Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Truth to Power, etc

188 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 8 Newer→ Last

  • Russell Brown,

    I'm embarassed to admit spreading CK's story around. In my defense, it seemed all too plausible that Australian cost accountants who don't value subbing would take it to the next level.

    And hell, it could be plausible. I'm just not convinced by what I've read. So sue me.

    No, actually. Don't.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22830 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Oh. My. God. Whale Oily makes a funny in his pants:

    Given that Cactus Kate is a lawyer and Tim (nice but dim) is an Editor I tend to believe that Cactus has her facts straight.

    Um, anyone? Though I've got to note the little irony that the Kate and Cam Show are indulging in something that really pisses me off when The Herald does it -- the shock! horror! scandal! "scoop" where on the record sources and direct quotes are conspicuous by their absence.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole,

    It became much less plausible once Mr Murphy stated unswervingly that the legal budget hasn't changed, however. Until that point, I wouldn't have wanted to bet either way, because I don't think there's a single person here who's in awe of the quality of "journalism" (churnalism maybe?) displayed by the Granny stable, and most of us realise that that's largely driven by budget cuts eating into the number of journalists and the time they can spend on stories of any real complexity.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Gareth Ward,

    Um, anyone?

    10ft pole etc etc

    Auckland, NZ • Since Mar 2007 • 1727 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    No! Just can't do it. I feeling sick too :)

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    So sue me.

    No, actually. Don't.

    Damn you and your watertight get-out clauses.
    ;-)

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Matthew Poole:

    Could I suggest that decent journalists and publishers don't take a casual "publish and be damned", kill 'em all and let the lawyers sort it out approach to defamation because it's also a shitty and unethical way to operate? Heavens forfend that I suggest that Tim Murphy isn't an expense account Satan, but as I said being cautious about running up huge legal bills doesn't make you a spineless bean-counter.

    Perhaps I'm hopelessly crusty here, but it seems to me that telling the truth to the very best of your ability shouldn't be an optional extra.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • HORansome,

    I like the way that Cactus Kate immediately suggests a Conspiracy Theory for why Russell is questioning the quality of her investigative journalism.

    Tāmaki Makaurau • Since Sep 2008 • 441 posts Report Reply

  • Rob Hosking,

    I'm intrigued by it and would like to know more about the context in which the message was sent.

    Because most of it is Boilerplate Journalism training, of the kind you get just after they've shown you you will spend most of your time covering councils and courts - if you're lucky.

    Well, we did in my day. I think they now just jump straight to post-modernism.

    But I digress... Two exceptions to the above comment: : the opening statement about taking a 'more conservative' approach.

    Mind Game here for fellow journos: you see that sort of line in a report or release from a business or a government agency, what are you going to conclude? You're probably going to conclude there has been a change of some sort.

    Secondly: the bit listing 'people who are more inclined to sue if they are the subject of adverse publication'.
    I've never seen that sort of thing given to journalists before. Not even in my days on provincial newspapers.

    Talk about Chilling Effect.


    As I said, I'd like to know more about the context of this missive.

    One un-addressed question: the terms of APN's Defamation Insurance. I'd love to know if they've changed in any way recently. I suspect they have.

    South Roseneath • Since Nov 2006 • 830 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    I like the way that Cactus Kate immediately suggests a Conspiracy Theory for why Russell is questioning the quality of her investigative journalism.

    I'm still wondering how she busted PAS as a Herald-worshipping cult with Russell as the high priestess. We put so much effort into establishing our cover. :)

    Two exceptions to the above comment: : the opening statement about taking a 'more conservative' approach.

    Just as a matter of interest, how many apologies have the two Herald titles published over the last couple of years? Upheld Press Council complaints? Defamation suits lost or settled out of court?

    If there's been an increase, I'd suggest there's nothing at all sinister about suggesting a "more conservative" approach being taken be taken by a newspaper that had to publicly apologise to Sharon Shipton for printing the surprising news that she was leaving her husband -- including a sourced quote attributed to her.

    Personally, I'd have used the slightly less diplomatic "getting your f-ing facts right the first time would be just fabulous, people". But I'm not really management material. :)

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    MU

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    Off topic, but Craig's mentioning of the Press Council reminded me that last night Henry read out a BSA finding on Close Up, which I had the misfortune to be watching.

    At the end of reading it out he sneered and screwed up the bit of paper he was reading from and tossed it aside and made some comment.

    Such. a. dick.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Such. a. dick.

    And incredibly unwise. Didn't Paul Holmes pull the same crap back in the day, and then not only have to read the original statement again but apologise for his little drama queen hissy fit?

    BTW, here's the text of the apology to Sharon Shipton. The really eye-watering money quote?

    Sharon Shipton says she gave no such authorisation for any person to release any statement in her words. She was neither approached nor interviewed for the article by the Herald on Sunday.

    The Herald on Sunday accepts it should not have used the phrase Mrs Shipton "told the Herald on Sunday".

    Call me an old reactionary, but I'm all for a very "conservative" approach to attribution -- like not 'quoting' people you haven't even interviewed.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Sue, Grabbit and Runne

    Craig, you worked at Private Eye!
    Respect...

    I'm still wondering how she busted PAS as a Herald-worshipping cult with Russell as the high priestess. We put so much effort into establishing our cover. :)

    Someone must've infiltrated
    our Bohemian Groove :- )

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7943 posts Report Reply

  • ScottY,

    Shock horror! Large media organisation has legal guidelines!

    The extracts Cactus Kate has published are utterly unremarkable.

    I note that her areas of legal expertise appear to be corporate, tax and trusts.

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Brickley Paiste,

    yeah rattle in the insular little Russell Brown fan club.

    Ok, that was funny.

    Can I humbly suggest you get over yourself and just participate in a discussion?

    She's just being caustic and lippy. Did anyone sign something that said "play nice"?

    Are you a middle child, Russell? Be honest. This is important.

    Since Mar 2009 • 164 posts Report Reply

  • Leigh Kennaway,

    I'm still wondering how she busted PAS as a Herald-worshipping cult with Russell as the high priestess. We put so much effort into establishing our cover. :)

    Perhaps she saw the ad for your AGM in the public notices of the Central Leader?

    sunny Pt Chevalier • Since Mar 2008 • 40 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Someone must've infiltrated
    our Bohemian Groove :- )

    Screw it, I want an apocalyptic death cult with Many-Angled Elder Ones and Orgies and Virgin Blood drenching the rug or I'm taking my ritual boning knife and going home.

    She's just being caustic and lippy. Did anyone sign something that said "play nice"?

    No, but if she's going to come around and get shitty she shouldn't be too surprised if she gets her nose rubbed in it. You don't have to agree with Russell, or anyone else, but is it within the realms of possibility that he isn't talking out his hat on the subject?

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1158 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    She's just being caustic and lippy. Did anyone sign something that said "play nice"?

    Some intelligence is a prerequisite surely?, Amoebic misanthropy sucks everytime.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • bustedblonde,

    Hey guys, I was a journo and have today had a bit of a yack to a few scribes at the Herald. There is some concern about the emails. especially this bit

    1. Conservative editorial approach

    Editorial could take a more conservative approach to the subject matter and content of the risky or contentious articles. Where editorial identifies an issue or risk in an article the relevant passages could be proactively removed, or rewritten internally, to remove the perceived risk, as an alternative to obtaining legal advice on the risks of publication.

    I blogged on it here.. http://roarprawn.blogspot.com/2009/11/publish-and-be-damned.html

    Hell , Im glad Im a blogger and not a journo - thats all i can say.
    To give the emails some context the Herald has had a hell of a lot of retractions and corrections lately.

    In the main the emails look like a rev up apart from the very odious para above. I know of at least one other publication ( not APN ) who has taken the same line.

    wellington • Since Nov 2009 • 4 posts Report Reply

  • bustedblonde,

    He Sophie - if Catcus is amoebic then be very afraid.. Ascerbic she may be , but she has one of the finest intellects in the blogzone..

    wellington • Since Nov 2009 • 4 posts Report Reply

  • Just thinking,

    I respected Warren Tucker for his openess in dealings with the spying on 11yr old girls etc.

    But this is a bit WTF?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10609858

    Putaringamotu • Since Apr 2009 • 1158 posts Report Reply

  • ScottY,

    Where editorial identifies an issue or risk in an article the relevant passages could be proactively removed, or rewritten internally, to remove the perceived risk, as an alternative to obtaining legal advice on the risks of publication.

    [emphasis added by me]

    Does this not simply say: "if you decide not to get legal advice on that risky passage, maybe you shouldn't run with it"?

    Is that really so chilling?

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Alan Perrott,

    bustedblonde - having read your post I'm pretty bloody pleased you're a blogger and not a journo any more as well.

    I can't find anyone here you've spoken to...and FFS, what emails are you wittering on about?

    oh, and who is this 'editorial' you speak of?

    I need a new desk, my forehead has done for this one...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 438 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 8 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.