Posts by Cecelia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Back home and read the response to my early morning rant. Yes, I guess I do have a puritanical streak and I'm also very bad at expressing stuff. I'll try again. I'm in my 60s and have been a Labour voter all my life (except when they piss me off and I vote Green). I remember exactly where I was when Norm Kirk died and David Lange resigned. They were both clever men and both brought Labour to the fore but both had shocking diets/health and died, burnt out or got sick before their time.
I've been watching Shane Jones for years, since he was first praised as an up and coming Labour leader and I've been somewhat disappointed. And if I were his mum I'd think he was not looking after himself - he looks fat and flabby not robust and red-blooded to me. Winston Churchill might have been able to burn the candle at both ends and slip in a bit of world leadership but I don't know if there's anyone who could do that today.
And perhaps after so many years of teaching I get sick of people saying "he has so much potential". What has Jones done as an MP to fulfil that potential? How many years can go by before people stop saying that? -
Here we go, the prissy middle class is coming out to play.
No, no, no. I really don't mean that. What I mean is that someone touted as the new leader of Labour and first Maori PM, who is a father of seven and highly intelligent with a Harvard degree and a cancer survivor can't even look after himself to a reasonable degree.
If he can't look after himself, how can he fulfil his much talked about potential?
I don't understand why "red blooded, robust" males want to watch porn movies but I assure you that if I didn't know about it it wouldn't worry me at all!!
-
Hmmmm. Back to Shane Jones. People have been saying for decades how smart he is. His colleagues are quoted this morning as saying "He's a bloody good guy with tons of potential".
He was a Minister of Building and Construction and after each day's meetings he watched porn movies and ate junk food? He's an overweight gentleman who, if I remember it rightly, had cancer some years ago.
How smart are his lifestyle choices? Does he really have any ambition or does he think high office will come to him on a plate? We have a national scandal in our building and construction industry. Don't people like him have to read and prepare before going to see organisations about their work? What state would he be in the next day after quaffing junk and watching a couple of pornos.
Was he bored? Is he so clever that politics is too easy for him? Didn't his portfolio matter to him? Is his life out of control?
-
"I lost the plot." Shane Jones yesterday. What does this mean????
-
Basically in our game it doesn't matter who you work for or what product you put out - there'll always be someone who thinks you are a pile of shit.
Maybe - and I sympathise with hard-working people who perform thankless jobs. I was a secondary school teacher for decades. You just have to grin and bear the constant moaning:)
I just think there is a vein of frustration in this discussion. Russell and Damien are very good journalists and they have chosen to work in aspects of the industry in which they can make an intelligent contribution. It's not about them. It's about the way TV One news and current affairs is not as good as it could be, the way it used to be before it was so ratings driven.
The spoof pro-whaling chappy just focused attention on it again. I think Damien wanted to discuss spoofs but ended up tapping into the winter of our discontent.
-
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?)
I like that point. Shallow and shallower - our main channel.
Meanwhile, on a more cerebral note, Coro is on in less than an hour. The revered Paul Henry wondered last week how a show about "ugly poor people" could do so well. There are probably a few "retarded people" , "schizos" and "ladies with moustaches" on it too. Ain't he a lovely guy?
-
Does making fun of less good journalism help? I'm not sure.
I think it does because it foregrounds the weakness of story choice. What was going through the programmer's (?) head when (s)he took up a Sunday Times (!) story about commercial whaling. I don't think it is wrong for me to say that such a stance would never get traction in NZ. So why even go down that track. Was it to provide some non-PC "balance" to the Peter Bethune story. He was an anti-whaling nutter who made a good cause seem a little crazy???? Throw in a pro-whaling story to feed into that emotional current????
Do you remember Mark Sainsbury interviewing a right nutter who criticised DOC and wanted to farm endangered birds to save them?
These stories are a waste of our air space because they are very weak and have no future but they provide a weak flutter of indignation or agreement. A sort of news porn or something.
-
I don't think that should be used of evidence of his pro-whaling agenda either.
He might not be pro-whaling at all but he often pours scorn on liberal 'PC' matters. I don't think he is all bad but when I watched the video of his interview with the prankster, I felt that someone was playing him (and Breakfast) at his own game. Knock the libs, give it a shallow once over ...
-
Stop giving column inches and airtime to people simply because their views are controversial.
I think this is an important point and almost justifies the prank. Henry was probably about to revel in the non-PC aspect of it all. Hoist by his own petard - sort of. I know that he would not choose or prepare the stories but he loves to take a contradictory view.
-
Thank you for the link, Sacha. I don't know how I missed it.