Actually Alistair I was trying to draw a distinction between what I regard as genuine blogging; opinion and news gathering involving individual research vs blatant plagiarism dressed up as opinion/news.
Forgive me if I get a little pissed off at people who help themselves to my work and that of my colleagues, slap it up on their site without so much as a "please" or a "do you mind". Journalism costs. You want to take our work? How about asking first? How about making a contribution even?
I don't mind quotes and links. Fair use is fine. But lifting whole articles is taking the piss.
Meanwhile what no doubt incensed Armstrong so much was the “indirect” insult about interviewing typewriters which we can see from Russell’s quote wasn’t actually directed at John in any event. Fran and now Felix Marwick have now elected to focus on this part of Armstrong’s critique probably thinking it is the bit that holds the most water.
Actually not so much.
My view is that John is perfectly entitled to make criticisms of those who make criticisms of him. People can draw their own conclusions about the merits of the arguments used.
I did think it was a little unfair to say there’d been scant work done on analysis of the TPP. I’d seen a lot done in most of the main media outlets about it in the build up to APEC. Admittedly the analysis might not have sat well with some, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t done.
For the record I read both Bryce’s and Gordon’s work on a regular basis and respect their abilities. I certainly don’t regard Gordon as a blogger either.
As I said on KJA, as a rule of thumb I don’t get drawn into publicly criticising bloggers for much the same reason as I don’t wade into the work of my journalist colleagues. It just encourages ill-feeling and doesn’t achieve a lot. Having said that if bloggers criticise journo’s, it seems only fair if journo’s should be allowed to return the favour if they choose to.
BTW I’m not anti-blogger. there are quite a few blogs that I read on a daily basis. But its fair to say some do create some frustration. My personal bugbear would be with those who decry the “lamestream media”, yet happily use huge tracts of reporter’s work on their blogs, chuck in one line of comment, and pass it off as insight.
Russell, regarding your earlier point about being surprised that journalists don’t read transcripts. In my case if I have a recording and full notes of an event then there’s little need to get a transcript. The occasions when they are used is where there is ambiguity, poor audio, strong accents, and the potential to misinterpret comments. Generally this doesn’t happen that often.
When you’re on deadline and you have clean audio and accurate notes transcripts are a secondary concern. They’re damn handy for referencing further down the track (eg 6 months later). If we’re trained properly (and most of us are) our professional abilities should be enough to provide an accurate and balanced version of events. If we can’t keep accurate notes, or competent recordings, then we have no business being a journalist.
Having said that your get did actually make for an interesting story in and of itself. I’m guessing the State Department’s made some changes as a result.
Sorry, but there were a fair few gallery journwith the PM on that trip. If he'd actually said it they would've reported it. It's not a comment that would have been overlooked or missed.
The BIMs will be released in January. Generally there is a 4 – 6 week window for their release. They’re coming out later this time largely because the election was later when compared to 2008.
As regards the Judge’s written decision on the Waitakere judicial recount, It was the most fun to read legal document I’ve seen in ages.
Well I recall that the Herald and ZB covered it. I see Fairfax also followed it, as did RNZ, Radio Live, and AAP.
Hell, I even tweeted about it just to make doubly sure it got out there.
Trevor Mallard seems to be enjoying the media response in a way that suggests the 'leak' was carefully stage managed.
Re the scabrous freezer. Baking soda is good for soaking up noxious vapours. I don't know why but it worked wonders for when we had a similar freezer issue a few years back
My first girlfriend was Jewish. She didn’t receive any repeat calls from those selling the Watchtower once she informed them of this….
I find a painted goat skull in view once the front front door opens works pretty well
if this is still going:
liquifracked - as in "my house in Christchurch has been liquifracked"
perkage - as in "the MP's career came a cropper because of over indulgence in perkage" (applies equally to over use of entitlements and random gropings of cleavage)
@ Just Thinking
re the councillor - I think I'll leave that to people to work out. I wasn't really supposed to hear it. However Chch people who know their councillors well should be able to make an educated guess.
The CD centre I was referring to was the city art gallery. To be honest it did hold up remarkably well - though the great big bronze hanging thingy in the lobby did put the shits right up people when it started to sway a bit during aftershocks. Can't say I noticed any falling plaster when I was there either. I do know that was definitely an issue at the cathedral though.
(and I never even thought about what a quake might do to all the glass there until well after I left)
Finally, I can't say as I'm surprised about all the hoopla over the heritage building issue either. One of Christchuerch's greatest strengths is the number of historic buildings it has managed to retain over the years. However one of the city's greatest weaknesses has always been the bitter debate that inevitably blows up everytime heritage issues come up.
The great pity here is I can't see how there will be enough money to save and restore all the damaged buildings. I believe the Government will stump up to 10 million dollars to match what is raised locally. However 20 million won't be enough. Fixing the old St John Church at Horarata alone has an estimated cost of $5 million.