Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I did not know, so please do not make statements along the lines of "I can't believe he didn't know".
Fair enough. I had some idea this sort of thing was going on but I hadn't realised it was so extensive. It was referred to in the thread on Kiwiblog.
Yes I could have taken the time to go to her Wikipedia page and check the edit history. But I didn't think to do that, and that really wasn't the issue. I have had malicious editing on my wikipedia page, but that doesn't mean I call for the Government to pass a law about it.
Some moron vandalising your page isn't quite the same as having your opponent do it while you're standing for office, though. And actually creating the articles to do it in the first place. I don't know Caughey, and I don't think regulation would be appropriate, but I think she was fairly upset by the nature of the campaign against her.
-
The National Enquirer's response to the McCain camp's threat of legal action:
ENQURIER RESPONDS TO MCCAIN/PALIN
Wed Sep 03 2008 18:19:21 ET"The National Enquirer's coverage of a vicious war within Sarah Palin's extended family includes several newsworthy revelations, including the resulting incredible charge of an affair plus details of family strife when the Governor's daughter revealed her pregnancy. Following our John Edwards' exclusives, our political reporting has obviously proven to be more detail-oriented than the McCain campaign's vetting process. Despite the McCain camp's attempts to control press coverage they find unfavorable, The Enquirer will continue to pursue news on both sides of the political spectrum."
-
You talked about the Pink Dollar and the idea of gay affluence. This has been shown to a myth
I sort of said that, but in a different way: if there is a Pink Dollar, it's not apparent to ad agencies. It is very different overseas: Vodafone, Virgin Airlines, Absolut, etc, all make TV commercials specifically targeted at gay men (I couldn't find a lesbian ad). Here, niches seem to be too hard to deal with.
And that does have implications for local gay media -- the pool of potential advertisers is bloody small. Ask my friend who used to sell for both Express and GayNZ -- it's hard work, and the ventures wind up depending on a small group of gay businesses and the Aids Foundation. Hence the turmoil at Express.
I see on gaynz you were informed Pink Triangle was a magazine not a newspaper, ok, I'll pass that one, but I disagree, I always saw it as a national newspaper when I was a lad in the 80s. Minor point but it was around way before mtm and express
Fair enough.
Up was published from Wellington early this century for around 4 years I think. jack from Auckland for about 2.
I know both David and Julian who produced Jack, but I couldn't fit into the backgrounder. David also loaned us the original film poster for Squeeze (which he was in!) but, again, we couldn't fit it in.
The lesbian newsletter has been running for over 20 years now I think. But women didn't get much of a look in. Maybe if you'd framed it as being about the gay male world it would have been better?
In retrospect, yes, you're absolutely right.
And the drag queen interview - *sigh* it's not the the equivalent to putting whites in blackface to know what Maori think, but nearly.
Yep, Simon got that. He was sitting in the audience and felt the energy go all dark ...
But all that aside, yes, you have to fit it into the time limits of tv, and overall it was good, I gave it a pass ;-)
Thanks. But one thing I've come away with is the view that someone has to make that documentary. Not just one part, but three. The stories are too good and too important to squander.
-
He ain't playing the victim, right wingers generally don't.
Are you kidding? The more alarming the wingnut, the greater the chance you'll find them writhing on the floor if someone barks at them. See: Redbaiter and Whaleoil.
As you've pointed out in this post Aaron has messed with Christine's profile on wikipedia on numerous occasions. His edits show up a pattern of pettiness and bullsh*t. You have highlighted this well and are going to piss off Aaron/Barzini. Well done, you are a smart political operator.
Excuse me. I am not a "political operator". I'm a journalist and this is a story, albeit one of a kind most journalists aren't going to get.
I'm actually really pissed off that DPF came down like a ton of bricks on Caughey without even hinting at why she might feel that way. And I can't believe he didn't know. It's just deliberately deceptive, and David knows enough about the internet to know better.
Chistine Caughey missed all this easy opportunity to attack her opponent and instead shoots herself (and her associates) in the foot. Suggesting she would like to regulate the editing of wikipedia is about as stupid a suggestion as anyone can come up with - it is not only obviously unworkable, but also it is gauranteed to piss off every wikipedia editor.
She thought there should be electoral rules governing this sort of crap. I think that's unworkable, but I also think that good Wikipedia editors are going to be much more exercised about a politician deliberately and over a long period abusing the good faith at the heart of the Wikipedia process by turning it into a sewer or a soapbox than they are about the person who copped it spending two sentences telling a committee that something ought to be done.
-
I'll have to get back to that speech, I'm afraid. I lasted about 10 minutes ...
-
We had a silly, meaningless visit from something called the World XV who wore jerseys that would make your average jockey blush.
Didn't the ABs lose to them too?
-
well Russell, the show was ok, but could have been better with more research
Just out of interest, what do you think we could have researched better?
My original script for the set-up piece covered Circle and Gay News in the 70s, as well as Squeeze, but we couldn't get good enough visual material in the time we had (I tried to get copies of Circle during the weekend), and it was too long, so that part went.
I'd have loved to have the Truth front page that printed the proposed lesbian takeover of Carterton (it was a joke in Circle) as news. But that kind of stuff deserves a series of its own.
A series, say, like the recent brilliant BBC4 three-parter, It's Not Unusual ...
-
I'm not trying to get you to "fix" all the good bits, and I agree that the programme as a whole was good. ;-)
Yeah, no worries. I've addressed similar qualms over at GayNZ today as well. I think part of the problem is that this kind of show is so bloody rare that people, understandably, want everything addressed in case it never happens again.
-
@media7
I'm glad Jay Bennie called you on the Simon Pound piece. It made my skin crawl as well.Simon was aware of the response to that track on the night. But I can assure you it was done in good faith and I think "skin crawl" is taking it way too far. And it did give Jay the opportunity to raise the point.
Also the tone of Pound's narration in the interview piece with the "gay theorist" was so condescending. This appears to be his style - to mock and condescend.
I really couldn't see it in that one, sorry. I don't think it was disrespectful at all.
I wonder if you tried to cover too much ground ("segment 1: we'll do this; segment two, we'll move to this"). There was a point where you asked Johnny to "hold that thought" because you had to go for a break, but what was he holding for? When you came back, you followed your script and his point was lost. I think you would have been better served to continue the discussion. And that could be a guide for all your programmes. Start the discussion, have stuff to fill if the discussion goes nowhere, but let discussions that are interesting develop.
Unfortunately, we have a requirement to record the programme in three parts, so I was obliged to cut of Johnny as he got rolling (I had my director barking "gotta go" in my earpiece). That's TV, and Johnny, as a TV professional, wasn't in the least offended by it. I'm a bit surprised you've chosen to focus on that rather than all the good things that happened in the programme.
But, as of next week week, Media7 will have only one break. It's only another 30 seconds (taking us to a 25 minute runtime), but not having to go in and out will give us more time to talk, and to let discussions run.
-
To be fair to Bhatnagar, he does put in the hours, and makes plenty of uncontroversial edits (someof them albeit where he might still be seen to have a conflict of interest).
But he also pulls crap like this.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 … 2279 Older→ First