Posts by Damian Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hey Michele, can I just say it's great to have you and Jeremy and Brendhan all joining this discussion and that it's all nice and polite and reasonable like a good grown-up debate should be. Makes me proud to be part of publicaddress. Imagine if politicians decided to join in here too. World peace within days I tells ya.
I too watch Bill Hicks DVDs over and over until I can recite some of the jokes word for word. I guess the question is when material becomes 'classic' and bears repeating forever, when it should be retired, and what the classic/new mix in any given set should be.
I hope it's clear that when I talk about 'new' material I don't mean material being uttered for the first time that night, but rather that it's new since the last time someone could reasonably have been expected to have seen that comedian's show before.
In my case, I set that benchmark as being the comedy festival from year to year - like the film festival it's the one time of the year when the general public (or those of us who like comedy but don't go each week) could be expected to return to see a local favourite.
And I certainly take Brendhan at his word that his show this year is 80% new material from last year, all I had to go on this year was his 6 minute Wellington gala performance.
And I reinforce the point I stressed at the start of all this, Brendhan is a funny, funny man, and I hope this discussion is healthy and not a lame variation on the "all NZ comedy is shit compared to overseas" meme that seems to be favoured by people whose most recent reference point is Melody Rules.
-
You can't explain a joke, and all that.
I agree completely. Not to mention that if you've heard the joke only once or twice before, chances are you'll remember the fact you heard it, but not the nuances of its delivery. That's real trainspotter stuff.
I was having a discussion with a colleague today about art (as ya do) and she was saying she hates when art exhibitions have long descriptive pieces next to the painting telling you what the artist was trying to achieve or inspired by etc. I disagreed, but said that while the description might be interesting in itself, it didn't change your immediate response to the art. Same same but different with jokes.
-
I'm not saying no-one listens to National Radio, just that it's fewer than one would think based on how many people say they do...
I guess it depends on whether you think the dissemination of information ...carries with it any responsibility to society, or whether it's just another revenue stream to exploit.
Remember that revenue in media is directly correlated to viewers. So the question is really whether we should make worthy programmes that only a few want to watch, or worthless programmes that appeal to everyone?
I think most media these days tries to strike a balance between the two. The question is whether they've got that balance right and whether they can survive with the balance they've struck. Depending on your politics, you might also ask whether the state should prop up the less popular but more 'worthy' media.
Similar arguments can be made about state funding of 'elitist' arts, such as the ballet, NZSO and Concert FM. But hey, with the amount of tax everyone pays these days, surely the elite should also be getting some bang for their buck...
-
All lost in translation, I guess you had to be here, inside my head.
Ah stink buzz. I'd hoped for a second there was at least one person bored enough to mash up my open source story after I'd gone to the trouble of uploading all the component parts.
Actually I can't blame anyone for not doing it, the only reason I offered the unedited parts was because it seemed like the right thing to do, in a story about Open Source 'n' all.
NaOH: I think the gulf that's really interesting, and results in a lot of what we do end up seeing on TV is the difference between what people say the want, and what they actually want.
People SAY they want long form current affairs interviews a la Kim Hill, but then they don't watch them (and it's not a question of whether KH is the right person for the job, because a) she's great, and b) it's been tried before with other people and the same result). They tell people they want to see long form current affairs interviews but secretly they watch America's Next Top Model.
People SAY they listen to National Radio because they think it's what they should say when really they listen to ZM etc.
People SAY they read the Economist/New Yorker/Time when really the unopened subscriptions sit guiltily on their desk...
-
"why did your dad shoot the house up?"
Yeah, see that's the stuff I think most people want answered, even if he's not going to. We want the tell-all tale. Tell us what the hell was going on in that apparently very messed-up household.
I suspect we're not going to get it though, and if he is innocent, I don't believe he's under any moral obligation to do so.
-
And Don, no I didn't, I haven't seen any mash-ups yet, where did you send it? I hope they haven't just been bouncing back. Send it to me personally if you want (firstname.surname at tvnz.co.nz)
-
3410 - Yeah Emma's was a good question in the circumstances, and someone probably should have said it (jeez didn't he look uncomfortably squished at the end) but it would have only produced a laugh before the next reporter barged in with their question.
Like I said, the barrage of "how do you feels" from what sounded like a bunch of different journos was cringeworthy, but to be fair he hadn't even reached the scrum so I guess they were just hoping that would be the first question he answered. Repeating the same question until you get an answer is pretty standard in those situations, because the other journos aren't going to stand back and say "oh excuse me, I think there's already been a question asked that you haven't answered, I'll wait before asking mine". As we've said, it's just disappointing (but completely unsurprising) this was the first question on the journos' collective lips.
But god, please don't let me suggest that we (blogger speaking here) shouldn't give the MSM a good serve whenever it's deserved. All I'm saying is that it's not always as easy as you'd suspect, and the heat of a scrum (and pressure to nail it for your channel/station/paper, as opposed to working together to produce something of collective journalistic merit) can lead to some very odd results.
-
On the jersey tip, I have been told that his famous jersey wasn't actually his, but was given to him by Victim Support when his clothes were taken away for evidentiary reasons.
Ironic, because it seems to many NZers it was one of the deciding factors in his guilt. Any grown man who still wears jerseys like that (and does a paper-round) is a maladjusted oddball capable of anything...
Still, it's no worse than the one Dobbyn wore in the Loyal video. I used to tell people I'd bought that in a Rock 'n' Roll memorabilia auction, and had it encased in perspex on my lounge wall...
-
I guess we've all gotten used to crap TV "journalism", but what really blows me away is that it was clearly going to be the live media event of the year, and still no-one bothered to come up with a decent question.
You haven't answered the question though 3410, what would you have asked? Given that he made it clear he wasn't going to answer anything about the judicial process (and presumably therefore the case itself). We've had a lot of funny examples, prison nickname, whether he got action etc, but has anyone come up with some serious questions that would have beaten the media scrum that you're all having a go at?
If I sound a little defensive, I am. Just like everyone knows better than the All Black selectors, everyone in this country seems to be the new Current Affairs Genius/6pm Executive Producer in waiting. I'm not saying everything's As It Should Be in the MSM, far from it, but it's pretty easy just to call someone "a dork" and sit smugly back in your office chair...
-
Peter: All I'm saying is that it's a cliche for a reason, and I don't think it's because journos are lazy (though some are, sure) but because when you're interviewing a human being about their reaction to a life-changing event, asking how they feel is a pretty good start.
But yes, of course it sounded ridiculous when the first four questions to Bain were all "how do you feel?"
If I'm writing a question line in preparation for such an interview, there will almost always be something along those lines. Even if nowadays we all know to phrase it "what went through your mind when..." or "what were you thinking when you heard...". There you go, trade secret number one revealed...