Posts by johnno
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Would my actions at the case studies above have been less reprehensible if I worked for a newspaper, or radio? In other words, is it the physical presence of the me with the camera and tripod that is intrusive, or how it is shot? I would have thought it would be a sad day when the death of a young child is not worth covering.
-
Case Study A: One of the most intrusive things I've ever filmed was a man wailing and sobbing as his dead wife and child were placed inside a hearse. The area outside the church was filled with mourners, but there was absolute silence as the distraught husband and father came out the church, supported by his two closest friends. I was one one side of the hearse, and the competition's shooter was on the other side.
Case Study B: Outside a building, waiting for the extended family of a dead young girl to come out. There were about 8 press, cameras and reporters. The family pushed their way past, shouting that they wanted to be left to grieve in peace, and that we were vultures, picking over their dead moko's body.
The first subject was Mark Lundy, the second was Rachaelle Namana and Rongomai Paewai, "caregivers" to Hinewaoriki Karaitiana-Matiaha.
Did you watch those stories?
-
Problematic right now: Close Up's funding of petrol vouchers and accommodation as the price of access to Iti and his famly at Waitangi. It runs dangerously close to paying for the story, however modestly. Moreover, it's the news media not just conveying a particular Waitangi narrative, but actively creating it. Bad move.
...reminds me of the time TV3's Keith Slater was pulled up by a High Court judge after allegedly offering a "hitman" they had interviewed a couple of days holiday anywhere in NZ, and the use of a cellphone for the duration.
-
The TVNZ page (re. spin doctors) says they sourced the story from Newstalk ZB. I'm not sure, but I think this makes it even worse, in that they are reprinting someone else's poor reportage.
-
You realise, I hope, that somewhere a cat is reading this thread - and taking notes.
And then it practices it's Japanese.
-
drizzled with Paul Holmes olive oil from Mana Lodge
It's bloody good olive oil. I think the old fella has found his true calling.
I worked Chrissy this year and got sent to Gisborne for my troubles. 30 degrees at the Wainui beach, pumping surf, kids splashing in the shallows - all was good in Poverty Bay.
-
And so, because we are more familiar with the idea of a man sexually abusing a woman than we are of the idea of a more generalised abuse of police power( ie a few cops loose the plot during a highly charged operation and start behaving like baboons) we just project "likely" on the first and "unlikely" on the second.
Or you could couch it this way - the thought that a group of policemen could systematically and methodically groom young women for rape and exploitation over a number of years, and then use their position and mateship to stymie all investigations seems so horrific and incredible that it beggars belief... it is "unlikely" to use your word. The opposite - that a small group of policemen "loose the plot" in the middle of a "highly charged operation" - is, to my mind, more "likely".
-
"Phil Kitchens (sic) wouldn't have a bias, because he's not Louise's friend, is he?" Jackson asked ironically as he introduced the interview.
"Louise is a rock star and Clint Rickards is the scum of the earth according to mainstream media," he continued, later declaring "Operation Austin, they seemed to be able to find women everywhere."
Willie seems to have created his own little niche in broadcasting - the "a-prominent-Maori-has-done something-wrong-and-is-a-victim-of-MSM-racism" school of broadcasting. I seem to rememeber him and JT going down to see Donna Awatere-Huata when she was released on home detention. A lovely example of hard-hitting investigative journalism it wasn't.
On the other hand, you have a real journalist like Phil, who has an extensive track-record of exclusive investigations. Not many journalists can say they were responsible for revealing fraud from a sitting MP, resulting in jail-time.
-
IF these event occurred, are you prepared to condemn them?
If you are referring to the girl's comments, the answer is no, I would not condemn them. I would, however, condemn the actions of a couple of the adults in the house. I think the AOS have established tactical procedures over many, many years and through many, many different circumstances. They do not point guns at people's heads unless the other person has a gun. They do, however, shadow suspects with their firearms. There is nothing in her description that appears different from their usual tactics I have seen. There are instances where 12 year olds have been detained at gunpoint in the past, and where even younger children have been used to hide contraband belonging to the people who are meant to be looking after them.
-
The events that the 12 year old recounted 1st hand are completely unacceptable absolutely regardless of anything Tuhoe Lambert did or didn't do. The only question is, did they happen?
You make her accounts sound like the untarnished voice of truth, when they are merely one representation of the events. I would like to hear others before passing judgement.
The real politic of the situation, given the extreme imbalance of institutional, legal, financial and social power between the Police and the girl (and her family), is that her ability to present evidence, bring a case and get justice is severely constrained. This is not a level playing field.
Does this explain why the family chose to take their grievances to the court of public opinion - a court where they are free to say whatever they want, and where the police are constrained from responding? Where an uncritical media will accept their comments at face value, even when one organisation involved already held a copy of the affidavit that called into serious doubt anything that Tuhoe Lambert said? You can make a nice game out of comparing the comments made by Lambert, and to a lesser extent, his son, with actions observed in the bush. His credibility, and his son's, is very dubious.