Posts by izogi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to BenWilson,
I kind of struggle with the inherent apathy involved in even watching free to air live TV, with it’s complete surrender of any responsibility for choice about what one’s mind is subjected to beyond pressing channel and mute buttons, but I’m well aware it’s what millions of people do actually like to do in NZ
On this I’m guessing this is all as much a thing of human nature that’s being assisted by the internet’s availability. The ’net encourages its own problems of apathy with the ease in seeking out like-minded silo’d communities, using them for self-justification of preconceived opinions. Popular internet platforms, like Facebook, actively assist with this polarisation.
Lately TV media seems to be gradually becoming just another silo’d community of like-minded thinking, and maybe it’s market forces as a consequence of the internet’s ubiquity. When the modern age lets viewers switch off and go elsewhere for a more agreeable and self-reassuring source of information at any time, why alienate the audience you have by suggesting there are different opinions out there?
Not to suggest everything was all fine and objective before these modern times began, of course.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Joe Wylie,
She makes a good point about Bryce Edwards’ credulity re. David Farrar’s manipulations.
Stats aside (as was Fran's slant on DPF) I'm also struggling to see any relevence of determining bias for or against the government by simply counting stories which are positive and negative. Isn't that like stating journalistic bias for or against climate change by counting stories which are positive and negative?
Sometimes journos say stuff because it's what's there. Otherwise we might as well start criticising our media for not explaining to us why the Boxing Day Tsunami was really 50% a good thing, and similar. I can see how people so embedded in political manipulation would see bias where someone's simply ignoring their spin, though.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Grant McDougall,
It’ll be really fascinating to see what Campbell and his team actually end up doing once this has all been settled one way or the other. Ideally he / they’ll still have some broadcasting / print outlet, rather than drifting into obscurity or PR.
I guess in theory a review like this could result in something better for journalism, even if that seems unlikely.
I think part of the reason I don't see as much of CL as I'd like is that the news drags on for so long, with or without anything to talk about. Long ago I almost remember when TV news was standard at 30 minutes, but was changed to 60 minutes in the late 80s or early 90s... maybe about the time TV3 arrived? I much prefer the Radio NZ style of news, where there's a relatively short bulletin that gets straight to the point and directly says stuff. Then, immediately following within a few minutes, is the more in-depth analysis and interviews with shows like Morning Report or CheckPoint.
I guess it's wishful thinking that TV3 might remove aspects from its news like the sensationalising of tragedies, shameless self promotion and pointless crosses to empty parking lots, and commercials, and sports coverage that's sometimes hard to differentiate from a week before (that's probably just me). But if JC manages to stay in a vaguely comparable role, I think I'd like to see the news shortened to something much faster and more direct, then have someone similar to himself come in soon after and look at the more important stuff in more detail. Maybe it'd seem like a demotion for him to be back in the news team, but I could see it working.
But yes. Pipe dream.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Lucy Telfar Barnard,
I’d assume your assessment is correct except… for a few stories, while the pieces themselves may be fluff, they’re probably bringing attention to more serious broader issues.
I think some of the serious ones are also mis-hits on occasion. eg. @Yamis mentioned the school thing (page 2 of comment thread), or more recently I felt they’d probably been set up by campaigners with this story on a topic that’s very emotionally charged and which could have been more objectively researched. I’m sure there are others. But for me it’s more the precedent with CL that’s important. They’re trying to do something that’s not just about giving interviewees a free ride, or feeding viewers whatever they might want to hear.
John Campbell is truly marvellous but this is a waste of his talents.
Yes it is.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Russell Brown,
There is on-going speculation that the Jono and Ben show is being considered as a possible replacement for Campbell Live. This seems to be based on a fabrication by the Herald
I hadn't heard that rumour but I've independently been wondering if MediaWorks could field popular 7pm slot show, masquerading as analysis of current affairs, by pulling together some of the half-decent comedians it already has affiliations with. I wouldn't expect it to be great in a journalistic sense, but there's already precedent for doing more or less this, with The Project on Channel Ten, which is overloaded with comedians on the payroll thanks to Melbourne's comedy scene. The format would surely appeal to much of the audience currently watching Seven Sharp.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to James George,
I cannot understand what all the fuss is about – talk about do as I say not as I do. The very same media peeps n hangers-on who coagulate in spots like this spent most of september 2014 chasing down stories about dotcom minutiae – the sleazier the better. No mention of state house sales or any other of the issues about keycorp’s corrupt government and their policies.
It's funny you should say this. Campbell Live isn't perfect and has had its dud stories, but my impression is that it's been repeatedly 'punished' by the political wing of the government (through refusing to provide interviews, etc) for daring to be critical at times, and while not a complete excuse, this inability to get access probably hasn't helped with its ratings.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Russell Brown,
I can honestly say that Campbell Live is the only thing I would watch at 7pm, live to air. But do I watch it all the time? No. It's usually dinner time with the family.
Same here, and I see Craig's also said something similar. Sometimes it's that TV1's just on (prefer it because subtitles are handy in a noisy household) and other times there's just to much else going on. I probably watch more Campbell Live through links to reports on TV3's website than actually watching the show as broadcast.
Is it that the viewers no longer care about having journalism (compared with entertainment) in the 7pm slot, or that viewers no longer care about having quality journalism at all? Would a show like Campbell Live do any better, or at least make a better return, in a different timeslot?
I'm not convinced many people even care about real news given how the news is repeatedly pushed as entertainment. ("Coming up, [asks a question]? We'll tell you if you watch later!"... compared with a few years ago when a promo would actually state what happened.)
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Ah. Yeah I get what you mean. Taranaki in particular has a big lobby from the local mountain running community. It's always been a huge place for harriers clubs and similar, and they often enjoy nicely groomed tracks, so I don't think DOC's too concered about providing and attributing that as part of its recreation-fostering mandate.
In fairness to DOC in that case though, and probably much of Tongariro NP, I think much of it has been put in place for protecting the surrounding environment in reaction to popularity more than for making a nice pathway for people. Much of Taranaki in particular gets really really wet and muddy, and the ground erodes rapidly when faced with a vaguely high concentration of visitors, which encourages people to step over a much wider area and erode even more. Sometimes I wonder if the local conservancies which have excuses like that go a bit overboard, though. I find Taranaki a bit out there in terms of boardwalks and steps every time I go there. Also, they must have placed more pointless fixed ladders up and down small climbs and drops than any other park in NZ. I think the Tararua Range will probably always be my favourite, closely followed by the Ruahine. :)
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to Amanda Wreckonwith,
Sorting out the feral cat issue in NZ will be a long and expensive process. I favour the approach of regulation of breeding, keeping and sale of cats.
Also I agree with this. I can't see any reason why cats shouldn't be treated similarly to dogs, at the very least re licensing and registration.
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to Amanda Wreckonwith,
Cool. Yeah, I phrased badly but also thanks. I’m not too concerned about traps which kill commonly accepted predators. More about a trap in my back-yard accidentally dispatching all of the neighbours valued feline family members from all sides. Whatever I might think of domestic cats, I don’t really want to got down that track. :) From what Steven said it sounds as if the traps available through Halo have some aversion to cats, so I might investigate further. It’s not too clear from Halo’s website whether they put cats at risk.