The Glucina attack piece on Amanda Bailey and now the obvious political payback on Campbell live. The Plutocrats must be confident, they are giving up even pretending.
Personally, I think the dog's breakfast that is RNZ afternoons could do with Campbell. Simon Mercep is OK, but to me his style is more after 10pm.
Kathryn Ryan might be worried....
If anyone was still in any doubt that our psychoactive drug laws passed and lauded as “world leading” are nothing but a giant con job – a designed-to-fail law that is a smokescreen behind which a cynical government with no intention of ever allowing anything to become legal can hide – then surely the triumphalism and contempt which Peter Dunne didn’t even bother to hide when discussing Matt Bowden’s bankruptcy has removed that doubt.
I have always maintained this new law was absurd and designed to make it easier to ban, not legalise. Bowden’s demise is the final nail in the coffin of the hope of those who sincerely engaged and believed the government. It was nothing but a confidence trick all along.
After watching Dunne’s pleasure in putting out of business someone who he didn’t like I felt queasy and slightly ill. Whether or not you approve of Bowden’s business practices a businessman who embarks on a venture based on a belief the government believes in the rule of law and it’s own legislation who is then bankrupted at least partially by a government that lied all along about it’s intentions should alarm us all.
Audrey Young somehow manages to repeat the phrase five times in today’s Herald.
This is an illustration of Keith’s point that objective reporting is never objective. There is no such thing in not taking a position, because not taking a position is a position all of its own. Journalists like Young and O’Brien take sides everyday, because their ambient values align completely with the neoliberal ruling project. They are just too stupid to understand their role as a cog in the machinery of neoliberal propaganda.
There was woman on Mora’s show yesterday saying how she felt sorry for Labour, because Little couldn’t get any ’cut through” on issues important for the left. When Tova O’Brien makes it her job to repeat a government’s childish attack line rather than the substance of a speech, or Mike Hosking’s bullies Amanda Bailey, or everytime TVNZ leads with a story about the royal family instead of unemployment – these are positions, and they are positions designed to reinforce a right wing hegemony.
At the end of the day, journalism in this country is dead. Not under threat, or forced into isolated pockets, but dead. Gone. A cursory examination of the 6pm news on any night will tell you that. As a left winger, I kinda welcome the death of journalism, because with it goes the myth of press freedom and the need to maintain the fiction of a free, fair or balanced media. The other side controls the news. Accept it. Celebrate it. And then realise that means that when or if the left returns to power it wil have carte-blanche to return the favour, in spades.
The best journalism these days is on Comedy Central, which kinda tells you everything you need to know about the state of contemporary journalism and the value of having an informed opinion behind your reporting.
You are right about the English establishment (read: Oxbridge City bankers) being petrified of the SNP. The Scots have no love of the City and if Milliband has the wit to pretend to let the tail wag the dog he can use them as the excuse for all sorts of left wing measures that could amount to the SNP enabling the most left wing government since 1964.
One of the criticisms of US police is many of the smaller police forces only require 12 weeks training (less for part timers), with the maximum anywhere being 20 weeks. I am surprised at how little training our police receive – NZ police officers only get 19 weeks training and have to pass various tests. Apparently police in Nordic countries like Sweden attend much longer training programs, and are also expected to have a tertiary qualification of some kind.
The shorter climate debate:
If we do nothing now, we’ll have a catastrophe in 100-200 years. In the meantime, I can keep my job, maintain my standard of living and hope someone invents cold fusion in a flux capacitor.
If we act decisively now, hundreds of thousands will have a dramatic drop in their standard of living, much of the economy will be disrupted, and the good times are over. Forever.
Which one of the two above paragraphs is a voter most likely going to vote for? Which one of those two above paragraphs is a politician going to push? The only fauna that gets a vote is humans.
For most people, when push comes to shove climate change is something they just hope is always coming tomorrow.
It is only with slight hyperbole that I can say that in my observation a young policeman at a US music festivals is like an isolated and dangerous island, that the crowd carefully parts to avoid. Whereas in this country usually the main danger to a young policeman at music festivals is getting kissed by to many *ahem* "exuberant" young women.
Compliance vs. community policing, I guess.