Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The Uses of Dotcom, in reply to Joe Wylie,
You’d be up for an endless procession of surprises if you took the trouble to find out what’s really going on in a part of the world you’re happy to talk down to.
Three factual errors in that one sentence. Although maybe I'm just not clear who "you" encompasses. I personally doorknock regularly, do talk to people, and am unhappy about being accused of talking down to people. Again, if anyone's making assumptions and patronising people, it's you.
-
Hard News: The Uses of Dotcom, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Have you considered hanging out a shingle as a therapist? You're certainly surprising me with insights into my own character, and from such scant evidence too.
-
Hard News: The Uses of Dotcom, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Want to talk about Chch Central issues, but you’re merely a long-term resident? Pay your sub and step inside where we can safely patronise you. So the boneheaded condescension that nearly cost Labour Chch Central in 2008, and lost it to Nicky “differently abled” Wagner last time around, appears to be still all the go in Party circles.
Remember, this was in response to Ian suggesting that there's no candidate becuase of "arrant madness". How is it condescending to point out that the party's stuck with acting in accordance with its own constitution? I'd say your sarcastic attribution of imaginary words is far more condescending that anything I wrote.
For what it's worth, I expect the next candidate will be big on grassroots politics.
-
Hard News: The Uses of Dotcom, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Why didn’t they pick someone when they picked the Christchurch East candidate?
Smacks of arrant madness…Because the Labour party has an ancient and complex democratic constitution that prescribes the timing and process for electorate selections. Personally I think it needs a thorough overhaul, but considering the changes already made in the last 2 years, it's going to take a while. Sorry. If you find it too slow, feel free to join and help out.
-
Hard News: The Cycle Frolic, in reply to Jolisa,
Political leadership. Political leadership. Political leadership.
Yep. Which implies:
- working with relevant existing advocacy organisations to help them be strong and figure out proposals and costings and make press releases and run events and make submissions and do all that good shit that always falls to the same few people who really care.
- working with politicians and political parties at local and national levels and make them see what's in it for them and for everyone -
Hard News: The Cycle Frolic, in reply to Glen Koorey,
Your memory is deceiving you
Quite right. It had been a long day.
-
Speaker: Need, in reply to Jackie Clark,
I should make it clear that the reason I don’t go out and actively hit up big players is that I haven’t the time
What you're already doing is huge and amazing. The way you tell stories that move people to act for a cause would put many a PR professional to shame.
-
Business in Auckland today. Suddenly struck me, taxiing back to the airport, how there are no cycle lanes on Pah Rd or similar arteries the way that there are on Harewood, Memorial Ave etc in Christchurch. There's room for them -- cut back some berm and put them on the far side of the parked cars.
-
Cracker: How Media Made me a Bad Person., in reply to Bart Janssen,
The problem is that as I’ve read or watched news stories where I’ve actually known the facts or the subject in detail it has become very clear that the reporting of those stories in long or short form has often failed to properly inform the public. Errors of fact, errors of tone, bias. I now view almost every news item delivered by the media with deep suspicion. If the reporting of the stories where I know the facts is wrong then how can I trust the reporting of stories where I don’t know the facts.
Hmmm. In my worser moments, I think that too. But then consider how often eye-witnesses differ in their recollections of apparent fact, or how different people can give wildly differing accounts of an event because of what matters to them. When you think about that, and remember the need for a story to be a story, I suspect our mainstream media are not too bad.
-
*cough*
