David Farrar hates Home Brew | The Jackal

14 Nov 2012

David Farrar hates Home Brew

Today, Kiwibog reported:

Readers will be aware of the 2012 Vodafone Music Awards, where cheered on by Labour MP, the band Homebrew referred to the Prime Minister as a cunt, and said he should suck their dicks.

Now we have free speech in this country and Homebrew are entitled to say that.

RIANZ, who organise the Music Awards, are entitled to invite them to perform despite knowing that the band hate John Key (they have said so in public many times, and one of their songs is directed at him). Just as Labour invite Homebrew to play at fundraisers for them, so RIANZ is free to invite them. If I was RIANZ though, I wouldn’t be expecting their advocacy on industry issues to be particularly successful in the future. Free speech has consequences after all.

As if RIANZ is responsible for what a band says on stage. But what I find most amusing about David Farrar's rant is that if he was truly that offended by what Home Brew Crew said, why hasn't he made any formal complaints? That makes his whinging look rather pathetic if you ask me.

Unfortunately he's right about there being consequences to speaking out against the National government though. In fact that's why I'm an anonymous blogger. But RIANZ cannot exactly ignore one of the most popular bands in New Zealand at the moment can they? What Farrar really doesn't like is that Home Brew Crew's message is popular, and that message is anti establishment and anti John Key.

I suggest that the sponsorship should reduce to zero. I don’t want a cent of my taxes going on the Awards. Let RIANZ and Vodafone spend as much of their own money as they want on it.

The $125,000 NZ on Air could save, would fund an extra six episodes of Q+A.

A taxpayer funded organisation should not be sponsoring an Awards Night that consistently is boorish and partisan in nature. It’s simple.

Therein lies one of the main differences between the left and right. National and their supporters are more than willing to inhibit free speech when it's directed against them. Instead, they like to fund shows that often promote right wing propaganda. What a bore!

There is no question that funding allocation should be made in an unbiased way to ensure growth in productive areas. Inhibiting potential growth just because of political opinion is quite frankly nuts! It ensures that talent is ignored simply because they don't support whoever is in power, it ensures even more resentment towards the government that undertakes such repressive measures, and it ensures New Zealand doesn't properly promote artists purely based on their potential to take over the world. Such repression is therefore not socially, artistically or economically beneficial to New Zealand.

Let's take the late and great Pauly Fuemana for instance. The Otara Millionaires' Club smash hit How Bizaar was named Single of the Year at the 1996 New Zealand Music Awards and went to number one in many countries all around the world. It earned an estimated $11 million.

Let's say that the government of the day didn't like Fuemana's politics, and decided not to allow him to perform at the New Zealand Music Awards by threatening to cut RIANZ funding. Let's say that a fascist little pen pusher decided not to fund the How Bizaar video in the first place, because of what Fuemana believed in. New Zealand would have lost millions and millions of dollars in revenue from that one single alone, not to mention the world would be culturally poorer, all because a decision was made to allocate funding depending on people's political beliefs.

Music has always been the voice of the people and Home Brew Crew, like many artists before them, are simply expressing what many young New Zealanders believe. Any government that listens to David Farrar's bleating and acts upon it could potentially reduce the revenue able to be generated by one of New Zealands growth industries. So clearly there should be no interference by politicians in the music industry apart from helping to promote it here and abroad through adequate and unbiased funding allocation.