Tony Veitch: monster or victim? A couple of questions for the Dom Post

I suppose the argument goes that it’s a good yarn and deserved to be told because domestic assault is a serious issue and knowing about public figures who are alleged wife-bashers is in the public interest.

But I can’t help wondering why the Dominion Post felt it was the right thing to do to break the Tony Veitch story on Monday some two years after the alleged assault and cover-up.

I’d like to know why the paper thought exposing Veitch and Dunne-Powell and their families was in the public interest.

A web of mundanity?

In a recent post I suggested that the blogosphere is now “officially mundane”. [Baby Herbal Soup]
I felt at the time EM readers might think that comment a bit pretentious and a bit of a put-down. It wasn’t meant that way, so I figured I should explain myself. I like to be provocative (in case you hadn’t noticed), but I also like to develop arguments and cases to back up my provocations. It’s the polemic method of a teacher.

The opportunity for further reflection and articulation of the Internet=Mundane idea has presented itself this week with a number of interesting news stories that show what I mean:

a Sky News story about the university gossip site, JuicyCampus, and attempts to have it banned on campuses

an NZ herald story about teenagers sending inappropriate images of themselves to each other then finding them in the public eye unexpectedly

a Sunday Star Times story about an irate online buyer who went round to an online seller’s house and forced him to remove comments posted to the Trade Me site about their transaction.

On any given day these “what were they thinking?” and “weird news” stories are in the media, they’re an indicator of something more profound.

[Dribblejaws alert: If you don’t like “theory”, go away now]