Posts by Sacha
-
OnPoint: MSD's Leaky Servers, in reply to
I trust I never read her again
good for the sanity
-
OnPoint: MSD's Leaky Servers, in reply to
Satire, yeah?
she's always been completely un-self-aware on Twitter, so no
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to
I'm not saying granting a source anonymity is never, ever justified.
You said:
You can speak truth to power, or you can choose to pimp your credibility for access
If you can't see the difference between that and this from the policy you cited:
Whenever anonymity is granted, it should be the subject of energetic negotiation
then please don't expect it to escape comment from others.
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to
used for irrelevant smears and diversions, along with him having been one of the un-prosecuted Urewera 17 (nothing to do with MSD's security leak)
Quite skillful use of associations by the spinmeisters, though, don't you think? Taps nicely into that broader discourse about risk and power, and trade-offs between public security and individual freedom.
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to
But, sorry, I still don’t think credible and ethical news organizations get to have it both ways. You can speak truth to power, or you can choose to pimp your credibility for access and play along with a political strategy to discredit a political embarrassment.
If the world were actually that black or white, we wouldn't have any ethical struggles.
-
OnPoint: MSD's Leaky Servers, in reply to
it's not going to sit well politically to go begging for more money
That's where Keith may have done us all a huge favour - more likely now that Cabinet will approve extra money before all the other cross-agency systems are in place, especially Health ones.
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to
her (admittedly less unequivocal) denial
Kind of revealing, some might say. The part about not wanting to ask her staff directly sounds awfully familiar.. coughjohnbankscough
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to
Journalists have always had exemptions from usual transparency, in the broader public interest of finding out what's going on - not as if protecting sources is a new thing. Reducing that protection is. Should be an interesting show.
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to
You're missing what seems a quite plausible explanation: the information provided to him by other staff wasn't correct, and he passed it on in good faith. That wouldn't be his comms staff either. And it takes a while for any new CEO to reach down enough in a big organisation to establish other channels to know what's going on.
-
OnPoint: MSD's Leaky Servers, in reply to
governance stakeholders
exactly