Posts by Cecelia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I enjoyed the interview and feel vindicated. I was annoyed (more than) that the Listener had fallen for Bryder's revision of history so quickly.
Then I was shocked when I heard last week's interview. Thank God National Radio has followed it up so well.
Did someone say there was more in this coming week's Listener?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartwright_Inquiry
Wikipedia article. Is it accurate?
I had a hysterectomy over 20 years ago and was given a fact sheet from National Women's Hospital. It was written by Bonham or Green and was very patronising - they were taking away the cot but not the playpen etc.
To me there is a far wider issue here than the two groups.
I also objected to the tone and one-sided nature of the Listener piece.
-
I agree ChrisW. My point was that she at least pushed the question. My distaste with the Listener was that they uttered a black and white summary of Bryder's book - Coney, Bunkle and Cartwright got it WRONG.
Gee, I'm no analyst of political or historical movements but I have just listened to the feedback to Kim Hill's show and someone wrote in that Bryder's work was an example of "conservative revisionism". That's what I felt but I wasn't able to articulate it.
To quote Hilary Clinton: "It's part of a vast right wing conspiracy." (Just kidding on that one, but ...) -
What you say makes a lot of sense, Hilary. I have now listened to Bryder on the Kim Hill show. Under pressure from Hill, she admitted that she considered Coney and Cartwright wrong. She was reluctant to couch her opinions in such a black and white manner. The Listener, on the other hand, has a cover page with "got it wrong" in bold letters and a headline inside "Finally, the truth."
-
Thank you very much ChrisW for responding to my off topic post. I read the Listener and had to find someone somewhere who could put the article into context for me. I have started listening to the Kim Hill interview but it's long and will have to wait till after work.
I MUST reserve judgement but my first thoughts were Listener, Joanne Black as wilful distorters not Coney et al!
I hope Russell does something on this topic. -
This is off topic but I've just read the new Listener - the article about the Unfortunate Experiment. I'm stunned.
-
Back to Holmes. Does he write well sometimes? If not, how did he win the Qantas Award for best columnist when there are brilliant writers out there who are so very much better than he is. He seems to have one main subject - himself. As someone said before, he has this image of himself as a little kiwi battler - like Paula ...I don't dislike the guy, I really don't, but I'm mystified by the award ...
-
His syntax was mildly confused when he spoke after the trial too. The words don't come out the right way for some of us when we're put on the spot.
And if you think he said "I shot the prick" you think he is guilty of at least one murder. How on earth has he concealed this from his father figure, Joe Karam?
-
Agree. He's a lazy bugger. But if you are employed to write a light-hearted opinion piece, do you need to use sweet reason? And did you see Garth George's Herald column about the Gaza War - nothing to do with us etc.
This sort of provocative, lightweight, knee jerk reaction sort of stuff makes me wonder about the worth of these sorts of columns. Hmmm.
-
<quote>I once told Paul Holmes that while I might on occasion disagree mightily with his words or actions, I had never doubted his authenticity. In a world where so many empty vessels make noise, he is what he is; sometimes maddening but rich and real. On the day of his final breakfast radio broadcast, I wish him all the best.</quote
Can't agree. Have never listened to his radio but his Holmes show was only too aptly named. He's rich but is he any realer than any of the other dudes out there? I remember a brief interlude when Linda Clarke took over from him on the Holmes Show and how she injected some intelligence ... Yes, he's been a stalwart and one has to wish him well - standing down must be quite sad for him but I don't think he ever added much depth to our media ... nor have his replacements but at least it's not all about them.