Category: Conspiracy Corner

Last week was, unexpectedly, the last in the current series of “Conspiracy Corners”. Due to some changes occurring to bFM’s Breakfast Show, the segment is on hiatus, although I’ve been told it might be resurrected at some point in the future.

“Conspiracy Corner with Matthew Dentith” had a decent run: February 2011 to April 2014. If we add in the previous incarnation, “The Dentith Files” then I’ve been part of the bFM soundscape since 2008. That means the Laphroaig Quarter Cask I was drinking last night was made, bottled and consumed during my time on air. When you can measure a career in the media discussing conspiracy theories by the age of a good whisky, then something is right in the world.

I’m kind of tempted to continue the Conspiracy Corner format off of my own bat, producing a weekly, eight minute-esque podcast. If I do, however, it won’t be for a few weeks; the book is due with the publisher in six days and then I have a few assignments, all which need taking care of. If the podcast eventuates (I’m thinking of calling it “The Podcaster’s Guide to the Conspiracy”, since Douglas Adams’ references is what I’m about, basically), I’m going to have to solve the issue of how to host it, et cetera. It’s quite possible that I’ll go “Bugger this for a lark; I’m just spend my time writing another book!” (I am going to write another book, but I won’t be talking about that until such time the current one is actually out.)

Hopefully this isn’t really “Goodbye to all that!” but rather “See you soon!” Still, in case it is a case of the former, I’d like to say thanks to the bFM team for putting up with me all these years.

Particular thanks to my producers: Imogen Barrer, Esther MacIntyre, Lucas Jensen-Carey and Ellen Moorhead.

Special thanks for the actual on air talent who had to put up with my diatribes and sometimes quite overt moralising: Connor Nestor, Vince Wynn, Zac Arnold and Ethan McAuley.

So, what did I go out on? Well, last week we discussed the Tamiflu scandal, a story about a little drug that doesn’t really do what it says on the packet, but all the governments in the world still want to stockpile it.

At 8:15am every Thursday morning, Matthew phones in his thoughts on the conspiracy theory of the week to Zac and the audience of bFM’s Breakfast Show.

This week me and Zac talked about Exxon Mobile’s change of heart; they are no longer climate change skeptics but, rather, climate change fatalists. We also discussed how this change of heart fits the profile of certain conspiracy theories about the petrochemical industry which claim corporations like Exxon Mobile had a vested interest to deny the science behind claims of climate change in order to keep feathering their own nest.

At 8:15am every Thursday morning, Matthew phones in his thoughts on the conspiracy theory of the week to Zac and the audience of bFM’s Breakfast Show.

Last week I fulfilled part of my promise to talk more about the book (“The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories”, Palgrave Macmillan, 2014). It was also the last (for the time being) pre-record, as we’re going back to the old interview style with Zac. So, listen in one more time to the home studio recording styles of a boy and his cheap microphone pretending to talk with a fictionalised, anthropomorphised version of the Pork Board.

At 7:45am every Thursday morning, Matthew phones in his thoughts on the conspiracy theory of the week to Zac and the audience of bFM’s Breakfast Show.

Two weeks ago I talked a little about the TPPA; you can listen in here.

Notes:

In no way is this an ad for you to attend a protest on Saturday.

Honestly; I have no connection to the people involved in this protest at all; I just happen to be a concerned citizen who thinks that this kind of protest has a point in our civilised society.

So, this is no ad. Especially since I probably won’t be at the protest myself.

Or maybe I will. It’s hard to say. It depends on how much I celebrate the end of my first practicum on Friday night, really.

Sorry, I’ve got ahead of myself. What protest, you are probably asking? Why, the protest against the TPPA. It starts at 1pm at Aotea Square.

The TPPA, or Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is an agreement being negotiated in secret between eleven Asian and Pacific-rim countries, including the United States, which, if signed, might well be disastrous for Aotearoa.

Reasons it could be disastrous:

Trade agreements with the US always end badly because the US is big and is protectionist, so small countries like our own lose out.
We’ve seen drafts of the text of the agreement and it’s clear America wants us to cave on some of our sovereignty, like Pharmac and copyright, which means we’ll lose some of the benefits we have accrued in order to protect the profits of foreign corporations based (mostly) in the US.

Why did we get involved? Well, because the original version of the TPPA was between a number of smaller countries, which were essentially equal. However, the pool of potential signees grew and America came on board, which meant it was no longer small-but-equal countries negotiating. Now it is a number of small countries and some really big ones, and it’s no longer a relatively even playing surface.

What’s the conspiracy angle?

Two angles:

1. Because the negotiations are being undertaken in secret, no one is really sure what is on the table and what is not, and the fear is that whilst we’re being told our negotiators are fighting for us, the worry is that we are trying to appease America to get in their good books. Thus, people are concerned we are being lied to by members of the government, which makes it conspiratorial.

2. The secret nature of the negotiations feeds into certain New World Order conspiracy theories, where the TPPA is symptomatic of a wider goal of subsuming the world under one, single governing authority.

Let’s focus on the first conspiracy theory, the claim the government is lying to us about the real agenda behind our negotiations around the TPPA. The problem here is that it’s not clear what to make of it all. The PM, for example, has variously claimed everything is negotiable and yet also that some things aren’t like Pharmac. The leaks of the negotiations thus far indicate that our negotiators do seem to be working in (most) of our interests. However, there’s a whole of ambiguity and the fact the government insists that the negotiations must go on in private (despite no compelling argument to that extent) makes everything seem just a tad suspicious. After all, the PM saying “Pharmac is safe” doesn’t mean that Pharmac won’t change as a result of the negotiations. Indeed, some have pointed out that Pharmac just shed a large amount of its middle and upper management, in a move which some suggests looks suspiciously like the government changing it in order to make it fit in with a post-TPPA version of Aotearoa.

With respect to the second conspiracy theory, well… You don’t have to believe it to believe that the TPPA is suspicious, but if you believe in the existence of a plan to create a New World Order, the TPPA certainly fits the bill.

Claims that some set of conspirators have been working on a New World Order have existed for decades now and it seems they are still not quite there with the setting up of the single state. If the TPPA is part of that system of control, it seems as messy and prone to leaks as every other part of the suspected plot for world domination.

I tend to take a dim view of world domination conspiracy theories; there are enough warranted instances of conspiracy to go around without needing to worry about the mess that is trying to prove that the Illuminati still exist, or that there is a plot which spans both sides of the political spectrum to bring the world under the control of a single authority. Still, when governments act in secret and all we know about their negotiations is due to leaks by whistleblowers and concerned citizens, you can be excused for thinking something is up. After all, we live in a world where the Pork Board can surveil ordinary New Zealand citizens. Isn’t that right, Pork Board.

Yes, that’s right, you dirty commie vegan.

At 7:45am every Thursday morning, Matthew phones in his thoughts on the conspiracy theory of the week to Zac and the audience of bFM’s Breakfast Show.

I’m currently on placement/section/practicum (depending on who you talk to), and one of the downsides to being on placement/section/practicum is that you get to encounter and “enjoy” the many childhood diseases that run rampant amongst the nation’s younger members. Last week, for example, I had a bout of laryngitis, which rendered me literally speechless for the weekend and made recording a segment for the radio somewhat problematic. Luckily, Ben Curran and Rachel Rayner volunteered (via Twitter) to team up with my good old friend, Robo-voice, to help produce the segment. You can listen to their dulcet tones (and my raspy voice) discuss Flight MH370 in the segment below.

One thing which didn’t get discussed in the segment was this Wired article that the most likely explanation for the disappearance of Flight MH370 was that an electrical fire killed the pilots. I’m no aviation expert, so my endorsement here means nothing, but I think the author makes a very good case for this being the best explanation for the event; I’ve thus far considered, based upon the available evidence, the whole kidnapping or terrorism theses to be rather dubious. I have sometimes wondered whether the prevalence of these particular explanations in the media’s discussion of the disappearance of Flight MH370 is more that these theories a) render it possible that the crew and passengers onboard the flight are alive (which is a salve for some of us) and b) make the tragedy something we can pin on some individual or group? Whilst I know certain agencies are actively pursuing the hijacking theory, I am curious to just how likely they think that hypothesis is, compared to it being an accident.

Hmmm… As I was writing I was pointed towards this article, which suggests some rum doings in re mysterious people contacting the pilot just before takeoff. Make of it what you will.

Finally, the original version of last week’s segment was almost entirely Robo-voice, but my producer thought seven minutes of it was a bit too much. If you’d like to hear the synthetic voice version of the segment, listen below:

Side-note: It’s a bit weird how the synthetic voice takes in breath at the start of each sentence, isn’t it?