OnPoint by Keith Ng

Read Post

OnPoint: Sunlight Resistance

402 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 11 12 13 14 15 17 Newer→ Last

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    almost perfect irony.

    Ferrous the Key...?

    Well, fear is the vector...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    Oh for the good old days when I was the only me on the internet, now there are thousands of me – we gave our kids both our surnames, they’re still unique

    Exactly why I use nzlemming everywhere ;-)

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2929 posts Report Reply

  • st ephen,

    I felt Key’s use of the All Blacks behaviour to legitimate Jason Ede’s dirty work – just appalling

    It did show where the real power lies in NZ though. Key claimed (in relation to the Nats accessing Labour's unprotected files) that of course the ABs would access the Wallabies' team sheet in the same back-door way if they had the opportunity, and he knew that for a fact because they'd done it. Now, either he was making shit up for the sake of squeezing in another rugby analogy, or it was true because his AB mates had told him about it. Later he stammered his way through an unconvincing retraction, saying he might have been thinking of the case where English journalists had taken photos of an AB whiteboard with "Greatest Team in History" written on it.
    In between times, Steve Hansen presumably rang the AB's Number One Groupie and told him to pull his head in, or the deal for election day supportive tweets would be off... ;-)

    dunedin • Since Jul 2008 • 254 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I’m always amused/appalled by those people who declare that they registered a protest against the system by refusing to vote. No you didn’t, dude. Everyone just ignored you.

    Indeed, the signal is lost in the noise. It needn't be, if voting were compulsory

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10629 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to cindy baxter,

    That's an excellent link, thanks Cindy. Much to think on there.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10629 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh,

    This may be relevant: Pam Corkery on the "puffed up little shits". She gives some examples of truly unprofessional behaviour.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Greg Dawson, in reply to andin,

    Maybe we can learn from baboons. Yes I’ve posted it before, but …..

    Curse you for posting that before btw – I’m now halfway through a marathon watch of Sapolsky’s entire Human Bio 150 lecture series at Stanford. The guy is a great speaker, and the material is utterly fascinating.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 294 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Andrew Geddis,

    No. I’m saying that if you don’t put a tick in a box every 3 years, then all the other democracy stuff you do is pretty much pointless.*

    And you would be wrong about that.

    Caveat: I didn't read your caveat. If I had I'd have answered

    But trying to get other people to change how they vote is still less effective than being part of a heavily voting cohort that garners politicians’ attention for that reason alone.

    That entirely depends on how effective you are at getting people to change their vote.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10629 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    In a column about the media and their effect on the election it is almost perfect irony.

    And she has no idea. Doubt she reads her comments section or she would not have posted that here.Cortex=Speargun= Bollocks. Dumbing down the masses or is she really blinded by the Key and believes that rubbish? She'll be ramping up the TPPA soon cos Key wants her to. It's not like she knows anything about it,just that it's good for business but what business?

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to tussock,

    National nailed it. Perfect campaign, beautiful responses, glib brush-offs because their voters didn’t want to hear excuses and explanations (if you’re explaining, you’re losing, they know that). Dirty Politics still cost them a bunch of seats.

    Yes, that does need to be remembered. It was an outside shot that power was going to change hands on Saturday, not just on polling data but on the simple fact that National has never had less than 3 terms. The voting public does move quite slowly. This "landslide" has delivered a small majority to National, and they now have a whole basket of fails that will only continue to stack up over the next three years.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10629 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Have we started something here?First Pam ,now Dita De Boni lets loose.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    ...now Dita De Boni lets loose

    Ah well, there goes her welcome on RNZ's 'The Panel'...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7876 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to Creon Upton,

    The answer to the media question doesn’t lie in a return to honorable public broadcasting and increased regulation around the Official Information Act.I think Jon Stewart is a better model.

    Brilliant commentary. Yes, but when the Jon Stewart watchers want substance over sensationalism for the rest of their viewing/listening week - an alternate outlet needs to be an available landing spot in the sea of propaganda.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    As much as I love Jon Stewart he does live in a media world where he has a lot more material to draw on to make 4 nights a week's worth of pointing out the foibles of others - NZ's a much smaller place, I'd (wildly) guess that there's maybe 1 night a weeks worth of politicians and media worth laughing at, maybe less.

    John Oliver does one night a week and does one investigative report a week, any country probably has way more than one thing a week that needs looking at by TV media.

    I think that a night a week of political satire, actual funny stuff, pointing the finger at stuffed shirts at their most stuffiness would go down well. But not as a replacement for something like Campbell Live (the only thing that brings me to TV3 or TV1 these days)

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2605 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to BenWilson,

    This “landslide” has delivered a small majority to National, and they now have a whole basket of fails that will only continue to stack up over the next three years.

    I haven’t thought its a big landslide. It’s more that it’s suprising they did so well, considering how dirty politics everyone knows they are. However, now that the price of milk is going to hit the farmers in the wallet. And we already sold of half the electricity generation. So who knows where the government going to get the farm subidys from. There could end up being a large number of farmers who can’t get enough – minimum wage workers, on a three mounth trail period – to keep from going under. So the television might instruct its audience to vote against the government next time, (between advertisement breaks).

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4163 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Caleb D'Anvers,

    What a large proportion of New Zealanders want, in other words, isn’t ‘fairness’, it’s a war against the weak.

    All the more so when the middle classes feel precarious and their dreams of making the 1% slip away. Then they start scapegoating the reds/greens/blacks/browns/yellows/pinks/rainbows or whatever colour a ‘hated minority’ symbolises. It worked for President Nixon’s Southern Strategy in the 1960s, at the height of the Civil Rights movement and the Vietnam War protests. And I’ve said it before, but the collapse of the Weimar Republic in 1933 took it to its logical extreme.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5414 posts Report Reply

  • Jan Rivers,

    I was involved in a conference in early August. Democracy, ethics and the public good was held at St Andrews on the Terrace in Wellington.

    The conference report is being finalised but conference delegates identified three topics as crucial for future work to re-strengthen our democracy. One is the quality of our media. http://www.publicgood.org.nz/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/securing-our-democracy.png

    The intention is for St Andrews Trust and Public Good to be part of the work with others to scope a plan to improve our democracy. One small but useful initiative, signalled at the conference would be to crowdfund for summer research scholarships to investigate some of the issues that have arisen in the light of Dirty Politics. This would also need to find a sympathetic academic(s) to supervise the work and to frame up some ideas that would convert ideas into suitable research questions. Off the top of my head I had thought of the following topics but I’d welcome other suggestions.
    Researching the relationship between right wing bloggers and the appearance of mainstream media stories.
    The coverage by the media of parties and third parties investing significant amounts of money in the lead-up to the 2014 election. (In particular the contrast between the privately funded parties Conservatives and Internet-Mana whose treatment by the media was significantly different).
    The coverage of stories that address collaborative action by citizens whether in coops, charities, NGOs or unions. These seem to be presented with increasing levels of disdain.

    I’d love to know the thoughts of commenters on whether this is the right approach but if you’d be interested in supporting this (or a similar effort) (crowd funding Keith perhaps!) I can be contacted on jan[dot]rivers<at>publicgood<dot>org{dot}nz

    Since Apr 2011 • 18 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to steven crawford,

    3 months is becoming 12. Team Key may say not selling any more assets but what of vast tracks of land? Excuse, freeing up for much needed housing development. NZ assets? Not at all. If they start by changing the classification of National parks….. and then there will be Farms to subdivide. Just a thought.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to steven crawford,

    And we already sold of half the electricity generation. So who knows where the government going to get the farm subidys from.

    To pay the interest bill and to defend our int'l credit rating, the Government's only choice I suspect will be to sell more assets, as I doubt they can reduce outgoings or increase revenue (through expanding the tax base) fast enough.

    Options are Landcorp and Conservation Estate lands, possibly the partial or full privatisation of ACC or alternately a cave in on the TPPA in exchange for US support on our dollar and borrowing?

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to Jan Rivers,

    Jan Rivers

    Small organisations and trusts with these sorts of common objectives need to amalgamate under one banner. The key to any movement toward better democracy is to motivate, educate and enthuse those without vested interests – which means the young and the disenfranchised. This new organisation is to my mind the best I’ve seen in that regard;

    http://www.actionstation.org.nz/

    If I were you, I’d talk to them.

    Many years ago in NZ when environmental interest groups began to form there was a state of similar small independent factions who recognised that one banner-one movement had a better chance of making an impact. A number of these joined together to form ECO;

    http://www.eco.org.nz/

    That is the model to follow. A high level of on-going funding is critical and Action Station recently crowd-funded a full page ad in the NZ Herald calling for a Royal Commission into Dirty Politics .. so they have proven impact and potential. They are also the same people behind RockEnrol – again an initiative that brings with it a 4,000 odd people database (folks they newly enrolled for this year’s election).

    They also did a blog post here about their experience in that regard.

    Best of luck with the initiative – might come across you if you join forces with Action Station.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Rob Stowell, in reply to Jan Rivers,

    The intention is for St Andrews Trust and Public Good to be part of the work with others to scope a plan to improve our democracy. One small but useful initiative, signalled at the conference would be to crowdfund for summer research scholarships to investigate some of the issues that have arisen in the light of Dirty Politics.

    Sounds good!
    I'd like to see someone research how the 'modern political parties' use data. And what the different parties spent on PR advice, polling, and focus-groups.
    All perfectly legal, except the 'black ops' stuff doesn't come out of nowhere.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 2089 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Jan Rivers,

    I suggest adding how journalistic ethics are being acted out, reflected on and maintained in newsrooms.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19667 posts Report Reply

  • Trevor Nicholls, in reply to Katharine Moody,

    or alternately a cave in on the TPPA in exchange for US support on our dollar and borrowing?

    What evidence is there of any resistance to the TPPA on Key's part at all?

    Wellington, NZ • Since Nov 2006 • 310 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    If they start by changing the classification of National parks

    Something to keep an eye on on this topic, all three major parties (Nat, Lab, Green) agreed before the election that there’s a strong need to classify NZ’s stewardship land, and they’ve all had an intent to give the process a kick after the election, especially after the PCE produced a report about the problem last year. That’s basically 30% of the Conservation Estate administered by DOC, or about 10% of NZ, which doesn’t currently have a clear status besides basic protection and being managed fairly generically.

    In conservation terms it’s often very valuable land (or not) and was meant to be classified since 1987, but DOC’s never had the resources or inclination to get around to determining and formalising its status. Classifying it properly is a good thing in principle, because most recently the ambiguous status on Stewardship Land has been at the centre of a bunch of controversies, in part caused by even the applicants for conservation land use not being clear on how significant the values are on land which they’re interested in using.

    Anyway, this term and after there will probably be recurring announcements about new blocks of public land being more strongly protected. Some will go into more National Parks, more Conservation Parks, or more Reserves, which is always going to reflect warm and fluffy karma back to the government of the day. The critical detail will be in the fine print of what’s allowed under that “protection”, and in the exceptional cases of what continues to not be protected beyond the basic level which it is now. I wrote more about it over here.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Greg Dawson, in reply to Trevor Nicholls,

    What evidence is there of any resistance to the TPPA on Key’s part at all?

    None whatsoever. Our best bet on dodging this particular bullet remains Japanese resistance. Long may it continue.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 294 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 11 12 13 14 15 17 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.