NZ ''Big Brother'' Awards - Call For Nominations
New Zealand ''Big Brother'' Awards
Hosted by the Auckland Council for Civil Liberties
Nominations have opened for the first New Zealand 'Big Brother Awards' for people and organisations that have been outstanding in their abuse or disregard of privacy in New Zealand. The awards were presented at a function hosted by the Auckland Council for Civil Liberties in March 2004. Nominations close on Friday 27 February 2003.
The Big Brother Awards (BBAs) were conceived in the mid-1990s as a means of drawing attention to privacy invasion by corporations, public officials and government. The annual event also includes "positive" recognition of individuals and organisations that have worked to protect privacy.
These first New Zealand Big Brother Awards follow in the tradition of Privacy International awards staged as an annual event in the United Kingdom, the United States, Austria, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Hungary, Denmark, Spain, Finland, Belgium, France and Australia. Each BBA event is held at a national level, with judges and nominees drawn from the relevant country. To date there have been over 30 BBA ceremonies in thirteen countries.
The following guidelines for the New Zealand BBAs are derived on those followed in other countries.
THE NATURE OF THE AWARDS
The award ceremony is in the nature of a spoof "Oscars" (or "Orwells"). The events should be good fun, incorporating humour, audience participation, and audio visual support.
Award winners attending will be presented with an award certificate to commemorate their achievement.
Among the many award categories for bad deeds, below, there are also two positive awards for good works in the service of protection of privacy called the "Smith".
The Big Brother Awards for privacy abusers
The categories of privacy abuser for which nominations are sought:
Person of the Year: supreme winner, for outstanding abuse or
disregard of privacy and civil liberties in New
2. Worst Elected Representative: for the elected representative who has most neglceted or abused their responsibilities to protect privacy
3. Long-term menace: for a privacy invader with a long record of profound disregard for privacy.
4. Worst Corporate: for a corporation that has shown a blatant disregard of privacy.
5. Worst public agency or officials: for a government agency or official that has most systematically invaded privacy.
6. Boot in mouth: the ‘best’ (most appalling!) quote on a privacy-related topic.
"Smith" Awards for Privacy Defenders
Nominations are also sought for two awards to be given to champions of privacy, those who have done exemplary work to protect and enhance this elusive right. These will be called "the Smiths", after Orwell's rebellious hero, Winston Smith, who struggled against the nightmarish regime of Big Brother.
1. Best Privacy Guardian - for a meritorious act of privacy protection or defence.
2. Long-term Achievement - for provision of outstanding services to privacy protection.
Call For Nominations
The judging panel, which is made up of privacy specialists and advocates, is currently inviting nominations for the eight prizes.
Please submit your nominations before Friday 27 February 2004 by posting them to the Auckland Council for Civil Liberties, c/o PO Box 6125, Wellesley Street, Auckland or e-mailing to email@example.com . The identity of people making nominations will be kept strictly confidential and anonymous nominations will be accepted.
It's easy to nominate a potential award winner, here's how:
A. Choose your nominee for each or any category
They should be in or associated with New Zealand, a public or private sector individual or organization, and responsible for a truly outstanding abuse (or defence) of privacy.
The deed for which they are nominated should have at least partially been put into practice – they lose points for just planning or announcing something!
B. Check the facts
It is preferable to include copies of, references to, or images of, press reports of the nominee's deed, and any Internet addresses of web site reports which confirm that they have actually done what you think they did. Rumour and speculation will not be enough foir the big prizes.
C. Describe what they did
Write a short description of what they did that was so bad (or good), why it is so outstanding you think it deserves an award, and perhaps who it affects, and how. Be specific if possible.
D. Select which category of award they deserve
Send in your nomination by Friday 13 February
2004. In the body of the message include the following
- Who you are nominating
- Which Award category
- What they did
- Why it deserves an award
- Links, references or attachments to substantiate what they did
E. Send the message to Auckland Council for Civil Liberties, c/o PO Box 6125, Wellesley Street, Auckland, or to firstname.lastname@example.org Nominations received by Friday 27 February 2004 will be forwarded to our panel of judges who will identify winners in each category above, and also the 'People's Choice', the one with the most nominations.
CONTACT: Tim McBride, email@example.com