Cracker: Bare Breasts Key for Important 18-49 Auckland Demographic
125 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
Still think it's preferable not to set yourself up for a tag-team mauling, thought it's an entirely fair point that you can't be edited into looking like a shifty moron if you do the interview live.
I recall some years ago when I somehow wound up talking about drug policy in the media, and did a Kim Hill interview along with the head of the drug squad. That was okay, if a bit surreal.
Then 3 News rang up and wanted me to talk to them for a pre-recorded story. Which would have been utter madness.
-
This is where the interviewers skill and need to interrupt -
Being able to interrupt your subject and get the conversation where you need it to go -- ideally, without appearing rude -- is a core skill of broadcast interviewing, for sure.
which then raises all those "I hate the way interrupts all the time, it's so rude." Well, if they didn't, Phil Goff for example, wouldn't come up for air for about twenty minutes...
Oh god. Years ago at bFM, I went out to see Goff with a tape recorder, and made the mistake of putting the result to air. It went on half my life.
-
It was the idea that bare breasts on a beach were somehow more "porn" than actual porn stars that got me.
It depends on the treatment, doesn't it? I mean, if Baywatch was done entirely topless, slow-mo shots 'n' all (and don't think I haven't suggested it), it would be "bare breasts on a beach", but undeniably porn.
Is it more porn than a discussion with a clothed porn star about her breasts? Is a discussion with a porn star about anything automatically porn?
I reckon if the CL story had have stuck to shots of the woman sunbathing topless, rather than repeated, extended vision of her emerging from the water and walking up the beach, you could argue that point. I've spent more than a few years putting together stories for current affairs, I'd like to think I've got a reasonably good handle on the line between "necessary for the story" and "gratuitously for ratings". The fact they showed breasts in the promo breaks kinda emphasises my point.
-
The fact they showed breasts in the promo breaks kinda emphasises my point.
True. It did seem out of the ordinary.
-
Somewhere online there's a clip of Jeremy Paxman asking some Conservative politician the same question about 12 or 13 times. Turns into absurdist theatre at that point.
Yes, and I'm sure Jeremy Paxman is still dining out on that clip. But let me ask you a question about Sean Plunket: Was his finest moment one of his trademark badger-ramas or when he was actually paying attention to a more that usually weasel-worded answer from David Benson-Pope and asked a lethal follow up where he, basically, admitted, lying about about what he knew about the Madeline Stechel sacking, and when he knew it.
-
Oh god. Years ago at bFM, I went out to see Goff with a tape recorder, and made the mistake of putting the result to air. It went on half my life.
Years ago Jane Clifton warned me that if was interviewing Goff, I should "take a packed lunch".
I don't think it's intentional space-filling with Goff, I think he just enjoys talking. I can empathise.
When I did the (ahem, exceptionally prescient) "will Phil Goff be the next leader of Labour" article for Metro in 2008, and Phil wasn't doing any press on the topic, I remember managing to score a precious 10 minutes on the phone in between (his) meetings. I said "how's it going?" as we began the conversation, and watched four of my ten minutes being swallowed up with a list of his activities for the past fortnight... All I'd meant was "how are ya?"
Fortunately the 10 minute interview then went on for about 20...
-
Is it more porn than a discussion with a clothed porn star about her breasts?
It was a bit more than a discussion. They have her walk down Queen St and encourage passers by to grope her.
Is a discussion with a porn star about anything automatically porn?
A discussion about an "experimental" medical procedure that has given her a porn gimmick is porn, sure.
-
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.
Aye. I liked what Campbell brought to the mid-show interviews with politicians during TV3 news. There was an appropriate amount of cynicism as he tried to cut through the spin, without a screenful of Holmes wankery.
I used to make time to watch Campbell Live when it started in the hope that it would be a decent in depth news and interview show. Now I only watch it if I see an advert and it happens to be something I'm really interested in.
-
I said "how's it going?" as we began the conversation, and watched four of my ten minutes being swallowed up with a list of his activities for the past fortnight... All I'd meant was "how are ya?"
I think we all know people like that. The amazing thing is how rarely they remember to ask how you're going afterwards.
-
Well, if they didn't, Phil Goff for example, wouldn't come up for air for about twenty minutes...
Loved this quote from Phil Goff (stuff this morning):
But Mr Goff said the lack of a challenger was "a recognition that the leadership team they have got in place is the best team that they could hope for".
Perhaps he should shut up more often?
-
It was a bit more than a discussion. They have her walk down Queen St and encourage passers by to grope her.
I don't know why I'm being drawn into defending this. I said IMHO the Close Up story had no journalistic merit. At all. Although I thought the reporter's treatment of it wasn't too bad. And while I don't want to split hairs, I saw an old Chinese guy who copped a feel, I didn't see anyone saying "wanna touch these?". Or do massive breasts by definition amount to "encouragement"? :)
A discussion about an "experimental" medical procedure that has given her a porn gimmick is porn, sure.
Really? Then I think we have very different definitions of porn. Would that make the film Inside Deep Throat porn too? Or any media discussion about the porn industry?
-
@Matthew: I still quote I'm Alan Partridge at parties. "Will you stop saying you threw your monkey in the sea! It's really disturbing..."
@Steve
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?.
Fair warning, I am going to steal this and tell everyone I came up with it. Too good not to.
-
I'm too busy to hunt down and link to the Onion article about how, one year on, the nation's children remain traumatised by the sight of Janet Jackson's breast during the Super Bowl half time show - let's just assume that I did and it was hilarious.
-
But Mr Goff said the lack of a challenger was "a recognition that the leadership team they have got in place is the best team that they could hope for"
Ouch.
-
The most disturbing thing about this thread is the discovery that some people think that @seven was anything other than a puerile, painful, cringingly unfunny waste of space. I'd much rather have Simpsons re-runs: hell, even re-runs of Melody Rules would be better.
-
...Mr Goff said the lack of a challenger was "a recognition that the leadership team they have got in place is the best team that they could hope for"
Ouch.
Why? This isn't a bad thing to be - this is an awesome thing to be. Labour MPs and supporters, in their wildest dreams, have been imagining the perfect most awesome leadership team for Labour possible, and have been hoping for that team.
No-one's that good - even in the Heydey of Helen Clark, Labour MPs would have changed some things about her - they might have hoped for a leader with Helen's intellect, and command of everything, but Rodney Hide's new teeth, for example.
But somehow, Labour now have not just the best leader from their current MPs, nor the best leader of a generation of MPs, but the best team that they could even hope for. Even in their wildest dreams of what an awesome perfect Labour leader could be like, no-one could be better than the one they have.
I had the same thing a couple of weeks back. I'm always on the lookout for fancy new awesome soft-drink. And then I tried Frank Sparkling Zesty Lemonade. Wow. In my wildest dreams I could not have expected such an awesome soft-drink. Just yesterday I took two buses to go across town to try to find a supermarket that stocked it in four-packs. I loaded up so much, that I had to take two buses home and then go out again just to buy milk.
In my wildest dreams - hope against hope - I could not imagine a soft drink that awesome. I wouldn't even have been sure that it was possible to hope for a soft drink that good. It is the best soft drink I could hope for.
Ouch?
-
I understand that bared breasts are not always sexual, but unless there's a baby attached, it's game on...
Oh. Oh, did you just say that? Yes, you seem to have. Facetiousness noted. No comeback necessary.
-
I'm glad this thread has confirmed that it's not just me who's been a bit worried about where Campbell Live's been heading lately. Having been away from NZ for a couple of years and then returning to watch the programme again for most of 2009 I had to ask 'Hey John, where did the politics go? You know, the stuff you were actually pretty good at?' It must surely be a concern to him, knowing that there's not really anything else on the mainstream FTA networks that come close to maintaining a sensible approach to serious political issue reporting.
-
I think the sugar rush has addled Graeme's brain.
-
Come to think of it, could someone graph the continuum of Incisive Journalism to Vaudeville with the declining presence, and then influence, of the amazing, IMhO, Carol Hirschfeld?
Bring back Carol!
[Insert chant here] -
.. I had to ask 'Hey John, where did the politics go? You know, the stuff you were actually pretty good at?'
I ask him much the same, and yet he never replies.
I gave up on Campbell Live a long while back. It is painful to watch someone who is clever, well-informed and has a good track record having to do idiotic stories. When it started, the show was supposed to be about news stories, but now you would learn more from those Simpsons repeats.
I was quite amused, in a sardonic sort of way, by the cut for the topless beach story. It is as if the editor thought it necessary to show the same shot of the topless woman every few seconds, in case the audience had forgotten what the state of toplessness involves.
The sudden appearance of the woman from Famiy First made me think of Goths in Hot Weather
-
Imagine the eager jostling of cub reporters..
Jiggling and bouncing like puppies in a sack...?
I'll get my coat.
-
3410,
Somewhere online there's a clip of Jeremy Paxman asking some Conservative politician the same question about 12 or 13 times.
-
Why? This isn't a bad thing to be - this is an awesome thing to be.
I guess I just heard the silent " ... in the circumstances ..."
-
I think Carol is working for M(äori)TV now. Some new shows, some tightening up-
Post your response…
This topic is closed.