Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: We can do better than this, in reply to Russell Brown,
What are you saying? That journalists should never accept leaks and tips from politicians?
That's wishful thinking on my part, but a good start would be for the Press Gallery to make it SOP to open visits from politicians with "This is all on the record and attributable." I expect that would lift the quality of such 'leaks and tips' enormously, as well as give us silly peasants a chance to decide how much weight we want to put on the person doing the speaking.
-
Hard News: We can do better than this, in reply to Carol Stewart,
It’s over to you, Pete, to identify a left-leaning blogger with even a tenth of the venality and vindictiveness of WhaleOil.
I feel kind of icky agreeing with Pete (sorry, Mr. George) but if our baseline is "not as bad as Whaleoil" that's a depressingly low bar you can clear without lifting your feet. And for the record, I've been smeared by the gutter trolls at both The Standard and Kiwiblog. They were equivalently fucking revolting. At least David Farrar has, to his credit, finally got out of utter denial mode but I'll believe it when I see it.
-
Hard News: We can do better than this, in reply to ,
Which, well, highly tasteless and offensive if it’s true, and therefore a bit off to be retailing without evidence, but I leave to the reader to judge how it compares to smearing victims of sexual assault etc.
Oh, Jesus... Could you take a moment and really think about what you just did there?
-
But there is an extent to which political journalists especially are required to play the game.
Sorry, Russell, but that’s bullshit. They choose to and I thought grown-ups were expected to be honest about, and accountable for, their actions in this sad and sorry world. At least, that sounds an awful lot like what political journalists are happy to demand from everyone else on a daily basis.
-
Hard News: We can do better than this, in reply to Russell Brown,
No. The majority of journalists never get near sensational stories.
And that’s true as far as it goes, but these damn things don’t just magically appear Harry Potter-style. Not for the first time, I have to wonder if the media in this country is magically assembled by elves when everyone else has gone home. Because every damn time the media gets caught with its hands in the chamber pot it’s always everyone else’s fault.
Does anyone actually have editorial responsibility for anything in New Zealand media? Or is the golden rule here that nobody shits where they eat, because a media culture that evades self-reflection, transparency and accountability doesn't strike me as much of a contributor to civil discourse either.
-
Hard News: We can do better than this, in reply to Pete George,
Journalists can’t rule out reporting on or using as a source certain people or certain publications, shows or social media because, for example, someone associated openly admits to enjoying practicing dirty politics.
Oh yes they can, Pete. They do every day of the week – a very long time ago, I worked on a tiny provincial paper where I got the local council round. Let’s just say one of my eager sources could barely be heard over the sound of grinding axes. Something I got a brutal reality check on when, naive young noob that I was, I submitted a story that would have gotten my arse sued off for defamation if the editor hadn’t spiked it and (quite rightly) torn me a new arsehole for getting played. Never took a call from that guy on the sound principle of "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me three times, put me out of everyone's misery."
-
Hard News: We can do better than this, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,
One wonders that instead of Dirty Politics inciting an electorate- inspired cull of nasty, “venal” politicians, it will have the effect of causing a backlash against ALL journalists, bloggers and the like.
In my less generous moments, I’d say “not before time” because you can’t have dirty politics without dirty media. But if it gives journalists and bloggers who actually have integrity (and aren’t in utter denial) a chance to work some real and meaningful culture change the gain is worth the pain.
-
No one could with a straight face have given an award to the actual story Slater used these means to publish. It was a vile, pornographic tract designed principally to hurt, harm and shame. The reports that did subsequently raise real questions about Brown’s conduct as a public official – principally, his acceptance of free and discounted hotel rooms – were delivered by Jared Savage and others at the New Zealand Herald.
Before we pat The Herald too hard on the back, this is the same Jared Savage who (as far as I'm aware) never retracted or apologized to anyone involved for implying Brown exerted "influence" to get Chuang employed by the Auckland City Art Gallery. Yes? So excuse me if I hold to my position that when you lie down with dogs, you not only get up with fleas but you're not welcome in my house any more.
-
In one of the early reports that annoyed me, Radio New Zealand’s political editor Brent Edwards, talked about smears being unleashed to “blogs” and “the blogosphere”. Actually, we’re not all like that. The multitude of bloggers, political bloggers included, have no part in this.
I totally agree with you. But I’ve got to admit while I’ve been very happy the media have been rediscovering their moral compasses, I’d love to see just ONE journalist or senior editor front up and own their wallowing in the dirty politics tallow.
I don’t want to sound like I’m picking on Edwards, but I’d love it if Media Take or Mediawatch asked him (and a long line of his contemporaries) a couple of very simple question:
“How many stories have you run where Cameron Slater was used as a source? And on reflection, was that a good idea.”
Now, let me answer one obvious objection: In my view, that’s NOT burning a source and you media folks lurking out there can’t have it both ways. If he’s such a toxic and destructive blight on civil discourse, and this is (in Duncan Garner’s words) “the dirtiest campaign ever”, you don’t get to pretend you’re above and beyond it all. That’s self-serving bullshit the media in general pulls too often – it’s almost as if transparency and accountability is for everyone except the Fourth Estate. And we all deserve a lot better than that.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Michael Meyers,
Also, I have to disagree about Harre failing to get a word in. Harre was very evasive about any relationship that Kim Dotcom has to the Nicky Hager emails. She seemed wholly unprepared for a question that should’ve been expected. This was not preventing her getting a word in but rather asking pertinent questions.
Oath – and I don’t blame her one little bit for wanting to talk about Cameron Slater as desperately as Key was trying to avoid the subject literally minutes earlier. And even if you think he’s Evil Incarnate, you’ve got to have a sneaking admiration for Joyce’s steely determination to stay on (talking) point, even if reduces an interview to a piece of Dadaist performance art.
That’s what politicians do, and what journalists shouldn’t have a bar of without tipping things into a ridiculous shouting match. Which neither Fergusson nor Espiner did yesterday, and all credit to them. Neither of them “shouted down” or “ran over” anyone, but had the gall to expect straight answers to straight and legitimate questions. Keep it up, I say.