A Stranger in Paradise

This post updates my story that speaks to the confusion about the identity of the Piping Shrike - the bird that appears on the South Australian State Flag and Badge. I have explained previously that the bird is the White Backed Magpie and NOT the Magpie Lark. The recent BankSA advertising campaign that features the 'Piping Shrike' has added to the confusion because it misidentifies the bird. The advertising campaign correctly refers to the Piping Shrike but the caricature they use to represent the Piping Shrike is unfortunately a Magpie Lark.


My earlier post examines the history of the Piping Shrike in South Australia. There is no doubt that the bird is the White Backed Magpie. In the interests of State identity and pride, it is time to clarify the bird's identity once and for all.

Although the name Piping Shrike might be appealing to some people, the degree of confusion about the bird's identity supports the idea that it is time to consider if continuing to use Piping Shrike is useful. I suggest that it is time to call the magnificent bird by its name of White Backed Magpie instead of Piping Shrike.


Below is the White Backed Magpie that appears on the State Flag and Badge:

Next is the Magpie Lark that DOES NOT appear on the State Flag and Badge.


  

The caricature below is also a Magpie Lark, according to the markings and beak. 

Bank SA, it seems, has changed its advertising, although it looks the same. Here's a copy of the advertising:
The Piping Shrike | Park :45s from Flavio Fonseca on Vimeo.

In this version of the advertising  the ‘Piping Shrike’ caricature is no longer ‘better than that’ [a Magpie]. However, as you can hear, he quite misleadingly says ‘don’t call me a magpie, I’m the Piping Shrike’.

Then he spreads his wings to make the connection between himself and the State flag:

BankSA advertising

South Australian State Flag

The response to Piping Shrike spreading his wings is ‘Ahhh’, demonstrating explicit recognition that he is indeed the bird on the State flag:

However, as I have pointed out in my earlier blog posts, the bird on our state flag is the White Backed Magpie. Information available from a number of South Australian sources confirm the bird’s correct identity. These websites include the State Library, the SA Parliament and the SA Government (under Insignia). 

The caricature known as the Piping Shrike has previously claimed that he is not a Magpie and is instead a Piping Shrike. Before, he said that Piping shrikes are ‘more refined’ than Magpies. The tweet included an image of the White Backed Magpie.

Source: Twitter 11 Sept 2016

BankSA supported the idea that the 'Piping Shrike' that appeared in their advertising was not a Magpie. 

From BankSA Website

BankSA also used the 'Piping Shrike' in a call for innovative ideas to promote our state. However the caricature, who at the time was 'not a Magpie', claimed he appeared on State Crests and the State Flag. See below for an excerpt from BankSA's website:

Later, ‘Piping Shrike’ changed his stance a little. But instead of acknowledging that a fundamental error of identity had been made in conceiving the Piping Shrike Campaign and in turn the BankSA advertising, he attempts to muscle in on the Stage Flag along with the White Backed Magpie. He says: 

‘These birds, Magpies, Piping Shrikes, whatever you want to call them (us) we’re on your flag, we’re the OFFICIAL STATE EMBLEM…'

I wonder why there is a pseudo and partial change of stance only. I understand that this error might be embarrassing for many people including Piping Shrike, BankSA and probably government ministers and state officials who are all complicit in propagating confusing misinformation about the identity of the bird on the State Badge. I assume that BankSA's use of the State Flag and Piping Shrike was approved by the relevant minister. I suppose money may have changed hands. It is great if the government can squeeze a few dollars from Westpac/BankSA so they can use the State emblems in their advertising. Permission to use the bird in a corporate advertising campaign does seem unusual. Here's an excerpt from the BankSA website with a facsimile of the State Flag on 'Piping Shrike's' jacket.

From http://webapps.banksa.com.au/pipingshrike/index.aspx

However, in the accompanying video, the Sate Flag does not appear on the caricature's jacket.

But on Piping Shrike's Twitter page, the State Flag appears on the jacket

https://twitter.com/mrpshrike

I hope that the State Flag will no longer used by 'Piping Shrike' or BankSA  - or both of them together - while they continue to misidentify the bird. The bird is the White Backed Magpie.

Maybe it’s simply a case of species dysphoria. Perhaps the Piping Shrike caricature actually believes that he is a White Backed Magpie. The evidence suggests this might be so. It is good that the BankSA Piping Shrike has at least begun his transition from Magpie Lark to White Backed Magpie. 

However, all of this is very confusing and downplays the significance of the Piping Shrike – and I mean the real one that appears on our flag - for our State. This unacceptable degree of confusion does not arise with our other icons all of which are all correctly identified by their name.

It's time for action from BankSA and Piping Shrike

It's time for BankSA and Piping Shrike to come clean and admit the mistake and clearly spell out that the bird on the State Flag and Badge is in fact the White Backed Magpie. If the Piping Shrike caricature maintains he is the state bird, he should alter his costume so that it no longer represents the Magpie Lark. The fact that we see the back of the bird on the State Flag and Badge is perhaps more difficult for the Piping Shrike to overcome given we always see his front in the advertising. It's a question of how far Piping Shrike and BankSA are prepared to go to correct the misinformation and clarify the bird's identity. We are talking about an important State icon after all. It doesn't make sense to perpetuate the misunderstanding.

Finally, thank you for reading my blog. Please comment, if you wish.

A letter to the South Australian Goverment

A letter to the government

I have sent copies of my blog posts to members of the South Australian Parliament and sincerely thank those who responded with a genuine interest in this topic. I thank Adam Kilvert for his responses to me in writing and by telephone. 

A Stranger in Paradise

What is the point of the fabulous image of the White Backed Australian Magpie being selected as our South Australian bird emblem, but being called a Piping Shrike, when there are no Shrikes in Australia and thus perpetuating a flawed situation, which has been disregarded by successive South Australian Governments for over a hundred years.

There is, as far as I am aware, absolutely no connection between the two bird names and therefore, no logical reason why there should not be a name change as soon as practicable.

There is also another reason why the change should occur, namely, South Australia has several other emblems that bear the same names as their respective images and therefore the emblems are clearly and correctly identified. To be CONSISTENT, the White Backed Magpie should be treated in the same manner. I believe that the government has a duty to correct this unfortunate anomaly.

It should be remembered that the White Backed Magpie is a member of the Australian Butcherbird family, the same as the rest of the nationwide magpies. Also, I am of the opinion that the presently portrayed image would have been a commissioned painting. If so, it should not be described as a stylised image; Illustrators of that time would not have had the benefit of colour photography.
As a matter of interest, white backed magpies are generally located across the  southern  part of Australia;  eg,  Western Australia,  South Australia, Victoria and Tasmania, but are only officially known as White Backed Magpies in South Australia and Victoria. The Black Backed Magpies generally inhabit the rest of the nation. All are Australian magpies.

For a comprehensive coverage of this project, please refer to my blog titled ‘Reflections on South Australia’. You can find my blog here: http://jockreflects.blogspot.com.au/
Jock McLoughlin
2 Feb 2017

The Piping Shrike campaign - The great pretender

My post of September 1 points out the confusion about the identity of South Australia’s bird emblem, the Piping Shrike, and highlights important historical information that leaves no doubt that the bird in question is the White-backed Australian Magpie.

Because the history is clear, it is difficult to understand why there is so much confusion about the identity of the bird. Unfortunately, BankSA's Piping Shrike campaign muddies the water because the bird they use is not a White-backed Magpie. Instead, it is a Magpie Lark - colloquially called the Murray Magpie. It is a shame that the Piping Shrike caricature used in the advertising campaign explicitly claims to be the state emblem, when it is not.

I wonder why BankSA and the South Australian Government continue to spread false information about our state emblem.

In September, I emailed elected South Australian representatives of both houses of parliament including Jay Weatherill, the South Australian Premier and Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation. The response sent to me by the Executive Director of Government Relations provided confusing and contradictory information.

The government claims that the State emblem is a stylised image of the White-backed Magpie and is not an exact depiction of the White-backed Magpie - or indeed any Magpie. To add to the confusion, the government says that the ‘Piping Shrike’ name is used to represent the family of Shrikes.

However, this information seems incorrect. The State bird emblem is not ‘stylised’ as the government claims but is rather – and this is very important - ‘drawn proper’. The only reference to a stylised bird emblem in South Australia’s history is the special logo created for the State’s 150^th anniversary. Here’s a copy of the image.

South Australia's Jubilee Logo

Why would we want our bird emblem, the White-backed Australian Magpie, to be used to represent the family of Shrikes? It would seem more appropriate for our emblem to be representing the family of Australian Magpies rather than Shrikes. Recall that there are no Shrikes in Australia. Of course this would not include the Magpie Lark, which features in the BankSA advertising because it is not a Magpie, despite what the BankSA advertising tells us.

I raise the prospect that there is perhaps a connection between the government’s recent position about the state bird emblem and BankSA’s advertising campaign.

Here’s a recent BankSA advertisement featuring the Piping Shrike.

The Piping Shrike campaign seems to be carefully orchestrated. The gorilla marketing campaign ambushed Adelaide's Lord Mayor earlier this year and was reported by InDaily: Giant bird swoops Lord Mayor in Town Hall ambush

I wholeheartedly support the promotion of South Australia but revising our history in the interests of a corporate marketing campaign is indefensible.

The 'Piping Shrike' Changes his Story

The Piping Shrike, at first, carefully distinguished himself from the White-backed Magpie. In the earlier BankSA advertising Piping Shrike said ‘we might have recognised him from the state flag’. At the same time he said he is NOT a magpie and claimed he was more civilised than that.

By late September, the Piping Shrike had changed his tune by identifying with the Magpie.

Tweet by Piping Shrike

Rather than ‘him’ being the state emblem, it’s now ‘us’. In other words, the Piping Shrike is trying to hitch a ride with the White-backed Magpie by claiming ‘we’re on your flag’. This significant change in position by ‘Piping Shrike’ is supported by the government’s recent story in their response to me when they said, as I mentioned before, ‘the ‘Piping Shrike’ name is used to represent the family of Shrikes’. However, as I have explained, the so-called Piping Shrike featured by BankSA is not the State emblem.

The most recent round of advertising asks South Australians for innovative ideas to improve our state. I repeat that I support the general thrust of this part of the advertising campaign. However, it looks like the Piping Shrike campaign now has ‘official’ endorsement by the State, because the State flag features in the advertising. It is an offense to use the emblem without approval of the minister.

The State Flag now appears on Piping Shrike's jacket

Further, Piping Shrike explicitly asserts his position as state emblem.

I acknowledge the confusion and reiterate my preference to rename the State emblem to reflect the actual bird. At the same time I accept the name Piping Shrike is appealing to many. However, I suggest that BankSA and the State Government come clean about the identity of South Australia’s bird emblem. This is a great opportunity to do so. Why perpetuate misunderstanding? Perhaps there is a financial arrangement between the Bank and the State concerning the use of the State emblem. I have no issue with that whatsoever but please don’t rewrite history in the interests of corporate advertising.

I suppose BankSA has invested significant funds into this flawed campaign, but that doesn't give them the right to use the wrong bird as our State emblem. It seems this mistake was made from the outset of the campaign. Although the mistake may be embarrassing for BankSA, Piping Shrike and the State Government, it is better to admit the mistake and clarify the bird emblem's identity. It is certainly better that revising our history.

JKJ McLoughlin, Happy Valley SA.

South Australia's Emblematic 'Piping Shrike': Which Bird is that?

 

Many people seem to be unaware which bird is South Australia's emblem. Officially the bird is the ‘Piping Shrike’. However, there are no birds with that name in Australia. The emblem is referred to as: the Piping Shrike, Murray Magpie, Magpie Lark, Australian Magpie and White Backed Magpie, amongst other names. The range of names for the State's emblem simply alerts us to the degree of confusion about the emblem’s identity. The key reason for the confusion is that, in Australia – both historic and contemporary – many birds are referred to by colloquial names and/or their common names. The confusion about the bird's name is therefore hardly surprising.

When I awaken in the morning and hear the musical warbling of the White Backed Australian Magpie and the piping sound of the Magpie Lark, my heart fills with gladness. As a proud South Australian, I promote the idea that the name of our bird emblem be clarified and applied consistently, in the interests of State identity and also to reflect more accurately the bird represented in our heraldry. Rather than calling our State emblem the Piping Shrike, we ultimately need a Magpie name to match the emblem. In the meantime, we should at least confirm the identity of the bird on our emblem.

I provide information about two particular ‘pied’ birds. One of these was temporarily named as a ‘Shrike’ during early settlement in Australia. The common name has since been changed. The two birds are the Magpie Lark and the Australian Magpie. I chose these two birds because opinion about which of these birds is the State emblem is divided.

1) The Magpie-Lark (Grallina cyanoleuca) 

Is not a magpie, but its pied colouring makes it amenable to a Magpie name. It has been known by various names, such as Murray Magpie, Mudlark, Peewee and Peewit, the last name being an interpretation of its high pitched piping call. This is one possible reason many people think that this is the Piping Shrike which is featured on the State emblem. However, the Magpie Lark is a dainty bird, which is easily identified by its small beak rather than a magpie like beak and by its distinctive white ‘eyebrows’.

Magpie Lark
Photograph by Neil, 2004
http://www.birdforum.net/opus/Image:1568magpie_lark_DSC_00501.JPG

2) The Australian Magpie  (Cracticus tibicen – formerly Gymnorhina tibicen)

Includes the white backed version and inhabits virtually the whole of Australia. The white backed version is found in much of South Australia and Victoria. It is a handsome and friendly bird, and has a large strong beak, like the other butcher-birds. As with many other birds, it can become aggressive and protective in the mating season.

Australian Magpie (White Backed)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dsevictoria/4839890126
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode

Below is how the bird is represented on the State Flag (1904). It is important to note that the back of the bird is displayed.

Please complete the poll

The Root of the Confusion

The Australian Magpie has, over time, been called many different names and the current confusion about the correct identity of the State emblem is not surprising. I briefly outline some important historical information about the State emblem because it helps us understand the current confusion.

Below is an excerpt from the 1876 work by Harcus, South Australia: Its History, Resources and Productions. The book includes important information about South Australian birds, which was provided to Harcus by Mr F G Waterhouse, the curator of the Adelaide Museum. You can see below that a range of bird species included the word ‘shrike’ in their common name including, in broad terms, Crows, Australian Magpies and Butcher Birds. This is one of the reasons for the confusion surrounding the name of the bird on the State emblem. I have highlighted the two birds we now call Magpies. The common name for the Australian Magpie was the Piping Crow Shrike. None of the birds were named the Piping Shrike. You will see that the Magpie Lark was not referred to as a Shrike.

The State bird emblem first appeared in the early 1900s when a new Governor’s ensign was approved. The emblem also appears on the Commonwealth Coat of Arms. The formal communications about the State emblem are confusing with the bird apparently referred to by colloquial names:

1901: Lord Tennyson – South Australian Shrike

1903: Sydney Morning Herald – Piping Shrike commonly known as the Australian Magpie

1912: Lord Harcourt – Australian Piping Shrike

Only the Sydney Morning Herald identifies the Piping Shrike as the Australian Magpie. But, even then, the use of Piping Shrike is not consistent with the names of South Australian birds in the 1876 work that I referred to earlier. 

In 1903, the South Australian Education Department publication Children's Hour addressed the State emblem and included the names White Backed Crow-Shrike and Whistling Crow-Shrike as well as a description of the bird:

Whole of the back pure white, throat and beak black, bill pointed and slightly bent or hooked, nose bare of feathers and nostrils flat slits near the middle of the bill.

There is no doubt that the above is a description of the White Backed Magpie. It is certainly not a description of the Magpie Lark (Murray Magpie).

From the outset the identity of the bird is unclear and the available information confusing. The South Australian Government currently acknowledges the discussion about the identity of the State emblem and contention about the use of ‘Shrike’. Ultimately, they provide the following definitive information:

The Piping Shrike, or white backed magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen leuconota) is the South Australian bird emblem.

This recent statement clearly identifies the Piping Shrike, a colloquial and outdated name as, in fact, the White Backed Magpie. However, many South Australians do not know which bird is the State emblem. A recent Bank SA advertising campaign further muddies the waters about the emblem's identity.

Confusion Perpetuated

Based on the history, current position of the South Australian government and the features of the State emblem design, there is no doubt that the bird is the White Backed Magpie.

However, confusion about the State emblem prevails and I am baffled and disappointed by the continued efforts of Bank SA, in promoting the Piping Shrike name. I have no problems with the bank, excepting for its advertising, which distinguishes the Piping Shrike from the Magpie and connects the Piping Shrike with the State's emblem.

I have included, below, recent Bank SA advertising that features the ‘Piping Shrike’. 

The Advertiser, 20 August, 2016

Bank SA Website
Source: http://info.banksa.com.au/pipingshrike

Note that the information included on the Bank SA website says: You might recognise me from the State flag… . Further, the television and Internet advertising explicitly refers to the Piping Shrike and claims that the Piping Shrike is not a Magpie. So, which bird is Bank SA's Piping Shrike if it is not a Magpie? The markings on the bird indicate that the ‘Piping Shrike’ used in the Bank SA advertising is the Magpie Lark (Murray Magpie). The white ‘eyebrows’ are a significant distinguishing feature of the Magpie Lark. It is unfortunate that Bank SA think the State emblem is the Magpie Lark instead of the White Backed Magpie because their interpretation is not supported by either historic or current information about the State emblem. Their advertising can only serve to perpetuate the confusion about the identity of the bird. 

Here’s a news story about Bank SA’s advertising campaign that features the Piping Shrike:

Clarify the Name

Bank SA's advertising compounds the confusion about the bird's identity because they do not know which bird is South Australia's emblem. Also, the use of the term 'Piping Shrike' is partially responsible for the confusion. As mentioned earlier, there are currently no Australian birds with the common name Piping Shrike. While acknowledging the long term use of the term Piping Shrike to describe our State emblem we must now clarify which bird it is. In my opinion, the continued use of the Piping Shrike name is flawed, especially when children are being fed misleading information.

One redeeming feature however, is the choice of the image of the Australian White Backed Magpie as the South Australian bird emblem, even though it is presently named the Piping Shrike. South Australia has used the image of the White Backed Magpie since the 1900s and it should be retained, but renamed. The White Backed Magpie is to South Australia, what the emu and kangaroo are to the Australian nation, where both of those latter images are featured on the Australian Coat of Arms. Try to imagine the Australian emu being called an African ostrich or the kangaroo being called a leaping reindeer. Even the Australian wombat being called a badger; the animals in this last comparison are both burrowing animals. Using an ambiguous and confusing name reflects badly on our State.

If this situation is not remedied, it could isolate the Australian Magpie from South Australia because of inconsistent Australia-wide naming. Common sense should prevail. It seems ridiculous that our State would think it acceptable to have our Magpies known as Piping Shrikes, while the rest of Australia calls them by their recognised title. It is unfortunate that this oversight has not been amended during the many years that it has been featured. I also mention here that two well-known Australian Rules football clubs were established before and during that same era, namely Port Adelaide and Collingwood. Both chose the correct name of 'magpie' as club names. The bird representing Port Adelaide is the White Backed Magpie. Imagine the Port Adelaide football club being asked by the State Government to change its name to 'the Piping Shrikes'.

It is my view that a name change would reduce the significant confusion about the identity of the bird on our State emblem. Calling the emblem an Australian Magpie – because that is after all what the emblem is - is just common sense. I accept the long-term use of the name Piping Shrike and understand that changing the name of the emblem to Magpie is in some ways fraught. Nonetheless, the starting point is to better educate all South Australians, including Bank SA, about the identity of our bird emblem. 

Perhaps revising the excerpt from the 1903 Education Department publication Children's Hour and circulating to all South Australian schools would help our children understand the truth about the State emblem. It would be helpful too if our political leaders - and Bank SA - made statements to clarify the bird's identity, based on the facts.

As Australians, we are developing our own identity. When I was a child, I honoured the British Empire, by participating in an oath of allegiance; also, we did not have our own National Anthem then. Thankfully, things change and I hope that any changes will be for the better. Educating South Australians about the identity of the emblem and ultimately renaming the State emblem would be, I suggest, changes for the better

Finally, thank you for reading my post. I invite comments and the posting of any further information you might have about the State emblem

JKJ McLoughlin, Happy Valley SA.