Random Play by Graham Reid

Read Post

Random Play: Hi-ho hi-ho it's off to work we go . . .

46 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • Craig Ranapia,

    ANd once more, I've got to ask: What the frak does Shane Curry do? Exercising any kind of editorial judgement doesn't seem to be in the job description.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • philipmatthews,

    That Holmes piece also makes the assumption that women don't go to work, or must have low-stress, meaningless jobs if they do ... Work pressure: it's a man's man's man's world.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2007 • 656 posts Report Reply

  • FletcherB,

    I guess we should ask Holmes.... seeing as Sunday night is off limits, what times is it better to schedule a fight for a breakfast jock ?

    West Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 893 posts Report Reply

  • philipmatthews,

    Saturday, according to Paul Litterick's blog/Elton John.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2007 • 656 posts Report Reply

  • Rickai,

    I thought the exact same thing about the whole Holmes article. It was a disgraceful thing to say.

    Mind you, in a different time, stressed out teachers would tend to refrain from beating their partner on Sunday night and take it out with the cane on Johnny from 4f on Monday morning.

    Veitch should have told his ex-partner that if she didn't leave him alone (or get the f*ck out of his house right now) he was going to call the five-oh. Simple.

    Any comment on the media silence since Sunday? What a wonderful, caring press we have.

    Since Jan 2007 • 47 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    I think that last year, with Tony on the verge of becoming the major New Zealand television presence, God said: "No, no, Tony. Not yet. There is something that has to be paid for. You have to pay for it and it's up to you to find your way back."

    I like this bit. By assaulting his girlfriend "Tony" temporarily remains in the ranks of the Great Unwashed with the rest of us, his ascension to Superhumanness - along with Holmes, presumbly - having to wait until he is worthy. WTF?

    On the plus side, this has motivated me to devote real time and energy to keeping that douchebag out of the mayoralty should he, as has been rumoured, anounce his candidacy for that office.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Megan Stunzner,

    Perhaps Paul Holmes was just trying to pour his olive oil on troubled waters?

    But I'm wondering if, during his long and profitable career, Holmes ever heard God's voice saying : "No, no Paul. Not yet. there is something (many things?) that have to be paid for."

    Since Apr 2009 • 2 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Stevens,

    Thanks for this - helps me get beyond my gut "bullshit' reaction to the Holmes' piece and view it more analytically - and it's still bullshit.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 230 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    I have waited to see if anyone would comment on Paul Holmes’ column in the Herald on Sunday last weekend.

    It has certainly attracted plenty of comments in the Veitch thread.

    As I said before, it is simply beyond satire. The old "I'm really talking about me-me-me while pretending to talk about something else" is an old sitcom staple. The joke, of course, is that the person speaking doesn't recognise how self-absorbed they are.

    Holmes' column is not only beyond satire, it is so bad - and so predictably bad - that it is beyond outrage. Which shows how far our expectations have fallen. A newspaper columnist writing drivel is common enough. But when said columnist is the host/interviewer on what purports to be the only "serious" public affairs programme on network television, and he disdains thoughtful analysis, and nobody in a position of responsibility at any of his employers seems the slightest bit concerned, then we have surely lost the battle. It's not that Holmes' piece is outrageous - it's that we are no longer outraged .

    If there are standards, he should be fired. But there aren't. So what do we do? He's laughing. We're shouting. Who won?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1330 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Robeson,

    and this man Holmes is the man we have doing our 'quality' political interviewing.

    *despair*

    Since Feb 2008 • 87 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Litterick,

    Holmes is like Chicken Man: he's everywhere, he's everywhere. I realise this is a small country but there is no shortage of opinionated people who could fill the vital role of giving uninformed commentary in a national newspaper. And Holmes is given outlets for blathering all over the place, including this one.

    The decent thing to do would have been to recuse himself from judgement, on the grounds that he knew the convicted man and precious else besides. But then, if he applied that principle to all his media outpourings, he would be out of many jobs.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1000 posts Report Reply

  • Heather W.,

    It's not that Holmes' piece is outrageous - it's that we are no longer outraged.

    Last century I used to watch TV1 for the facts, TV3 for the story and read newspapers for the background and visit the internet for different angles (it was interesting seeing the same story given slightly different treatments - definite differences between NZ and Australia).

    Now most news is delivered by presenters and celebrity rules. The same item is presented the same way in many platforms, facts seem to be a sidebar and research, journalism and judgement are lacking. We were not outraged because the changes have been insidious, changes were made to compete with other media and now mainstream media all looks alike and it's not so good.

    North Shore • Since Nov 2008 • 189 posts Report Reply

  • philipmatthews,

    I don't mind the HoS column. I take it as entertainingly bonkers: the semi-senile ramblings of a eccentric olive oil farmer from Hawke's Bay. I'm more alarmed by the fact that Holmesy has completely ruined what used to be the only decent interview show on TV (was Agenda, now Q + A). It used to be the place where interview subjects could actually finish their sentences; now we need to cut back to the yabbering host every five seconds, like every other show.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2007 • 656 posts Report Reply

  • Mrs Skin,

    Last century I used to watch TV1 for the facts, TV3 for the story and read newspapers for the background and visit the internet for different angles...

    ...now mainstream media all looks alike and it's not so good

    Well exactly. I periodically chuck my toys out of the cot and refuse to go to a particular source for my news on the grounds of laziness of presentation. The latest recipient of my sulk is Stuff, based on using the Amazonfail story from the SMH without so much as a quick once-over to check it was accurate.

    the warmest room in the h… • Since Feb 2009 • 168 posts Report Reply

  • Kerry Weston,

    We were not outraged because the changes have been insidious, changes were made to compete with other media and now mainstream media all looks alike and it's not so good.

    and isn't it annoying when at last there's two good shows on telly, on different channels and, of course, they schedule them for the same timeslot. Utter contempt for their audience.

    Manawatu • Since Jan 2008 • 494 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic,

    and isn't it annoying when at last there's two good shows on telly, on different channels and, of course, they schedule them for the same timeslot. Utter contempt for their audience.

    I haven't had a TV for the past 4.5 years, and I'm glad I made that choice. There's always OnDemand...

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5441 posts Report Reply

  • Roger,

    I guess that I am surprised that I am surprised that anyone expected anything better from Holmes. He has been around for quite a long time.

    Hamilton • Since Jun 2007 • 179 posts Report Reply

  • Judy Spencer,

    Another new side to Holmes. Not only is he a rabid NAct supporter but he is a keen advocate of domestic violence towards women as well.

    That explains a lot about his behaviour towards Helen Clark, his simpering attitude towards Key and then his attack on Helen Clark on the Q and A NAct show. He's unprofessional and nasty.

    He gives some men yet another excuse for bad behaviour. Really it is lack of self control on Veitch's part and the inherent belief that women are less than men. Even Clark's visible refutation of that myth does not seem to have filtered through the archetypal mists of time to reach the brains of many NZ men. They voted National.

    Holmes, like Paul Henry, is a stooge placed by National for brainwashing the public. If you want rid of these stooges, you have to be prepared to do more, legally, than just moan.

    Holmes and Henry (sounds like Burke and Hare, Jekyll and Hide, Key and Douglas, Hitler and Himmler...) are shutting down, with the help of the political right, the privilege of truth and unbiased, objective dissemination of information. Mis-information, lack of information, shutting down of democratic public discussion - the electoral finance bill was an attempt to shut down money buying elections; the National government is a successful under the radar attack on actual freedom of speech re Auckland Governance - is what National does.

    New Zealand is facing a reduced respect throughout the world thanks to National. The UN, whether one agrees with the power it may or may not wield, is another tool to promote communication. This government believes in physical resolution to everything and is hell-bent on inviting war to New Zealand and NZers. It is sucking in its youth by bribery (paying Uni fees) to use as cannon fodder.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2008 • 23 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    I am by no means a creature of the right but I think in your eagerness to promote the unbiased objective dissemination of information, you may have swung rather far in the opposite direction...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1609 posts Report Reply

  • Judy Spencer,

    Sam F
    I see another creature who likes big words. Would you mind finding your own.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2008 • 23 posts Report Reply

  • philipmatthews,

    He means that you might be reading too much into this.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2007 • 656 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    Beg your pardon.

    I share some of your concerns on a lot of the points you mention, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that John Key is determined that we go to war at any cost, or that there's a concerted National/media effort to shut down democratic debate and promote domestic violence.

    Unless all of the above were just satirical jibes of some kind, in which case my apologies.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1609 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    Philip: thanks - that's what I should have said were I not such a clumsy writer (and, apparently, a big-word thief into the bargain).

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1609 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Now most news is delivered by presenters and celebrity rules. The same item is presented the same way in many platforms,

    Isn't it a Fox trot, thanks to Mr Murdoch?
    I can imagine Mr Olmes sitting on his deck on a saturday night with microphone in hand belting out his drivel to fresh air, dreaming of his return to TVNZ, remembering his good old(really old) days,and finishing with "and that was Olmes". If anyone tells me he is back, I will vomit and write a complaint forthwith.

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

  • Jackie Clark,

    Speaking of vile people, I was reading a story at the Herald Online about Ryanair thinking about charging a fat tax. I made the mistake of looking at "Your Views". And it was a mistake.

    Mt Eden, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3136 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.