Cracker by Damian Christie

Despite recent swipes from the gnome-like patriarch of New Zealand broadcasting, there are some phenomenally good female journalists around. In some cases it’s as though the sixth sense often attributed to the fairer sex is further honed with journalistic skills to a level that is quite frankly frightening with its psychic-like nature.

So I had to laugh when I read Jane Clifton’s Listener column last week:

“National still has no viable successor to English, so the gaffes are likely to continue. Don Brash, who began the year as a tenuous potential replacement, has lost ground by developing no discernable political talent.”

Still, who was to know? Ms Clifton and I talk at the end of each month, summarising the past few weeks of political goings-on, and for as many months as I can remember, the state of the National leadership has been somewhere on the agenda. There have been so many false starts, red herrings, ‘imminent announcements’, it would have taken a very brave commentator to pick the week’s events and risk crying wolf yet again.

Despite appalling planning (Jane referred to it as “the worst coup I’ve ever seen”), even worse timing (GE moratorium anyone? Anyone?) and the slimmest of majorities (only two votes), early polling rather curiously shows it as being a good move. Around half the people in a Colmar Brunton poll saw it as a good move for National, and increasing the threat to Labour at the next election. Such polls are typically one dimensional, and it’s anyone’s guess to what extent respondents saw threat to Labour as increasing. I guess at this stage National are happy with any upward movement.

I spoke to Brash, albeit briefly, on Thursday. How did he respond to Winston Peters’ claims that under him National was little more than “Act in drag”? At a time when National needs more than ever to reclaim the middle ground and those floating voters, does he not instead represent a shift to the right?

“I don’t believe in policies being left or right” he replied. “I believe that policies are either right or wrong.” Ironically, it’s exactly the kind of aphorism that you’d expect to hear from someone like Ken Shirley or Muriel Newman. “A hand-up, not a hand-out" anyone?

At least it’s a change from a phrase now so entrenched in the Opposition’s lexicon that I wouldn’t be surprised if they started printing bumper stickers – “It’s political correctness… gone maaaaaaad”

Tired old cliché, anyone? Anyone?

And so just like that, we’ve got a new free-to-air music channel. It was a fairly painless transition all things considered, at least it was from my end. No screwdrivers, no rifling through manuals before expertly wiping all my other presets, no fiddling with the coathanger that passes for a UHF receiver in The Ham.

For the first couple of days, our flat was C4 mad. The opening extravaganza, ‘The Top 100 Music Videos of All Time as kinda arbitrarily decided by us’ was great. For seven hours we sat glued to the tube as classic after classic rolled on by. Who can forget Godley & Creme’s momentous ‘Cry’? Yes, quite. Personally, I was delighted that the ‘cool factor’ was for a moment forgotten, and the inimitable clip for Aha’s 'Take On Me' took its place at number three.

The next night, the Sunday, the line-up was inspired. We’ve played the top 100 videos of all time, now let’s REPEAT them. It was good though, having never seen the Chemical Bros amazing ‘Let Forever Be’ before, I was more than happy for a second look.

Now it’s been on for a couple of weeks, the dust has settled and I feel more able to comment. The all-white backdrop seems to be wearing okay, although surely it’s only a matter of time before some ne’er-do-well tags it, or leaves a cigarette burn. Even though it’s become something of a cliché for music TV in this country, I still would have been happier with a couch. Something a bit more homely, something that wouldn’t show up the living room at Sando. As it stands, every time we flick over I get the feeling I should pick up my shoes, give the bench a wipe, take my feet off the table. It’s a bit like having Phillipe Starck over for drinks (which so very rarely happens any more at No. 15)

But what about the hosts, you ask? What’s my opinion? It strikes me as odd that for a music channel, that’s all everyone is talking about. They’re only on once every ten minutes or so, and only for 30 seconds at a burst, does it really matter? Sure, I’ve got my favourites, those I don’t mind, and those who make me wish the music would hurry up and come on, but it’s hardly the be-all and end-all of the station. Is it? Still, on a week when Richard Long’s bung knee and dismissal from TVNZ have both been headline news (Is there any relation between the two, or just a coincidence? Anyone?) I shouldn’t be surprised.

I spoke to David Herkt of the now defunct NZ Tabloid dotcom on my show yesterday. Why did they close? He didn’t really answer, instead seeking refuge in the “well we set out to achieve what we wanted to achieve” line, whatever that was. Was it traffic charges, perhaps, from the squillions of people who visit the site every hour? The inability to keep the level of ‘news’ up to the high prurient standards set early on, even when they resorted to simply making up stories?

I suspect it was a combination of all of these, but also in the end, the human factor. No-one really likes being on the outer, and while the attention is fun and ego-stroking for a while, knowing there’s an ever growing number of people baying for you blood must make it hard to get to sleep at night. Secretly, I suspect, most of us want to be popular, and I don’t see why that would be any different for an insecure, confused teenage pariah.

I'm listening to Leighton Smith at the moment, and he's not annoying me. His words, which have riled me oh so much for oh so long, are like water off the proverbial. It doesn't matter how many times he says "Now, you're wrong, and I'll tell you why you're wrong after this commercial break", today it's not going to break me. It's my last day at work.

I wasn't quite so reserved when I heard him interviewing Bjorn Lomborg the other day. For as long as I care to remember, the Leightonator has been a greenhouse denier. No, there's no such thing as global warming, if there is then it's a natural thing, part of a cycle, and there's no evidence that anything we do (or don't do) has any effect on it.

So along comes Lomborg, his wet-dream interview, his environmental soul mate. He starts the interview audibly bursting with excitement. "So, tell me, is there any such thing as climate change?" "Yes, there is", says Lomborg, presumably to his dismay. Over the course of the next ten minutes we learn, as Russell noted, that Lomborg believes in climate change, that it's our fault, and we can do something about it, albeit not very much and at a great cost. And did our eminent broadcaster learn anything? Apparently not, within a few minutes of the interview's conclusion, Leighton forgot everything he'd heard, and sounded very smug and I-told-you-so.

I interviewed Lomborg myself on Thursday. He seemed very reasonable, although perhaps naïve as to the exact nature of the pact he'd entered. When you're being flown across the world to speak at the behest of the Business Roundtable, you've got to ask yourself whether they're really interested in providing clean water to the third world, or just getting out of whatever levy they're currently facing. I asked him whether, as the poster boy for big business, he was used to this sort of misrepresentation of his message.

"It does worry me, I think there's a lot of people on both sides of the issue who misuse my argument. I'm sure some of the business people are likely to say 'hey sure, cool, we shouldn't do Kyoto, let's buy another car. But most people do want to do good for the planet. And the problem of course is, Greenpeace is not likely to invite me out here, I'd be happy if they did, but I've got to basically take the invitation when I get it."

"But they only provide the microphone, I actually say, and I say to everyone, the same message, namely that we need to get our priorities straight. It's not about cutting down on the environment, it's about using the money in the best way. If we're willing to spend $150b in helping the third world, let's spend it on clean drinking water and not Kyoto. But Bush and other people are likely to hear just the first part of that message, oh don't do Kyoto, and perhaps neglect the other one, and it's their democratic right."

So there you go. Draw your own conclusions, make up your own mind. Exercise your democratic right. I'd just be a bit concerned at the banners hanging over my head as I walked up to the lectern.

But anyway. Change of jobs, effective today. No more Leighton. And he's one of the better ones (don't get me started on Pacific's Janet Wilson). I'm off to work full-time at the place I enjoy being most each week, Radio 95bFM. I'm off to go and make a difference, do some good, rark things up, anything but listen to Leighton Smith ever again:

"Now, I'll tell you why marijuana is destroying this country in a couple of minutes, but right now it's time to talk to Roger, from the Fine Wine Delivery Company…"

One of the allegations made over the past week or so, in response largely to Darkiegate, has been that New Zealand has lost its sense of humour. I'm starting to worry that for many people, it might be the case.

On Tuesday I went to 'It's In the Bag', the Havoc/Newsboy stage show, on as part of the AK03 festival. It was all good fun, and a fitting homage to the iconic kiwi show. Mikey played the part of Toogood with dutiful reverence, while Jeremy stayed in character as a fairly mute Tineke Stevenson, right down to a made-to-measure replica of a dress she wore in 1974. As I said, all good fun.

Not so for Ted, who called Radio Pacific the next day.

I saw a bit of that 'It's in the Bag' [on the TV News] and the co-host seems to be a bloke in a frock. I thought it was a bit strange, you know, I'm surprised no-one else has called up… If I went to a show like that I'd just walk out! I'm sure my wife would too, and lots of other women. It's weird. It upsets me, I just don't want to associate with people like that. There's far too much of it going on in NZ as it is."

Mark Bennett, to his credit, handled the caller beautifully, and used the by now stock defence "it was just satire". Is this phrase becoming the "I was just following orders" of the 21st century?

It would also seem that the NZRFU, or at least their agents, have a few problems in the humour department. I'll probably get in all kinds of trouble for posting this, but I'm feeling kinda Friday about life, so here goes.

I was writing a bit of editorial copy for a magazine the other day, about the new special world cup edition All Black Game Boy Advance SP. Essentially it's a real flash little handheld game machine, great games, great graphics etc, and they're doing a version in black with a silver fern on it, release timed to coincide with world cup fever.

I was told by the kind folks at Nintendo that my copy would have to be approved not only by them, but also by the NZRFU for approval, before I could use any of their images. Odd, but I agreed nevertheless. The reply, from a company called TradeMark Management, agents of the NZRFU, apparently responsible for ensuring their good name isn't sullied, left me dumbfounded.

My opening line, albeit somewhat cheesy, read: "Ever wondered how the second-string All Blacks fill in that time sitting on the bench? With their very own All Blacks Game Boy Advance SP, of course."

The reply?

The All Blacks (i) don't use GameBoy whilst sitting on the bench and (ii) there are no second string All Blacks. Once you are an All Black, you are an All Black. Can you please make those changes and send back.

I politely declined to do so.

If the Paul Holmes thing was a ratings stunt, then it worked rather well, didn't it? Whether people got the joke or not - whether it was a joke or not - everyone's been talking about it, even other radio stations. Linda Clark interviewed the little man himself, bFM breakfast Hugh Sundae talked about very little else the following morning, TV3 ran a story on it, even the PM saw fit to comment. Holmes was on the front of newspapers around the country.

Any way you look at it, the comment has generated tens of thousands of dollars worth of free publicity. I called the Broadcasting Standards Authority to find out what the maximum fine was that the station could face. $5000, apparently. As Mr Brown notes, survey is looming, and more people are bound to tune in if they think Holmes has gone off the rails than would listen to win a free trip for two to Sydney, and other more conventional ratings bribes. $5000 is nothing compared to the value of the Paul Holmes Breakfast show coming up trumps in the survey, both to Paul Holmes personally, and Newstalk ZB.

Is it even bad publicity? Half the people I've spoken to seem convinced it was satire. And even if people don't consider it to be satirical, we're talking about the station whose flagship talkback host is Leighton Smith, whose insidious "I'm not a racist, but…" schtick attracts huge audiences every day. ZB's liberal audience could fit in the same WC as National Radio's reactionary conservatives. It ain't done them any harm, trust me, even though some people are inevitably offended.

Re the pickled people, this response was a little more literal than I had in mind. Although, give the man a couple of hundred grand and some airtime, I dare say he could come up with something a little more lively than Edwards' show.

My mate Jen in the UK pointed out that while she was fresh out of pickled people, if I get in quick I pick up a weasel riding a chicken for a song.

And while we're on the animal tip, here's an invisible turtle that has captured my imagination.

Have a good weekend - DC