Public Address | System (Home)

Posted at 3:54PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Personally, I hope Campbell Live survives, but not if it's going to go all tits and arse – if I want porn, have no fear, I know where to get it.

Perhaps on Close Up, which had the porn star with the world's biggest breasts last year -- a story 20 times worse than anything on Campbell Live last night.

Posted at 4:01PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

I misread this - thought you were suggesting the Prime Minister should become a topless TV presenter to attract votes.

Posted at 4:08PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Hoo boy! Don't get me started on Close Up. For some reason, I've watched a few eps recently and, unbelievably, Sainsbury is even worse than I remember.

Virtually every single sentence begins with "Now, look, I mean..." and the faces of most inteviewees display a mixture of embarrassment and mild disgust at his invariably dim-witted questions. Many times, I've seen two guests have to virtually interview each other as the host consistently fails to grasp the issues at stake.

How long can it go on?

Posted at 4:13PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

The Crowd Goes Wild is far and away the best thing on at 7pm. That is not high praise.

Posted at 4:14PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Perhaps on Close Up, which had the porn star with the world's biggest breasts last year

Saw David Farrier interview her, pretty sure it wasn't for Close Up.

Posted at 4:17PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Damian, the BSA link in your posting is broken.

Posted at 4:18PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Farrier might have but Close Up did too. Her name is Chelsea Charms, link:

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/chelsea-s-itsy-and-bitsy-3007435

Posted at 4:23PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Philip: sorry, thought you were implying that Close Up had stooped lower than Campbell Live, rather than a sea of exactly the sameness.

We, also, watch The Crowd Goes Wild.

Posted at 4:42PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

sorry, thought you were implying that Close Up had stooped lower than Campbell Live, rather than a sea of exactly the sameness.

Farrier is on Nightline, not (as far as I know) Campbell Live.

The Campbell Live story may have had nude titties in it, but the story was about the frequent double-standards with respect to men's and women's toplessness, and one woman's challenging of that alleged inequity.

If anyone can find any actual socio-political value to Close Up's Chelsea Charms story, let me know.

(PS. D., if you're going perpetuate rumours about the demise of Cambell Live, mightn't a disclosure of interest be appropriate?) :)

Posted at 4:45PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Given that the show also featured John Banks, that feral Waikato farmer and a Hummer-driving psychopath, the topless sunbathing story wasn't the only one about tits.

Posted at 4:46PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

At least we're all agreed there is no Journalism involved in either production.

Of all the attention getters a woman being hasselled for being natural, unoffensive and acting legally is better than the great evil asian drivers ed scam of a few years ago. Of course those running it were all kiwis but hey why let facts get in the way of a good story.

Posted at 4:53PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

The Campbell Live story may have had nude titties in it, but the story was about the frequent double-standards with respect to men's and women's toplessness, and one woman's challenging of that alleged inequity.

And, to be fair, the bit with the council workers was actually quite a telling moment, vis-a-vis the tendencies of those with petty authority to use it to project their own moral judgements into areas in which they do not actually have any authority.

Posted at 4:58PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

I once had a boss from across the ditch who criticised a story on fashion week for not having enough “norks”

That was the cameraman's fault... ;-)

Posted at 5:02PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

How long can it go on?

As long as they keep outrating the opposition, I guess. First sign of a drop in numbers, and he'll be in a bit of trouble.

Posted at 5:06PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

And, to be fair, the bit with the council workers was actually quite a telling moment, vis-a-vis the tendencies of those with petty authority to use it to project their own moral judgements into areas in which they do not actually have any authority.

There is a worthwhile story there, but it's hard to tell it in a visual medium without risking accusations of either cynically prurient ratings-grabbing (if the breasts are shown) or hypocritical coyness (if they're not). The cries of "Won't somebody please think of the chooldren!", as if the sight of uncovered bewbs would scar an innocent child for life, certainly made me think that the woman had a good point. However, there are surely more worthwhile campaigns to (un)cover, and pretending that this primetime current affairs makes it seem like gutter journalism.

Posted at 5:22PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

(PS. D., if you're going perpetuate rumours about the demise of Cambell Live, mightn't a disclosure of interest be appropriate?) :)

Yeah fair call - I thought it kinda goes without saying, at least to the regular readers. Also I use my real name.

For the record: I used to work for Close Up, a couple of years ago. These days I'm self employed, and I contract to both TVNZ and Mediaworks (which owns TV3) on a weekly basis. Also I like John Campbell.

Anyone else here want to declare any interests while we're at it?

The Campbell Live story may have had nude titties in it, but the story was about the frequent double-standards with respect to men's and women's toplessness

Really? And TV3s extended Boobs on Bikes coverage is about one man's push to try and have the pornography industry accepted into a prudish society?

FYI, Here's Farrier's Chelsea story - it was for 3 News, not Nightline - note the "for extended and uncensored coverage, go to 3news.co.nz": http://www.3news.co.nz/Boobs-on-Bikes-parade-rolls-through-Auckland-CBD/tabid/312/articleID/122408/Default.aspx

I thought the quite telling bit in the story last night was when they pointed out it wasn't against the law for women to sunbathe naked. So the story, such as it is, is that one woman is trying to encourage more women to go topless at the beach. Awesome. Ring the Pulitzer committee.

My point - I have heard from a lot of people that Campbell Live is on seriously shaky ground, and they open the season with a story all about a topless woman. Join the dots.

Posted at 5:27PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

@Philip - thanks for the link - having watched that story, I'd make two points (rather appropriate, given the topic):

1. Neither story has any journalistic merit.

2. Despite the story being all about her tits, the pornstar kept her top on the entire time.

Posted at 5:39PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

What gets me is the continuous "Think of the Children" waffle that people come up with about this sort of thing, hey, the kids they interviewed were all "yeah, cool, tits" But perhaps these kids have had a fair bit to do with tits in a nutritional scenario. Are these people worried about a feeding frenzy?.

Posted at 5:41PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Also I use my real name.

Me-oww!

Really? And TV3s extended Boobs on Bikes coverage is about one man's push to try and have the pornography industry accepted into a prudish society?

I don't recall seeing it, but I imagine it was little better. However, you're the one aiming the complaint at Campbell Live. For the record, you're probably right that a story with nipples is likely (at least partly) an attempted ratings grab; I just don't much like the implication (by ommision) that it's not as bad on the other side.

I thought the quite telling bit in the story last night was when they pointed out it wasn't against the law for women to sunbathe naked. So the story, such as it is, is that one woman is trying to encourage more women to go topless at the beach. Awesome. Ring the Pulitzer committee.

I didn't say it was best thing since Edward R. Murrow, but we both learned something from it, so that's not a bad result.

My point - I have heard from a lot of people that Campbell Live is on seriously shaky ground, and they open the season with a story all about a topless woman. Join the dots.

Noted.

Anyhow, I'm just sparring. Hope you've had a good summer.

Posted at 5:47PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Despite the story being all about her tits, the pornstar kept her top on the entire time.

I still say that, despite her being clothed, the Chelsea Charms story was infinitely more prurient that last's night's Campbell bit.

And, like Steve, I had to laugh at all the "Well... if there's kids around..." comments. When have children ever had a problem with breasts? That's just unthinking plebs saying what they think they're supposed to say.

Posted at 5:52PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

And I'm going for a beer.

Posted at 5:58PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Me-oww!

ha, that was only half a dig :) The other half was merely saying that I'm Damian Christie on telly, on the radio, on the blog, wherever, and I often write about work and stuff, so a full declaration might not be as necessary as say, for example, an MPs private shareholdings or what not.

I just don't much like the implication (by ommision) that it's not as bad on the other side.

Um, did you miss the bit where I linked to the BSA decision against Close Up for that duck shooting story? I know the link was broken but I fixed it straight away. Also, if I may repeat myself:

All I'd say is, John, if you can't beat 'em, please don't join 'em.

Posted at 6:00PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

And yes, thanks :) I've had a good summer (although have been working every week doing a summer tour for Back Benches, including some great footage of babes at the beach in Tauranga, some of which gratuitously made it into the show...)

Posted at 6:02PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Meanwhile, staff at TV3’s summer show @7, which managed okay ratings during the hiatus, are quietly hoping they will be back on air in four months time, when Campbell Live gets the axe.

OMFG - no. It was perfectly enjoyable summer filler, as opposed to the squillionth re-run of a Simpsons episode that wasn't really that good when it first saw the light of day during the last National government.

I don't know if anyone else agrees, but the real problem with Campbell Live is that it was initially billed as smart, relevant and substantive daily current affairs for people who were sick of having their intelligence insulted by Paul Holmes.

I know this is going to sound utterly insane, but Campbell Live's last, best hope of survival is actually delivering on the promise. Five years late is better than never.

Posted at 6:05PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Um, did you miss the bit where I linked to the BSA decision against Close Up for that duck shooting story?

I didn't, but as you know, NAKED BREASTS(!) gets much more attention than boring old duck shooting (which no one ever said was Key for Important 18-49 Auckland Demographic).

Posted at 6:13PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

I actually found that piece quite interesting, Damian, largely because I didn't realise it wasn't against any bylaws to be topless on the beach, and I quite like not wearing clothes, so anywhere I can go seminaked is great with me. You know more than me about the goings on of ratings wars etc, I daresay, so you are probably right. This Miss Titty Topless, however, wasn't offended or cynical about the piece in the slightest.

Posted at 6:26PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

I suspect I'm with a lot of people in thinking that at varrious times, Campbell Live has been tremendously bloody good -- from its bravura handling of the unpromising topic of telecommunications reform, to the beautiful recent story on Chris Knox. I don't merely like John Campbell, I regard him as in influence on the way I try and do TV.

But I know how the interchange between PR and the 7pm current affairs shows works, and it's depressing to see Campbell Live when it's just three puff-pieces in a row.

And, of course, Media7 has covered some of Close Up 's less illustrious moments in the past year too.

Posted at 6:56PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

Wow, I actually agree with Craig for once. John Campbell should just do a proper current affairs show. Last year there was a whole run of cabinet minister no-shows. He could have got the opposition spokespeople on and had real discussions of the issues. But no, he had a little moan, skipped the topic and went on to something trivial.

John Campbell used to be an incisive journalist. Remember him exposing the Timberlands/PR story over a decade ago? Gripping stuff.

Or he could go the Jon Stewart way and do clever and witty. That would be a way to keep the @seven idea alive too.

Posted at 7:07PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

John Campbell used to be an incisive journalist. Remember him exposing the Timberlands/PR story over a decade ago? Gripping stuff.

Or he could go the Jon Stewart way and do clever and witty. That would be a way to keep the @seven idea alive too.

Have to agree. He cannot be John Campbell AKA John Pilger and John Campbell AKA Rove McManus at the same time. Actually I like both his persona, but when I seek satirical news buffoonery, there are better options.

There are no better options for incisive journalism that I'm aware of, apart from Media7 of course (kiss-butt alert), which makes the current ratings driven changes to CL quite disappointing, IMhO.

Posted at 8:28PM on 26 Jan 10. Permalink.

A pretty inoffensive Campbell Live clip, in the main. There was a legitimate story there and the topless woman had a cause to promote (sort of half-way to becoming a naturalist). The only disturbing element was from the woman from Family Fist, who loomed like some ugly black cloud. Where did she appear from--from under a rock? Popped out of sewer pipe?? Perhaps also the nongs who wittered 'what about the children??"