Fact checkin’ – Sunday addition

10 comments on “Fact checkin’ – Sunday addition ”

• Comments are now closed

1. randal 1

   19 October 2008 at 12:04 pm

   Steve we know the meedia in New Zealand is recruited for their hair and teeth and this only goes to reinforce that conclusion.
   And TV! should be sued for false advertising. their promos say they are offering in depth analysis and all we get is this sort of tripe and espinner on sunday night telling more lies.
2. jo zinny 2

   19 October 2008 at 12:50 pm

   maybe some more facts are due today on RNZ – with Kim Hill hosting the ‘Economic” debate from 5pm between various party leaders. Right after this – (6.30 or so) they cross back to Wellington for Mary Wilson to trek the drek of one or more and hopefully enlighten us with how the politicians sounded off..
3. randal 3

   19 October 2008 at 1:40 pm

   why dont they tell us now? they have already made thir minds up.
4. Ianmac 4

   19 October 2008 at 2:28 pm

   I saw a response from the CTU guy about 3weeks ago. During the Committee stages he said (paraphrased) “that given the tax relief for employers, the Govt input and the rebate for the 4X4 there could be a case for the same deal for a 2X2.” But when the National deal came out reducing the entitlements, they strenuously withdrew any support for 2×2. The Nat often quoted is of course out of context.
5. Robin Grieve 5

   19 October 2008 at 2:50 pm

   I think National should leave Kiwisaver as it is. At the moment only 800.000 are in it. This includes 100 000 children of the wealthy parents who can afford to join them up. For each of those wealthy enough to put in 4% the govt puts in $3000. ($1000 kick start, $1000 govt credit and $1000 employers payment that is refunded to them by the govt.) So $1000 becomes $4000 after 12 months thanks to the taxes of the poor and low paid who can not afford the 4% For self employed it is an even sweeter deal. We just have to put in $1040 and the govt gives us another $2000,again funded by the taxes of the 2/3 of the workforce who can not afford the 4%.
   I think Labour’s scheme is an excellent way to take mony off the poor and give it to the rich pricks. If National change it to the 2% it will mean most of the 2/3 currently unable to benefit will be able to join up and then the low paid will end up getting benefits that are now reserved for the wealthy. Seems rather odd that unions would not support that unless unions are trying to keep their members poor for some reason, I wonder what that could be.
6. Janet 6

   19 October 2008 at 4:25 pm

   Along with hundreds of others I have just been to hear Helen Clark at Te Papa. It was standing room only and the crowd was very representative of NZ – young and old and in between, pakeha, Maori and assorted ethnicities. Helen was cheered after almost every sentence, even when she was giving a grim warning about the economic times ahead and the measures that would be needed to protect the poor and vulnerable, and the responsible economic policies that Labour would follow (which includes no more spending promises this election). Afterwards she shook hands and had her photo taken with a large number of happy supporters. I was surprised how relaxed and glamorous she looks close up – not too unlike the billboards actually. By the way she was wearing a stunning Napoleon inspired red and black jacket and black trousers, and has an amazing figure.

   But wait for the media coverage – they will probably show the elderly person with their hands over their ears as the unfamiliar music of King Kapisi proved a little too loud (I saw a TV cameraman taking a close up of this) and will have some snippet of Helen looking serious and give it all a negative spin – such as ‘Labour runs out of promises…”.
7. bobo 7

   19 October 2008 at 5:24 pm

   It’s embarrassing how biased the media are even by NZ standards, I don’t remember the media being so anti government even after Nationals nasty 90s which compared to the last 8 years were terrible, the media tried to scare the public that the challenger Labour couldn’t be trusted, had no experience and would scare off overseas investment. All NZ needs is our own O’Riley Factor maybe hosted by good old hack Leighton Smith…

   Any predictions what this week will hold?
8. Lew 8

   19 October 2008 at 6:08 pm

   Honestly, the NZ media ain’t bad. I put up this defence a fair bit, but I’ll do it again.

   All media is biased, or rather – a distorted view of actuall real stuff which happened. It’s distorted by the way the PR industry works, how government operates, the fact that newsrooms are understaffed, the drinking habits of overworked journalists, for that matter, and most of all by the need to capture the advertising dollar in a set of dying media: TV and radio and newsprint. Read Nick Davies’ book Flat Earth News for the long version.

   The assertion that NZ’s media are worse than elsewhere rests on the idea that this marketisation of information is taking place faster here, or is more advanced here than it is elsewhere. But it ain’t so. Much is made of the fact we have a news duopoly here – Fairfax v APN; TVNZ v TV3; CanWest v RadioWorks (v Radio NZ, but since thy’re non-commercial they’re different). Other major news ecologies in the world (Australia; Great Britain and the USA are those I’m familiar with) have five or ten competitors, and this has a number of effects: First, it means the advertiser dollar is split more ways, it’s easier to segment the market and remain viable, but it’s also very competitive. Second, this market segmentation means nearly everyone can find some news which suits their weltanschauung – D4J and folks like that can watch Fox News in the US, or read the Daily Mail in the UK, and randal (you two are polar opposites in this thought experiment) can read the New York Times and watch the BBC. Everyone gets what they need and they think `thank god for $media_outlet, else the world would be fucked.’ But in reality, another big hunk of the population who drinks on a Friday night with D4J thinks the NYT is as pinko and commie as anything other than the Daily News, and I’m sure most readers will agree the Mail and Fox news aren’t the bastions of informative news their adherents believe them to be. Since here in NZ there is such a concentration of voices, neither D4J nor randal gets his daily dose of ideological reassurement intact – both have to cobble their talking points together from various sources, both favourable and unfavourable. THey duly do so, and in having to think about it (theoretically) become better-informed.

   There are other problems with a duopoly, but I’m saying it’s a matter of what faults you like and which you don’t. The fact that the NZ media (pick any major outlet) seems to piss off both the lefties and the righties no end (read any media-related thread on Kiwiblog to see the exact same complaints you’ve raised here, from the other angle) their discourse must be something approaching a consensus. To imply that such a confused jumble of ideas emerges from a pure and well-considered ideology is folly.

   L
9. Lew 9

   19 October 2008 at 6:10 pm

   bobo: Leighton runs The O’Reilly Factor on the wireless every freaking morning!

   L
10. bobo 10

    19 October 2008 at 7:52 pm

    Lew: News has gone from reporting facts and events to just opinion on facts and events, the news is reported almost in a narrative of the writers interpretation , I’d love to compare a Herald of 20 years ago to todays to see the actual content makeup. Content is no longer king opinion is king. I get what your saying though with both the far right & left not hearing in the media what they want.

    I’m also of the view that the papers/media are wanting a change of government as the last 8 years of Labour has been pretty low key scandal wise and a potential national / Maori party coalition would give them more meat to get their teeth into.

    Leighton always had a face for radio…

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS