Hard News: I've been hybridising for a while now ...
140 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Craig? I'm waiting ...
Part of me wants to dance naked in the rain with joy. (And I might give the SST another chance if Ruth Laughensen [sic] applies for and gets the editor's job -- an actual journalist who's been doing some very solid work might be a good influence at the top.) But the Law Commission? And Brett's "researching the impact of new media on free speech, including suppression and contempt of court"? Enough irony in that to make a full-scale replica of the Eiffel Tower.
-
"... opinion pieces are substituted for reporting and analysis - and everyone has an opinion."
And it's not just in politics. Thanks to Stephen Jones there are now a host of copy-cat rugby rants in the MSM expecting to be taken seriously. Journos as talk back shock-jocks.
I think it's because whereas sport was once treated as News and reported as such, now it's treated as part of the Entertainment industry. Unfortunately, in our shallow and cynical world, Politics seems to be making the same transition.
-
Seriously, folks who think The Listener has been ruined by a pack of Tory Stepford Wives aren't going to be talked in off that particular ledge by anyone. Certainly not me.
Agree in principle, but I'm struck by the hubris here. That the top political commentator in the country (am I right?) should not see a conflict of interest in dating a politician is, well, perfectly okay - she has every right to be judged on the basis of her work alone, like everyone else. But she ought to return the favour, don't you think, rather than implying that other writers outside of the journalistic pale couldn't possibly be impartial or objective.
-
You've got new media and technology (and not just blogging/internet) remaking your profession under your feet, then you're going to see some people adapt (however reluctantly), other decry it as the apocalypse (and either adapt or die), and others jam their finger and their ears and start screaming "I can't hear you! I can't see you! GO AWAY!!!"i
As above, but spoken as only Craig can. Giovanni correctly said the discourse used to be so limited. Pre-Net 2.0 it was often confined to a small television panel whose verbal to and fro-ing was defined as, well, definitive in some way, or reporters who were asked nightly 'what that really means'. We were told things and that was it, by experts. Clifton was a big part of that and it must be terrifying for the likes of her and Ralston to see that slip away so much as it has.
Simply put, they don't matter as much anymore despite their self perceived importance.
-
Also, it seems worth noting this part:
At the recent National Party conference, Labour activist Clinton Brown was refused accreditation – and the right even to enter the venue – but National activist David Farrar was happily installed at the official media bench. It was the National Party’s call, obviously, but some Gallery journalists were sniffy about Farrar being able to behave as though he was one of them – a discomfort compounded by the banning of Brown from doing likewise.
I think she's referring to Clinton Smith of The Standard, who iirc says he doesn't vote Labour.
-
OK, let's celebrate Brett's departure from the Sunday Scare-Crimes in proper style. Ladies and gentlemen, the truly fabulous Patti Lupone performing a little ditty the Fourth Estate seem to live by:
In olden days a glimpse of stocking
Was looked on as something shocking,
But now, God knows,
Anything Goes.Good authors too who once knew better words,
Now only use four letter words
Writing prose, Anything Goes.The world has gone mad today
And good's bad today,
And black's white today,
And day's night today,
When most guys today
That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goesWhen grandmama whose age is eighty
In night clubs is getting matey with gigolo's,
Anything Goes.When mothers pack and leave poor father
Because they decide they'd rather be tennis pros,
Anything Goes.If driving fast cars you like,
If low bars you like,
If old hymns you like,
If bare limbs you like,
If Mae West you like
Or me undressed you like,
Why, nobody will oppose!
When every night,
The set that's smart
Is intruding in nudist parties in studios,
Anything Goes. -
It would be remiss not to praise Colin Espiner for his willingness to debate with his commenters.
And too one of my favourite bloggers, Glenn Greenwald on Salon (where he went when headhunted from a blogspot site), whose always found in the comments section taking to task or, often too, admitting a shortfall. And I love the relentlessness and precision of his calling the MSM to task over bias, misreporting and factual dishonesty.
-
whose
who's
-
I lost my regard for many journalists simply by reading the daily newspaper in the town I lived in for over 20 years: The DominionPost.
In the late 80s and early 90s, the Dom was a champion of MMP and electoral reform. In 1990, Richard Long became the editor and the Dom became a rabid opponent of MMP and electoral reform....and generally listed to the Right. It has stayed that way ever since.....growing worse over time.
While individual journalists may have preserved some semblance of balance or impartiality (I differentiate between the two), overall their newspapers have not.
Moaning about advocacy in blogs ignores the reality that the monopoly media outlets in each of our cities very much lead the way.
For example, the NZ Herlald has become a shameless shill for the National Party overall while only John Armstrong seems to be able to maintain something resembling a reporter's eye.....rather than an advocate or apologist's eye. The coverage today in the Herald about Georgia is almost exclusively from the hawkish Telegraph......an outlet generally in favour of war and half-truthes than a balanced view.
I've begun my own blog in an effort to seek out those other reports that our newspapers don't carry. The ones that contain information that can be verified that lends perspective to the apparently illogical and one-sided view we are fed by outlets with an agenda to push. By contrast, the Sunday Star Times ran a pair of articles that lent a very different perspective to events in that country.
You'd think the war-mongering Bush like would have fallen out of favour......but apparently not.
-
Cate Brett working for the Law Commission? As a research wonk? I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
This is the same woman who ran the "the SIS are spying on teh maaaris" story with such gay abandon and never mind the facts. To her credit the retraction was front-page, above-the-fold, but it should never have been necessary in the first place.
The thought of someone so utterly incapable of validating sources working in a role around privacy law is somewhat terrifying. -
But why Joanne Black on Media 7? She already has ample (too much?) access to the public discourse, and really has nothing much to say (and if she mentions her bloody house renovations again....!!!)
Couldn't agree more - unless you're looking for a dull background to make the others shine.
-
I think it's because whereas sport was once treated as News and reported as such, now it's treated as part of the Entertainment industry.
And isn't that exactly what it is?
-
@simon
We were told things and that was it, by experts. Clifton was a big part of that and it must be terrifying for the likes of her and Ralston to see that slip away so much as it has.
yeah... i'm inclined to think we still listen to experts. the diff is that now we get to choose them.
plenty of people seem to think that cameron slater is a reliable arbiter of the truth (for example). i can't be sure whether to describe them as deluded or denuded though.
-
Cate Brett: Now there was an intrepid and thorough investigative journalist.
-
In 1990, Richard Long became the editor
Ahh, the stories I could tell you. And I wasn't even a journo.
This is the same woman who ran the "the SIS are spying on teh maaaris" story with such gay abandon and never mind the facts.
Was she not also the woman that oversaw the "Labour party are pro-pedophile" around the time of the review of age of consent laws?
-
Isn't it great - 'old media' poking the stick at 'new media'.
*yawn* How tiresome. How 1990s.
FFS - Doesn't Clifton understand how corrupt MSM has become? Sure bloggers have a viewpoint (albeit some rather disturbing, vitriolic nonsensical rambling BS) - but then, as Rupert Murdoch said,
every newspaper has the duty to reflect the prejudices of its readers.
Clifton should read Flat Earth News to get a handle on what newspapers in the UK are like - 80 % of their material is not generated inhouse, owners of news media are completely compromised in their collusions with politicians and journalists are confined to their desks doing churnalism at best.
Helen Sissons at AUT School of Journalism is doing similar research here - it's going to be interesting to see the parallels.
-
__This is the same woman who ran the "the SIS are spying on teh maaaris" story with such gay abandon and never mind the facts.__
Was she not also the woman that oversaw the "Labour party are pro-pedophile" around the time of the review of age of consent laws?
Which I actually regard as the greater editorial crime. The SIS 'Operation Leaf' story was the work of a dedicated fabulist -- which isn't to say they shouldn't have rumbled it -- and it's the kind of thing every journalist dreads.
The age of consent story was just a big, cynical lie.
-
Clifton should read Flat Earth News to get a handle on what newspapers in the UK are like ... Helen Sissons at AUT School of Journalism is doing similar research here - it's going to be interesting to see the parallels.
They'll be there for sure. A poorly-sourced story can very easily flash around the world and wind up in our papers. Medical research is the ostensible topic of many of them.
-
From the sublime to the ridiculous (trivial), I've already sent a message to Jane Clifton asking her not to give any more encouragement to the headlong invasion of NZ English by the USA version.
"Titbits" please. Not "tidbits".
And not by Jane (yet), but where have all the fire engines gone?
-
This involves extensive community consultation.”
I am curious about the fact that Palmer emphasises the fact that the value of a journalist/editor is because the project has extensive community consultation.
Leaving aside Cate Brett's merits (which I have no strong view on), I thought the emphasis in the press release was interesting.
-
Which I actually regard as the greater editorial crime. The SIS 'Operation Leaf' story was the work of a dedicated fabulist -- which isn't to say they shouldn't have rumbled it -- and it's the kind of thing every journalist dreads.
The age of consent story was just a big, cynical lie.
Oh, come on Russell... you did more actual fact-checking (and a pretty rudimentary sniff test of the primary source) of the Operation Leaf story than Brett bothered. And that's just not good enough. Much as we might like to sneer at the evil Anglo-American media-industrial complex, Piers Morgan and Howell Raines lost their jobs for being taken in by "dedicated fabulists".
Let's remember the Operation Leaf story saw print just ahead of a hotly contested (and, it turned out, finely balanced) election , and I don't think it's hyperbole to say that if it had turned out to be even half-true it could have had a real impact. I just don't think most New Zealanders look kindly on the security services being used by the government of the day to spy on its political enemies, especially when they're elected members of Parliament. Helen Clark certainly took severe exception to the insinuation.
-
The thought of someone so utterly incapable of validating sources working in a role around privacy law is somewhat terrifying.
Hum... well, in Geoffrey Palmer's position I'd be having any research over Ms. Brett's signature very carefully peer-reviewed. I certainly think any law changes around privacy law, name suppression and the sale of liquor requires more rational and considered input that the SST has ever managed under Ms. Brett's leadership.
Still Rachel Prosser has got me thinking -- the more I look at that press release, the more I suspect Brett's real function is going to be what's euphemistically known in the trade as 'perception and relationship management'. Or, in plain English, sharpening up the Law Commission's PR operation.
-
But why Joanne Black on Media 7?
Yeah, when my eye sees her page - which I don't read - my heart feels that someone's stolen my Listener.
I know I have to get over it - I'm searching for meaning on the internet - curling up with a mag is no longer as satisfying ...
-
I just don't think most New Zealanders look kindly on the security services being used by the government of the day to spy on its political enemies, especially when they're elected members of Parliament. Helen Clark certainly took severe exception to the insinuation.
I'm not surprised she got rather tetchy about it. After all, as minister responsible for the NZSIS, the law requires that both she and the Commissioner of the NZSIS sign off on domestic interception warrants. So the allegation, if true, dropped it squarely on her desk with zero wiggle room.
There's also the small matter of the law requiring that the Leader of the Opposition be briefed regularly, and the allegations by implication impugned either the integrity of the Commissioner or the integrity of (then) Don Brash, since one or t'other would've been staying mum about what was going on.Toss in the fact that the law (see section referred immediately above) says that the NZSIS isn't to be used for "furthering or harming the interests of any political party", and I'd say that the Operation Leaf bullshit far outweighed the age of consent issue.
With one, the SST is throwing shit that can be deflected by a moderately competent PR flak whispering in a few ears. With the other, the SST is alleging high-level political interference in the operations of a part of the national security apparatus, implying that its head or the LotO have absolutely no integrity, and doing it in a way that's almost impossible for Labour to disprove because, of course both Helen and the NZSIS will deny that they're bugging the Maori Party. After all, that's very far on the dark side of grey, and, if it were being done, it'd be ostensibly on the grounds of national security in a country where we don't even get government acknowledgement of the deployment of the SAS until Dubbyah's already announced it to the world. -
As a member of the so-called MSM and the Press Gallery I've been wondering whether or not I should contribute to this conversation. Given the references to churnalism, corruption, and elite snobbery that have been bandied about I'm not sure anything I have to say will make much of an impact.
But here goes:
Bloggers in the Press Gallery
- an interesting idea and one that poses a few challenges. Despite some of the accusations of snobbery and elitism that have been cast in our direction the fact is accreditation is actually not a necessity for them if they want to cover Parliament. An organisation wanting to cover proceedings in the House, on a less regular basis, is free to make a request of the Speaker to do so. Until there is a blogger who wishes to cover Parliament in a full-time capacity I suspect that will be the best avenue to take. (on that note is there currently a full-time blogger who could cover Parliament full time?)The Gallery reports the game not the substance
- Have you seen the behaviour in general debate and question time lately??
Politics is a mix of both game and substance. Parties point score off each other, and MP's do have a tendency to push their own agendas. Whether you like it or not that is worthy of reporting as voters should have some idea of the way their elected representatives are behaving.
As for not reporting the substance - well I'd estimate I'd file between 130 to 150 pieces of copy a week (that'd probably cover 30-40 different stories/issues) and I'd like to think most of it is centred on political processes, legislation, and the like.
I think the issue is that some of the "game" element capture the attention with a lot more ease so people focus on that and some of the more ... umm ... less sparkly stuff (probably a poor choice of words) slips under the radar.The media is biased
- We get this one all the time. I will note though, in a lot of cases, the people making the accusation are coming from a political perspective of their own.
I'm just saying, but it seems that sometimes when people find something that doesn't gibe with their worldview the default position is to accuse the person who wrote it of bias.
personal disclosure: since I started covering politics I haven't votedAnyway that's my two cents worth for the moment. I just felt like doing my bit to defend, if not my honour, some of my fellow professionals.
BTW regarding that stuff the Standard was spouting about Tracey Watkins. Well I work not that far away from her and can honestly say from what I've seen and heard the Standard has pulled that story out of its fundamental orifice
Post your response…
This topic is closed.