Cracker: Shut 'em Down : Public Address

Change text size...

Recent Blog Posts (RSS)

Hard News: Ready for the Weekend 9:58AM on 19 Mar 10
Up Front: This is a Photograph of Me 12:11PM on 18 Mar 10
Field Theory: The second test and the first test 11:33AM on 18 Mar 10
Southerly: This Week in Parliament 12:48AM on 16 Mar 10
OnPoint: Property Investment Federation: Just STFU 2:30AM on 12 Mar 10

View all posts on Public Address

Ads by Scoop

Public Address Cafe (RSS)

System > Public Address Cafe >

Public Address
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 1654

RSS

Cracker: Shut 'em Down

Posted at 11:19AM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

I'm always a bit sceptical of politicians trying to branch out into the new media.

Read More Original Blog Entry

I'm always a bit sceptical of politicians trying to branch out into the new media.

Politicians having blogs for instance. Rodney Hide’s I don’t mind – I’m pretty sure he writes it himself. But John Tamihere never used to write his – this became apparent when one very able press secretary was replaced by another who had issues with sentence stringing. To the uninformed observer it must’ve seemed as though JT had overnight suffered some form of stroke which left him without the basics of spelling and grammar.

And it can backfire. For politicians, the Internet is a wild frontier, a brave new world filled with nutbars, pornography and most alarming of all, people filled with a strong belief in free speech. Worse still, these people have access to the same platforms as you do.

This was well illustrated in the past couple of weeks with the ‘guerilla’ footage of National Leader John Key at the Porirua Markets. A few sound effects, a bit of commentary, and wowsers, John Key suddenly looks like a guy who doesn’t know how to sniff vegetables properly and couldn’t give a toss about the common man.

But you’re a public figure, orchestrating a walkabout to make it look like you’re ‘one of us’, that’s what you can expect.

Likewise, if you post video blogs and speeches on the Internet, you can expect people to respond. Here’s one of my favourites, from a New Zealander teaching English in Japan. Make sure you watch it at least until she refers to Key sounding like he’s giving a drunken speech at the rugby clubrooms, or whatever she says. Defamatory but delicious.

But that’s the Internet. People will say things you don’t agree with. You’re allowed to respond to them, argue with them or ignore them.

What you really shouldn’t do though, when someone offers their reasoned perspective, is ban them.

Which is exactly what the Nats did to “MonarchyNZ” when he posted a few comments on a recent video by Gerry Brownlee.

You can read the comments and judge for yourself whether MonarchyNZ was trolling and should have been banned. But I can’t see anything objectionable there, certainly nothing that would be moderated out on this blog, let alone result in a ban.

Personally I would have been far more inclined to ban the obsequious toad who posted comments like “I'm hoping for something bold, brave and innovative like the [National Party’s] roading policy.”

And

Have you watched John Keys speech on roading policy? The video is 30 minutes long but I think it's well worth watching.

MonarchyNZ’s only offence as far as I can see – and God knows there’s a few people on various comments threads who’d see you shot for it – is to prefer Labour. But the fact he actually SAT THROUGH a four minute video blog by Gerry Brownlee should at least give him the right to comment doesn’t it? If it were me I’d be asking for four minutes of my life back (and I say that not for a second against Gerry or National, simply that I can’t imagine willingly sitting through four minutes of ANY uninterrupted political diatribe).

I don’t know who NatNZ is, in the sense of which person clicked the ban button, but for someone in charge of the Nat’s on-line musings it’s pretty rubbish behaviour. This guy either has a) no idea how the Internet works or b) is high on the power of being gatekeeper to the National Party’s e-missives.

This line particularly makes me laugh:

“If you ever find you have something constructive to say, you'll be welcome back.”

NatNZ if by chance you’re reading, here’s a link you should click.

See how "constructive", in it’s erm, more conventional sense, does not mean “in favour of the National party”? See that?

And while you’re there, check this one out too.

Righto.

Now. On another related matter. I don’t necessarily agree with GayNZ and other media’s line regarding Bill English’s son and his alleged comments on Bebo. As I think Russell was getting at last week, many of the comments, while foul, aren’t anything I wouldn’t expect to hear directed from the boys of one school to another. Certainly they have a very familiar ring to what I remember being yelled from the Upper Hutt College school bus when it drove past St Pat’s Silverstream. Does it make everyone that yelled those comments homophobic? No. Does it make it right? No. But I don’t think it should mean Bill English should be singled out.

Interestingly though, walking down Lambton Quay I overheard a young man on his way to luch, bragging loudly to his two female companions. Paraphrasing:

“So yes, after that whole thing with Bill and his son’s comments on Bebo, I went on-line and checked, and there were four of the MPs kids who had sites with the same sort of thing. So I told Bill about it, and they’ve been set to private now…”

“Which kids were those?” I asked, turning to him mid-stride? He blushed and went quiet. I hope I didn’t ruin his chances with the girls.

Anyway, I don’t care which kids they were, or what comments they made (I don’t imagine they were half as bad as young Master English’s alleged comments), but chances are half the things teenagers say when they think they’re not being watched are going to be potentially embarrassing to an MP.

The point being, the Internet’s a dangerous place. With election year coming up and all votes counting, the Net can certainly Giveth, but it will just as quickly Taketh Away.

Hide Full Article Original Blog Entry

kowhai montgomery
From: wellington
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 446

Posted at 11:19AM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

Personally I would have been far more inclined to ban the obsequious toad who posted comments like "I'm hoping for something bold, brave and innovative like the [National Party's] roading policy."
And
Have you watched John Keys speech on roading policy? The video is 30 minutes long but I think it's well worth watching.

Oh how I laughed! Well worth the 4 minutes of my life to read this.

Michael Fitzgerald
Since: May 2007
Posts: 631

Posted at 2:15PM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

Gerry backs Labour power policy, maybe John Key "leading a Labour Govt" is rubbing off?

Rob Hosking
From: South Roseneath
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 705

Posted at 4:42PM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

Pretty sure that when he started Tamihere did his own stuff.

The reason for that is his comments on when Helen Clark was visiting the Pope, and there was some comment about whether or not she would, like when she met the Queen, wear a trouser suit.

Tamihere reckoned Clark should avoid a mini-skirt, especially if she planned to kiss the ground at any point. He was still a minister at the time.

Damian Christie
From: Wellington
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 609
Moderator

Posted at 6:05PM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

The reason for that is his comments on when Helen Clark was visiting the Pope, and there was some comment about whether or not she would, like when she met the Queen, wear a trouser suit.

Yeah, either that or a press sec who was more sympathetic to JT than to HC... I'm pretty sure I know who wrote it from the get go, but prepared to be proven wrong.

Rob Hosking
From: South Roseneath
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 705

Posted at 6:31PM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

The comment had the whiff of genuine JT to me...and if you mean who I think you mean, she was a bit more cautious than that.

Damian Christie
From: Wellington
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 609
Moderator

Posted at 7:28PM on 17 Oct 07. Permalink.

Who knows, perhaps you're right. I could always fire off an email to her and ask of course... like a real journalist.

Eric Olthwaite
From: Auckland
Since: May 2007
Posts: 20

Posted at 11:44AM on 18 Oct 07. Permalink.

“Which kids were those?” I asked, turning to him mid-stride? He blushed and went quiet.

Softly Softly Catchee Monkey Christie...

Just hang behind them and listen in.

Andrew Paul Wood
From: Christchurch
Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 175

Posted at 6:15PM on 18 Oct 07. Permalink.

What puzzles me is why politicians' families are not given media awareness training. Surely that's common sense?

Shaz
From: Wgtn
Since: Apr 2007
Posts: 24

Posted at 8:54PM on 18 Oct 07. Permalink.

In my (v. limited) experience, 2 factors negated the need for *media awareness training* (yet anyway) - 1 was the family being taboo. Given that's not to be relied on, the other was common sense sans training, i.e., don't make an arse of your family member at work. Because the work's in the public eye, don't be a dick in the public eye. Heh dick in the public eye. Sorry v. inarticulate and simplistic, but not that difficult, unless there's some determined muck raking going on.

Shaz
From: Wgtn
Since: Apr 2007
Posts: 24

Posted at 9:11PM on 18 Oct 07. Permalink.

....Rule number 1: Don't. Be. A dick.

Robyn Gallagher
From: Wellington
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 1309

Posted at 7:34AM on 19 Oct 07. Permalink.

What puzzles me is why politicians' families are not given media awareness training. Surely that's common sense?

Politician Dad: Son, as I'm now more in the public eye, this lady is here to give us some family media training.
Teenage Son: You're not the boss of me! I'm going to listen to My Chemical Romance and/or write messages on my www Bebo cyber page!

Kyle Matthews
From: Dunedin
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 4401

Posted at 9:58AM on 19 Oct 07. Permalink.

Point to Robyn.

Doesn't rule number 1 "Don't. Be. A dick." apply equally to Politician Dad, and Teenage Son?

Hopeful of me I know.

Shaz
From: Wgtn
Since: Apr 2007
Posts: 24

Posted at 10:17AM on 19 Oct 07. Permalink.

Absolutely - frankly if they both fail that test then I'm struggling to find any sympathy. I guess my point is that it's not that difficult to avoid looking like an arsehole. If you can't manage that, then chances are that you are in fact an arsehole, so tough titty if the public finds out. (Realise am possibly spitting in the wind here)

Sarah Lilburn
From: Japan
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 3

Posted at 4:05PM on 30 Oct 07. Permalink.

Hi Damian,

Thanks for the mention in your blog.

Can you please explain exactly which part of the video you think is “defamatory”?
The Daily English Show places strong value on media ethics and would never intentionally defame someone.

As it says in Wikipedia, defamation is about making “a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual”. Which claim was I making?

Do you think the part where I said it sounded like he was drunk is defamatory?
I certainly wasn’t claiming that he was drunk.

Just to be clear about what I meant here – I didn’t mean he was actually drunk, or had drunk any alcohol at all. I don’t think any politicians would actually drink alcohol before going to parliament. What I meant was the style of his speech (cracking jokes etc) made it sound like that, so it would be better if we went for a more formal delivery.
Reading back over the script of what I said, I could have expressed myself better – but I still don’t think it qualifies as defamation.
I think this makes it clear what I was trying to say: “I mean I don’t think you were but just your delivery made it sound like that.”

You can read the script here:
http://thedailyenglishshow.blogspot.com/2007_02_21_archive.html

The intention of that video was to give my honest opinion of the National Party’s videos on YouTube. I certainly wasn’t trying to defame John Key and I regret that – at least to you – it came across that way.

Sarah Lilburn
Producer/Presenter
The Daily English Show

Russell Brown
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 9060
Moderator

Posted at 5:45PM on 30 Oct 07. Permalink.

The intention of that video was to give my honest opinion of the National Party’s videos on YouTube. I certainly wasn’t trying to defame John Key and I regret that – at least to you – it came across that way.

Don't worry Sarah. Damian wasn't using "defamatory" in the you'll be hearing from my lawyer sense. It was just quite a nice description.

But Damian does have a tendency to scare people like that.

David Haywood
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 540
Moderator

Posted at 7:33PM on 30 Oct 07. Permalink.

Sarah,

I think the defamation occurred when you implied that Key would make such a silly speech without being drunk.

I very much enjoyed your analysis of the videocast -- and hope that the National Party will take some of your points on board...

Damian Christie
From: Wellington
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 609
Moderator

Posted at 1:41PM on 8 Nov 07. Permalink.

Hey Sarah,

Yes sorry, didn't mean to scare you. Russell is right, I didn't mean defamatory in the sense of being legally actionable. :) If anything I used that term only because it started with a D. Like "delicious". I'll do anything for a good bit of aliteration.

So I wouldn't be worrying about JK's lawyers..

Please login to post a reply.

Public Address | System (Home)

Recent Blog Posts (RSS)

Ads by Scoop

Public Address Cafe (RSS)

Cracker: Shut 'em Down