Posts by Russell Brown
-
Speaker: Telling Our Own Tales, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Thank you. Some time back, among the pictures you posted from your trip to crumbling Avonside, there was a shot taken from two doors along of the familiar river view from what used to be my kitchen window. While it was kind of numbing at the time to realise that it was now in the public domain, it was really cool that you stopped and noticed. Thanks again.
I thought about it quite a bit. On my previous trip down, I'd done the same thing -- hired a bike and rode through the residential red zone -- but realised I couldn't take photographs while people were still hanging on there.
The next time, it seemed okay, if still an emotionally turbulent experience.
What I realised subsequently was that almost none of my Christchurch friends had ventured there -- it was too hard. I think I was able to do something as a visitor (although I grew up in Christchurch) that they couldn't.
The photo-essay is here if anyone missed it at the time.
-
Speaker: Telling Our Own Tales, in reply to Lilith __,
And thanks again to Russell for giving us room the last few years here on PAS, it means a lot.
It's meant a lot to me, too. Not just in feeling somehow useful, but for the fact that you and others have enriched the place by coming here to talk.
-
Dear Devil's Advocate. I've deleted your revolting bit of trolling there and I'm about to ban your account. You have no idea.
-
Speaker: Telling Our Own Tales, in reply to Simon Lyall,
Seriously Christchurch people. Next time you open your mouths try and talk for more than a minute without saying how much you hate Auckland(ers) and Wellington(ians).
Simon, I almost deleted your tin-eared comment because it seemed so awfully inappropriate given today's #eqnz anniversary.
But I would say this. When my friends in Christchurch talk about how they feel the loss of control of their own destiny and storytelling, I don't take it personally. It's not about me.
-
Hard News: Show some decency, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Best wishes, Sofie.
-
Speaker: On the upland road, in reply to Dismal Soyanz,
Although the bundle has not dropped close enough to Georgina Beyer. Not much chance of Dotcom keeping her reined in methinks.
Wasn't Beyer brought into the fold a month ago by her friend Pam Corkery? Jeez.
-
Speaker: On the upland road, in reply to Rob Stowell,
Seriously, you come across as a stooge.
BigPharmaChick – Carrick Graham in a chicken suit?
No. Pharmachick has an occasional commenting history and I'm pretty sure she's commenting in good faith. Let's disagree with each other rather than make accusations.
-
Speaker: On the upland road, in reply to Idiot Savant,
Which can only be taken as a threat.
This isn’t to deny the clear ethical problems displayed by Slater and DPF. But I’m not sure that a government crackdown on what has become a vital democratic forum is tha answer here.
What the Law Commission proposed was voluntary for bloggers. I'd be okay with it.
-
Speaker: On the upland road, in reply to Pharmachick,
I think the bar for public interest has to be very high Russel. While I’m maybe buying that some of this is in the public interest, some of it was really salacious piffle.
I think most of what’s the the book meets a very high bar. And not just in the book. I’ve just written about how important Matt Nippert’s stories on the campaign to undermine financial regulators are. He got his break from emails supplied to him by the hacker. Are you going to accuse him of doing it for the money too?
I think Prof Geddis was quoting a couple of sections that the hacker definitely breached earlier, whether or not Mr. Hagar is also criminally responsible is a matter for the courts/crown prosecutor to decide.
His legal advice was unequivocal on that score. How many books he sells has nothing to do with it.
Also, an argument can be made that Hagar targets both sides (Key, Brash and Clark) and makes no money so he’s even handed and fighting the good fight. I simply don’t trust his motivations pulling this stuff out just before elections every 3 years.
Yeah, another myth. Two books, Seeds of Distrust and Dirty Politics, 12 years apart. I’ll leave you to count up up how many elections there were between them.
Oh yes, and Mr Hagar is a novelist, not a journalist, when he publishes books. There’s already been one precedent before the courts that says book writers don’t have the protections of their sources in the way that journalists do. Again this will probably be a precedent setting case if it heads to court.
No, he’s not a “novelist”, for goodness sake. And I’ve written about how dreadful Justice Winkelmann’s decision on David Fisher’s book was. Hager was mindful of that when he gave back the material to the hacker, so he couldn’t be compelled to hand it over.
-
Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to Alfie,
The production values were bloody aweful through , audio levels all over the place , the intros were far too long and it was very hard for me to hear what Press Editor was saying.
That’s a valid point Richard. We tuned in around 7:35pm and found numerous technical problems. For a start the pictures were out of sync by about two seconds. I closed and reopened the page, switched to the lowest quality offered, but nothing improved that.
The audio levels were poorly mixed and I found myself riding the volume on my PC to try and hear what was being said. It didn’t help that the Press journos often stood some distance from their mics – radio mics would have been a better call. And when Key was shouting over Cunliffe his audio took precedence, suggesting a poor or even unattended sound mix.
I tweeted last night that it showed how hard producing this kind of live video on a limited budget actually is. The Green Room webcast I did last week had its rough edges too -- our director couldn't hear the discussion and had to cut on what he could see (which did seriously well).
But The Press event was, even given the inevitable challenges, bloody poorly produced. The difference in volume between Key and Cunliffe in the first half actually influenced the debate.