"Yes23 Needs work, but not the same blinkered Journalism!

                                                                                                                                                                         

   Last week an article appeared in the #Conservative newspapers, suggesting people coming from a 'No' perspective on the Referendum on Recognition of Aboriginal People in the Constitution and the Voice to Parliament, were increasingly reticent to voice their opinion for fear of the response and being branded racist! How ironic!

There are valid reasons to consider a NO vote:

- You genuinely believe this Constitutional change is racist or divisive

- The Constitution is not the place to reflect this reform

- You are convinced it won't deliver equity for indigenous Australians

- The separation of the 'values behind it' from how it will be established concerns you

This is different to:

- Feeling Aboriginal people get advantages and this is a 'leg up' - which by definition implies 'undeserved' or 'unjustified' special treatment (something Aboriginal people are very familiar with)

- You're  racist, with little or no appreciation of culture/story 

- When challenged you become abusive (yes I'll offer in return)

- It being about your own struggles and perceived lack of 'fairness'

- Appeal to the ideal we are all equal why divide us, the genuine case study version of a perspective shared from white privilege, whatever 'opportunities' you feel aren't open to you.
Equity is different to equality.

- You don't have 'the details' which is a distraction, where when details are offered we argue about them instead of the principle at hand eg. should it be 24 or 26 representatives when it's very existence is the main point and questions like this will vary as its effectiveness is measured. Details changeable, principle fixed as a solution generously asked for by aboriginal people themselves

- Not understanding who the few public aboriginal 'No' voices speak for

- And a few more...

   I'm reflecting on this today because I'm having some fruitful measured conversations with people genuinely open to learn or share and some idiot social media exchanges parroting memes and what are perceived to be funny quotable quotes (as above) avoiding the issues and applicable to all people, masquerading as wisdom or humour, when the quote is just about us all at some point or other...

   But even more, the same articles appeared around the plebiscite into 'Marriage Equality' and could have just had the topic 'cut and pasted,' even if the research is real! Maybe just as 'Yes' enthusiasts are invited to share generously and around enquiry, those feeling 'No' might simply offer their questions or concerns, open to hear alternative views. If that meets with threatening or negative feedback, call it out! But please, journalists, your vehicles editorial bias is showing! How about instead of 'gotcha' details questions, you ask people's perspective on the detail which exists, tell the story of indigenous people and invite them to tell it first, ask the No politicians which aboriginal leaders they have consulted with and whether, for example, being on a Mining Company Board effects your opinion on the interplay between mining permissions, traditional owners and 'The Voice.' Ask how a former Government who commissioned a 'shape of the Voice' report doesn't recall what it said!

   By all means ask about the kinds of valid reasons for 'No,' some of which are above... but don't subject us to the same 'cookie cutter' articles we've seen on previous issues.