Posts by giovanni tiso
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I feel that so very strongly that having started to make a small, gracious, to my mind completely defensible criticism, I lack the self-control to leave it at that, and I have to sing my relentless monotonous song again.
I resent the accuracy of this description.
-
Little bit :-)
-
I know why I feel sorry for him. Because I like him and can't believe he was so careless.
-
Jose is a rising star. And Jesus H. Christ I hadn't seen the We Are the World rendition by the Israeli journalists... I think I need a drink or five.
-
Well, not on my TV show. And neither would Stewart. Ever. Ever, ever, ever..
He has. The business guy springs to mind, whatshisname? That was pretty devastating, both in the edited version that went to air and in the unedited version that you could watch on the website. "Roll 2-12" is a moment that will stay with me.
That was far worse than the Crossfire interview. And he's had Crossfire-like moments with a lot of people, although mostly it didn't look like they started that way - in other words, he was playing good host and things just became adversarial.
However, I also said I understand why you can't as that question. What I am asking is if you think there is a space in New Zealand for that sort of thing. And if not, why not? And if yes, why is nobody doing it - is it simply because nobody is hurting New Zealand that bad? Or is it because you invariably know not just the game but also the player, and you know that they're not that demonic in real life? (which I'm sure they aren't, nobody is.)
-
(Although in the real world where the salaries of newsreaders have come down - which I welcome - I will note this: what does it say about the industry that Hawkesby in his day was considered such a prized scalp? Because surely, even though he was very good at doing a difficult and demanding job that I couldn't do in a million years if you got Cronkite himself to coach me, he still *was* at the end of the day the guy who read the news. Not the editor. Not the reporters. Not the interviewer. Not the producers. So what does it say about how we understand the TV news that TVNZ felt that if they lost him they would lose the viewers? That the viewers would go with the guy who read the content as opposed to the guys who made the content available to him? Does it mean that they had dumbed the product down enough that the face presenting it had become the only value added, the only recognisable difference? How bloody insecure is that?)
-
Can I gently point out that fronting two and a half hours of live television every day is not actually easy?
Argh! I'm not saying it's easy! I'm saying that what Geoff Robinson does is also not easy and arguably requires *even more* skill.
This really has come down to hating people on the telly.
No, it really, really hasn't.
Anyway, do feel free to be indignant when someone else (on Kiwiblog, perhaps) complains about the salary attached to a job of which you approve.
If you're still referring to me, sorry, I think everyone should be paid the same except for dentists and toilet cleaners, who should be paid twice as much as everybody else.
-
The whole news-readers-have-no-skill-they-just-read-words-and-get-paid-too-much is really really tired an really really old
It's not what I said - and furthermore you know it's not what I said. Geoff Robinson does what our newsreaders do on television, and on top of that he interviews people, which is bloody hard. And his programme is longer. And he gets up every morning at god knows what hour. And he's been doing it for many years, which ought to count, remuneration-wise. Yet somehow reading the news is more valuable. And there are fewer people who can do it as well as what Robinson does. (That has to be the assumption behind the whole "what the market will pay" thing - these people have to be damn near irreplaceable, if the theory holds.)
I was trying to point out that what Robinson does is very valuable, not de-value what newsreaders do. All the bile has been supplied by you.
Really the narrowness of what can be questioned is quite amazing.
-
and his job is not just to read things
What are their jobs then? And bear in mind I say that after having sat through the thing where Judy Bailey explained what her day was like.
-
You too Giovanni.
If we've seriously got to that point in the argument, the bit where we just start slagging newsreaders, then I'm out.
Er... you're the one for whom the differential in salary between Geoff Robinson and whoever it is who reads the news on TVOne in the evenings now is justified by the paparazzi factor, and I'm the one "slagging"?
Also, apparently my slagging consists in describing what they do: read the news. Hence their name: newsreaders.
Okey-dokey.