Posts by martinb
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The other aspect is the aspect of the nation. What things do we do that most people will join together in, have as a shared experience of life in NZ?
I didn’t realise that the Listener had a monopoly on tv listings untl the 80s- that seems bizarre, but that, for example, used to be one part of the shared culture.
The idea of the blog, netflix, etc etc world is it is one that doesn’t have to engage with much it doesn’t like or isn’t presented confronted with it, and there is less of the old glue of national culture.
I guess there is probably someone who has written better on this overseas, but this is the kind of thing we used to be able to read in the Listener! What is the result for the idea of NZ of these split cultures with fewer and fewer uniting points that everyone a) has access to and b) wants to watch or read?
-
It's great we now have a template for the terms of independent audits and investigations into allegations and appearances of the potential for impropriety in the public sphere.
-
ok having read the entire comments- i can answer my own question on that one...
-
Will the Nation be getting Mr Slater and that nice man from the Publishing Council back on to ask them questions and give clarifications after their piece last week? It made it seem as if Mega was like a torrent site- which it isn't going on the description given in the blog right?
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to Seamus Harris,
Your posts did initially make me think of this:
Wikipedia editors and Russia's internet army, but then the more you said the less I thought that likely.I think most people are balancing out the good work Len's done, who would win if he lost his supporters, the sordid and sleazy nature of the attack which damages the credibility of that attack against the personal betrayal of his family and some of the other behaviour which is weird, but also really really not something we need to know or actually asked to find out about.
There is an issue about the reference, but I think most people wouldn't categorise it as "swinging ratepayer funded jobs for his shag" the way you did. He seems to have been one referee out of 5 IIRC, and he didn't appoint her or create a job for her.
So the short answer is that some of us aren't pissed as off with this because it isn't for example pressuring public servants to alter their professional opinions to allow the government to push ahead with a scheme which could "kill the rivers involved", but a lot of sordid and personal details which affects private morality more than public, and doesn't seem to have affected the public purse or important decision making processes.
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Didn't realise this was going to have such legs.
I guess what I was saying is that the harm to someone else of you laughing in your own head at someone's name is quite minimal compared to doing it on national tv or all over the twitter verse.
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to Katita,
yeh think this is more false equivalency.
It’s ok to snigger at a name privately- but Henry’s BS was a state broadcaster denigrating a representative of a race, in a fairly insulting, degrading and bizarre manner, in a country where there is already a lot of racism against this race.
Yeh- I’m interested in how the name of a boyo from the valleys came to be the moniker of this young lady from Hong Kong…
-
Ok ok- common expression as in ” A mullet is a lesser crime than socks and sandels"…but ask that the expression be removed and replaced with “this isn’t even as big a deal as”
seconded?
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to SteveH,
but still was reasonable to expect that he may have heard of her capabilities through her volunteer work with the council and other community groups.
All these potentials for unethical behaviour in my opinion fall well short of the the threshold for resignation from a position. This would be an over reaction.
But as Russell kind of notes- it seems to be more down to how the National party chooses to handle this one, almost, rather than Brown, as to how it will play out. It would also be important to see who has leverage over Brown from this incident and how his ability to be mayor is affected. Metro was close to giving him Brownlee like omnipotence and importance. How will that change?
EDIT: sorry sorry Lillith- it's a common expression! but bad timing after the McCarten thing.
-
I think this is a lesser crime than that of Nick Smith pressuring ACC over Bronwyn Pullar.
In a public precedent Smith had to stand down, but really is now back and not much has changed with his career. He is still a senior minister charged with fractious portfolios and tough campaigns.
In the case of Pullar, Smith used Ministerial letterhead in an attempted to go around procedure and directly invoke the Minister's support. Len Brown was one of 5 references from well known community leaders. The normal procedure of the reference was followed and as far as we know he didn't go above and beyond what is normal procedure.
We will have to wait on the others, but as we have seen Ms Chuang was a great networker and Brown was not the only influential person who helped her.
Brown's is one voice among several backing Chuang for a job she was qualified and had experience to suggest she could do.
It is unethical as the nature of the relationship isn't clear, but as we have seen with Nick Smith it shouldn't be a hanging offence. As far as we have seen so far, Brown didn't give her a job, or create a job for her, he gave her his support through the correct channels.
How Brown does his pennance will be the question, as it seems he still so far retains the support of the community in his role of mayor, if they perhaps think a bit less of him personally and his integrity has taken a hit.