It's not ok to question the Labour Party when John Key has slimed into Parliament as the Government and lets Collins and Williamson back in and still wont tell the truth.
OK, Sofie, I think everyone well and truly gets it that you don't accept the outcome of the election and think everyone who voted for the wrong side is either stupid or malignant but it's never "not OK" to question our political lords and masters.
Would you still agree that when the media is being used to attack the opposition, democracy as a whole suffers?
I will never agree that subjecting our elected representatives to scrutiny and criticism ipso facto hurts democracy. And characterizing the Opposition as "powerless" is just beyond belief.
As I've said, I don't really see the news value in the OTT focus on the leadership of the Labour Party that's, as far as I'm aware, going to be an open question for at least three months even if Paddy Gower gives himself a brain bleed and follows Cunliffe into the loo for a good harangue. But pronouncing the death of democracy is just doubling down on the hyperbole.
Hearing Guyon Espiner badger John Key with “Is it OK?” is one of the few circumstances where that style of questioning really works.
Because it was about the only time that style of questioning was actually called for.
(Although resident intellectual Raymond A Francis seems to think it was some kind of vicious and unreasonable assault. Whatever.)
Dover Samuels said on NatRad this morning that Labour lost because it “lurched to the left”. Knowing Dover, who party voted for Winston this time round, I’m not even sure he’s right or not.
Honestly, Red, all anyone knows about "why Labour lost" is that National got a lot more votes than everyone else. Anything else is wild surmise, as far as I can see.
And as for blaming Cunliffe , who else was responsible ? The party president, the advisers and media people ? The factions within Labour ?
Are Labour just aping National's el Presidente approach and looking for one heroic leader to pull them all together?
Maybe Labour should be deeply reflecting on the party itself not its leadership.
I guess there's also a bit of "oh crap the election is over what do we do now" from a press gallery still running on adrenaline ...
If the media were stopping at “scrutiny and criticism”, I wouldn’t see a problem. But I don’t think that’s an accurate characterisation of Gower & co’s conduct.
And it would be nice to see "scrutiny and criticism" being applied more consistently to ... oooh, you know, the actions of and processes followed by that even larger power bloc within parliament.
But I can assure you it’s not the media’s fault.
No it's the media fault for not sorting the Dirty Politics shit out for us. The corrupt government that has had 4 days of frilly bullshit stories. just as they like it. Wouldn't want to burn any bridges now that Key has 3 more years. Reporters need to finish their last job about corrupt government before they report the only thing worth knowing about is Labour's internal selection process. Key does a quick mention about Ede then nothing to see here move along and reporters smile and wave with him.
The leadership of Labour Party however isn't a matter where they need to be accountable to the public
Exactly. Labour lost, they are not the Government, they have not been accused of corrupt behaviour, there has been no scandal of conflict of interest, there has not been a suggestion of obstruction of justice, there has been no evidence of deliberate destruction of the reputations of public figures, there has been no reports of cash for favours. No, the party that did all that, the party that "won", the party that now governs is not being questioned, not being held to account, not having its corrupt leader challenged it is being treated like a hero.
And there is no point in telling the MSM to wake up, it doesn't work on zombies.
I guess there’s also a bit of “oh crap the election is over what do we do now” from a press gallery still running on adrenaline …
Extremely likely -- I'm sure everyone in the Press Gallery was loading up on Red Bull and No-Doze for a return season of Winston's Koalition Kapers (the greatest show on Earth)... which just didn't happen. What's left? From the look of it, a load of "Johnny No-Mates who shouldn't be up so late on a school night" snark directed at David Seymour and an understandable (if dull) level of ebullience among Team National.
OK, Sofie, I think everyone well and truly gets it that you don’t accept the outcome of the election and think everyone who voted for the wrong side is either stupid or malignant
You are wrong Craig. I can completely understand people make choices and I can understand My choice didn't get in. I don't understand how this lot get in without being accountable. I don't understand why ,what I think are bright people will stick their head in the sand and want to look like an idiot for actually voting for this lot after knowing about their operation.
rather than just reporting what the process is and explaining why no one is talking
But they *are* talking. Despite Cunliffe telling them not to.
Maybe Labour should be deeply reflecting on the party itself not its leadership.
The election was run in a presidential style. Had National lost then people would have said, rightly, that John Key lost the election, because his influence was overwhelming. He set the tone for his ministers and almost all commentary was from him. “At the end of the day” will never, ever have the same resonance for me. He is a master dissembler and media manipulator. David Cunliffe, while apparently a nice, intelligent person, could not compete, and often said things that failed to resonate with voters and could sometimes be used as ammunition by right wing bloggers and their followers. Labour has to solve this problem, and the first step is to find a leader who can connect with voters without leaving openings for right wing propagandists.
Labour lost, they are not the Government, they have not been accused of corrupt behaviour, there has been no scandal of conflict of interest, there has not been a suggestion of obstruction of justice, there has been no evidence of deliberate destruction of the reputations of public figures, there has been no reports of cash for favours.
the first step is to find a leader who can connect with voters without leaving openings for right wing propagandists.
That's not the first step, it's the desired endpoint. Team-building and staff training exercises might be useful first steps.
Still waiting for any serious investigation into which of our “journalists” have been working for Slater co and churning out national party lines.
Why even argue about how they’re behaving when we know at least some of them are puppets?
While I understand why Nicky Hager chose not to name names for the media people involved, I believe he's done a disservice to the general public by allowing them to continue as they were, given how we rely on the media to know what is going on.
The election was run in a presidential style
Absolutely so. National was almost totally invested in the "John Key's National" meme. NZ First has always been the Party of Winston. And the Conservatives had nothing except Earnest Colin Craig's Eyes.Those were the three parties whose vote share went up.
I don’t understand why ,what I think are bright people will stick their head in the sand and want to look like an idiot for actually voting for this lot after knowing about their operation.
1. Most people haven't read the book and, because they don't follow politics, didn't understand (or even care about) the substance of what it depicts. They did form the view that Judith Collins was pretty dodgy -- I'm confident that there were Curia polls to that effect before she was finally dispatched.
2. They didn't feel secure about Cunliffe, or about Labour leading a government.
Remember, the Espiner interview hinged on his point-blank, repeated refusal to answer a reasonable question about the conduct of a Minister of the Crown.
Why did Richard Worth have to go as a Minister?
Sofie, I do have an interest in who leads the opposition, firstly because a strong opposition is important for our democracy and because there is a better than even chance he (or she) will be our PM in three years time
Journo: "Will you work with Winston? Will you work with Winston? Can you confirm or deny that you'll work with Winston?"
Poli: "Well, we don't have any intention of working with Winston but we'll have to see how the public votes"
Journo: "There you have it! Mr Poli Tician will be lining up to call Winston Peters on Sunday morning."
LOL, your example was my over-riding memory of the night's coverage! As if by repeating the fiction enough it would become true. Classic
Gower was a petulant child even in the pre-caucus conference, like he hasn't realised the election is over now.
The abuse piled on those in the news media is sometimes shocking - ask the people who are tasked with managing the social media feeds for various outlets, it's almost a continual torrent of hate.
There's actually *people* behind @OneNews/@3News etc, not just a faceless corporate entity and it comes back to Russell's point about humanity.
Russell, if you received a Canon Media Award for the best blog would you feel honoured or horrified? :)
1. Most people haven’t read the book and, because they don’t follow politics, didn’t understand (or even care about) the substance of what it depicts
OK, I have to put a penny in the swear-jar for using the phrase but it was almost the textbook “Beltway issue”. And I’m not going to be popular for saying this, but I think too many people on the left forgot to go out and convince people outside the Beltway bubble to care rather than think chanting “Whale Oil” and “dirty politics” was going to be electoral Kryptonite. It just wasn’t, and you can spend the next three years pouring vitriol on the stupid sheeple but it misses the point.
But spare a thought for the journalists.
Sadly, with a few notable exceptions (Patrick Gower is not one of them), my dominant thought for journalists is less than charitable.
I'm certain most journalists enter the profession with dreams of being a source of knowledge and information for the public. But somehow the industry seems to promote the Gowers and his ilk. Journalists and editors combine to distort data into "news" or at least what they define as news, which seems to be whatever will get the most advertising revenue.
As far as I can tell the system is broken. Nobody benefits. Not the journalists who still want to be the conduit for information. Not the public who see a distorted view. Not the subjects of the journalists examination.
Yet some journalists do figure out how to be that conduit and maintain integrity. The problem seems to be giving those journalists an outlet that also provides for their family.
1. Most people haven’t read the book and, because they don’t follow politics, didn’t understand (or even care about) the substance of what it depicts.
And that is where our Media have failed then. How is it democracy if it comes via press releases that are not fact checked and it seems what ever our president says is not fact checked either. Inform people so they hold their own and the publics heads high. Then we have democracy. We have enough bloody infotainment in the rags. If I want womens weekly ,I'll get it.