Posts by Michael Meyers
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm interested in the calls that I'm seeing here for a "real" public broadcaster. It just feels a bit like people thinking that the grass-is-greener.
Overseas there is the BBC, ABC, PBS and probably numerous other examples of good publicly-owned broadcasters. While they all produce good content I don't understand why a body like NZ On Air can't replace the work that these public broadcasters do by funding appropriate shows.
I would much rather have NZ On Air funded appropriately to allow a variety of broadcasters to make good current affairs shows rather than have tax dollars spent on the TV One newsroom.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Lilith __,
Which parts of it do you think are untrue? To my knowledge no-one has ever shown Nicky Hager to be anything but totally rigorous
I tried to carefully word my comment but I knew I would never be careful enough.
What I'm saying is some people disbelieve Dirty Politics, some people vote National and some people watch Seven Sharp. Very few of those people comment here but they clearly make up a good chunk of the population.
-
A good insightful post from Russell but it has got me wondering whether the commenters on PA are really the best people to be commenting on why Campbell Live is facing the axe.
John Campbell has become a bit of a lefty icon while Mike Hosking is the dark side of Dirty Politics. You'd think from reading the comments on PA that everyone in NZ believes Dirty Politics, no one votes National and everyone watches Campbell Live. Sadly, reality has shown that isn't the way the world works. I've heard there are even people out there who don't listen to National Radio.
People obviously watch Seven Sharp and lots of them. But who are they? There must be some out there or does no one want to admit it?
However, I've not sure that Campbell Live is the problem. Looking at TV ratings (http://www.throng.co.nz/2015/04/tv-ratings-8-april-2015/), I'm surprised that after 25 years 3 News still hasn't made a larger dent in the ratings of TV1. It has got to be depressing to create a decent news show and get less than half the viewers of the other other channel.
And if you don't get people watching your news broadcast, they're not going to stick around for the info- and/or -tainment show that follows.
-
I feel like if Key hadn't tried to claim the Gwyn report as a win for National, then they might actually have come out ahead. Be a little bit humble and benefit from it. But clearly they didn't and now spin needs to be added to more spin to not look like it's all a big lie.
But instead they tried to paint it as a win, when it clearly isn't. And it hasn't really worked out.
Also, I expect that Cam Slater's death plot is mostly related to this post: http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2014/11/im-alive-something-share/ [warning, WhaleOil link]. It's not about anyone actually trying to kill him but just putting him under enough pressure that he kills himself.
I'm pretty sure this just shows the paranoid nature of Slater. And megalomania. As far as I can tell, the pressure on Slater is directly related to the dodgy situation of his own making.
-
Hard News: The humanity, in reply to Raymond A Francis,
So it was ok when the PM was being given a hard time before the election, I certainly don’t remember you calling for an easing of the questioning
Yes, that was ok, because the actions of Judith Collins (which I expect you are referring to) did need some sort of explanation to the public. As did questions around the GCSB. There is a public interest here.
The leadership of Labour Party however isn't a matter where they need to be accountable to the public. They should be working in the best interests of the party at this point, when looking at going forward. The interests of the country come later once they have sorted themselves out. They could put anyone forward as leader as long as that person had a reasonable shot of winning the election and can convince the country that the Labour Party is working for New Zealand.
The media can ask all they want but I don't feel an obligation to be told what is going on behind these closed doors. But I do want to know what Judith Collins was up to, in the same way that I'd like any Labour or Green MP in a similar situation to be held accountable.
-
I have got a little tired of the style of political journalism that TV3 is following at the moment.
On their election night coverage it got a bit tiresome. Trying to get the scoop from the party leaders as they walked in to give their speech didn't really add anything for me. I'm aware a journo needs to be pushy but it just got to be a farce.
I've also got tired of the manufactured scoop:
Journo: "Will you work with Winston? Will you work with Winston? Can you confirm or deny that you'll work with Winston?"
Poli: "Well, we don't have any intention of working with Winston but we'll have to see how the public votes"
Journo: "There you have it! Mr Poli Tician will be lining up to call Winston Peters on Sunday morning."
I'm aware that journalists need to work hard and there is less money in any sort of media these days but creating a narrative that only just fits the facts seems to be happening more and more. I'm not in the press gallery so obviously the journalists see a different side to the story than I do. If there really is a story, show me the facts rather than the fantasy.
I'm also aware the politicians are often pretty economical with the truth when it suits them but asking the same loaded question twenty times in a row doesn't achieve very much. Hearing Guyon Espiner badger John Key with "Is it OK?" is one of the few circumstances where that style of questioning really works.
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Alfie,
The other footage of the man writing on the ballot papers is also explained in the Guardian article linked.
At times, uncounted ballots would be placed on tables that had yes or no signs attached before being sorted, she said. And piles that didn’t reach round numbers of 50 or 100 would be wrapped in a piece of paper on which the total number of votes would be written, explaining the Edinburgh footage.
I'm a little surprised that there is no recount of the ballots done on the Scottish referendum. It's not even possible to ask for a recount.
It seems that the NZ election has a complete recount before the final result is announced 4 October which makes me a lot more confident in the process.
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Alfie,
The "Yes votes on the No table" conspiracy seems to have been pretty thoroughly debunked since they were apparently votes waiting to be counted.
Also, I don't know what the process in the UK is but that sort of counting "fraud" would be difficult to achieve here as all results from election night are checked by a recount over the next two weeks as detailed here.
-
Hard News: The sole party of government, in reply to Emma Hart,
Your ballot paper has a number, under the black sticker. That number matches the stub, which has your page and line number written on it by your issuing officer – in biro.
I had seen the number under the black sticker but hadn't looked at the stub before I was handed the ballot paper. There was discussion in my household about what would happen if I were to vote twice. Obviously it would be caught but I wondered how they would find the appropriate ballot paper if that were the case.
It did also make me wonder how secret the secret ballot really is, although it would take a lot of work to match all the ballot paper with all voters. Lots of black stickers to peel off.
-
I've found that Cunliffe has grown on me during the campaign. Seemed a lot more statesman-like than Key during the debates although I can see why people don't like him.
I think the left were always going to struggle to win this election with the economy going strongly. A government won't often lose an election in the midst of an economic boom (even if I think it might end any day now).
The CGT and increase in the top rate of tax just weren't going to work with the current electorate either. The apparent "steady and stable management" of the economy by National had brought the economy back into surplus and it was not made obvious why the taxes need to go up. John Key's line of "5 new taxes" was a killer.
I expect over the next term in government, the economy is going to go south, and public services are going to be eroded by budget cuts. Then it will be obvious why taxes need to go up but we're not there yet.
Also, I think Dirty Politics was a big deal in the election but National still got through it for two reasons.
Firstly, Judith Collins was pretty heavily implicated and was cut loose. Polling showed that she needed to go and she was duly removed as a minister. Everyone else in the National Party was only really tainted by association. There was no hard evidence of anything else it was all hearsay. An email from John Key would've done it but emails from Judith Collins and Cam Slater weren't enough. I still think the Goff OIA thing looks pretty dodgy but nothing was proven sufficiently to really taint Key.
Also, if a voter decided to abandon the National Party because of Dirty Politics, where else were they going to go? They weren't going to come to Labour. I expect that a good part of the bump in NZ First and the Conservatives might have come because of Dirty Politics.
I certainly struggled with that thought myself. Labour tried to compete with National by taking a jump to the left with the Greens (although many here might disagree with that). That leaves a gaping hole to the left of National.... and many people want the stability of the status quo rather than "5 new taxes".