Hard News: In the Game
141 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
I take it that it is too naive to suggest that a major media event such as RWC is a significant tool for promoting Maori culture and language by drawing viewers to a channel so dedicated ?
-
a significant tool for promoting Maori culture and language by drawing viewers to a channel so dedicated ?
No, it is a misdirection of the cultural brief and intent of MTS.
-
I know 'The Standard" loves to bray on about "dog whistling" at Kiwiblog on not much real evidence
But this certainly pushed the buttons
On the other hand I cannot imagine Miss Clark allowing the opposition to have done this in her time as PM, without a sharp comment or two
-
Speaking as a non-commercial person, is it possible that for a $3 mil investment Maori TV would reap some sort of commercial benefit?
-
Geoff - I'm genuinely curious about this - can you explain a little more for the stupid bloke with his Monday brain in ?
Or perhaps direct me somewhere I might learn more about the matter ?
Could grow to like the edit button....
-
PA reader Graham Leonard points out that last night's "documentary" on the channel, Making a Killing, is a polemic produced by a Scientology front organisation, The Citizens Commission on Human Rights.
...
the film ... occupied two hours of publicly-funded television time last nightIt wasn't last night's documentary. It was last night's film. I wonder if that will be enough to save Māori Television from a BSA complaint?
It was also the most hilariously one-sided documentary I have ever seen (most of). I've ordered the DVD. Free to anywhere in the world =)
The evil-sound intonations of the voice-over, ominous music, and the fact that not a single argument would put from the other perspective, all made for quite compelling viewing, I thought. The wide array of opponents of psychiatric drugs they assembled was quite impressive, but despite the voice-over, the vast majority of those they interviewed were reasoned and reasonable. There was no other side put, but it would be interesting to see the rebuttal. The first segment I saw of the film - on the marketing of drugs and how drugs are approved - was certainly unsettling.
Maybe it was all lies, and every single person interviewed was an actor or a quack; but while it may have been funded by people seeking a polemic, and the voice-over added to this quality, there was a lot that was thought-provoking. There were obvious rebuttals to some claims, but ignore the "science" and you've still got a lot worth seeing.
Also, it was 90 minutes.
-
...and DPF comes out with wide-eyed, disingenous, indignant spluttering when Danyl (quite mildly) sticks the knife in on on DPF's coverage of a couple of those issues.
-
On the other hand I cannot imagine Miss Clark allowing the opposition to have done this in her time as PM, without a sharp comment or two
As it happens, she did. This has been going on for years. Bill English didn't just move to Wellington, and the Greens didn't just start a superfund. It has been known for some time that the Greens were renting from their superfund, in part to maximise their claims allowance. And that Bill English's family lives in Karori, while owning a farm near Dipton, isn't a surprise to anyone who shopped in Karori New World, or follows secondary school debating :-)
And let's not forget that the Greens were a part of the opposition during (at least some of) Clark's reign.
-
DPF,
Well yes Eddie I did, when the posts Danyl linked to actually had me defending Clark mainly. I defended her right to speed as it so happens.
And I don't know how I could have gone any softer on Chris Carter. Three times I said I thought his motivations was good. And the HoS Editorial also found his actions unwise.
He did not just go as support person to Winnie. He has been meeting Government officials and issuing press releases. That is not what someone there purely as a support person does.
I ask people to be fair and consider what Clark would have done if a Nat MP had done what Carter did. Remember she tended to label Opposition MPs who were ever critical of the Govt overseas as "treasonous".
-
Remember she tended to label Opposition MPs who were ever critical of the Govt overseas as "treasonous".
A quick google search yields nothing. Got a link, DPF? I remember cancerous and corrosive, and Winston Peter's calling the Herald treasonous, and Chris Trotter calling Guyon Epsiner treasonous. And people accusing Helen Clark of treason, but the closest I get for Clark herself is Don Brash's uncyclopedia page :-)
-
And I don't know how I could have gone any softer on Chris Carter. Three times I said I thought his motivations was good.
Followed by a 'but', every single time. I'm not calling you disingenuous, but...
And while you're here, would you care to actually address Russell's point about the comment thread?
-
I'm with Trevor Mallard on Maori Television's bid for Rugby Word Cup TV rights. If the broadcaster was bidding with its own resources that would be one thing – but for it to do so with $3 million promised without reference to Cabinet by the Minister of Maori Affairs is quite another.
Indeed -- but could someone remind me what the then-Broadcasting Minister had to say when it turned out additional episodes of Sensing Murder were being paid for with charter funding specificially targeted at the production of show that were otherwise not commercially viable. (A criteria no sane person would apply to a show that might have been total shit, but was top-rating shit.)
Farrar meanwhile strikes a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger pose in blogging about Labour MP Chris Carter travelling to Samoa, providing a platform for his troll farm animals to bray their creepy homophobic sentiments.
Whereas, it strikes me as perfectly acceptable to point out that Carter is a fucking knob without bringing his sexuality into it. Like you, I've no problem with Carter acting as a "support person" for Winnie Laban (who has, it should go without saying, my condolences), but it might have been more seemly to do that as a private citizen and avoid the temptation to play political silly buggers. For fuck's sake, Goff showed better judgment after his nephew was killed in Afghanistan in 2007 -- he could have played his personal tragedy for political ends (and if he wasn't tempted to do so less than a year before an election that was going to be a very hard haul indeed, he was a better man than I'd be) and I'm thankful he didn't.
I'd like to think the response to the horrible tragedy in Samoa is New Zealand's -- not the Government's, or any political parties -- and out representatives would behave accordingly. Play your silly games at home, not (almost literally) over open graves.
-
I'm not calling you disingenuous, but...
Can I suggest "mendacious" instead, then, Emma :P?
-
(FFS, David: if you really want to raise the tone of your comments, don't fanny about giving "20 demerit points". Just ban these people.)
That would be prescriptive nanny-blogism.
-
The fact that Maori Television only reaches 85% of viewers presents another obvious problem.
But wouldn't it make for a hell of a burning platform to encourage the analogue switch-off?
-
Geoff - I'm genuinely curious about this - can you explain a little more for the stupid bloke with his Monday brain in ?
Or perhaps direct me somewhere I might learn more about the matter ?A good place to start is the webpage "About Us' for MTS <www.maoritelevision.co.nz>, which describes their intent and purpose. Their cultural brief is magnificent but I don't see how it fits with outbidding for exclusive rights on a global sporting event such as the RWC.
-
DPF,
Emma. I try to be consistent with the demerits policy. The idea is that it tells people when they step over the line, and an incentive not to keep doing so. Last time I checked I have handed out demerits on several hundred occasions to around 100 different people. Most respond to it - 20 or so have carried on and been suspended.
-
3410,
last night's "documentary" on the channel, Making a Killing , is a polemic produced by a Scientology front organisation, The Citizens Commission on Human Rights.
Perhaps so, but the story told - in that ten-minute clip, at least - is virtually the same as that in (the relevant parts of) such "legitimate" documentaries as Adam Curtis' The Trap: What Happened to Our Dream of Freedom (BBC Two.)
-
A good place to start is the webpage "About Us' for MTS <www.maoritelevision.co.nz>, which describes their intent and purpose. Their cultural brief is magnificent but I don't see how it fits with outbidding for exclusive rights on a global sporting event such as the RWC.
And even if the case could be made that bidding for commercial rugby rights serves the brief of Maori development, I'd expect to see and hear the case made, not have taxpayers' money just handed over on the say-so of the minister.
For a start, you'd want to look at the opportunity cost of taking that $3 million away from all the other development initiatives that might have a claim on it.
Apart from that, Sharples' actions here seem quite extraordinary, and they would be equally so from any other minister.
-
And even if the case could be made that bidding for commercial rugby rights serves the brief of Maori development, I'd expect to see and hear the case made, not have taxpayers' money just handed over on the say-so of the minister.
For a start, you'd want to look at the opportunity cost of taking that $3 million away from all the other development initiatives that might have a claim on it.
Apart from that, Sharples' actions here seem quite extraordinary, and they would be equally so from any other minister.
To me it seems a little bit like "I've got some power now and I'm going to use it" .
It strikes me as a poorly thought out opportunist move on his part. And a totally inappropriate way to use TPK funds that are tagged for development. A rort in fact. -
Whereas, it strikes me as perfectly acceptable to point out that Carter is a fucking knob without bringing his sexuality into it. Like you, I've no problem with Carter acting as a "support person" for Winnie Laban (who has, it should go without saying, my condolences), but it might have been more seemly to do that as a private citizen and avoid the temptation to play political silly buggers.
But have either of them really "played political silly buggers"? I can't see that they have.
-
The idea is that it tells people when they step over the line, and an incentive not to keep doing so. Last time I checked I have handed out demerits on several hundred occasions to around 100 different people. Most respond to it - 20 or so have carried on and been suspended.
So, can I take it that you're by and large both happy with and taking responsibility for the content of that thread?
-
For a start, you'd want to look at the opportunity cost of taking that $3 million away from all the other development initiatives that might have a claim on it.
So would I be right in thinking the issue rests with the sum of money, effective oversight and where it comes from ?
-
A good place to start is the webpage "About Us' for MTS <www.maoritelevision.co.nz>, which describes their intent and purpose. Their cultural brief is magnificent but I don't see how it fits with outbidding for exclusive rights on a global sporting event such as the RWC.
Or running (often bloody excellent) foreign films on on the weekend? :) I can't say I disagree with Russell that the lack of transparency is as excremental as the examples of TVNZ's rather dodgy uses of 'charter' funding. But the problem with "cultural briefs" is that you start running into all kinds of definitional problems. In the context of New Zealand Book month, from a cultural nationalist point of view Mister Pip and Novel About My Wife are bloody fine novels, but what they contribute to our 'national identity' is highly debatable.
-
But have either of them really "played political silly buggers"? I can't see that they have.
So how exactly did they (in your words) "embarrass Murray McCully"?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.