OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance
397 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 16 Newer→ Last
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
He’s not. John Campbell is, however,
Thank you. There is a remarkable difference with what Campbell does compared to Hosking.
-
Kevin McCready, in reply to
Andrew, read this:
http://pressthink.org/2011/08/why-political-coverage-is-broken/
Keith linked to it and was probably trying to make the points it made, but didn't do quite as good a job as Jay.In particular, Keith seems to think "journos" try to hold pollies to account. If they do, and that's debatable, they do so within a flawed framework that discounts truth in favour of entertainment, saviness, HeSaidSheSaid journalism and HorseRace journalism. Patrick Gower blocked me on twitter for saying this about his "journalism".
-
Keith Ng, in reply to
Woodward and Bernstein spent two years working the story, and didn’t go to press with anything they didn’t have solidly corroborated from multiple sources and/or with documentary evidence to back them up
NOPE. See the "grand jury" part.
-
Rob S, in reply to
But these were the words used by John Key to dismiss what seems most likely to have occurred. A tacit admittance it would seem perhaps even showing he knew what Ede was up to 2 doors down
The emails weren't just Slater they also pointed to other players and aren't in my opinion just Cameron Slater being a fantasist but also Jason Ede [remember him] going on about accessing the website. This guy described as Nationals black ops person was being paid by the taxpayer to engage in political attacks on the opposition.
I respect you Craig for your engagement with PA but could I please have a yes or no regarding the matter of a commission of enquiry being established into these concerns as you are concerned with keeping the Government to account for their actions. I think myself that there is good reasons to believe that wrongdoing has been occurring and it needs some daylight shone on it. -
Yamis, in reply to
The one that did creep me out was the bookending of traffic reports on Radio Live and ZB with “party vote National” ads. This was in the middle of the news, with the electoral ad spoken by the same announcer who gave the traffic information, almost in the same breath.
She was a swing voter. When I first heard her (it was a female the times I heard) she started "Vote NZ First, delays on the north western motorway after a 3 sheep pile up at Westgate, Vote NZ First, endorsed by blah blah", and then in the afternoon "Vote National, traffic is running smoothly on the ... vote National..."
-
And trying to get myself back on topic: I heard about Oravida long, long before it showed up in the NZ media because I read Chinese. I knew more about Judith Collins visiting China by reading the Chinese media than by reading the NZ media. I've seen stories like this appear in Chinese then I've gone looking for anything in English and I've found lots of information, even press releases sitting un-copied-and-pasted on the Beehive website, but none in NZ's mainstream media. I understand pressure and deadlines and the time needed to get stories right, but I still can't help but feel Dirty Politics had so little an effect on the election because it was all too little, too late. There's plenty NZ's mainstream media could be doing to fulfill its old "speak truth to power" mission, but just isn't.
-
Sacha, in reply to
But it got repeated to the point where it virtually became the truth.
That’s how it works – by weaving the context, laying the groundwork over time. It’s where journos, editors and producers have done the most damage by faithfully trotting out carefully-crafted lines fed to them by the Nats, for years. Great to see Gower waking up and apologising for calling Cunliffe “tricky” at last.
It’s how Key’s repeated claims about “left-wing smears” were so easily used to neutralise both Dirty Politics and Snowden/Greenwald so far. Labour have not been doing strategic comms like this for over half a decade as if it’s somehow not important. Even the Greens didn’t do so well at it this time as they did in 2011.
You don’t fix that by swapping the front-person. You fire the backroom dolts who presided over two defeats in a row without doing the basics like putting “Party Vote Labour” on their billboards.
-
CJM, in reply to
What have read about this new corruption case of the deputy mayor of Guangzhou and the NZ and national party connections, Chris?
-
Sacha, in reply to
The question is why does the media feel the need to overstate the mandate in that way? What benefit is there for the media?
Legitimates them exaggerating that perspective? Less work than reflecting several of them.
-
Lilith __, in reply to
the media failed to hold Collins to account, failed to hold Katherine Rich to account, and more or less failed to hold Ede/Key to account.
And the fact that they tried their hardest is a critical part of this. The solution isn’t to “try harder” or simply be better at their jobs. I think the lesson here is that their jobs no longer fulfil the role we need them to. The idea that a mob of journos chasing politicians around sticking a mic in their face could hold them accountable needs to be reexamined.
Key, Collins, et al. barely troubled even to deny accusations of lying and corruption. They just brushed them aside and ignored them. If necessary, they painted themselves as victims of "partisan attacks" and "politically-motivated revelations" and "unfairness". As if democratic criticism, opposition and debate victimised them.
So many media reports and headlines led with quotes from Key or Collins, the whole framing was from their point of view. When Labour said or did something, Key's reaction was often leading the report.
And I don't remember this being the case under the Clark government, when National attacks were widely repeated and taken seriously, even if they were nonsensical. ("lightbulbs!" "cold showers!" etc.)
There is a subtle framing also when we hear about "attacks on the government" or (even "attacks on our goverment) rather than " criticism of National/National government".
I think the Nats' PR machine has had insidious effects in the media even when the source wasn't Slater and co.
How can Len Brown's extramarital affair have been "the story of the year" when wholesale foreign spying on NZers barely made a blip?
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
That's about 40% of eligible voters and 48% of those who bothered to vote.
So, 60% of eligible voters, which is more than half, didn't vote national. Even if you factored in an even split between National and Others among the eligible non voters, which I would doubt but obviously have no proof, it is still more correct to say half didn't as opposed to half did. If you take the entire population into account then I would say way more than half didn't.
So I am right and you are wrong. ;-)Anyway it was just a play on a Dennis Skinner quote...
Half the Tory members opposite are crooks.
He was then told to withdraw the remark.OK, half the Tory members aren’t crooks.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
I respect you Craig for your engagement with PA but could I please have a yes or no regarding the matter of a commission of enquiry being established into these concerns as you are concerned with keeping the Government to account for their actions.
I'd say no, while granting there are perfectly legitimate counter-arguments that the grounds specified in the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1908 apply. I still need convincing that "the issue cannot be dealt with through the normal machinery of Government or through the criminal or civil courts" but, again, I'll happily defer to superior expertise on a point of law.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
How can Len Brown’s extramarital affair have been “the story of the year” when wholesale foreign spying on NZers barely made a blip?
Exactly. Also now that Chuang says she was blackmailed, why does that slug still keep his award?
And since when is she a politician
ETA oh ok it's been removed now -
Steve Barnes, in reply to
the issue cannot be dealt with through the normal machinery of Government
When the Government is Team Key the problem is beyond that.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
So far only what I posted on one of these other threads, which was an article cribbed from Global Daily and seemed to be little more than a translation of the original FT piece. So far it doesn't seem especially relevant to NZ except that China might like to do a little deal to help get their stolen money back and perhaps put a couple of people before the courts.
-
Kevin McCready, in reply to
I thought ess than 1/3 of eligible voter voted National?
-
Lilith __, in reply to
I still need convincing that “the issue cannot be dealt with through the normal machinery of Government or through the criminal or civil courts” but, again, I’ll happily defer to superior expertise on a point of law.
The "normal machinery of government" is what's in question.
-
Kevin McCready, in reply to
on crowdfunding a defo case: count me in
-
Katharine Moody, in reply to
Agreed.
An argument (i.e., abuse of executive power) I've put forward on Pundit on more than one occasion, but I find you never engage on.
Or am I being unfair?
-
Rob S, in reply to
I still need convincing that “the issue cannot be dealt with through the normal machinery of Government or through the criminal or civil courts”
Well lets see, you think that the current Government will investigate with any real zeal [turkeys voting for Christmas] or the same for our police who I expect are dreading having to investigate senior figures in a position of considerable power when one of the issues is their maligning of public servants and a very popular PM saying that there's nothing to see here?
Surely an investigation headed by a Judge looking into all aspects of this saga with witnesses compelled to give evidence under oath must be what our Democracy requires to show that it takes such things seriously?
This whole matter is in regard of how a political party has been shown to probably have been subverting our Democratic system to it's own ends as there is some very compelling evidence to assume as much.
There is a cloud over this Government and all it's actions point to them not wanting to be held to account for their deeds. -
nzlemming, in reply to
then suggests that it might be trouble for Ana Samways at the Herald because she tweeted Williams and Graham to advise that “no one can take you assholes seriously”.
I have new-found respect for Ana Samways.
-
Alfie, in reply to
The emails weren't just Slater they also pointed to other players and aren't in my opinion just Cameron Slater being a fantasist but also Jason Ede [remember him] going on about accessing the website. This guy described as Nationals black ops person was being paid by the taxpayer to engage in political attacks on the opposition.
I've yet to hear any journalist ask about the exact date Ede stopped being paid by the taxpayer, and started being paid by the National Party. Was it before or after Dirty Politics was launched? Or perhaps the more relevant question would be, on which date were Parliamentary Services notified that Ede was no longer in their employ?
-
Andrew Geddis, in reply to
I wouldn’t go as harsh as “if you don’t vote, don’t complain” – because I think even if you don’t vote, you’re still a citizen and have a right to curse your employees in the legislature as incompetent malign numpties, fairly or not, even if it gives me a migraine in the process.
Oh, sure ... you can complain. But don't expect to be listened to. Case in point - why do policies so markedly favour old people over young? Which may be terribly unfair and all that ... but it's what you get when you (or, rather, your age/class/ethnicity cohort) aren't active participants.
My point then is that saying "National only got the support of 30-odd percent of New Zealand" is potentially as misleading as "National got the support of 50 percent of New Zealand". There's no such thing as "the proper figure" here, because "proper" depends on what purpose you're using it for.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
There is a cloud over this Government and all it's actions point to them not wanting to be held to account for their deeds.
Hear hear, Sir's right Madam.
-
Lilith __, in reply to
Oh, sure … you can complain. But don’t expect to be listened to. Case in point – why do policies so markedly favour old people over young? Which may be terribly unfair and all that … but it’s what you get when you (or, rather, your age/class/ethnicity cohort) aren’t active participants.
You imply that democracy consists of putting ticks in boxes every 3 years. It doesn't.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.