Muse: The Good Word, Bad Numbers and The Fake-Fact That Won't Die
80 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
It’s not a matter of any kind of vendetta.
And none from my end, either. Nothing but sincere up-snaps for Herrick and Barry Hill for owning their mistake and undertaking to correct it and I'll be taking the time to make sure they hear that directly.
I keep challenging The Herald to be better because it has an effective monopoly in the largest newspaper market in the country. There are also plenty of very talented, honourable people there who deserve a paper that's consistently at their level.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
I keep challenging The Herald to be better because it has an effective monopoly in the largest newspaper market in the country. There are also plenty of very talented, honourable people there who deserve a paper that’s consistently at their level.
Fairfax is only slightly better, but why don’t they just resurrect the Auckland Star? Or does the Sunday Star Times basically fill that role now? I've noticed the Sunday papers aren't quite as shallow as the dailies.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Fairfax is only slightly better, but why don’t they just resurrect the Auckland Star?
Short answer: Starting a credible metropolitan daily from scratch would require a very large initial outlay and the ability to sustain years of red ink. However much I'd like it to, don't think the Fairfax Group has the ability - let alone the will - to do that .
-
I've just been talking to Linda Herrick and it looks like there'll be a correction in the Herald tomorrow -- approved by Shayne Currie.
I think she deserves great credit for the way she's handled this.
-
Yep. She's doing the right thing.
But credit to you and Craig too- it could have simply slid on past, to be further quoted down the road. As long as 'low viewer numbers' is touted as a reason for closing TVNZ 7 this has to be slammed at every opportunity.
And I dunno- reckon we might still be waiting a while for the Herald headline: Minister misled public on TVNZ 7 viewer numbers! -
Russell Brown, in reply to
And I dunno- reckon we might still be waiting a while for the Herald headline: Minister misled public on TVNZ 7 viewer numbers!
You'd think someone there could have written that story.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Starting a credible metropolitan daily from scratch would require a very large initial outlay and the ability to sustain years of red ink.
It's not really that large. There's dozens of people who have that kind of money in NZ, who would hardly notice if the thing went belly up. I'm amazed none of them can be arsed, considering that owning a paper is owning a pulpit.
-
merc, in reply to
You'd think someone there could have written that story.
Career move fail.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
It’s not really that large. There’s dozens of people who have that kind of money in NZ, who would hardly notice if the thing went belly up. I’m amazed none of them can be arsed, considering that owning a paper is owning a pulpit.
Michael Horton tried it in the late 90s, with an afternoon daily based in Manukau. It served a part of the greater Auckland area very poorly served by the Herald but it still didn’t fly and was closed in 1999, so the family could concentrate on its printing business.
NBR publisher Barry Colman had a crack at a weekly (Thursday) paper in the 90s too, but it also failed (perhaps its slightly garish tabloid look was ahead of its time). To his credit, he paid out everyone’s contract and there were a few journalists quite happy to pocket several tens of thousands of dollars.
Basically, starting a competing independent paper in market with one dominant player is much, much harder than it looks.
Then there’s that other weird little business weekly that was publishing for a while. Starting newspapers is a bit of a mug’s game these days.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Minister misled public on TVNZ 7 viewer numbers!You’d think someone there could have written that story.
Can't find a direct quote though, what with Twitter treating me like a leper and snubbing my every advance.
Yes, I think someone should write a piece on a Minister of broadcasting not giving a F**K about broadcasting. -
BenWilson, in reply to
So, like, no one has tried it for at least 12 years? I wasn't really envisaging something indy and small. More like one of NZs burgeoning billionaires setting one up just because they like the pulpit, and think competition is a good thing. That's IF they believe that, which considering the way NZ is, is probably unlikely.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
More like one of NZs burgeoning billionaires setting one up just because they like the pulpit
They already have one, it's called the media, or what will be left of it once they have destroyed the good bits. Why bother building another bit?.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
They already have one, it's called the media, or what will be left of it once they have destroyed the good bits. Why bother building another bit?.
It's kind of hard to believe that none amongst our elites has the get up and go to challenge for their piece of it. The Morgan family, maybe? It's really a sitting duck, it's not like the frikken infrastructure for printing off newsprint is a huge military industrial complex. Writers are also cheap and by God do journalists sound desperate for a chance to actually do journalism. They'd be able to poach quite a few staff from the Herald on that alone.
-
This morning's correction, at the bottom of the 'In Brief' column on page 3 of the Herald.
-
Sacha, in reply to
It's an industry whose business model is changing. Investing in printed media is not a good bet. And online isn't sustainable in NZ yet either, for some strange reason.
-
3410,
Correction
Contains:
a) No admission that the NZH/HoS has repeatedly used the false figure.
b) No admission that NZH/Hos failed to respond to earlier requests for correction.
c) No explanation that the false figure had hugely understated the actual popularity of TVNZ7.
d) No admission that the false figure was the anchor "fact" for an NZH editorial which purported to show that TVNZ7 had failed to garner a large audience (and therefore deserved its demise).
e) No admission that that editorial could have created or substantially contributed to a false impression among the general public that TVNZ7 is far less popular than is actually the case.
f) No pledge to - in future - fact-check figures before publishing.
I could go on.
Suffice to say that this *technical correction* will do absolutely nothing to remediate the damage done. -
BenWilson, in reply to
It's an industry whose business model is changing. Investing in printed media is not a good bet. And online isn't sustainable in NZ yet either, for some strange reason.
It's not a safe bet, anyway. But as part of a massive portfolio of all kinds of bets, I'm surprised that none of our ridiculously wealthy people see the fringe benefits of having their own rag. It would cost a lot less to have a newspaper than to own some of those ridiculous superyachts in the Viaduct that seem to never get used at all. I'm talking about people for whom owning crazily expensive vanity items is normal - how is owning a newspaper any less of a vanity item? They could put a picture of their super-pe..yacht on every page, and get in tens of thousands more people's faces every day. They could influence elections, swing all kinds of favours, take vengeance on their enemies - all the crap that media moguls have always done. It's downright weird that it hasn't happened.
-
merc,
The big story is how Joyce is not being questioned over his intentional misuse of figures to ditch TVNZ 7.
Because that would also lead to very searching questions about how this Govt. actually does push legislation. -
Russell Brown, in reply to
I could go on.
Suffice to say that this *technical correction* will do absolutely nothing to remediate the damage done.Given that the Herald refused to even respond to TVNZ's attempt to provide correct figures, I'm treating it as a small win.
-
Sacha, in reply to
They could influence elections, swing all kinds of favours, take vengeance on their enemies - all the crap that media moguls have always done. It's downright weird that it hasn't happened.
Or you could take it as some evidence that they don't need to own a media outlet to achieve those ends.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Yes, credit to the Herald for publishing a correction.
-
Sacha, in reply to
how Joyce is not being questioned over his intentional misuse of figures
He got away with it for several years over wasteful roading projects as well.
-
3410,
I'm treating it as a small win.
That's cool, but you won't mind if differ.
:) -
BenWilson, in reply to
Or you could take it as some evidence that they don't need to own a media outlet to achieve those ends.
I'm more inclined to think that it's just something that isn't part of the culture here. It wouldn't even occur to people as a cool thing to do. Rather like the whole culture surrounding owning a sporting club, something I've always found it weird to care a stuff about, but people go nuts for that kind of thing overseas. Our celebrity culture doesn't really include the super rich, who prefer to keep to themselves and their clique.
I'm not lamenting that this hasn't happened here, I'm just commenting that it seems odd that it hasn't been tried more frequently. Perhaps our egalitarian self-image gets in the way of that kind of ostentation.
-
merc, in reply to
He got away with it for several years over wasteful roading projects as well.
How, just how? Silly I know, but surely there are checks and measures against completely batshit crazy funding decisions by rogue govt's?
Oh wait...
Post your response…
This topic is closed.