Cracker: A Whale of a Tale
348 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 14 Newer→ Last
-
glaring omission is the long-form, one-on-one interview
Which you get on Media 7
-
Are you kidding me? I'd LOVE for somebody to start to seriously criticise how universities are run in New Zealand. And one of the big issues about doing that historically has been the lack of independence of academics and humanities organisations with said universities.
So, just like the media, then?
-
Which you get on Media 7
You do, and you also get Guyon Espiner on Q and A. But both are more narrowly focused shows than the Hill, Fraser etc ones were.
-
I'm actually quite pissed off that Bart can declare that me speaking about someone on the basis of experience does me "no credit".
I'm sorry for offending you Russell.
I believe neither you nor Damian would knowingly support a bully. The problem with bullying in general, and I think it is worse in NZ because of our "man up" culture, is that it's hard to see bullying for what it is and how much damage it does.
Yes Russell you pointed out how bad some of Paul Henry's behaviour was, inexcusable even. But then you did something very typical in New Zealand and in respect of workplace bullies. You said that sometimes he can be fun and you and Damian complimented his technical ability. Both of those things are commonly used to defend a bully's behaviour. It becomes OK to do the bad thing because the bully is somehow good in other ways.
No I don't want my villain to be monochrome. But that's one of the most difficult parts of dealing with bullies, they are not monochrome. Many of the people they deal with may never see their bullying. They are often "effective" in the workplace. They are often fun and funny. They may be good parents or good friends. Unless you become their target.
Again my apologies for upsetting you Russell. My reaction to this stuff is coloured by my own experiences. I no longer really accept that a bully can be excused (and you may not have intended to do that) because of some other worthwhile trait because I've seen the damage they can do.
I won't apologise for connecting workplace bullies and suicide. Sure I didn't see the cat's wee joke, I don't watch Paul Henry if I can avoid it any more. I accept that in context it may have been funny and much lighter than it read in text. But this isn't a fun or funny issue.
-
FWIW, tonight's Media7 is a good one.
Interviews with Jon Stephenson (Gaza and the media) and Richard Boock (the darker side of the FIFA World Cup) with backgrounders on both, written and compiled by me.
The show's been a lot of work for me this week and last, but I'm really pleased with what we made.
-
So, just like the media, then?
Yes, which is very precisely my point.
-
If you want a service like the BBC offers it's going to cost about $10 billion per year, give or take
ten billion? For a n.z state run news service. Where the hell did you get that figure?
-
I work in advertising media sales. I sell the ads that pay your salary. Now you should hear the abuse I get. wow, some mean stuff, tears, red faces, abuse, screaming....and that's just the sales meetings.
-
I somehow doubt that the news bulletin produced on TVNZ7 costs $10 billion a year. We'd know by now I think.
-
Most of New Zealands advertising stock is overpriced, especially to SMES's.
Ad selling is not a healthy market.
-
On the subject of the RNZ cuts, can I offer the following actual suggestion I got from Facebook today?
-
I used to watch morning TV relatively rarely - once a week at most, if I had nothing else to do.
My impression on Henry solidified that he really was a dweeb and I didn't want to support his salary, so I stopped watching. Some time before the Stephanie Mills incident, but that would have done it as well.
Maybe I am missing some talented work, I'm happy with that. I'd like to reward 'good guys', which I think he's not a member of. I'd like to think that these shows can be presented without the presenter either being, or taking on a persona of being like that.
See also Holmes, who I think is less of a dweeb, but who I think has no talent at all as a broadcaster. Stopped watching him many years ago.
-
I would just like to point out that I DO write (or email or tweet) to journalists when they do awesome stories too, as at least one person posting here knows.
But a lot of jobs are like that -- good work is unremarkable and people only get in touch about bad stuff. Everyone who's ever worked on a help desk* knows that punters never ring to say "my pc is working great! Thanks for everything!"
* I still have phobic reactions to the telephone ringing years later.
-
I blame that Russell Brown. If I hadn't started to listen to hard news on bfm all those years ago I wouldn't have known why media mattered.
-
* I still have phobic reactions to the telephone ringing years later.
Let's form a support group, man I know that one.
-
I work in advertising media sales. I sell the ads that pay your salary
I am always interested in how advertising effectiveness is measured. What strategies do you use?
I tend to subscribe to Kellogg's dictum Advertising works half the time but nobody know which half
Is that unfair? -
My experience is more glengarry glenross. You sell to people on emotion, its faster and more efficient. All you want is to meet that sales target, because if you don't, no one gets paid......and you get asked to leave.
Efficiency of advertsing? Only one has real stats, Online,and onlines click through rates in New Zealand can be devastatlingly low.
-
Wow. You're actually getting quite offensive now.
You know, I can see now that in the way that I put it that it was both unfair and out of line. I apologise for that. For not other reason that what you've created here is exactly an independent space of criticism, and it's often aimed at the media.
I do however remain curious as to whether anybody thinks there is in fact a problem of industry scale in the kind of criticisms than can be levelled from within the established media themselves, rather than, say, on Public Address.
(And FWIW, I didn't mean to suggest the existence of a clique - I know I would be less likely to criticise somebody harshly on a professional level if I knew them personally, and they happened to be likeable.)
-
3410,
More a matter of not burning bridges.
-
I do however remain curious as to whether anybody thinks there is in fact a problem of industry scale in the kind of criticisms than can be levelled from within the established media themselves, rather than, say, on Public Address.
I'm only a media consumer, but looking at the lack of cross-media criticism I would assume so. I grew up with the different colour newspapers (Communist, Socialist, Liberal, Conservative, Anarcho-Syndicalist) tearing strips off each others' reporting in a way that wasn't always useful, but often refreshing.
-
Lets agree on nut-job then.
Let's agree Russell was perfectly in order calling bullshit on a tendentious man-splain and shouldn't have had to do it more than once.
-
Have you considered the further possibility that not everyone agrees with you on everything?
This! Has anyone considered the other 4 million odd people in NZ that may want to watch a bit of crap on the box? There is a shitload of telly I don't need and guess what? I don't friggin watch it. DC can think as he likes about PH. RB can too.It's a democracy isn't it?You don't have to agree with them but honestly to suggest their personal view needs correcting, what bloody bus did y'all drive in on? I'd love the News produced to my standards (as I mentioned this here morn)but in a democracy I cant have it all, so I switch or listen to music. I don't want to get all jiggy about the amount of bullshit I find because I'm no more important than anyone else and their preferences may just be a pile of steaming to me, but worthwhile to them. Why would I want the argument, honestly. How good is that gonna make you feel. Freeview has really helped to personalise needs and eliminate unwanted TV. Bloody good start eh? Check it out. Could be right up your alley. Eliminate all the bits you don't want without leaving your armchair, but I suppose for some, that leaves more room for arguments. hmmm... ;)
Jus' sayin -
Freeview has really helped to personalise needs and eliminate unwanted TV.
Actually, until such time as everybody gets it, no. We're still pitifully served by the state television broadcaster, to say nothing of the only available newspapers, and that hurts us. It's not about indulding in crap in front of the telly - that's what Coronation Street is for. It's information.
-
Seriously, Justine came to NZ for a trip in 1995, brought a tape of the TV One evening news back to Italy and I thought it was satire. I took some convincing.
Some Australian friends visited Golden Bay last summer, and had to be told by the bach-owner that the television was getting full reception. They kept looking for the 'serious' channel.
I don't think this is the fault of individual journalists. I know journalists, and they work hard within the very considerable constraints they are given. The problem is structural.
And if there is one person in this country who I blame, it is Michael Cullen, who made the Government's decision that TVNZ's profits were more important than the public interest. Side projects notwithstanding.
-
You don't have to agree with them but honestly to suggest their personal view needs correcting
That's not such an outrageous suggestion on a discussion thread.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.