Public Address | System (Home)

Posted at 10:38AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Bill who...?

Posted at 10:42AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Bill who...?

I should note now that a reciprocal torrent of abuse from y'all isn't what I was after. I just felt I had to say something.

Posted at 10:43AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

I didnt hear Ralston before 5:00pm but he came back on after the news around 5:10 with "and I'm not going to talk about Russel Brown any more"... and then went on to make several of the comments you mentioned...

There was no reason given or explanation of what topic lead to it... but presumably it was a follow-up to something earlier. it was DEFINITELY "frothing at the mouth" stuff...

btw. you missed the 'best' line... "Journalist? He's not even a journalists bottom!"

I was bemused.... He does seem to rant a bit, and even plays up at being a curmudgeon... I wonder if its an intentional artificial persona?

Or, maybe the vast right wing conspiracy has put out secret instructions? Discredit the Brown.

:)

Posted at 10:55AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

You are, naturally, at liberty to criticise either of us.

Meh... I don't really want to get into a media bitch-fight, but I really wish Ralston would give the 'bloggers aren't real journalists' crap a rest. After all, you'd think someone who spent so much of his career in television -- and now writes columns and hosts a talkback radio show -- would be a little careful about being a media snob.

Posted at 10:56AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

And on another subject....

Does $500 really seem too much to ask for the new-to-market decoder?

I dont have that sort of money spare, and wont be getting one until the price has settled.... but considering the price history of any new technology.... Commodore 64, PC, CD-Player, VHS, Playstation, Playstation2, etc.... all started in excess of $1000 before finishing their retail life at sub $200... Your $1800 TV would have been over $5000 three years ago, maybe $8000?

$500 just doesnt seem all that outrageous a starting point to me?

Early adopters always pay extra.... Seems the premium is lower than usual?

Posted at 11:02AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Don't be angry, Mr Brown. Make yourself an espresso, turn on your cool TV, and amuse yourself with the notion that even in a vacuum, people who have made a job around being opinionated will still have something to say. After all, it's your job too ;p

But seriously, it does sound like you pissed him off royally. Like, more than professional disagreement kind of pissed off. More like, I-want-to-set-fire-to-your-new-TV kind of pissed off. Were you extra mean to him, off the record? Come-on, fess up.

Posted at 11:07AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Maybe Mr Ralston didn't get his cool HD gadget like you did.

Posted at 11:07AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

I missed the broadcast but am distinctly underwhelmed by Ralston's insistence that journalism is some sort of a closed shop. I've met/know more than my fair share of journalists, and have a few very accomplished ones in my family, and the profession is as variable as any other. I'd've thought Ralston was a little past slagging someone off on air simple because they criticised his work. Given the MSM rush to blog-format news and commentary, you'd think they'd be prepared for constructive criticism... must be frustrating when the equivalent of letters to the editor appear instantly and without editorial oversight.

Posted at 11:07AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

But hating on China itself sometimes seems to me to be the acceptable face of xenophobia. China isn't going away.

I take your point, and its a fair and important one. But I'm not "hating on China", any more than those who were in favour of economic and cultural/sporting sanctions against apartheid-era South Africa (I believe that included the whole government front bench) were "hating on South Africa". Or, for that matter, than any criticism of the policies of the government of Israel is, ipso facto, anti-semitic in nature.

Posted at 11:14AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

While the Chinese response certainly seems well over the top and undoubtedly had an "upscaling" effect (HD PUN!), I don't think some of the initial media reports that painted a "poor innocent sit-in monks beaten to death by the Red Army" picture were entirely accurate either.
The populace of Tibet was violently rioting in many cases and while they have every reason to feel that their calls for autonomy are going ignored, I never enjoy violence in response. China should have responded with less violence, of course.
Keith Locke is taking it a little too far for an MP in my opinion...

Posted at 11:17AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Building on yesterday's theme of Brown=Blogosphere, Ralston's really giving you a plug, whether he intends to or not. Anyone who was listening to him and thinking "I really should find out what this blogosphere is all about" now knows what name to type into Google. Then they can judge for themselves just how nutty PA is, by comparison to the talkback they were accustomed to.

Doesn't excuse all the abuse though. I wonder what it's all about? For Ralston to be jealous of Russell's journalistic career would just be silly. For Ralston to be jealous of the total editorial freedom that Russell has always enjoyed seems more likely, and he's having his own little run off the leash. Like most people who have strong opinions, that early time off the leash is when they are blundering around trying to find their new voice. I hope his one settles down a little bit, because he's got a very sharp mind, and still could contribute a lot to NZ journalism.

Posted at 11:20AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Keith Locke is taking it a little too far for an MP in my opinion...

I thought Goff responded pretty well in the Close Up discussion last night, despite the set-up for it being unsympathetic.

Russian governments have visited much greater Hell on errant provinces in the last decade, and we've merrily kept on trading with them.

Posted at 11:21AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Agreed, Russell. There is a knee jerk anti-Chinese reaction that you can bet your house on when these issues arise. In the final wash, New Zealand is going to need China an awful lot more than China will need New Zealand. Now if we were Australia with its mineral resources, that would be a different story. And Phil Goff made good points in his Morning Report interview yesterday - if New Zealand restricted itself to trading with countries with squeaky clean human rights records, we wouldn't be trading with many large trading partners including Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United States (remember Guantanamo Bay anyone?). The Chinese government has done awful things in Tibet but no country in the world would have its police and army sit on its hands while rioters destroyed the downtown area of a major city while targeting members of another ethnic group and destroying their businesses. As for the FTA, bring it on. New Zealand needs better access to Chinese markets. After all Chinese exporters have pretty much unrestricted access to our small market.

Posted at 11:24AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Maybe Bill Ralston wanted a TV7 programme?? And did not get one (yet??)?

Posted at 11:28AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Keith Locke is taking it a little too far for an MP in my opinion...

Aw, I'm going to defend Keith Locke here. (You in the back, close your mouth before it starts catching flies.) I don't think he's saying anything -- about China or the FTA -- that he hasn't been saying for years, and strikes me as entirely in the mainstream of where the Greens are.

And I think it's an inconvenient truth to point that successive New Zealand governments have been quite happy to engage in quick-draw 'megaphone diplomacy' when the bullhorn is pointed at nations (Zimbabwe, Fiji) that aren't too far up the trade league table (China, Iran). Hypocritical moral prostitution or the uncomfortable sight of realpolitik in action?

Posted at 11:33AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Thanks, Russell.

Posted at 11:35AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Russian governments have visited much greater Hell on errant provinces in the last decade, and we've merrily kept on trading with them.

Yes, and on the day Gergina Beyer was on the forecourt cussing out the Density Church folks as homophobic 'blackshirts' (who may be vile beyond endurance, but were holding a lawful and peaceful protest), Helen was in her office taking a photo op with the Iranian trade minister. (I guess a shitload of butter and lamb helps the murderous theocrats go down.)

Posted at 11:42AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Meh to bad tempered aging men abusing their media privilege to take out their resentment at father time on anyone and anything. It seems to be so de jour just now, but I just find it tedious and embarrassing.

Memo to Mr. Ralston: Study Brian Edwards as a model of growing old gracefully, without rancour, and with good humour. That way you'll stay relevant longer.

I'm afraid I'm in the anti-China camp. I have a naive belief in the superiority of democracy and the universality of human rights. I also believe democracy is something that has been constantly guarded and its biggest enemy today is authoritarian capitalism, be that from the Talley brothers or from Beijing.

Engagement with China under its current autocratic model is simply showing all the global corporates out there that there is an alternative place to make money other than in pesky participatory democracies with their annoying labour and environmental laws. Engagement won't see democracy by osmosis in China, it will see creeping authoritarianism here.

Oh and $500 for a HDTV free view box? Why would pay that?? I live in a high six figure income household with all the latest gizmos, early adopters even (well at least after the first service pack anyway) but sorry I'm not interested in paying $500 for another set top box for largely free to air channels. I never watch much telly during the week, and much as I am curious to see free view I'm not so curious as to part with all that dosh just so I can see John Campbell (sans tie, good grief where have all the standards gone???) do his New Idea impression live in HDTV.

Posted at 11:43AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

the uncomfortable sight of realpolitik in action

Indeed, and it does sit a little uncomfortably but it is reality - you can be blistering in your comments at Zimbabwe because you know there is no other level of communication with them. But when it comes to China, or the US, or Australia, or Iran, or.... you have to comment within the context of that broader relationship. It ain't pretty, but it is politics. In fact, it's life - we all shape our commentary and opinions based on the contexts of our broader relationships.
The PMs eventual statement seemed of the right balance to me

Posted at 11:43AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

But hating on China itself sometimes seems to me to be the acceptable face of xenophobia. China isn't going away.

I'm probably a good example of someone who is torn
I've studied Chinese history, and adore the artistic expression that comes out of china. I dream of visiting china one day.

but oh those in power
my one thing i remind most people i know is that this is a country that denies the massacre that happened in tiananmen square in the summer of 1989.

Well yeah that's just lovely isn't it

Posted at 11:44AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

We've since viewed content in various formats. Oddly, the worst of it was a movie on Blu-Ray: Talladega Nights, which looked odd and garish, with the HD resolution largely serving to highlight shortcomings in set design and makeup. I downloaded a couple of HD (720p) TV torrents: the latest episodes of Lost, which looked very good, and Torchwood, which looked positively sumptuous.

But to ligten up a little, a while back I saw a hilarious interview with Felicity Huffman where she mentioned an unexpected side effect of shooting Desperate Housewives in HD. More make-up than she had to deal with she was playing a pre-op transsexual in Transamerica. :)

Posted at 11:45AM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

OTOH, he's quite fond of that veteran journo Cactus Kate

http://www.nzlistener.co.nz/issue/211/columnists/10194/shop_surf_surf_shop.html

Posted at 12:00PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Oh and $500 for a HDTV free view box? Oh and $500 for a HDTV free view box?

it's a hell of a lot
but then I pay $10 a month for a TelstraClear decoder
had it over 5 years, therefore i've spent $500 on it but i don't own it

but I'm not giving it up I'm addicted to discovery travel and adventure, prime and E! none of which i get with freeview

Posted at 12:04PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

an unexpected side effect of shooting Desperate Housewives in HD. More make-up than she had to deal with she was playing a pre-op transsexual in Transamerica.

The New York Times had an article a couple of years ago about the ugly new world of HD. Previously attractive TV stars turn into crater-faced, wrinkled monsters under the cruel lens of HDTV.

Posted at 12:04PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Can anyone name an example of a country against whom we took a strong stance and AND with whom we have had a significant trading relationship? I can't think of one. As far as I know, New Zealand foreign policy has always been of craven pragmatism whenever there are exports at stake. This latest to-do is no different.

Posted at 12:04PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Rather than spend $500 on a set-top box, I've sort of seen the writing on the wall. Both my VCR and DVD player are on their last legs...
So I'm going to attempt to build a HD Freeview PC contraption. Dunno if I'll ever get it perfectly seamless, but I like a challenge.

Posted at 12:06PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Sue said:

my one thing i remind most people i know is that this is a country that denies the massacre that happened in tiananmen square in the summer of 1989.

Oh, it's better than that. About three years back, I saw an article about the massacre, and how the Chinese aparatchik deal with it. The short version, incoming members who are too young (read: under about 40) to "remember" it are shown videos that decry the protesters as violent insurgents out to bring down the nation, justifying the oppression, and suggesting that it's entirely reasonable to run people down with tanks.

That's not historic, that's recent. This material was shown to people who were taking up positions earlier this decade, so it's not something that was only done in the years immediately afterward.

But if we don't engage with China on trade we'll be left out and that's not good for the economy. As Helen observed the other day, nearly everything that China exports to us comes in tariff-free anyway. We have about the most open marketplace in the world, bar none, but people still bitch and moan that an FTA with China will open us up to flood of cheap, crappy imports. Guess what: we're already being flooded with those cheap, crappy (and other distinctly un-cheap and un-crappy) imports. Nothing's going to change. We stand to benefit a lot if we can get our goods into China's protected markets easily, and we don't have much to lose because we have so little protection in the first place. China has very little in the way of objectionable policy that they would want to make conditional (as contrasted with the US position of their way or the highway on IP-related policy) and so we don't lose in that regard, either.

The only possible downside is low-cost workers coming here, but Helen seems to think that that's taken care of. Without seeing what the agreement says on the matter it's irresponsible to speculate on what might occur.

Posted at 12:07PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Ralston has an interesting point that blogs don't do 'primary research', in terms of people on the ground actually doing interviews, taking footage etc. And yes, for most blogs, which are written by one person, that is of course true. They're not a huge newsroom with professional photographers and helicopters waiting to race off after ambulance or police emergencies. They don't usually get interviews with the PM. In general, the news is mostly parasitic off the MSM.

However, they are an alternative 'view' on that data coming in, and they are places of discussion. They go further than any medium before in that respect. If you want analysis, you'll get all you can handle on the blogosphere, and Ralston appears to know this when he both slags on blogs, whilst at the same time confessing to spending a lot of time reading them.

And the 'primary research' point is not totally true either. The commentators on blogs are numerous, and they will often talk directly about what is going on inside their own domains. As for interviews, we are starting to see quite a few people who would normally be the sole province of a TV or radio interview coming straight here and saying their piece, exactly how they wanted to say it, without any editing.

It's not the same as MSM news. It could not replace it, any more than than electronics have replaced paper. But it may very well become bigger, in exactly the same way that Wikipedia is bigger than any other encyclopedia, and Linux has more people working on it than any other OS. This could be very hard to see for people stuck in the model of thinking that unless you can make a lot of $ out of it, it won't last. Some ideas are just bigger than that.

Posted at 12:09PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10498996

While it's just a singular "inside view", I think that perhaps some people like Mr Locke should explain why they think we should have instantly lambasted China for their troops "standing back and watching protestors" and "not moving to quell violence for 2-3 hrs" when Tibetans were throwing rocks and torching buildings.
As you alluded to Russell, there is an instant "China must be violently quelling peaceful dissent" meme whenever Tibet and China are mentioned but it's probably a Western arrogance towards both the people of Tibet and China when their complex struggle for some degree of autonomy boils down to that.

Posted at 12:11PM on 19 Mar 08. Permalink.

Stephen said:

As far as I know, New Zealand foreign policy has always been of craven pragmatism whenever there are exports at stake. This latest to-do is no different.

Us and the rest of the world. Principles are a very sometimes thing in global politics. We're a lot more principled than many nations (look at how the US cuddles up to Saudi Arabia and then in the same breath calls Mugabe a murderous thug) but there are still real downsides to shitting in the international trade lunchbox. If we can't trade, we're in deep, deep poo, more so than many nations because our internal economy is so tiny. We cannot support our standard of living just buying and selling within NZ, so trade is vital. Politicians know that, and act accordingly.