Outrage was the winner in the Parker chaos

Predictably, everyone can claim victory after antitrans activist Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, aka Posie Parker, was shut down at her public rally in Auckland yesterday.

The pro-trans lobby is jubilant that Keen-Minshull was denied a platform for her divisive and inflammatory rhetoric and is celebrating a strong show of support from the thousands of Aucklanders who turned up to protest the event.

Conversely, the free speech lobby are quietly rubbing their hands at the chaotic scenes that forced KeenMinshull off the stage before she had even spoken; it plays into the outrage of its supporters about a so-called ‘‘out-ofcontrol cancel culture’’.

Keen-Minshull herself, meanwhile, surely must have got what she wanted out of it. She barely looked up from her cellphone as she filmed the angry protest, presumably for her YouTube and other social media channels. Those pictures are a far more powerful motivator to her followers than what was the likely alternative, the sad sight of a handful of supporters in an otherwise empty park who actually wanted to hear her speak.

Keen-Minshull courts division, anger and outrage to boost her following. Judging by the low number of those who turned out in support, she has very few followers in New Zealand. But her opponents will always turn out in force.

The only sign that KeenMinshull may have been rattled in Auckland was after security had to push their way through thousands of protesters to get her to a waiting police car, and she was heard asking officers if she should cancel her Wellington speech today.

It seems that decision was made soon after; Keen-Minshull apparently left the country last night (though she denied she was leaving early when contacted).

Amid all this are questions about the limits of free speech.

There will also be questions about Immigration New Zealand’s judgement that KeenMinshull was not a threat to public safety or security.

Should someone as divisive as Keen-Minshull be entitled to say what they like in public? And when social media provides an untrammelled platform with a far greater audience than a band rotunda in an Auckland park, why would she bother flying down here to speak to a few hundred supporters anyway? Presumably because it’s the conflict that gives her cause oxygen.

So, does that old-fashioned concept of sunlight as the best disinfectant still apply in these days of mass media, a 24/7 news cycle, and social media algorithms that can deliver an audience of millions almost within seconds? Or is oldfashioned sunlight more imperative than ever when it’s so easy to spread division and hate unchallenged over the internet?

When veteran broadcaster Kim Hill interviewed Keen-Minshull on RNZ last week, there was immediate outrage and complaints about ‘platforming’ Keen-Minshull.

‘Platforming’ has become the outrage du jour; it gained currency during the lockdowns and parliamentary protest – whenever the media spoke to those caught on the wrong side of the vaccine mandates there was a backlash at ‘platforming’ anti-vaxxers.

In Keen-Minshull’s case, since she had been green-lit into New Zealand by officials, surely the media would be failing if they ignored the elephant in the room?

And surely we’re all better informed by a broadcaster like Hill holding Keen-Minshull’s feet to the fire on her more outlandish claims?

As one of my fellow editorial writers so thoughtfully put it this week, it has become extremely difficult to have a reasonable and respectful debate on gender issues – or any issue.

‘‘We have lost sight of how to talk about these and other issues without pushing the nuclear button,’’ he wrote.

Sadly, there’s no sign of that changing any time soon.

There will also be questions about Immigration NZ’s judgement that Parker was not a threat to public safety.