Hard News: Friday Gold: An email exchange with Michael Laws
327 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 14 Newer→ Last
-
Just read the Herald on Sunday account and Laws has turned the whole exchange into a positive. It will play even better in Wanganui. Own goal, Russell.
Really? It didn't seem that way to me. But the idea of an "own goal" presupposes the existence of a goal. You might not want to over-analyse this.
-
And for what it's worth I emailed Laws a week ago because of his SST article - I tried to be rational but I'm not the best of writers - anyway I got back the rudest response I've ever received - might not sound bad to you but ... It was "Bye bye crazy lady"
On the other hand ... does Laws write any non-abusive letters on his mayoral email address?
-
Cecelia: since no doubt you didn't bait him the way that Madden-Smith did, I agree with Sacha - it's worth lodging a complaint about that.
-
Cecelia: since no doubt you didn't bait him the way that Madden-Smith did, I agree with Sacha - it's worth lodging a complaint about that.
Yes, and I disagree with Emily that it's funny. It's actually pretty weird.
-
I see Nippert took the point about stopping at "jerk jerk jerk".
-
Calling them ignorant hillbilly hicks was not good but, well Laws started it by being abusive in his first response. If he had responded sensibly the first time they could have had a discussion.
I live in a similar provincial town (WE have an H) and I would think it appalling if we were labelled hillbillies. However, I'd be even angrier to have someone like Laws representing me. There must be lots of Wanganui people cringing.
I've followed Laws' career over the years (you can't help it - he loves the limelight) and I think we are witnessing the decline and fall of this man. He wasn't always like this. I wonder if being a shock jock and a media celebrity corrupts the souls of some people ...
I rant - must go write those reports!
-
Oh, and I gather Brendon Madden-Smith expressed an apology to the people of Whanganui over his "redneck" comment when he spoke to Matt Nippert, which was the decent thing to do. But neither the comment or the regretting of it featured in the story anyway.
-
I wonder if being a shock jock and a media celebrity corrupts the souls of some people
I suspect the causality may be reversed.
And do write a quick formal email of complaint to the CEO of the Council. May not be a ble to do much short term, but evidence builds up.
-
Thanks Sacha but I must point out that I emailed him on account of his SST article and used the email address at the bottom thereof. It was his Radio Live email address so I can't really complain - in his capacity as talk back host he's allowed to insult old ladies!!!! I still think it was childish, rude, nasty and unnecessary. It's the measure of the man!
-
Oh get over it! And Russell why post the exchange if your aim wasn't to embarrass Laws? I read the NZ herald poll yesterday and the week before that where something like 75% called him the voice-of-reason or something like that. That was AFTER the Otaki incident.
He is playing everything as a popularity contest and he seems to be winning. Decline & fall? Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer, anybody? -
I think his mission is to insult anyone except middle aged white men, and he manages a few of those too. Amazing how that can constitute a career these days.
-
why post the exchange if your aim wasn't to embarrass Laws?
Emily, snippets of evidence like that email exchange feed into an ongoing conversation here about making sense of where the country's public debate is at. Plus it's entertaining. As for "embarrass", Giovanni reminded us quite well I thought that none of this is going to change Lhaws' mind or behaviour.
-
As for "embarrass", Giovanni reminded us quite well I thought that none of this is going to change Lhaws' mind or behaviour.
I think the point is rather how it plays out with the public. My probably wrong opinion is Otaki exchange = bad Madden-Smith exchange = good (from Lhaws' point of view, that is). But it will all be very moot indeed if W(h)anganui doesn't produce a credible candidate by the time of the next election.
-
I read the NZ herald poll yesterday and the week before that where something like 75% called him the voice-of-reason or something like that.
Herald polls are simply a bucket provided for those shut-ins who must vomit up their ineffectuality ("Look at that, mate! And I never even had frozen peas!") While the vast majority of NZers have lives, there's a certain morbid fascination in peeking into the bucket.
-
I live here! He won easily at the last election and this whole 'h' thing has only increased his popularity with the locals. Yes, we liberals might hate him but we organised an outstanding candidate and campaign two years ago and gor trounced.
Wanganui - and I will give it the current name until it is officially changed - is very strong on the 'h' issue and it isn't in favour!
-
Look at that, mate! And I never even had frozen peas!
rofflenui
-
Lhaws certainly resonates with many - and so can not be overlooked. Today's column about holding parents responsible for their children having breakfast before school, likewise.
-
Wanganui - and I will give it the current name until it is officially changed - is very strong on the 'h' issue and it isn't in favour!
In the words of someone up a few posts (oh hang on, it was you Emily) " Oh get over it!"
-
Oh get over it!
Woah, chill out, Emily. I think Cecelia is within her rights to find her email from Laws rude and childish. It also raises questions about how often Laws behaves like this on his official email account.
And Russell why post the exchange if your aim wasn't to embarrass Laws?
It was interesting and amusing, and people clearly wanted to read and talk about it -- this thread has nearly five times as many views as the one for the post I made yesterday morning.
It's not my responsibility if some people think the other participant in the exchange is as a big a dick as Laws, and I can't calibrate editorial decisions according to how they might play with Wanganui voters. I posted it in my blog: what anyone else does with it is their business.
-
On the other hand ... does Laws write any non-abusive letters on his mayoral email address?
Now there would be an interesting OIA request. Could tie bureaucrats in knots.
CEO, Wanganui District Council, PO Box 637, Wanganui
Official Information Act request
I request the count of the number of emails sent from the address michael.laws@wanganui.govt.nz in the seven days 14 - 20 September 2009.
I request the numbers of these categorised as sent to Wanganui DC email addresses (internal) and other addresses (external)
I request the numbers of internal emails further categorised as not abusive; partly abusive; abusive
I request the numbers of external emails further categorised as not abusive; partly abusive; abusive
If you are not able to categorise emails as not abusive; partly abusive; abusive, then I request a copy of each email, with enough content so that I can categorise each
You are reminded that the information requested is official information within the scope of the Act and must be provided as soon as reasonably possible as it is consistent with the public interest.
-
Wearing my Elected Rep hat may I point out that really, there is very little 'official' sanction that Laws may receive. You can complain to the CEO, but as Laws is exercising his political muscle, the CEO can do little. You could complain to the Council as a whole, but given that half support Laws and the other half don't, you would not get very far.
The only thing that receives much official interest is corruption and the like. I'm afraid in this instance, corruption of public intelligence is not a prosecutable offense.
The OIA request is interesting. OIA's can be useful, I've done it a few times myself. For OIA's to succeed you need to be very very precise. The above OIA fails IMHO because there are no criteria attached to the terms 'abusive', 'partly abusive', and 'not abusive'.
This leaves it completely open for the officer to exercise discretion and should said officer decide that 'F*** off you lazy old cow' is, while extravagant, not abusive in the context of the person making the statement, then it's not abusive.
Leave absolutely no wriggle room in OIAs. That way you are more likely to get what you are after.
And finally, while Laws's conduct is deplorable and somewhat reprehensible, rest assured that the universe works in mysterious ways.
Whipping said ER hat off.
-
You could complain to the Council as a whole, but given that half support Laws and the other half don't, you would not get very far.
Agreed. In general, who enforces any codes of conduct for elected local body members? Thinking of the equivalent of Parliament's privileges committee, etc.
If it wasn't his official Council email address, then no communiucations policy would apply. However, bringing the organisation into disrepute should be of some interest to his peers and it can't be the only time there has been a rogue in office.
-
Wearing said ER hat...
No-one. That's the short answer Sacha.
Council's are required to have a code of conduct which governs conduct of councillors. Breaches are handled either by Council as a whole or a delegated committee.
But as Laws has proved, a person can bring W(h)anganui Council into disrepute without much censure from his fellow councillors.
By and large Codes of Conduct ensure that Council meetings are relatively cordial, and that Councillor behaviour towards constituents and citizens is relatively respectful, but there is no real form of punishment if breaches are committed.
The only real form of punishment is vote disapproval and given that the good burghers of W(h)anganui appear to vote Laws in every election, Laws can freely operate without any fear.
The other form of punishment tends to be marginalisation. Being a 'common touch-telling it like it is-a spade is a shovel' kind of mayor tends to marginalise oneself within the political elite, both in W(h)anganui and outside of it. The more you operate in black and white, them more you find yourself outside of the 'grey' area where most politicians play.
Removing said hat.
-
You are all very earnest, aren't you!
And you don't like being contradicted, but if Wanganui is insulted and Laws then returns the insult at, I'm assuming, an Aucklander, how does that play out in Wanganui and anywhere else for that matter, as favorable to the initial insultee?
The HOS were very kind to the e-mail man because the next crack at Wanganui would have really tipped the scales.
Laws is loved, in part, because he is so politically incorrect and everytime he lets fly at soft targets like Auckland liberals then it is not just Wanganui conservatives who are cheering!
And Russell, I don't think Laws looks like a dick with this email exchange: it would take more than calling someone a "jerk" for that to happen.
-
but if Wanganui is insulted and Laws then returns the insult at, I'm assuming, an Aucklander, how does that play out in Wanganui and anywhere else for that matter, as favorable to the initial insultee?
Wanganui shouldn't have been insulted, I agree, as I said before: I wish the emailer hadn't done that. However, in the wider context (the Otaki letters) Laws is the one who is coming across as particularly rude and unreasonable.
The issue of respecting the Maori name is bigger, I think, than just Wanganui. Therefore it affects us all, whatever corner of the country we're from.
And I did get over Laws' response to me - I just thought it fitted into a pattern and might add to the discussion here. I often email people if I'm interested in an article and I've had angry responses but never rude and personal! I just think he's doing himself a disfavour - and the people he represents AND his radio station.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.