stay indoors and do easy going light mahi.

Let's get to it.

Ka kite, winter

There's still a chill in the air, but the birds are chirping, and Google searches for 'spring' (season) are on the rise. That can only mean one thing: spring is here. We decided to take a look at the data behind spring to see how people discuss it, and what the big topics are.

Yes a lift in search intent around August and September.

However, according to Google Trends, spring is our least popular season. Both winter and summer have a larger share of search intent over the course of the last 5 years. Red is winter, yellow is summer, see below, the peaks for winter and summer internet searches are higher.

When it comes to online mentions, the shift from winter to spring to summer is about as uniform as you'd expect. Winter mentions usually outstrip summer ones in the first week of June and Matariki is closely associated to winter (Matariki is the green line below).

Note that Matariki is out-performing or more popular search term in New Zealand than winter.

So how are people discussing spring?

Here are the related search queries around spring according to Google Trends.

Looks like two main threads - "when is spring?" and "spring rolls (recipe)". No real exciting data in there.

In summary, according to Google Search result it appears that many people prefer to focus on Matariki and Summer. Enjoy your spring whānau, even if in lockdown!

• Spring
• Hacking & Trolling
• Equinox
• Maramataka

Full Episode

In the Pacific, from Hawaiki-nui, Hawaiki-roa, Hawaiki-pāmamao we have a large range of temperatures, seasons and timezones. Like the maramataka each place is unique in its season and aspect. For example in Hawaii, it is passing into winter but in Aotearoa it is passing into spring.

From Wikipedia - September Equinox timetable:

Scientific NASA charts showing the traverse of the earth around the sun:

How is the passing of seasons in your place?  Here are some ways that' the world is celebrating this unique day. Enjoy!

Giving thanks for food and sustenance in New Mexico:

Remembering times and knowledge past in Ireland:

Epic Autumn colours in Croatia:

Ancient time and architecture at the Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple in the capital city of Kerala, watch the animation it's cool!

Using a satellite scientists have captured the sunlight crossing earth over the year:

Or comparing suns rays as the cross Europe in three various seasons:

Weather service reporting:

Mountain view celebrations in Glastonbury UK:

Pumpkin time in Winnipeg Saskatoon!

These Chicago city folk are annoyed that the sun will no longer be in their view - how inconvenient!

Lastly I'll leave you with the cool shade web app which shows the day and night traverse over the earth map. Enjoy that here → Shade Map.

Turou hawaiki!

• Mammoths 🦣
• Aquaman 2
• Te Wiki o Te Reo Māori
• RayBan + Facebook.

Full Episode

If you are interested in a deep dive, check out this awesome report from Te Matawai.

He Rau Ora, Language Revitalisation Review

Good practice in Māori language revitalisation - a literature review.

Te MātāwaiTe Mātāwai

Here are some links to resources:

The daily moon on the digital app https://app.native.zone.

https://livingbythestars.co.nz

https://manawhenua.com

Mihi to Rereata Makiha, Rangi Mataamua, Heeni Hoterene and Reuben Taipari for sharing their knowledge. Tīhei Mauri Ora.

How many Māori and Pacific people have been vaccinated in New Zealand? Using official numbers from the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Statistics, the Native Zone team refactors the visual presentation to (hopefully) make it a bit easier to understand.  

Full video below ↓

Q. Are you thinking about getting vaccinated?

This is the fourth night of the lunar month called Ōuenuku (note for some tribes/iwi/hapū this is the nineteenth night of the lunar month, there are a few knowledge systems depending on your home longitude and latitude). Ōuenuku is the moon in it's early waxing building phase, 12% illumination. This can be a primo day and night - building energy, ideal for laying down seedling beds, planting and fishing.

Big mihi to Rereata Makiha, Rangi Matamua and Reuben Taipari for sharing their knowledge.

See the daily moon on the digital app https://app.native.zone.

Definitions:

• Māori authorities are businesses involved in the collective management of assets held by Māori.
• SMEs are Māori businesses with fewer than 100 employees, and are not Māori authorities.

Key facts for 2020:

• there were 1,230 Māori authorities
• three-fifths of Māori authorities were classified as essential during COVID-19 alert level 4 lockdown
• almost one-fifth of Māori SMEs reduced the range of goods and services they offered during the lockdown periods of COVID-19
• one-half of Māori tourism businesses adapted their business for new markets in response to COVID-19
• Māori authorities exported around $755 million worth of goods, almost half of which was to China
• the average Māori farm was five times the size of the average New Zealand farm
• total assets for Māori authorities reached $24.3 billion.

Here are those charts:

Tatauranga umanga Māori – Statistics on Māori businesses: 2020 (English) | Stats NZ

Three-fifths of Māori authorities were classified as essential during the 2020 COVID-19 alert level 4 lockdown.

Stats NZ

Learn about Matariki with Dr Rangi Matamua from Living by the Stars. This seminar was broadcast on 29 June 2021 by CORE Education (https://bit.ly/363hq7e) and Living by the Stars (https://bit.ly/2UggSbq).

Her particular research interests and specialties include: the development of high-value plant-based food and ingredient solutions that are beneficial for health and contribute to the revitalisation of natural ecosystems; the role of micronutrients, trace metals, and phytochemicals in health and disease; domestic and in-market regulatory requirements for the development of functional ingredients and high-value food and beverage solutions for export; and cultural and intellectual property law and the protection of mātauranga Māori.

Meika is co-Principal Investigator on a New Zealand Singapore Future Foods Catalyst consumer science programme and on a High-Value Nutrition National Science Challenge community dietary intervention programme; and contributes in various capacities to a number of universities and research institutes. Among her industry roles, Meika is contracted to support the work programme of AuOra Limited, the health and wellness unit of Wakatū Incorporation.

In Part 1 we share the stories of:

Te Arawa arrival

Maketu

Otamaka

Pakotore

In Part 2 we share the stories:

Rotoiti

Pukeroa

Mokoia

Whakarewarewa

Tarawera

In Part 3 we share the stories of:

Rotokakahi

Motutawa

In Part 4 we share the stories of:

Tarawera

Okareka

Rotomahana

Otukapuarangi & Te Tarata

In Part 5 we share the story of Tarawera post-eruption

In Part 6 we share the stories of:

Ohinemutu

Awahou

Pare Hauraki

Whakarewarewa

Kakaramea

Paeroa

Tuhourangi Ki Tai

2018 Census Māori Population Total: 775,836

Published in Stuff.co.nz here are some Iwi organisations and their asset size. Note that relative size of assets versus population distribution.

It's a kaupapa driven thing. All of us contributed to the kaupapa. It wasn't an individual whakahihi thing. We are very humbled we've been given this possession to help each other.

It's all part of our whole kaupapa whakapiripiri, e tū pākiritanga. In that we ought to be able to share and rejoice in it. At the moment we are going through a very terrible racist perspective within this nation. We have to start to take some stand to retain our integrity as Māori for a start, and we have a lot of Pākehā people who feel the same. So we need to actually bring those two elements together. It doesn't matter what field we work in...

What we have to understand within each of the Iwi here, each of us have our own kawa, we have our own history, we have our own tikanga. And what we ought to be doing, is ensuring that those people, those tamariki are grown up within that environment by, from our old people so they can take control and have a stake in their own tikanga and kawa within their own particular Iwi.

Now this world is not interested in that. This world, wants to be able to take a real culture and make it into a sub-culture because it's going to make a lot of money. That's the danger that we have.

For me, people turn around they saw Once We're Warriors. Everywhere in the world they thought it was a culture. It wasn't. It was a sub-culture that's been created since colonisation. A sub-culture remember. Now as far as I am concerned there are other films that reflect a sub-culture as well.

We are there for our point of difference and our own point of tū pākiritanga and rangatiratanga. It's nothing to be ashamed of, it's nothing racist, it's nothing separatist, it is an identity that everyone has a right to own and have a stake in.

Moe mai e te rangatira. Ka nui te mana i roto i tō kōrero. 🤙

Here are the kupu to the waiata at the end.

My goal for writing this is to bring a tech perspective to the data used to evaluate Māori broadcast media. I advocate for spaces where native & indigenous voices can exist in all their diversity. E tautoko ana ahau te reo-a-Iwi kaupapa.

I believe Māori Television needs to stay. It would be foolish to throw it away based on the chart in the report (I explain why below). Saying "it has to go" and replacing it with a new hub is not the tahi. Māori Television can evolve into a relevant digitally focussed channel while also still being Māori Television.

Also, as suggested elsewhere, the idea to replace Māori Television with a fully-fledged digital OTT platform (a streaming media service offered directly to viewers) ain't that easy. I'll share my experiences with Navigator as an OTT service but before that I want to address four things:

1. The problem the Government is trying to solve is wrong
2. Old world meets new world
3. Foreign versus local content
4. OTT Centralisation

The problem definition is wrong

From a technology and data reporting perspective I have concerns with the problem definition in the Māori Media Sector Shift document. I shared my thoughts with Te Puni Kōkiri last week (thank you TPK).  Here is some further extension to that discussion. Principally, I find the chart below misleading:

1. The chart doesn't show what the audiences are watching, or when they are watching, it only shows reach. What about frequency?
2. Where is the engagement length data?
3. What days/times are popular?
4. What programs are people watching?
5. How is the online engagement analytics data paralleled with Nielson's reach and frequency data?

^{Source: NZ on Air/Māori Media Shift Options document, Te Puni Kōkiri.}

That chart above is a limited view of what is actually happening.  The metrics are aimed to make Māori Televsion look bad. Reach will only give a picture of how many people over a specific time period tuned-in. Frequency will give information about how many times people tuned-in over a period. Engagement time will give you information on how long people tuned-in each piece of content.

So if we compare the bottom of the chart with the top of the chart across all dimensions, that is, how many people, how many times, how long we have a very different story emerging. For example, what do 'All Māori New Zealanders' people watch on YouTube? What do they watch on Netflix? Is it the same content they watch on Māori TV? No. Could be cupcake videos, conspiracy theory (likely), music video, sci-fi - anything.

Maybe we should aim to get a wider picture before firing guns?

If we compare the top and bottom and think about the 'elephant in the room', to me it is that the social media and OTT platforms are better at measuring what people want. They are better equipped to do so as digital native platforms.

In general, social media technology companies have attuned themselves to far more meaningful commercial performance metrics than broadcasters, and they are rapidly empowering their users to be informed by these metrics.  That user level insight is a massive game changer.

So, instead of focussing on target audience rating points (TARPS), or just reach, they have been focussing on 'attention' and 'time on site' (engagement) for quite a while. This focus has driven innovation on their platforms at a faster rate (velocity).

They already know how discreete segments spend time on their social platforms, what they talk about, who they talk with and how they react. They know this by specific days & times. Whatsmore, they have highly attuned social psychology research and artificial intelligence programs that study or exploit biases and neurocities (eg Cambridge Analytica). Just check out Facebook's Artificial Intelligence page.

Competition for attention on the social media platforms is intense and this therefore makes their very advertising offerrings very profitable. Twitter and Facebook's advertising media buying mechanisms are sophisticated (I know, I have been spending money on social media advertising for quite some time). For example, here are Facebooks video metrics reports in it's creator studio:

^{Source: Facebook Creator Studio}

(Show me a broadcaster with better social analytics data and I will make your whānau a hāngi).

So this is the problem. Data. There is no data platform. There is no data for content creators. There is no open source analysis of engagement, views, organic reach, paid reach and distribution.

Ultimately, data empowers content creators (producers, program makers) to make better decisions about how they design and write video content. The problem definition could orientate around these questions:

• How do our native/indigenous voices sit alongside or inside data informed platforms?
• Is the time on site metric what broadcast media should be aligned to?
• Should we be constructing our own data platforms?
• How will we empower content creators and distributors to make better decisions about how they create and share video content?

All of these questions should be asked with Māori Television included.

Old world meets new world

Traditional terrestrial broadcasters represent an implicit reputation network. These networks were built on years high quality content. New programs, born into these networks, are implicitly expected to be high quality - One, 2, Three, Māori TV and (paid subscription service) Sky. Maturer professionals in the broadcasting industry know this. Quality = big budget.

Since 2012, YouTube, Facebook, Tiktok and particularly during Level 4, audiences normalised viewing preferences to lower quality, faster more relevant content. It is common to watch 'user quality' content on YouTube or any social media platform - you know, audio is out of sync, over contrasted Zoom call backgrounds or green screen effects and some very creative and funky titles (ahem, some of us don't have a choice, our budgets are micro-tiny).

As we move forward we need to make the most of the implicit trust audiences have in the older networks and combine it with data-informed production cycle. Perhaps we can champion legacy values alongside a data-based conversation instead of saying, "it needs to go". We need to balance out the largest, loudest and angriest program makers voices with those of tech-savvy data-informed content creators.

Foreign versus local content

Foreign content, in particular US & UK content fills New Zealand's most valuable programming slots. It is rich, well made and highly engaging and costs the New Zealand tax payer millions each year. One or two executives travel business class with a big fat purse of tax-payer money and engage in one-sided negotiations to acquire anything from 911 to Sienfeld to Coronation Street to MKR to the Simpsons.

Obviously, Hollywood attracts the best of our program makers as well, then offers them other large projects, for example, Taika Waititi on Disney's Mandolorian.

How come our media sector can afford to import James Cameron and 3D animators to make Avatar, but as a country we can't provide a pathway for our own talented people to make productions here that fill core programming spots? How the heck does 'The Casketeers' get popular on Netflix first and not on our own networks?  

Is there a belief that New Zealand programming isn't good enough for primetime? What do executives really think of Māori programming? Is Kiwi content second class? Then what, Māori programming third class? Was there ever a conversation that went...

Hey, you know that $20 million we are going to spend with Fox and Time Warner?  How much content do you think we could locally produce with that instead?

The concept of supporting foreign media rattles my cage. They should be paying us to be here.

This is the most important reason that Māori Television needs to stay. Māori Television has a cultural purpose and is born with a survival instinct, to keep our culture and language alive (revitalised → normalised → right-shift). Not only that, Māori Television often makes programs that are incredibly cost effective (oh and if anyone is doubting the cost-effective awesomeness of Māori Television then wait to see how Iwi media performs on the smidgens of funding they receive).

Also consider that Netflix and YouTube now take up a quarter of all internet traffic. Netflix, YouTube, Apple, Neon, Lightbox, Amazon, Hulu, PlayStation, Xbox, Roku provide unlimited access to all foreign content now. Time to invest in our own people and culture. We can attract people back to work here but we need to invest in ouselves, not divest of ourselves.

OTT Centralisation

As co-founder and technical developer of an over-the-top video (OTT) content service Navigator I understand a little of what is required to set-up a fully-fledged digital OTT platform (a streaming media service offered directly to viewers).

Navigator is small and establishing, actually we are micro-tiny, we focus only on native & indigenous documentaries and films (longer-form) content. Netflix, Hulu, Amazon are hungry corporate beasts and have evolved like social media platforms - they centralised data and analysis under one group structure. Successful OTT services focus on episodal TV content and movies but with a meaty data-tech-financial layer.

The most important thing to know (from my set-up experience) is that it is really hard to acquire existing content. Producers need to be compensated. There are already other things in place including sensitivities around tāonga, intellectual property and exclusive distribution rights. That is why Netflix, Quibi, Amazon and Apple commission their own content.

The idea of one central portal is only going to work with a huge multi-year commitment to take on Quibi, Netflix, YouTube etc. It is a difficult path. Not impossible, but the team will have to be extremely bold and focus energy in the right areas.  

A fully-fledged digital OTT platform is about centralising all user insights and program production under a non-linear (on-demand) service. It is 80% a technical and data management exercise, not a program creation exercise. Simply, the platforms conduct surveillance on their users then make funding decisions, for example,

I checked the engagement reports, we've got lot's of sci-fi viewers so lets make more sci-fi content.

Demand is interpreted by data scientists. Supply decisions are made by analysts & financiers not producers. Also, as we already know, Iwi do not want power centralised in one agency. They want a diversity of views as promised per the Treaty of Waitangi. How will the data-science and commissioning inside an OTT reflect the Treaty?

I don't see OTT as a current panacea for the Māori Media Sector.

New Zealand on Air have invested significantly into this technology already. New Zealand on Screen https://www.nzonscreen.com/ is a non-profit that receives about $1million per year from the Government. Go check it out, it's awesome. In comparison Quibi raised $1.8billion to launch it's specialised mobile-orientated OTT service. Apple has invested also a ridiculous amount.  Facebook earned US$17.74 billion in Q1 2020. The variance in budget size is phenomenal.

If the Government is set on creating a 'digital pātaka' or OTT service the next stage it will need to show a detailed understanding of data analysis, OTT business models and demand/supply levers. What is the ROI?

What will the metrics for success be? And when those corporate metrics don't look so good (because social media and foreign owned OTT have more money) what will happen?

Lastly, I just keep feeling that the tech-focus will negatively benefit Māori. Māori aspirations will be put to the side and forgotten about, much like when people go to YouTube, Netflix or TVNZ they are unlikely to be watching Māori content, it is forgotten about. That is why we need a Māori Television.  

Uplift ourselves first

In summary, I agree with one thing, the Māori Media Sector Shift document provides an opportunity for us to consider our investment in a new future. In my mind there should be no single source of truth and no moves to centralise without a discussion about data and how we measure engagement. A diversity of technically capable voices should inform the decision making to avoid the privileges of a few over the others. We need to honour the Treaty of Waitangi.

But above all, we need to acknowledge and recognise Māori Television and Iwi Media as significant drivers of innovation. They continue to produce cost-effective local driven content that is the only place in the world to celebrate our unique voice. Long live Māori Television.

About

Kingi's background is in technology, advertising and video games developing Xbox & PlayStation games, iPad & iPhone apps, web apps and OTT (Over-the-Top) video broadcasting projects such as Navigator.  Kingi media career started in 1997 at Saatchi & Saatchi as a media planner buyer.

Te Mahi Mara Hua Parakore: A Maori Food Sovereignty Handbook

Published: 1 Jan 2015

Jessica Hutchings (hua parakore gardener, activist, academic and certified Te Waka Kai Ora grower) explains the political implications of the decisions that we make about growing and eating kai. She encourages us to take control over the food security of our whanau, providing practical advice on how to grow kai in accordance with the kaupapa of hua parakore, inspiring us with stories of hua parakore heroes and reassuring us that becoming a hua parakore gardener is a journey that anyone can embark on.

Te Mahi Mara Hua Parakore: A Maori Food Sovereignty Handbook by Jessica Hutchings - ISBN: 9780473316532

Hutchings, Jessica

Te Mahi Oneone Hua Parakore: A Maori Soil Sovereignty and Wellbeing Handbook

Published: 31 Jul 2020

Soil health and security are key components of our wellbeing. Even so, soil is faced with many environmental challenges under the current iteration of capitalism. A paradigm shift is needed to encourage care for this resource. In te ao Maori, soil is taonga. It is also whanaunga - it holds ancestral connections and is the root of turangawaewae and whakapapa. It is the source of shelter, kai and manaakitanga. Te Mahi Oneone Hua Parakore: A Maori Soil Sovereignty and Wellbeing Handbook shines a light on Maori relationships with soil, as well as the connections between soil and food security, and frames these links within the wider discourse of tino rangatiratanga from a variety of Maori perspectives. Through a range of essays, profiles and recipes, it seeks to promote wellbeing and elevate the mana of the soil by drawing on the hua parakore Maori organics framework as a means for understanding these wide-ranging, diverse and interwoven relationships with soil.

Te Mahi Oneone Hua Parakore: A Maori Soil Sovereignty and Wellbeing Handbook by Jessica Hutchings - ISBN: 9780473516192 (FREERANGE PRESS)

Hutchings, Jessica

Source: Te Pūtahi

a. - male
b. - over 21
c. - have individual title to land

As Māori land was communally owned, few Māori could vote - they didn't have individual title.

However, when the Crown established the Native Land Court to individualise title to Māori land, to make it easier for them to get the land, there were now heaps of Māori men, aged over 21, with individual title to land and, thus, able to vote. It looked as though Māori would win about fifteen seats in the upcoming election, so the Crown passed the Māori Representation Act, in 1867, to restrict the number to four. One would be in the South Island and three in the North Island. This would also right the balance of parliamentary seats for the North and South Islands.

The total numbers of parliamentary seats at the time was 70, and this rose to 99 over the years while the Māori seats stayed the same, in spite of the fact that the Māori population had increased dramatically over the years.

When mixed-member proportional (MMP) representation was introduced in 1996, it was decided that the formula used to establish the number of Māori electorates would be the same as for the general electorates, i.e. base it on the number of Māori on the Māori roll, and so the number was increased to five. This rose to six for the 1999 election, as more Māori switched rolls, and then to seven for the 2002 and 2005 elections.

The next time Māori were able to shift from the general roll to the Māori roll was at the April 2006 census.

The hope is to be able to mount a campaign to get more Māori to switch to the Māori roll. If all Māori were on the Māori roll, there would be about 18 Māori electorates - win them all and we've got the balance of power.

T. Murphy

Why Māori Seats Should Stay

20 September 2005, Massey News
Source: http://masseynews.massey.ac.nz/2005/Press_Releases/09-20-05.html

Uncertainty over the future of New Zealand's Maori electorates will remain at least until the shape of the next Government is decided. Massey University senior lecturer in social policy Dr Richard Shaw looks back over the 138-year history of the seats, finding it riddled with inconsistencies and discriminatory practices, and mounts arguments for retaining the current system.

1867 The Maori Representation Act establishes four Maori seats in the 76-seat Parliament. They are voted for by Maori men aged 21 or over. Maori men therefore gain the universal franchise 12 years before non-Maori men who, until 1879, have to own or lease property of a certain value to have voting rights. They are not the only specialist electorates at the time:

Three were set aside exclusively for Otago and Westland gold miners, and one for an Auckland Pensioners' Settlement electorate, although each of those four seats was abolished in 1870.

1870 Secret ballots introduced for "European" electorates but Maori must vote by show of hands in front of a returning officer, and often under the watchful eye of local Rangatira, many of whom directed their people how to vote.

1893 Maori women receive the right to vote along with all New Zealand women but only in the Maori electorates.

1910 Voting by show of hands no longer compulsory although it is another 27 years before the law provides for compulsory secret ballots on Maori electorates.

1919 New law requires voting in Maori electorates to be held on a different day from the general election, usually the day before.

1949 Maori permitted to vote in national referenda.

1951 Voting in Maori electorates returned to same day as general election.

1967 Maori permitted to stand as candidates in European electorates, although still unable to register to vote in them unless they identify themselves by the official term 'half-caste'.

1975 European seats renamed General. Maori given choice of enrolling on General or Maori roll.1993 Electoral Act provides for numbers of Maori seats to increase - or reduce - according to the size of the Maori roll. By this time there are twice as many Maori registered in each of the four seats as in the average General seat, of which there are 99. Over the next decade the number of Maori seats increases to seven.

2005 General Election produces 18 Maori MPs, including four from new Maori Party. The number of Mäori MPs now roughly in proportion to the number of Mäori in the wider population. National Party pledge to abolish the Maori seats if it leads the new Government requires only a simple majority in Parliament whereas provisions governing the general electoral system cannot be amended without the support of at least 75 per cent of all MPs, or through a national binding referendum. Dr Shaw does not believe the Maori seats are a version of apartheid, as has been claimed by some.

"Apartheid was a system of institutionalised racism, which oppressed a black majority and shut it out of public life," he says. "For long periods of our history, had it not been for the Maori seats Parliament would have been a Maori-free zone.

"It is difficult to see how the Maori seats can be described as a 'privilege'. Voters on the Maori roll have two votes just like everyone else. If you're on that roll, you can't pop your two votes in the ballot box then whip round and have another go in a General seat.

"Also, the Maori electorates are more unwieldy than their General counterparts, covering huge geographic areas, particularly Te Tai Tonga, the Wellington-South Island seat, and Ikaroa Rawhiti on the East Coast. So, no sign of privilege there, for either the MP who has to spend long periods getting about the electorate, or for the constituent whose access to that MP is hampered by the tyranny of distance.

"Boil it right down, and about the only thing that can be considered a privilege is that someone who identifies as Maori gets to choose which electoral roll they're on, while those of us who identify as something else do not. That doesn't appear to be something which gives those on the Maori roll any material gain which the rest of us don't get a sniff of."

"Historically, being treated differently under electoral law has not been to the advantage of Maori. Anyway, depending on how one understands the notion, equality needn't require treating all people in exactly the same way. In fact, if equality is understood as achieving the same or similar outcomes, and if what is sought is a Maori presence in Parliament which reflects the presence of Maori in the wider population, then different treatment may well be justified.

"In the end, the debate about the Maori seats is really about the form which Maori parliamentary representation should take. And it has been slap bang at the centre of this year's election action. Out there in the Maori seats, the old political verities have broken down. The Maori Party has taken full advantage of this. By taking four of the seven Maori seats, and creating a parliamentary overhang, the party has put itself right at the centre of the coalition negotiations.

"While Labour does not need the four Maori Party MPs' support to form a government, at least under some scenarios, nonetheless it will talk with the party in the interests of securing a broad base of support in the next Parliament. On the other hand, as the numbers currently stand, National simply cannot create a government without the Maori Party, and it's difficult to see quite how National's promise to abolish the Maori seats can be accommodated by a party whose very existence depends on those seats. The Maori Party may well be the last cab off the rank, but if it's 3 in the morning, and there's only one cab left, then you pay the tariff."

Hina Kneubuhl talks with Qiane Matata-Sipu of Ihumātao (co-founder of SOUL) about how the families of Ihumātao have been excluded from the planning process.

It very much seems in the last weeks that anxiety based media stories and centralised oppressive regimes have been disrupted by social media generated, grassroots based, decentralised social movements built around cultural values. But there is more to the story. Coming to terms with the change lies in understanding some core values in Hawaiian and Polynesian cultures.

Might is never right.

On one side big money. The State of Hawaii, University of Hawaii, very wealthy donors of the Thirty Metre Telescope (TMT) project, anxiety generating media, some culturally ignorant sub-communities and a ready-for-activation oppressive policing regime.

On the other, Hawaiian educators and activists armed with cellphones, social media savvy, cultural fluency and a set of firm principles of engagement, kapu aloha.

Welcome to Mauna Kea. Ku Kia'i Mauna (Stand, Protectors of the Mountain).

"They" are the problem.

The central premise of the State of Hawaii's Governor David Ige and the University of Hawaii's President David Lassner strategy, whether intentional or not, was to use press releases, positions of power and lazy editors/journalists to build a campaign narrative that normalized Mauna Kea construction opponents as the 'other' - troubled, lost, fragmented campaigners stuck in a vicious cycle of drugs, alcohol and bad choices. Whatsmore, anyone associated in anyway with the 'protestors', would be treated with disappointment.

The best type of remedy for the 'others'? Give them what they deserve, a good dose of immigrant style border policing. At a gut level to me, this is kind of what it feels like -These types of agitators have no claim. We can use pure force to remove them. Wait. Even better, ensure the policing is carried out by the Hawaiian's employed in the police forces, this shows that dissenters don't belong in this society. We must give the message that these type of renegade Hawaiians must conform. (Again that's just my impression of the attitude).

For Māori this is nothing new. We've seen this and observed this time and again with successive New Zealand Governments intent of retaining hegemony, squashing Māori voice and positioning Māori as second-class citizens (see my article on perception of Māori past, present and future here).

The core tenet of Ige's and Lassners strategy is focussed on keeping the gaze of inquiry on the actions of the 'other'. To see 'them' as perpetrators. Analyse 'them' and denounce 'them' by framing the story to the local media with the State of Hawaii as the victim and the activists the oppressor. At all costs, distract the majority of readers from inquiring about the actions of the State.

Problem with the 'us versus them' strategy is that Russia-Trump campaign, Brexit and Cambridge Analytica exposed the malignant lies and scandal behind it. Today (2019) trust in mainstream media, news organisations is low and people have become accustomed to looking beyond the story. Who is 'us'? Who are 'they'?

I'm mostly surprised by the actions of UH President David Lassner. He surely committed professional suicide by writing a letter to academics telling them to comply. In principle, academics fight for freedom of speech, enlightenment, knowledge and insight. Lassners letter, an attempt to muzzle the opposing views is the anti-thesis of any university institution and was like putting petrol on a fire.

Of course he should have expected that fiery response from his department heads. I am just not sure what logic was running through his brain at the time.

UH has shifted strategy to include a new, never previosuly revealed line of documentation to back-up it's agenda, recently covered by Hawaii Tribune Herald,

At UH-Hilo, new Chancellor Bonnie Irwin’s tenure at the university begins as construction is set to start on the $1.4 billion project.

“Regarding TMT, it was already on the road before I arrived,” Irwin  said when asked about the project this week. “So it is my responsibility  now to get up to speed, to learn, and so I’ve been reading a number of  documents, and I’ve been talking to various people involved.”

Most valuable so far is a report from a series of conversations called “Envision Maunakea,” she said.

“And by reading that document, you really understand that there’s a  whole spectrum of opinions,” Irwin said. “It’s not just one side and  another side, there’s a whole series of them. And that was really  important for me to understand.”

It will be interesting to see these 'number of documents'. Documents and research are the arsenal of the University, it's weapon in the information war. The goal? Denounce the actions of the others (Kia'i). But will these documents, in the current climate, persuade general public as to the validity of the University's claims? Do people really want to see the continued marginalisation of Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians standing side-by-side? Is this blow-by-blow information combat the best way forward?

Kapu Aloha

To trace the roots of the TMT opposition one must understand 'kapu aloha'. I had to ask my wife Hina Kneubuhl for a translation for kapu aloha. Hina's day job is translating Hawaiian archive documents with her 'Āwaiaulu team, of whom Kaho'okahi Kanuha is a colleague, one of the spokesperson/leaders against TMT construction. This is her draft:

Kapu aloha is an ethos of engagement wherein our people uphold the highest standard of aloha in the very name of who we are, and in doing so, affirm both our unique existence and our inherent birthrights.

Kapu aloha, may simply mean to uphold the highest most sacred standard of aloha.

Aloha is similar te reo Māori 'aroha' but 'aloha' has wider use and meaning: love, welcome, acknowledgement, gratitude, respect for others, humility, goodbye, thanks, cheers and a way of showing a sense of deep connection to the person being addressed.

'Kapu' is similar to te reo Māori 'tapu' and means anything that is sacred, spiritually or physically. For example, the head is tapu, women in birth are tapu, placenta are tapu, as well as over-fished areas, geographically sensitive locations (waterfalls, springs), dangerous weapons, blood, religious items, death, medical equipment and for sure certain chants, spoken word, karakia, shadows and energies held by someone with intense tapu or spiritual power.

Kapu aloha is a practice that affirms not only Hawaiian values and relationship with others but is a birth right that upholds a unique Hawaiian worldview with the land.

Therefore in it's highest form, kapu aloha maybe in principle a values-based ethic for connection, confrontation or de-escalation. The question is simply, "How can I make this engagement as aloha based as possible? How can I uphold aloha no matter how confrontational and aggressive the other side is?"

From a Māori perspective, I see some cross-over with how Māori view 'mana' - inherint personal prestige and power as viewed from oneself and in others. Everyone has mana, their own life energy. In fact everything in the natural Māori world has mana, a rock, a tree, a person, an enemy. We may not like that person, or rock or tree but we still accept they have mana.

Mana, Kapu Aloha & the State of Hawaii

To explain the next section we need to posit three things. First, we take the principle that everyone has mana. Second, we treat everyone with aloha, no matter what. Third, we treat that aloha as kapu (kapu aloha).

In my personal opinion, as a human, as an inhabitant of earth, I think this is really centered place be. To acknowledge that everyone has mana and to treat them with kapu aloha. This means you respect and listen to them, hear them and acknowledge them. Everybody is somebody. This doesn't mean you have to agree, it just means you offer acknolwedgement.  

Simply, dignity.

So, if someone attempts to take mana away from someone else, what does that mean? They take their dignity. Why take someones dignity? To make oneself greater?

Māori call this dignity degrading process or process to trying to validate ones importance over another 'mana-munching'. Literally eating someone elses mana. Mana-munching only happens in a space without aloha and is certainly not a kapu aloha experience.

How does mana-munching affect progress:

Samuels said the four principals should "reconcile their differences, and lay down their egos for the sake of Ngāpuhi and move ahead with the claim". "With Ngāpuhi now, all I see is a mana munching, ego massaging exercise of leadership. "It takes the focus off missed opportunities for a settlement."

We've all probably experienced some mana-munching in our time or had pity on someone whose dignity has been stripped away. Maybe it has been at a funeral where someone was not offerred the dignity they deserved, or with social climbers intent on pursuiing their own aims at the expense of others. It's yuk to watch and also to be a target of. Teasing, name calling, reputation trashing - basically politics and ego massaging. If anyone has engaged in it (most of us reluctantly have participated at some stage or another), it feels rather degrading and horrible.  

This mana-munching is certainly what is happening with Governor Ige, President Lassner and the Board of TMT, there is certainly no aloha present and kapu aloha has not been enacted at any level.

Stately Mana-Munchers

Herein lies the essence of the grassroots, social media fueled victory. When kapu aloha sits opposite the mana-munching actions of the State of Hawaii and Unversity of Hawaii, the incivility is so transparent. The juxta-position shows the actions towards the 'others' for what it truely is - a socially destructive, toxic, degrading, dignity reducing mechanism that everyone knows and fears.

An uncivil Government.

No-one wants to work or live in an oligarchy, or a David Ige dictatorship. No-one wants to be part of the mana-munching on the 'others' opposed to TMT. It looks boastful, wasteful and gregarious. It brings no dignity to the situation.

You can pretty much be sure that no-one wants to back a system that uses its power to munch on others.  This is the reason why massive public outcry continues:

A pathway forward

Can the State of Hawaii and University of Hawaii adopt kapu aloha? Treat each other with dignity? Enable everyone to have mana, instead of munching it away?

How might that look? Some questions:

1. If it is about desecration of the land, how can we bring dignity and mana back to the land? How many telescopes are sitting decommissioned, decrepid and vacant?  What should the state do to rectify this?
2. If it is about desecration of the Hawaiian people, how can we bring dignity back to the people? Should we treat them as 'others'?
3. If it is about desceration of the Hawaiian culture, how do we bring dignity back to the culture? Should we only take what elements of the culture we like (surfing, hula and few words) and forget about the others? How should we structure our constitutions, our laws so that they reflect a Hawaiian world view?

These are some of the questions I believe the recently enlightened leaders of the State of Hawaii and the University of Hawaii need to dwell upon. I am hopeful that dignity and kapu aloha will become enshrined in the culture of the institutions that have a say over so much of the lands and resources in Hawaii.

Malama 'aina. Malama kānaka. Malama ke ao hou.

(Update: Edited 6:2pm 23 July 2019 to remove references to Trump - KG).

Part 1 of 3 The history of the Ohiwa Harbour and its tribes: Pouroto Ngaroto, Wallace Aramoana, Toopi Kokere Wikotu.

The desire to influence the public debate in foreign countries is nothing new, as disinformatia and psychological operations (PsyOps) have long been a tool in the arsenal of States.

The desire to influence the public debate has become a buzz in the era of 'fake news'. 'Fake' being a somewhat misleading term, as it does not accurately portray the damage created by successful disinformation campaigns.

The Oxford Internet Institute has been studying this topic since 2012 and it's affect on political campaigns is well known in Brexit and the US election.  A corporate vehicle Cambridge Analytica has established itself as a leader in the field, merging both psychology and social media advertising into one powerful buyable manipulation package.

Most recently in January 2018, this manipulation of public perception was enabled via the Twitter platform and a co-ordinated effort on #ReleasetheMemo hashtag. This is explained very well in this article by Politico a news source devoted to exposing abuse of power in the US.

So what has this got to do with New Zealand & Maori?

As Fabio Rugge writes, these latest disinformation or influence techniques are nothing new. Essentially the practice of influence has been well-used since the development of the printing press. What this article suggests is that indigenous Maori have not had a response to this form of social control, and therefore, have been at the harsh end of the perception manipulation stick for well over 150 years.

That Maori survived this onslaught is a qudos to the Maori communities, as well as the support of non-Maori who saw the injustice and picked up the fight - sometimes alongside Maori and sometimes out of just doing the right thing (exposing and righting the injustice).

I won't delve into the ACT Party, National Party or even Labour political campaigns, but many in New Zealand will understand the polarising effect of the Iwi Versus Kiwi or Foreshore & Seabed disinformation campaigns.  These were psychological tactics devised to polarise Maori at odds with the growth and development of non-Maori New Zealand. Used specifically to elevate certain politicians in a strong arm role to push down and suppress an idea of Maori emerging power.

So let's start briefly at the arrival of the first printing press.

New Zealand colonial tactics

If we skip briefly through the history of New Zealand's British Colonisation, we find many documented examples of information manipulation. The Church Missionary Society of England had interest in influencing early settlers, workers, travellers and indigenous Maori in New Zealand in 1830:

The Bay of Islands had seen printing 10 years before it saw a newspaper. On 31 July 1830 the schooner Active arrived at the bay from Sydney. Aboard were the Rev. W. Yate, a James Smith, a 15-year-old printer, and a press. Yate wrote in September 1831: “employed with James Smith in printing off a few hymns in the native language. We succeeded beyond our most sanguine expectations”. Several copies of work done by Yate and Smith are believed to be among the records of the Church Missionary Society in England.

Source: Te Ara Encyclopaedia

This original distribution was intended for religious missionary purposes, to 'educate the natives'.  Nine years later Edward Gibbon Wakefield, a British Politican, with a somewhat questionable character (more below), planned his elopements with the New Zealand Company:

"Possess yourself of the Soil and you are Secure."

Edward G Wakefield was a well-connected elite in Britain, serving as the King's Messenger, carrying diplomatic mail all about Europe during the later stages of the Napoleonic Wars, both before and after the decisive Battle of Waterloo.

At a meeting in March 1839, Wakefield was invited to become the director of the New Zealand Company. Although wealthy by contemporary standards, Wakefield was never satisfied. He wished to acquire an estate and enter British Parliament, for this he needed more capital. In 1826 he abducted 15-year-old Ellen Turner, after luring her from school with a false message about her mother's health. Wakefield was brought to trial for the case known as the Shrigley abduction in 1827 and, along with his brother William, sentenced to three years in Newgate prison.

Wakefield also attempted to overturn his father-in-law's will and get his hands on the remainder of his dead wife's money. This is the same Edward Wakefield who financed the first newspaper in New Zealand:

The New Zealand press was founded by Samuel Revans “of rough exterior, careless in dress (who) wore a conspicuously large Panama hat. His eyes were dark, penetrating, and deeply set, surmounted by thick, bushy eyebrows. His manner was restless, and his speech, though intelligent, often coarse”. After arriving back in London from a stormy experience in the Canadian colony, he was engaged by E. G. Wakefield to produce a journal for the New Zealand Company's expedition then fitting out to colonise in the antipodes. Before the expedition left England, Revans had used type and a Columbia press to produce, on 21 August 1839, the first issue of the New Zealand Gazette. The second issue (four pages for 1s.) appeared from a whare on the banks of the Hutt River eight months later; and this latter, of 18 April 1840, was the first newspaper to be printed in New Zealand.

Both Samuel Revans & Edward Gibbon Wakefield are the first in New Zealand to run significant information manipulation campaigns and engage in 'perception management' towards the indigenous people of New Zealand, the Maori.

They are not the only, there is a long line of negative reflection and sensationalism into many facets of Maori culture, people and history.  For example, this Victoria University Review points out the flaws in this book Te Rauparaha:

Sensationalism: Butler's text has a fatuous interest in body counts and cannibal feasting: hardly any of these details, I notice are edited out. He particularly highlights words like "forequarter" and "diemember". Whereas important names and episodes have vanished.

It was in the interests of colonisers (of that time) to demonise indigenous Maori as oppressors to British succession. Various tactics were used to heighten neurocity in settlers (e.g aggrandised reports of cannibalism), justify reasons for conquest (dishonest dealings or falsehoods, eg Waikato Wars), generate false-flags (e.g Hauhau religion) or amplify otherwise innocent resistance (e.g Parihaka).

As the book "Book & Print in New Zealand : A Guide to Print Culture in Aotearoa" points out:

Many newspapers published in the second half of the 19th century used Maori language, though not all were published by Maori. ... Te Karere o Niu Tireni (in various titles, 1842-63) contained government announcements and correspondence, Te Pihoihoi Mokemoke i runga i te tuanui (1863) was established to counter Te Hokioi (see below), and Te Waka Maori (1863-79 and 1884) was under government control after its first few years.

Source: http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-GriBook-_div3-N11F9E.html

These newspapers were clearly devices to gain and control colonial information dominance - 150 years of stigmatisation and rankism toward Maori (as well as emerging immigrant groups) have successfully suppressed anticipated threats to settler hegemony.

As a teenager I read both versions of 'The New Zealand Wars', volumes I & II by James Cowan and the single volume book by James Belich (along with his television series).  The exotic sensationalism in the volumes by James Cowan is really 'hammed up' to give the book some marketing appeal. I understand that being a historian is difficult and challenging, but to skew the facts and inflate aspects knowingly is fiction and misleading.  And this is the problem, it's been ok to sensationalise, fictionalise, dramatise the history of Maori.

Disinformation has been so deeply allowed and accepted within the social fabric of New Zealand.

What about Maori media response?

From 1830 to 2018 there have been many Maori newspapers, magazines, radio and television outlets (not plentiful but many). The question needs to be asked - have any of these been successful in reversing the tide of colonial information dominance?  Or assisting to rewire public perception of anti-Maori thinking?

Most of these newspapers in Maori took a particular stance on political or religious issues, but they all frequently also contain reports of hui, obituaries, waiata, advertisements, local news, correspondence and so on, which are all valuable sources of historical information.

Source: Victoria University

Many would argue, not so, particularly if Maori populations have frequently been reported at the lower-end of the socio-economic scale or untrustworthy partners in development (or land, businesses, social enterprise).

By the way, access to Maori newspapers is in microfiche, an archive format exclusively reserved for the domain of academics and researcher. It's not easily accessed.

Study of Maori newspapers has been hampered in the past by the location of scarce copies in research libraries. In an attempt to improve accessibility the Alexander Turnbull Library, in cooperation with other libraries which held copies, first produced microfilm copies through the National Library, then in 1996 produced microfiche copies, aiming to allow study through any library or institution with a microfiche reader. The complete set of Niupepa 1842-1933 has been purchased by a few major libraries, and digitisation of the papers is currently under discussion. However, the microfiche edition includes only those titles which began publication before 1900. Some later titles are available on microfilm from the National Library of New Zealand.

Source: Victoria University

It was not until the 1980s that Tu Tangata subtitled itself Maori News Magazine. Mana Magazine made an appearance. Also, some Maori have been employed as journalists within established colonial media companies, what is now commonly known in New Zealand as 'mainstream media'.

With the arrival of disruptive political voices and activists in the 1980's, general public awareness of the constitutional set-up of New Zealand (Treaty of Waitangi) was bought to the fore. With this political movement came the emergence of Maori storytellers in film, journalism, radio and other media avenues.

What about Maori Television?

Maori Television was launched on 28 March 2004. The main channel attracts 1.5 million viewers each month; half of all Maori aged five or more, and one third of all New Zealanders. 'Te Reo', the station's second channel, was launched in 28 March 2008. It stands out from the main channel in that it is both free of advertising, and broadcast completely in Maori (without subtitles). Te Reo features special tribal programming with a particular focus on new programming for the fluent members of its audience.

At it's core, Maori Television is a state funded project and must meet specific goals of language education and retention. Whilst certain elements of content indirectly address colonial dominance, cultural confusion and rankism issues, Maori Television does not appear to be a vehicle to counter the information dominance by institutional settler media organisations for the general New Zealand public. It's market is mainly Maori, pro-Maori and anyone interested in the topics of it's shows (for example, hunting).

It is more likely that the issue of Maori disinformation sits exclusively in the domain of the non-Maori New Zealand media (with a much larger audience base and therefore a more powerful ability to influence).

A continuing struggle

Simon Collins, a reporter with the New Zealand Herald writes in January 2018, 'Racism exists, we feel little and bad' - school student. As a father of two young Maori/Hawaiian girls aged 4 and 6, I became very concerned.

A high school student said: "Because we're Maoris, and the teacher might think we're dumb, they don't want to pay as much attention to us, and focus more on the white people."

This discrimination extends not only to Maori but others who look Maori too:

A Tuvaluan/Samoan/Rarotongan student said: "Some teachers are racist. They tell you that you are not going to achieve ... this makes me feel angry because it hurts."

And for every reporter or journalist like Simon in the NZ Herald, there is also a counter force, such as well-known Mike Hoskings. Why?  Perhaps because he appeals to the long established anti-Maori faction?  Not sure, exactly. Perhaps he draws viewers?  Maybe it is the many of the generations of settlers whose minds have been drip-fed a diet of anti-Maori information?

Perhaps it would be too radical for the NZ Herald to move so abruptly from it's position of cultural perception?  Are we seeing a change?  Or will we continue to see generations of Mike Hoskings?

The psychopathy aspect of disinformation

When the editors, producers and publishers of the media promote the Mike Hoskings it is time to ask why. Is it for financial gain (viewership & advertising revenue)? Or is the pursuit of perception management deeply entrenched in their beliefs?

And the target of their anti-Maori publishing efforts?  Language teachers.  Schools.  Kura Kaupapa Maori.  Kohanga Reo. Families.  School children.  Language learners.  Cultural revivalists. Non-Maori who are totally comfortable in Maori world.  Even those who might like to haka just a little?

My gosh, I fear for anyone daring to using the word 'Maori' around the Mike Hoskings type of people.

We could describe this negative attitude and behaviour as a kind of disease or some kind of form of psychopathy because there is very little empathy and remorse for the people they are affecting.

Psychopathy, sometimes considered synonymous with sociopathy, is traditionally defined as a personality disorder characterized by persistent antisocial behavior, impaired empathy and remorse, and bold, disinhibited, egotistical traits.

Source: Wikipedia

For example,  I'm really struggling to understand why school children studying Maori language would be a threat to financial and property power of non-Maori organisations in New Zealand. Why would a non-Maori person not active in the pursuit of Maori language start a discussion about 'Killing Te Reo'? Or even question the value of te reo if they have zero knowledge of the community and the language itself?

Their reason perhaps is only one-sided: to conduct disinformation and tune a negative perception of Maori language. Can anyone prove that point wrong?

Either way, the point is clear - we surely live in a very active system bent on developing a negative perception of Maori and other challenger minority groups (Mate Ma'a Tonga anyone?).  Racism was developed as control mechanism to control the settler populations thoughts about Maori. To maintain hegemony.

Nothing has changed. For all the new politicians, in the media world nothing has changed.

While the vicious thoughts of Mike Hosking are allowed by the producers, publishers and editors, so we are still in an age of psychological warfare in New Zealand.

Any Maori reading his, indeed know this to be sure.  It is a widely developed topic with international commentary, 'Racism: Tolerated and trivialised in New Zealand'.

But breaking these trends is made all the more difficult when mainstream media presents the trends as social norms. Last month, award-winning cartoonist Al Nisbet penned two satirical pieces on New Zealand's free breakfast programme for schoolchildren in lower decile schools.

The two pieces, published on May 29 and 30 in the Marlborough Express and The Press, respectively, portray characters that play into mainstream stereotypes of Maori and Pacific peoples. Selected characters are shaded in a brownish hue, presented as overweight, speaking improper English, belching, and expressing their value for government subsidies so they can spend money on wasteful activities, also portrayed in the cartoons: drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, and gambling.

An asymmetric threat for cohesion

The perception management toward Maori & minorities has long been an asymmetric threat to peace between the cultures in New Zealand.  The polarisation agenda has put Maori at odds with non-Maori.

Asymmetric warfare can describe a conflict in which the resources of two belligerents differ in essence and in the struggle, interact and attempt to exploit each other's characteristic weaknesses. Such struggles often involve strategies and tactics of unconventional warfare, the weaker combatants attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in quantity or quality.

Source: Wikipedia

Perception manipulation is a barrier to peace.  It is a barrier to a dignitarian society - a society where everyone is given dignity, no matter your colour, race, language or beliefs.

That is why I wrote this article.  To make aware that we are not there. We are a long way off.  How can we make change?

To recap the problem: the drivers behind the disinformation and misinformation campaigns are fundamentally colonial. That is, media mechanisms designed to control the mind of the settler population for the avoidance and distraction away from the guilt about the acquisition of land and profit (for 150 years).  As Wakefields words echo:

"Possess yourself of the Soil and you are Secure."

Wakefield never revealed his game about the use of information.  Neither did Trump, but we can see very clearly in Cambridge Analytica the tools behind his success - psychology and information.

A Multi-Facted Response

There is a gaping need to address non-Maori "perception" of Maori, particularly as Maori success grows and feelings of powerless emerge within non-Maori favouring communities.

Independents may wish to publish and promote their own projects (broadcasts, online sites or writings) to develop an audience. Or, the wider community, business owners, Iwi facilitators and hapu leaders could look to strategic endeavours with like minded organisations (internationally and domestically)?

How can managing the anti-Maori sentiment not be on the agenda of any Maori or New Zealand business? Perhaps it is not on the agenda at all because those organisations are still against Maori?  Or is this job managed by employees without insight into this hot topic?  Or are the positive Maori messages suppressed by larger structural censorship vehicles?  Or are Maori professionals still without equal of their communications peers in the hierarchy?

Regardless, progress can be made. Fabio Rugge suggests in this article, there are things that can be done to counter information warfare;

Investments in technological innovation and cyber capabilities aside, there are probably at least five major endeavors.

Here are five things to do to fight 150 year old legacy of anti-Maori thinking:

Awareness & Education: Awareness about the threat, the game at play and the price at stake, both among the general public and at the top institutional level with influencers committed to seeing a peaceful bicultural New Zealand. Fabio suggests this is the first line of defence.

Values: Our societies’ coherence with our core values is our strength: information warfare represents an attack to an unavoidable vulnerability of open democracies, but this does not mean we shall question or negotiate our commitment in transparency, openness and the rule of law. Manaakitanga, Kaitiakitanga and Rangatiratanga are sound and true. As well as upholding our diligence in Treaty of Waitangi issues, with robust, frank, dignitarian discussion.

Refrain from Retaliatory Strategic Communication: The danger, in other words, is that of fuelling an escalation in the conventional domain with relevant repercussions. Instead, a viable option, although a very challenging one, is to respond to information warfare not retaliating in kind, but countering its desired effects. ISPI, for instance, is one of the many think-tanks that launched a fact-checking initiative to expose fake news; likewise, many institutions are focusing not on developing a counter-narrative, but rather on exposing the mechanism behind fake news, such as the “EU-East StratCom Task Force” launched in 2015 to counter Russian propaganda in Eastern Europe, the “EU myth-buster” and the US State Department’s Global Engagement Center.  Perhaps there is room for an initiative exposing the destructive anti-Maori narrative.

Strengthening Maori response-mechanisms at the institutional level: collaboration by Iwi, Maori authorities, hapu and interest groups. Maybe it is time to update at the domestic level our decision-making processes and to develop a strategy for countering the emerging threat of alternative nationalists and reversionists who are threatened by current advances in Maori success. A series of meetings to brief, form and discuss ideas.

Partner with those that are defending against the same menace.: There are many indigenous groups around the world sufferring under the the same colonial instruments.  Although connections may be limited due to capital constraints technology can assist with connections.

Information warfare is very hot issue in the international security debate.  Michael V. Hayden, who served as CIA Director under President George W. Bush, described the Russian interference in the last US presidential elections as the political equivalent of the 9/11 attacks - an event that exposed a previously unimagined vulnerability and required a unified American response.

We must transform the way we look at information. We must use information strategically to retain our beautiful way of life and ensure the survival of our cultures.  I would love to see development of a dignity based culture in New Zealand, one that is positive of Maori aspiration as well as many other cultures - this is not an exclusively Maori endeavour, but we first must address the deepest and long-standing historical grievance on our doorstep.

Thank you for changing the headline on one of your articles written by Emily Cooper. It used to be headlined:

"Sir Bob Jones to sue Maori woman who wants him stripped of his knighthood."

If we flip the personalisation, it could have read:

Pakeha Man suing Renae Maihi...

or even better for ratings:

Racist Pakeha to sue Angry Maori...

Or if we take a trip back 10 years perhaps

Sir Bob Jones defends himself against hoardes of angry Maori radicals and activists...

One person can be attributed as an actual bonafide person, another just a 'label' or a couple of labels, 'woman' and 'Maori'. Thank you for adjusting it to read:

'I won't sue her for a lot because that would seem like I'm bullying': Sir Bob Jones explains why he's suing woman who wants him stripped of knighthood

Now there is one label, 'woman'.

The TVNZ newsroom does not appear to be alone in this 'labelisation', try this search:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=sir+bob+jones+sue&t=opera&ia=web

Or this search:

https://www.google.com/search?q=sir+bob++jones+petition

So perhaps the entire industry is striving to have less racial bias and balanced reporting in our newsrooms... however, if machines are doing the job of pushing and promoting content, we have a long way to go in covering the subtle nuances of communication.

So thanks again for getting in there and writing something a little better than the rest. Kia ora!