Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Just wondering -- a staple of the "morning zoo" radio format is the loopy caller who may or may not be a hoaxer in cahoots with the host. If Breakfast deliberately had fake guests every now and then to provide a comic foil for Henry, who could tell?
The real test will be if the media now keeps going back to this guy for pro-whaling comments in the same way they keep going back to McCoskrie, who also has a website
I love this observation so much I want to marry it.
-
I just groan a little when every thread on the media on PAS takes about three comments to turn into "what is wrong with TV news these days, everything about it is fucked and the people who work there are all strange idiots who vote weirdly."
It's odd how that keeps happening, isn't it? It's almost as though the vaguely lefty, snooty, intellectual audience of PAS loathes and despises the TV news so much that they can't help themselves. I wonder why?
-
the difference between someone who has just started a pro-whaling group which has a website, and someone who is pretending to have just started a pro-whaling group which has an actual website is very small. You don't need to register with the Government, form a company, file a constitution or anything that could be checked with any relative ease.
Given that, @Jeremy - how would you suggest this imposter could have reasonably been spotted? Certainly not on his views alone, which as you point out, are pretty commonplace politically...
I think the answer is that merely claiming to have a group with a controversial take on a controversial subject is not in itself newsworthy. Breakfast could have saved themselves by having a marginally higher bar. You almost said it yourself:
Stop giving column inches and airtime to people simply because their views are controversial. Ask yourself whether they represent a substantial minority.
By demanding just a little more to establish a prima facie case of newsworthiness, you would require more effort from hoaxers and bad hats and give them more chance to trip themselves up on the way to the newsroom.
-
This is definitely more Borat than Yes Men. The claim that this is doing the Lord's work is pretty weak when it's obvious that enhancing a comic's career is the main motivation.
But I absolutely don't have any sympathy about the fact checking. There are so many bad hats out there that want to use whatever residual credibility the MSM has to further their cause -- I'm thinking of local racists like Martin Doutre here or the anti-vaccination crowd -- and they make full use of news media's inability to do elementary credential checking or check the claims made by people they talk to. If just one writer thinks twice about what they've read, or one interviewer does some background research and challenges a claim of fact as a result of this then good will have been done.
-
How do you feel about Kenny Strasser?
-
No. Only things that mock people I despise are funny to me.
-
Or possibly Key's penchant for agreeing with whomever he is talking to...
-
Sue, I think you have put your finger on what is troubling me about reports so far.
What is this trust exactly? Is it the same as the old Carnival Collective? What is the role of Chris MH, and of the other people quoted? Why are there such big discrepancies in various peoples' stories?
At this point I am quite cross, but I don't know where or who to direct this annoyance at -- except maybe the press.
-
"Organisers of the Cuba Sreet Carnival in Wellington claim Wellington City Council will no longer fund it because they won't hold the street party during the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
However, the council says that's not the case and it has not yet been formally asked for a financial contribution."
-
I hope that today's Dompost article is just the first story, and that there will be follow-ups.