Posts by Russell Brown
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Keith’s responsibility to protect his source. Claire’s responsibility to protect hers, but if others find out, and it’s newsworthy, they’re free to publish it.
Yep.
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to izogi,
To me this seems like the bigger media outlets getting back at a blogger because he beat them to breaking a major story.
But if you're given the name, you have to justify not printing it. And if you spit the dummy and say it came from (let's say) the minister's office, no one's ever going to tell you anything in confidence again.
So, no, I don't think Trevett or the Herald have it in for Keith. It's just the dance.
-
Hard News: Special Sources, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Quite possibly. It’s also perfectly possible Trevett’s source was in Paula Bennett’s office, and her (admittedly less unequivocal) denial was equally in good faith.
That seems considerably more likely than the source being the ministry, given Boyle's comprehensive denial, Bennett's disinclination to get to the bottom of it and the confirmation that her staff were digging around on Bailey last week.
-
OnPoint: The Source, in reply to Stedmund Bacon,
Thanks Russell
Not too unkindAnd it wasn't meant to be. If you do decide to shed that name, giz a yell and I can sort it.
-
OnPoint: The Source, in reply to Stedmund Bacon,
Very droll. but I predict you’ll regret registering under the identity “Stedmund Bacon”. You’ll stick around, get to like the place – and wish you didn’t have an impulse comedy name. Mark my words.
-
The worst part is I'm pretty sure you guys aren't even high.
-
OnPoint: The Source, in reply to Emma Hart,
Different things.
That was brilliant.
-
I see Claire Trevett's story is up on the Herald site.
Could someone please remind Brendan Boyle exactly who lays criminal charges in a democracy?
Mr Boyle said there were no plans to lay charges against Mr Ng for revealing the breach publicly but it was too early to say whether Mr Bailey would be charged.
-
OnPoint: The Source, in reply to Ben Masters,
How bitter do you have to be, when finding a breach in “national security”, that, upon realizing you weren’t going to be paid for your “troubles” you felt the need to go behind the back of MSD and break this story.
I'm puzzled as to how telling MSD he would be bringing the problem to the attention of his journalist friend is "going behind the back of MSD".
-
Wow. Kay Brereton of the Beneficiaries Advocacy Federation says she told MSD about the flaws in the kiosks a year ago. Stephen Judd has just said on Twitter that MSD was warned again by its own testers several months ago, and again did nothing.
It seems appropriate to declare this a scandal.