Journo Hildebrand withdraws from MCA debate series after being told off for how he moderated
A debate series at Sydney’s Museum of Contemporary Art hosted by Joe Hildebrand has been axed after a falling out between the journalist and the MCA.
Mumbrella understands that Hildebrand declined to participate in the final session of the MCA On The Rocks series after the organisation complained about his moderation of a debate on body image earlier this month.
The July 18 debate – the second in the series moderated by Hildebrand – had featured writer Bob Ellis, Cleo editor Sharri Markson and quadriplegic and disability advocate Matt Lennox.
Afterwards the MCA complained to Hildebrand that it did not like his handling of the topic.
Smacks of an arrogant & craven MCA executive.
An event subtitled – Ideas shaken and stirred – conjures an expectation of an edgy provocative discussion going beyond the moderated middle ground we are conditioned to live within in todays PC Australia (it used to be an easy going place you know).
Whilst its voice is in decline; the ARTS has always been society’s last bastion of the free thinker. Venue /Topic = great fit.
So an MCA beneficiary (no doubt a well positioned /perked/priveleged soul) wants to have thier influence and opinion ADHERED to. AND then sends out their lackey to deliver the message and face the music. Why does this entity need to be anonymous? Do they have no faith in the opinion they want adhered to? Are they so unsure that NO level of accountability is palatable?
Not surprised in the least. The tiresome, spineless, pseudo-intellectuals at the MCA wear offence as a campaign button, all the while strutting around like what they do is open-minded and cutting-edge. That place is a deep-freeze on deep thought.
Well MCA have discovered that there’s famous and then there’s people who the general public are prepared to buy tickets to see. If they hadn’t sold a ticket two weeks out there was obviously very little interest.
What a joke.
A public servant wants to control the debate at ‘their’ venue?
Here’s a tip Public Servant. It’s our venue as taxpayers. It not ‘yours’.
Just publish the public servant’s name. After all, we pay the public servant’s salary. Not a private business…
And always remember, when you email a public servant, the correct ‘sign off’ at the end of your email should always be;
“You remain my servant”
Who owns the venue; who is it run for, and who pays the bills????
Reading MCrAp’s assessment, it would seem the MCA and Hildebrand are a perfect match.
Maybe that’s the problem?
Too similar…
The MCA’s not actually government. It’s a Not-For-Profit public company.
I used to be a member, they send you a report every year
Their FAQ’s say:
HOW IS THE MCA FUNDED?
The MCA receives ongoing funding and support from the NSW State Government through Arts NSW and the Commonwealth Government through the Australia Council. Each year the MCA raises 60% of its income from additional sources such as ticketed exhibitions and events, sponsorship, donations and venue hire.
http://www.mca.com.au/about/faqs/
Just sayin.