Something everybody knew but some pretended not to: the level 4 lockdown was not the real reason Bauer shut down its NZ magazines.
Today they've shut down the Australian ones too. 70 staff made redundant.
A few apologies would be in order, I think (but don't expect).
Yes, nuanced is a fair description.
It's really an extension of the media mirror game, which is more evident now than ever before. The NZ media report on Ardern and/or NZ, and then they relay international reports on Ardern/NZ (often of dubious merit), and then they comment on the response in NZ to those international reports, and so the cycle continues. Each day a new contribution (today, Bloomberg).
Because we are globally insignificant, this is a new experience for us: what is happening in NZ is being widely reported (accurately or not) not because we are important, but because the virus is. Covid-19 is happening everywhere else, so the different approaches and results around the globe are news. For the most part, this overseas commentary isn't really about New Zealand at all.
I wake up, I stay in bed without guilt. It's my patriotic duty to have a lie-in. Love me a lockdown.
Anyway, this was my morning laugh (from the UK):
Thanks Graeme (and Andrew).
Going in the opposite direction, it would seem less likely now that the PM would call a snap election. I'm sure she has no plans to, but things can change ... NZF could unravel, Shane Jones could push his luck too far, etc.
But all kinds of practical problems then have to be considered: imagine a campaign without people gathering in large numbers (insert ACT launch jokes here). No rallies, no marches, no handshakes ... no baby kissing?
Several options related to the gun laws, but this is probably the headline choice. A news staple for half the year.
(shouting, of course)
Although a well-established word, in 2019 its use and definition became central to political debate.
(and I'll just add my annual grump, to say that it's not "neologism of the year", it's about words being used, not just invented, especially as they often fade fast).
Just a quick note (because I'm not on Twitter) re- Hosking's column today.
When it was pointed out (by Russell, Chloe Swarbrick, and anyone else who has been awake, ever) that Hosking's rant about clean needles was factually incorrect, the piece got changed.
No apology from Hosking. As always. And of course, there's no way to change what is either in print or has been broadcast on radio.
No consequences = no change. That's the NZME model now.
Yes, it was a disappointing follow-up to last week's very good opener.
It's important to cover the health risks, especially for young people, but you can't do that without highlighting that they are all still there while we continue doing nothing.
If a viewer had no background info at all before seeing that final part, then s/he would be understandably tempted to say "oh dear, best leave well alone". But it isn't well, at all. The status quo is not tenable, and Gower's doco did little to address the debate we must have, on what type of changes are safest and most effective.
The AM Show, Project etc are not going to give us anything beyond sound bites. On Weed was a rare opportunity to go deeper - and it was missed.
In the aftermath of the mosque massacre, Stuff reviewed its comments policy, and made some changes, mostly positive in my view. The trolling went down, the moderating got stronger, and it became much less of a platform for unchallenged bigotry.
It appears that was only temporary. The sewer of Stuff comments is back ...
I don't know if this is a deliberate policy decision, or just dropping the ball, but it's a sad sight. Especially as the website overall still delivers some of NZ's best daily journalism.