I thought ess than 1/3 of eligible voter voted National?
Yeah should've been 30% not 40% - damn editors where are they when you need them.
But if the point is to somehow undermine National’s claim to be able to govern alone, then I cry foul.
No it isn't. The point is this is simple math that is reported incorrectly all the time. I'm not saying National does not have a mandate, those are your words not mine. What I am saying is that repeating endlessly that National have the support of half of New Zealand is overstating the mandate they do have.
The question is why does the media feel the need to overstate the mandate in that way? What benefit is there for the media?
Can we say half of them didn’t?
I think, statisticaly, that is more accurate.
No, the point is just over a million New Zealanders voted for National on Saturday. In a country of 4.4 million people. That's about 40% of eligible voters and 48% of those who bothered to vote.
Paddy apologises for “tricky”
And uses his apology to call Cunliffe as many names as his thesaurus could spit out.
Honestly that was appalling.
Would you do 50-60 hour weeks for $50-60K, in Auckland?
I'm a scientist, I spent 9 years earning SFA to get a PhD which got me a job that paid $36k*, we can play this game all day and night if you like.
*I earn significantly more than that now having worked for 25 years as a scientist and consider myself to be "rich" although still well under the rich tax threshold proposed in the recent election.
people who grasp the idea that correlation does not imply causation
I can rant for hours on that. And please can people stop saying half of New Zealand voted for National ... sigh.
but I’m still struggling to see what the media could have possibly done
For me, it would have been nice if the media actually fact checked Key's quotes before they published them. We repeatedly got Key quoted front and centre and then 3 days later the retraction below the fold on page 17.
The media were all too keen to give Key airtime for denial after denial, but when later data showed the denials to be only loosely connected to reality Key was given more airtime to explain it away, usually with some "look a kitten" deflection. There were very few who ever challenged. It was easy mode news.
I get that, in the end 40% of eligible voters voted for National and SFA Labour voters got off their arses but frankly using that as proof that the media are just fine, is plain weird.
And if you yet another example of just how self absorbed our media is, Patrick Gower this morning apologised, I'm going to guess under pressure, for calling David Cunliffe tricky. And then proceeded to call him every name he could think of in as venal display of petulance as I've had the misfortune to witness.
exactly why is this the media’s fault?
Because the media, particularly the mass media, has set itself up as the source of all important news. They proclaim themselves to be the ones who go after the truth and bring it to the public for the good of us all.
The accept generous salaries, they accept free lunches, free passes and even a number of legal privileges to allow them to carry out their task.
Against this background we have pretty serious evidence of impropriety on the part of the National party and yet those same media were happy to wander along behind (or on) the National party bus phoning in John Key quotes.
Hell yeah I'm disappointed in them. They didn't live up to their own press, they didn't take the time to dig hard for the truth behind the evidence in Hager's book and yes they carry some responsibility for the result of the election because of that failure. Because as Craig and you both know the public responds to the messages coming from that media. Pretending the media is innocent of all influence over the election result is beneath you.