Kiri McKenna
LightNews LightNews
krmckenna.bsky.social
Kiri McKenna
@krmckenna.bsky.social
28 followers 68 following 2 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Kiri McKenna
ayoub.bsky.social
Netanyahu: “We’re destroying more and more homes — they have nowhere to return to. The only natural outcome will be that Gazans will want to emigrate out of the Strip. Our main problem is with receiving countries.”

www.972mag.com/gaza-expulsi...
The planned expulsion of Gaza's population is already underway - +972 Magazine
Israel is conditioning aid delivery to force Gazans south into ‘concentration zones.’ This scheme has begun to stall, but that only portends greater brutality.
www.972mag.com
June 14, 2025 at 8:39 AM
Reposted by Kiri McKenna
abigailbutblue.bsky.social
I made a formal complaint to RNZ about this article, based on the Media Council Principles here.
I am complaining with regards to the article published 12 June 2025 by Ruth Hill, "Teenager starves to death alone in emergency accommodation". I believe this article has breached at least 4 of the Media Council Statement of Principles. Principle 1: Accuracy, Fairness and Balance. This principle states: "In articles of controversy or disagreement, a fair voice must be given to the opposition view." The subject of this article stated his name as "V" and expressed a male gender identity. This is ignored by the author and deference is made to the wishes of V's parents who expressed intolerance toward their child's gender identity. These parents state V later rejected this identity. With their admitted intolerance towards V's gender diversity they are not reliable sources here. I believe undue deference is made to the opinions of these parents, considering many would argue their actions amount to abuse. Principle 2: Privacy. The descriptions given detailing V's remains are vulgar and gratuitous. The author of this article, Hill, writes: "It's the kind of photo any proud mum might have on her phone ... the next photo is not. It's of naked, skeleton-like remains, shrouded in the black nylon of a police body-bag." This over-the-top editorialising serves to do little more than shock and provoke. I do not see how descriptions like this serve V or the public. Principle 3: Children and Young people. I don't believe "an exceptional degree of public interest" has been met in this case to justify mining V's mental health struggles to this degree, especially as they started when the subject was very young. The article goes into extreme detail as regards V's anorexia and methods used in this plight. These descriptions are over-elaborate and describe the actions of an extremely distressed young person. I believe this breaches the subject’s right to dignity. Principle 7: Discrimination and Diversity. Undue deference is made to V’s parents who make no denial of their intolerance towards V’s gender expression. In the description of their final time meeting their child "She was wearing a puffer jacket in the middle of summer. She wouldn't let us near to see how thin she was, using the excuse 'You don't accept I'm a man'." This directly contradicts the statement from these parents that V had “abandoned” this identity. It appears V identified as male until the last. This contradiction is not explored or even touched on by the author. This article is distressing, bigoted, callous, gratuitous and vulgar. Most importantly it is cruel to its subject who is no longer able to voice his say. I am shocked it was written at all let alone published.
June 13, 2025 at 6:55 AM