Surfpolitik Here Comes Nobody

In: Surfpolitik by Stu Nettle 18 Comments Mon 24th May '10

Tags: media

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

Stuart Nettle
May 24, 2010

Lately I've spent a lot of time digging through my old surf magazines, and those of you tuning into The Rearview Mirror would've seen the results. It's a fun thing to do, to be reminded of what surfers used to wear, how they acted and what their values were. Like peering into a time capsule of whatever year the magazine was published, it's a historical snapshot.

Obviously there's a lot of things that have changed, yet the one thing that stood out was how much less protective we were of surfspots then than we are now.

It was a bit surprising really. Working at Swellnet, and running the photos and features on this site, I get regular correspondence from readers about what we should and shouldn't expose. The bottom line, and the one that I run with, is that no spot gets named unless it's obviously identifiable (Shark Island, Margs, Bells etc.). It doesn't matter if every surfer in Australia knows of it's whereabouts, it doesn't get named. I get reminded of this all the time.

Yet flicking through the old mags I've so far come across features on Voodoo, Blackfellas, Quarantines, LA, Potholes, Guillotines and many other 'sensitive' waves with absolutely no attempt to hide the locations. Those places (and others like them) are hardly secret spots yet these days just mentioning those names is likely to raise the ire of many readers.

The question that I have is this: why was it acceptable to name those spots back then, and not now? Websites such as ours have approximately the same readership as the major magazines had then, meaning the same number of eyes look at the shots, so, everything being equal, what has changed?

Here's a theory. It's a bit of a leap so stick with me...

There are a number of social studies, readily available on the net*, that have found fear of crime is increasing in society while the number of actual crimes have decreased. So, our fear levels are going up despite the world getting safer. The increased fear is irrational, it doesn't reflect reality.

The researchers suggest the reason for the increase is that people are more sensitive to the threat of crime due to media exposure. We see crimes reported on television, radio and the internet and it heightens our sense of fear. The media distorts the reality and makes us paranoid and protective.

Perhaps a similar dynamic is at work in surfing?

Perhaps us surfers also live in a kind of media-driven fear? We overestimate the power of the surf media to influence people and falsely believe that just by naming already popular surfspots yet more people will flock to them.

It's a very cynical, and even misanthropic view, to underestimate the ability of other people - but not yourself! - to make independent decisions. And to assume that people are automatons being led around by the surf media, leaving their own local spots to storm the waves they saw in a picture last week.

Perhaps, like the rest of society, media exposure is making us irrationally paranoid and needlessly protective? Because here's the rub: I know where these waves are. You know where these waves are. The media has named them in the past. So how will naming them now change anything?

PS: The picture on our homepage, showing six people dropping in on each other, was taken at Dee Why Point in 1962 (Photo: Ron Perrott)

 *ActNow- A Climate of Fear   NSW Recorded Crime Statistics  Crime in the Community

Loading Comments