Thursday, 26 November 2009

Oh no he di'int - Paul Henry does it yet again

Yes the man who reckoned mentioning a woman's facial hair was sufficient rebuttal to her points about compensation for those affected by nuclear testing, thinks psychic Deb Webber routinely solves crimes, and seems unable to get past a woman's appearance even when discussing her dancing prowess, has done it again.

But now he's going International with his judgeyness - his new target? Susan Boyle.

Here's the message from IHC about Monday's outburst:
IHC needs your help to complain about an item on Breakfast TV on Monday 23 November. In the item Paul Henry refers to Susan Boyle (the singer from Britain’s Got Talent) as ‘retarded’. He laughs and says she was starved of oxygen at birth and has an intellectual disability. He then say “If you look at her carefully you can make it out”.

To view the excerpt go to

If you want to complain could you please:

1. Email saying that Paul Henry’s comments about Susan Boyle and intellectual disability were inappropriate and discriminatory.

2. Go to the Human Rights Commission online complaints form and fill it out. Say that TVNZ is using discriminatory language about people with intellectual disabilities, making negative comments about their appearance and treating intellectual disability with derision and disrespect.

Please pass this email on to others so they can complain also. This is an opportunity to make it clear to Paul Henry and TVNZ that discrimination against people with intellectual disability is not acceptable, and that there are many people who are offended by the comments on Breakfast TV.
Hard to believe that there has been talk about Henry getting his own show. What is TVNZ thinking??


Principessa said...

He has a good laugh about physical abuse as well. Sicko.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, he sucks. But you watched the clips then drew more attention to him. In an odd paradox, TV problems actually do go away if we ignore them... Somewhat related: How dare you deride Joss Stones worthiness to act because of her physical features.

stargazer said...

In an odd paradox, TV problems actually do go away if we ignore them...

no they don't, they continue & persist. in fact they usually get worse. at the very least, mr henry should be getting the message from concerned viewers that it's not ok to slag people in the way he does. interesting how he saves these types of comments for women.

How dare you deride Joss Stones worthiness to act because of her physical features

and you get the "totally missing the point" award for today. no-one derided joss stone at all.

Anonymous said...

I thought implying a person was too "stunningly attractive" to properly portray a queen was slightly derisive, or at least somewhat ridiculous. But that's just me, we are all tuned to different vibes I guess. Was the point that look-alikes are more important in historical dramas than seasoned performers? I thought the resemblance was quite adequate. People like beauty, it's why you gaze at the stars.
I'm still gonna ignore P-Henry and choose to actively respect and help the disabled though.
Thanks for the award.

A Nonny Moose said...

Ignoring a problem gives them the implicit, unspoken ok to continue with their behaviour.

Ignoring a child having a tantrum - works. Ignoring a high paid TV presenter with the ear of advertisers smug anti-PC crusaders does NOT bring forward societal change. If this man is supposed to be a representative of his demograph, then he should behave in an appropriate manner.

We're not talking about just putting some dog-whistler in his corner - it's about changing this sort of behaviour and language on a societal and generational level.

A Nonny Moose said...

BTW - where is his co-host when he projectile verbiaging? How about a little bit of "You can't say that?"/"That's not appropriate"

Kate said...

"seasoned performers"? Joss Stone is a singer with no acting experience.

Craig Ranapia said...

Ignoring a problem gives them the implicit, unspoken ok to continue with their behaviour.

With all due respect, feeding trolls gives them the explicit, loud and clear message that their behaviour works.

And let's not enable Paul Henry's ego by making him more significant that he really is. He's a shock jock on a poorly-rating breakfast show that only registers with the overwhelming majority of people when his infantile attention-whoring becomes "news".

Meanwhile, here's something to think about, if Paul Henry is so clever why is the "retarded" Susan Boyle ending the week with the number one album on both sides of the Atlantic, and he's marking time until the next weather report?

Julie said...

So then Craig how does ignoring it stop it? There's been quite a lot of ignoring Paul Henry's ridiculousness in the past actually and I just see him keeping on keeping on with his offensive behaviour.

And given that he frequently hosts TV One's main current affairs show (Close Up), and there are widespread rumours he will be getting his own prime time show next year, actually I think it is important that people raise their concerns about his ongoing disrespect for other human beings, particularly women.

A Nonny Moose said...

So, if we can't talk about it, and ignoring it is wrong too...what ARE we supposed to do?

Keeping Quiet has create an historical surefeit of disenfranchised women and minorities. Speaking out has to be loud, persistant and make an impact where it really hurts - TVNZ's advertising dollars.

If you tell Breakfast's advertisers you won't support their products because of their implicit support of Henry, they'll get the idea.

We will not be rendered powerless by a little boy.

Hugh said...

Personally, I'd never heard of Paul Henry until he started getting criticised on this and other blogs.

Craig Ranapia said...

So then Craig how does ignoring it stop it?

Good question, Julie. After his disgraceful personal attack on Stephanie Mills, I decided not to directly enable his ego and instead informed TVNZ that I would be boycotting any company I became aware was advertising on Breakfast or Close Up and telling them exactly why.

I also think it would have been useful direct action if Breakfast's producers found it a lot harder to book guests. Ahead of the last election, I really thought both Helen Clark and John Key had much better things to do than be stooges to his obnoxious monologues.

But when, I'm reliably informed, Paul Henry almost literally gets off on complaints, I don't know if that's the most effective way forward. But, in the end, it's not my place to be telling you or anyone else how to do your activism. I just saying what makes sense to me.

Anonymous said...

To all the avid New Zealanders who wrote in support of Paul Henry's shameful behaviour and the bullies in New Zealand society:

What happens to bullies go to when they finish school?

They run the Broadcasting Standards Commission, the Race Relations, the Court System and other commissions in New Zealand. They run the government, SOE's, including TVNZ and the Energy companies, Media, rugby, become company CEO's in New Zealand (the good ones like FPH CEO excluded). They are all rewarded for being bullies. They all are in positions of prominence.Their behaviour degrades every New Zealander.

The result? The government has progressively put the citizens of New Zealand in a worse state, where ordinary people can no longer own basic things(the government tweaking the foreign land ownership law in 2002, allowing their buddies overseas to unashamedly make millions of dollars by speculating in property market, Rugby, our national sport, is in shambles. Most New Zealanders no longer switch on the tele. Free speech is a farce- it is fully controlled by media and their bullying friends, democracy no longer forms part of New Zealand politics, as politicians gain free hand.

Sadly, these bullies have enriched themselves over the years and short changing New Zealanders. They have usurped their power, have mates in high places, and their bullying certainly pays off - As the saying goes, the ar**h*** is always on top.

Despite them destroying everything they touch and their despicable behaviour, sadly, they go down in History Books as heroes, and from one position of influence to another, bullying their way through and supported by the rest of the bullies.

Of course,as in the case with Paul Henry, they will continue to close ranks in support of each other. We all can guess the outcome before the investigation.

Henry clearly demonstrated to the world the bullies that New Zealanders are!! What poor ambassadors for our country. Jane Ke;sey's New Zealand Experience is probably the only book which highlights this disgraceful behaviour.
We hang our head in shame.