Posts by izogi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I can't be bothered reading details. Does anyone have pointers to any nice, colourful visualisations?
-
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to BenWilson,
I definitely don’t contribute by ever telling people they should use the MSM to get their opinions
On that, where are the best places for most people to get their opinions when not the MSM, or at the very least reliable analysis towards helping them to form them?
-
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to Bart Janssen,
It was mildly amusing in that it made both leaders look like plonkers.
From watching that report I thought she made Andrew Little look like much more of a plonker than John Key. Right back to the introduction which set the stage by saying "it hasn't necessarily worked in his favour", then focusing on tengential detail and trying to make him explain, then repeatedly broadcasting the exact soundbite line the PM wanted broadcast, over and over again.
-
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to tussock,
We have people in government who do not believe in evidence or science in general, that it’s all just someone’s opinion, that’s a matter of public record.
This may be true sometimes, but I’m guessing that for as much of the time it’s not a case of not believing in evidence or science. I think it can also be ideological differences about desired outcomes, which politicians and other elites don’t necessarily want to admit too noisily.
For example, maybe they think it’s stupid to be spending tens of millions of dollars a year on protecting endangered flora and fauna–the problem could be solved by ignoring it and letting everything die out so that it no longer needs protecting. Maybe they think it’s acceptable for x% of people to be living and dying malnourished on the streets, as long another group of people excel in comparison.
But outright stating these types of things as goals won’t usually make for great political popularity amongst much of the populace who vote. That’s a problem if it’s what you actually want because it makes it very difficult to get elected. Instead it’s necessary to pretend you care about stuff that it’s traditional to care about, but try to discredit research aimed towards those outcomes, and argue that some replacement strategy will do it better, even if someone who digs below the surface of that strategy might easily discover it’s unlikely or impossible.
-
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to linger,
its creators live in an infernal eternal “now”,
trapped in an ever-more rabidly, rapidly, spinning howling maw
demanding more and more quantity,
and delivering less and less quality.If only we could vote one the journalists off every week.
Actually, to be honest, if we could then I'm not sure I'd appreciate the evental result. -
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Road safety is an objective science
Public policy isn’t though.
Water quality could be a better example.
"He’s one academic, and like lawyers, I can provide you with another one that will give you a counterview.", and all that. And anyone who wants to agree with that line of reasoning has plenty of apologists they can easily look up and hang out with, in this day and age.
-
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to Tristan,
I think this play was actually perfected by Helen Clark who was famous for always being available for a quote
Maybe, but if Helen Clark had a difference in this area it was that she could usually at least give the impression of knowing what she was talking about and taking some responsibility for it, whatever you thought of her.... even if it was due to her micro-management style of leadership.
-
Thanks for the excellent write-up, Keith. I have trouble with what seemed to happen to traditional journos when they spoke out, though. What does it take to be confident of actually having an effect?
Back in the day John Campbell and his team chased some of the Dirty Politics stuff really hard, yet nothing really seemed to change as a consequence, and eventually the story just died. Not just that, though. Today he repeatedly gets written off by some as a left wing nut-job because of the stances he takes.
Maybe this is because it's so easy, especially now that traditional media no longer has a monopoly on information channels, for people to find points of view which are closer to what they might want to hear? (We do it here too, obviously.) Journalists aren't difficult to ignore if you don't like what they're saying, because it's so easy to get information, opinion and justification from elsewhere. Even Facebook makes sure that people are surrounded by points of view that agree with them.
Even if modern media wasn't so commercially driven, would people actually read it and listen to it if it's telling them stuff they don't want to hear? And so, to commercially compete with the sources which tell many people what they (presently) seem to want to hear, we get things like Mike Hosking and Paul Henry put into prominent places which are normally associated with journalism.
-
Hard News: #GE2015: Proper Mad, in reply to Yamis,
New Zealand: Labour 1972-1975. That’s 40 years.
And that was a year after the sudden death of a fairly charismatic Prime Minister. Probably not the only reason for the loss, but hard to discount as significant.
-
Hard News: #GE2015: Proper Mad, in reply to Steve Todd,
This proposal would likely result in show ponies and ex-MPs (who only want to be mayor) baulking at standing for mayor, because, in most cases, they will have no interest in what they would regard as the consolation prize of being a councillor, should they be unsuccessful in their tilt at the mayoralty.
I can see that it might be less convenient for a show pony to need to win a position on council. But assuming they can comfortably do so, is there some reason why the show ponies wouldn't simply resign, and let in the next council candidate, if they weren't also elected mayor?
People already vote for show ponies under the current system. I'm not sure why they'd not do the same just because the candidate has declared, publicly, that they'd not remain a councillor if they don't make the top job. Especially if STV makes it easy for voters to have indicated their next preferred council candidate anyway.