Posts by Felix Marwick
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I also wondered whether you were actually allowed to record a conversation someone without telling them what you were doing.
As far as journalism is concerned the rule is pretty much as follows:
You can record a conversation without the other person knowing but you can not broadcast that recording (ie via TV or radio) unless you've told the interview subject before-hand that the interview is being recorded.
However this protocol is not always adhered to depending on the relative news value of the interview/story. A notable example was the expose in 1998 of former Chch Deputy Mayor Morgan Fahey where one of his victims elicited telling comments in a secretly recorded encounter.
-
Okay, here's the big fucking problem: no one amongst a crew of well-paid government communicators could come up with three clear bullet points like Idiot/Savant has done:
Actually they did. Well the Greens certainly made those points. I remember Jeanette Fitzsimons explaining them to me in depth and at length on Thursday (and yes the story was run).
-
How about some bitching about copyright N*zis, that seems to be reliably good for some agreement. Today's contenders AP for charging bloggers $12.50 to quote 5 words
Admittedly I am a journalist so I might be a little biased here, but given that AP pays the cost of generating the stories in the first place I can see how they might be a little miffed at bloggers copying and pasting it carte blanche.
It can be a bit galling, when you've slogged your guts out chasing an issue, to see your work lifted and used by others without so much as a by your leave.
By all means feel free to link to it - that's fine. But if you're a blogger, particularly one that generates revenue from ad's on your site, kindly pay a royalty/contribution if you're using work done by others.
As a PA example; I'm particularly impressed with David Haywood's blog contribution today, but it would be wrong of me to copy it and use it on a website of my own without his permission. It's his intellectual property so why should I take advantage of it without his consent, or at least paying him for the privilege?
-
2 years ago Christchurch was New Zealands murder capital. Most seemed to be street prostitution and therefore drug related.
As a journalist that used to work in Chc and covered a few of the murder trials that occurred there I can assure you the above statement is a an overgeneralisation.
Just going off the top off my head there were three homicides withing about an 18 month period that had connections to the sex industry. Most were due to other causes - mainly where the victim and the accused were known to each other.
Anyway I just wanted to point out the prostitution linked deaths were the exception not the rule. Though they did get a lot of publicity because of their nature.
-
I read my way through the bundle of released files this morning. From a historical perspective it was fascinating.
However my personal highlight (and it has nothing to do with espionage) is the inclusion of a paper Sutch wrote on the 1972 general election. Given some of the debate that's going on at the moment regarding this year's election I give you the following excerpt:
.... the Labour Party so far have not stated all of their policies mainly because it has been the practice of the National Party in the past to steal Labour Party policy when they think it might win votes for them.
William Sutch
Notes on the Political Situation in New Zealand 1972One has to chuckle.
-
I can't let Rob field this one alone.
Parliament and politics is a strange beast. Sometimes its what people don't say that's significant and then at other times it's what they do say and the context in which they say it that's crucial.
Setting aside for a moment the way some of my colleagues covered this story here are a few points to consider:
1) A important part of politics is to protect your position and not letting your opponents seize advantage. Discussing potential leadership scenarios will create that situation.
2) Even when your position is dire avoid acknowledging it. Promote the positive. To do otherwise will give your opponent a large stick with which he will club you. (as an example Bill English got roundly lambasted by Shipley back in 1999 when he tacitly accepted defeat on election night in an on-air interview -this despite the numbers being clear and Shipley conceding around an hour later)
3) Phil Goff is a canny politician with 25 years experience and knows how to play the game. In fact he'd have to be one of the most circumspect politicians I've seen when it comes to on the record interviews. For him to say what he did, while it might not seem that big a deal to the lay observer, it is out of character.
Politics is a murky business with occasional Machiavellian overtones. It's rarely black and white and is more often varying shades of gray. What we see on the surface often conceals something more substantial that's underneath. So what a politician says sometimes has to be considered in the context of the nature of the beast that is politics.
For the record Russell made a good point earlier. Sometimes politicians do let stuff slip to smaller media outlets that they wouldn't to the more established operators. And if that's the case, and it was a spontaneous burst of honesty, then my argument above may be null and void.
Still for what it's worth I think it was worth reporting. When a senior cabinet minister talks about future leadership options 4-5 months out from an election it is a story.
-
I suppose it's a little early for speculation on what Cunliffe will be offering us in terms of fibre
Speculation around the traps is that it will be announced in the Budget on the 22nd. Sounds as thought the Nat's policy may have brought Labour's announcement forward as the rumbles were it had been originally scheduled for later in the year.
As for the money involved - well there was the additional half billion the Government discovered it had late last year so odds are that might form the base of it. I'd suspect it'll be slightly more though given the amount the Nat's have put up.
I have no idea (yet) what the form of the policy is though
-
it's got all the elements you need. A curse, a family split apart, unrequited love, incest, and suicide (actually make that suicides) to name but a few.
Oh and I almost forgot.
Murder at semi-frequent intervals.
-
At the risk of joining the Tolkien geekdom.
I would suggest there are certain aspects of the Silmarillion that would make a good film. For example the Narn I Chin Hurin - it's got all the elements you need. A curse, a family split apart, unrequited love, incest, and suicide (actually make that suicides) to name but a few.
Delightfully dark and no annoying cutesy hobbit folk
-
Ahah. I just found a short biographical note on the author and the perspective makes more sense.
Just to add to the biographical knowledge on David Round. He was the National Party candidate for Chch East at the last election and he was also seeking the nomination for the Selwyn electorate this year. Though I understand he's no longer in the running.