…people ask “what’s up with New Zealand media?”…
It’s a good question.
In recent weeks, we have witnessed one of the most systematic and dirtiest smear campaigns in the history of New Zealand politics. And many media outlets and their journalists have been either wittingly or unwittingly complicit. The near hysteria with which some journalists and right-wing blog sites have written about these allegations and back-slapped each other is almost laughable. The fact remains that nothing outside the laws has occurred involving New Zealand First.
Many journalists have lost their perspective on these matters. At a time when the economy is very likely in recession, when we’ve had winter storm after winter storm, when petrol prices have soared, finance companies have collapsed, many families are struggling , the headlines have been full of slurs and downright lies about New Zealand First. Journalists need to get back in touch with what is truly important in this country.
Media commentator Tom Frewen, writing in the National Business Review, on 8 August 2008 referred to a recent Dominion Post front-page item as “tosh”. Mr Frewen noted that, in the same week that the worst storm in 40 years struck the Dominion Post’s circulation area, we received six times the column inches, including this ridiculous “tosh” where the journalist couldn’t even count! Frewen noted that the article mentioned above, written by Phil Kitchin, was “so shoddy as to disqualify it from being described as journalism, the story was an outright smear bringing discredit not only to Mr Kitchin, but also to his editor, Tim Pankhurst.”
So why this shoddy development in journalism in New Zealand? Well, I can give you three possible explanations – I’ll let you decide which one(s) you agree with.
1. Most New Zealand media outlets are owned by foreign-based companies. These companies know only too well that a core policy of New Zealand First is that New Zealand and New Zealand companies should be owned by New Zealanders. They don’t like that.
2. These same foreign owners have slashed the numbers of journalists they employ at their TV or radio stations or newspapers and as a result journalists must produce more, but in less time. They have little time to do any real research for their items. Instead, they just churn out whatever lands on their desk from press releases, other media organisations or professional political rumour merchants. This is a phenomenon known as “churnalism”. A less charitable interpretation is that by Dilbert creator Scott Adams: “Reporters are faced with the daily choice of painstakingly researching stories or writing whatever people tell them. Both approaches pay the same.”
3. In the modern world where anybody can get up-to-the-minute headlines delivered straight to their phone, their headset, their computer screen, or whatever, the traditional role of a journalist as the reporter of the day’s news is less and less relevant. This has led many journalists to view themselves as opinion shapers rather than just as detailers of events. Many journalists now also write on so-called blog sites, again blurring the line between reporting events and presenting an opinion. The net result is that too many journalists now filter the news through their own opinions rather than just a straight reporting of facts.
Every journalist has an opinion in him or her, which is an excellent place to keep it! Journalists need to get back to reporting the facts and let the people form their own opinions.
August 12th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Is it possible to charm a hostile press into unirritable harmlessness or even useful information disseminator by offers of open-hearted co-operation?
August 13th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
On foreign ownership,probably our most popular and economically effective policy is in our advocacy of a higher rate of domestic wealth & ownership creation on a more widespread basis generally - on which the press will want to be seen as unbiased.
In view of the NZCID (NZ Council for Infrastructure Development) “talkfest”(Aug.14th), shouldn’t we draw attention to the NZSF as the least inflationary and lowest interest (and still most NZ taxable income creating) finance source for infrastructure, a widely popular idea easily shown as economically sounder (&more profitable) than foreign capital?
August 14th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
“a core policy of New Zealand First is that New Zealand and New Zealand companies should be owned by New Zealanders.”
I have owned companies here nad employed people and paid tax and contributed to the economic, social and cultural life of this country. I am, however, not a New Zealander. Should I just bugger off then?
August 14th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
good on you for opening a blog..
..i.also ..am highly critical of the media..but for different reasons..
..i run an on-line news-service..whoar.co.nz…
..and ‘that is what i have done about it..
i’ve done a story on yr blog-opening..
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/winston-peters-has-a-blog/
..and i’ll come back later to argue the toss..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
August 14th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
The last point is an interesting one, and was the topic of a well participated discussion on Stuff’s blog recently.
IMHO a journalist is a person who upholds their honour and integrity in their reporting. Doesn’t print falsehoods without issuing corrections when they are demonstrated wrong, and makes it clear where their facts end and their “angle” begins. But it’s a relative thing, this is why sites like No Right Turn are widely recognised as journalism, and also why many people get irked when DPF gets invited into the media pack.
August 14th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Bearhunter - remember, that foreigners are welcome to start new business here, even if they live abroad - but aren’t you, living here, a New Zealander in practice, like an immigrant?
But if you sell your business, what is wrong with preferring it to be sold to NZ ownership, if there are buyers?
And for the presence of more potential business buyers and investors here, NZ First supports a higher savings culture - for increased reserves, productivity investment, and widening wealth ownership. Does that appeal to you as a positve prospect for the future?
August 14th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Yep, lets just tell all those furrin companies to bugger off. You know, like Ford, Coca Cola, Alcatel, Nokia, IBM.
From now on lets just buy NZ made stuff.
Oh, wait: we don’t make cars, turbines or computers, nor do we mine copper and oil in sufficient quantities to make all we need. That’s okay: we’ll rub sticks together for energy.
Good economic sense from the party chasing the votes of a disparate collection of the discombobulated and the edentulous.
August 14th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
I’m a New Zealander who is a permanent resident of the UK, should I just invest over in the UK then? What about British friends of mine, what about Russians? By the way, why should I accept only the low amounts New Zealanders might pay for my land when I can sell it to foreigners for substantially more and use the money for other purposes?
August 14th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
please advise what your policy is re publishing comments on your blog. Is it ok to disagree? Would a strong dissenting voice be published as it is not personally abusive?
August 14th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Great blog, will make a change from No Minister, Whaleoil and Not PC etc. What is John Key like in person? I may just vote for National, Labour are just not getting the tough stuff done.
August 15th, 2008 at 8:40 am
“but aren’t you, living here, a New Zealander in practice, like an immigrant?”
Doh. That’s the point. I AM an immigrant and apparently businesses here should only be owned by Kiwis. Perhaps I should just become a serf for some low-paying New Zealander instead? NAd as for being a New Zelaander “in practice” no, I am not. Never have been a Kiwi and due to the ridiculous rules of citizenship I never will be either. So what is so wrong with my owning a business here?
August 15th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Bearhunter, congratulations and goodwill from all NZ First Kiwis.
Preference for increased and widening NZ wealth creation & ownership is not to be understood as anti-foreign investment, but as part of the drive towards accelerated economic growth through a bigger effort by ourselves - because with capital ownership & investment, now the leading factor of earning potential & prosperity, without increased NZ capital we are bound to fall behind other leading countries, just as have-nots will always trail behind haves in productivity & income.
NZ First does recognise the need for diversified investments, including increased investment abroad, if there is a shortage of usefully profitable investment possibilities at home, as it is bound to happen in a small country.
August 16th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
jens, you’re still not answering my substantive point - as a damned foreigner, am i allowed to own a business here, according to nzf. i’ve got the opportunity to buy another concern - employing seven kiwis - but i’m not having a bar of it if nzf’s anti-foreigner policies continue. and all this despite having bought young winston a drink and given him a cigarette over the years. answers on a postcard…
August 18th, 2008 at 12:39 am
bearhunter, I think you have wrongly interpreted preference for increased NZ ownership as opposition to foreign ownership.
To my knowledge, NZ First policy does not contain any foreign capital ownership expulsion, expropriation nor penalising proposals, and doesn’t this answer your question?
Winston has had a hard time with the press (& some dubious big business) ever since the Winebox revelations,and it is unfortunate, that the continuing legalistc harassment by the press led Winston to associate this with its foreign ownership (only?).
What other reference to NZ First’s “antiforeigner policies” do you have? If not, then please could you comment on the pros & cons of widening NZ ownership?
August 20th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Jens, my most vivid memory of NZ politics was during the 1996 campaign, when the NZF candidate for Rangitikei (Woolston, was that his name?) told me in the street that NZF would stop the influx of immigrants in NZ. WHen I pointed out thast I was an immigrant, he blustered and huffed and puffed about “the right sort” of immigrant. That is what NZF has stood for to me ever since and I’ve heard NOTHING to alter that view in the intervening 12 years.
August 21st, 2008 at 3:47 pm
To bearhunter or what ever your name is. You came here as an immigrant so you must have wanted to be here. You don’t want to be a serf well thats fair enough. You don’t want to be a kiwi either because of ridiculous rules. If your passport has not been confiscated why don’t you use it and depart to from whence you came. That’s the benefit of living in a free country you can go anytime you like. Have a good trip!
August 23rd, 2008 at 10:14 am
It seems to me that journalists are no longer reporters but have become commentators. They are always offering their own opinion, which is always coloured by their own political, religious and business beliefs.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Bearhunter, it is a reality in politics, that politicians more often than not, try to please their audience. By the late 1990s the immigration wave pushed up housing prices & rents enough at least in Auckland to cause public resentment, and your NZ First candidate obviously believed to please you with his radical announcement. To my knowledge NZ First policy is to control the in-flow of newcomers to New Zealand to reflect our needs and ability to accommodate.
Don’t you think this is a sensible policy even from an immigrant’s point of view?
September 4th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Have you read today’s Teletext item headed “Glenn says Peters sought donation”?
The first paragraph of the item states: “Expatriate billionaire Owen Glenn has produced fresh evidence backing his claim that NZ First leader Winston Peters asked him for a donation.”
It substantiates this by saying: “There is no doubt that the request came to me from Mr Peters,” Glenn says in a letter.
This is not fresh evidence backing any claim. It is merely a restatement or reaffirmation of his recollection.
I know wordage is limited on Teletext, but this is just not up to reasonable journalistic standards, and follows similarly shonky reporting of the session of the Privileges Committee held a couple of weeks ago.
November 14th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
oh bearhunter…*sighs
I’m an immigrant too, and i didn’t see anything that you said that i can agree with.
NZF does not dislike all immigrants btw. Maybe you should go home though, with that attitude.
methinks maybe bearhunter has issues. lol and yuk to your ID that you chose, maybe you need hunted.
November 15th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
mmm, the only thing i can see wrong with this blog is the fact that the comments can’t be deleted by the author, lol.
I didn’t mean to sound so harsh when responding to bearhunter. i just get soooo sick of people using the word immigrant to describe overstayers and crap. migrants are most definitely not all under the same umbrella by any means.
note to whoever runs this blog:) Hi:) I’ll be more sparing with my comments since realising I don’t have the power to remove them:p