Hard News: The Wall and the Paper
297 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 12 Newer→ Last
-
Islander, in reply to
Tautoko Hilary - add that they will lose 3 subscribers from the Coast. And we could spread this further.
-
The show is here on demand, for those of you who didn't catch the broadcast.
-
Islander, in reply to
O coool!
I didnt realise I could pick it up from here!
Thank you.
And the SST editor has loong skid marks in his recollections- I will similarly & pubically renounce any buying from anything that is
a)associated with Michael Lhaws, and,
b)the SST
(have already cancelled the family edition.) -
A very good point, Hilary. Call me stupid but I thought being an editor of a newspaper means having responsibility for all that goes in it.
-
Carol Stewart, in reply to
I will similarly & pubically renounce
Sounds messy :-)
-
Islander, in reply to
Argh!
(Would be if I could remember where my pubes were)
PUBLICALLY
for other people than dense geoffs who might be confused- -
So if Steve Braunias lost his contract because he wrote a rude email to a reader, and now Laws has written an even ruder and more offensive email to another reader, doesn’t that automatically mean that the company (since it seems to be higher than the editor) will terminate him? Should I email the editor to check?
My impression from the interview is that the decision to fire Laws would be well above Kemeys' pay grade.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
My impression from the interview is that the decision to fire Laws would be well above Kemeys' pay grade.
Most things seem to happen when he's out of the office anyway.
-
So who is the deputy editor who actually does select and edit pieces for the op ed section?
-
So who is the deputy editor who actually does select and edit pieces for the op ed section?
I don't think there's any selection regarding Laws. They publish what he gives them, because they're afraid of upsetting him and his radio audience if they don't.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
The show is here on demand, for those of you who didn’t catch the broadcast
Thanks for that, good interview - your barely restrained fury was delightful to watch and certainly discomforted Kemeys. Good call on his blame-shifting.
And I echo Hilary - if Braunias was acting as an agent of and therefore representing the SST when he wrote that email, how much more and agent and representative is Lhaws when actually writing in the published paper?
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
being an editor of a newspaper means having responsibility for all that goes in it.
He looked like most of the senior administrators I've come across - all too happy to take the title and pay package but completely unwilling to either do the actual job properly or take the responsibility that goes along with the title.
"Being on holiday" is not an excuse unless he suspends his pay when he's on holiday - even then it's not an excuse if you have a spine.
I don't really mind senior management getting paid well to take responsibility but that means they F'ing well have to take it when shit hits the fan. That includes being the person who gets fired sometimes.
-
Stephen Judd, in reply to
they’re afraid of upsetting him and his radio audience if they don’t.
This is the problem, isn’t it? Laws has a constituency.
We don’t have enough national-scale papers in this country and they can’t differentiate into different niches – there’s no Daily Mail or Daily Star for low brow right wing nut jobs – so the SST graciously recognises its inclusive role and gives space for them too.
-
Who ever thought we'd be bemoaning the fall of Truth ...
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
“Being on holiday” is not an excuse unless he suspends his pay when he’s on holiday – even then it’s not an excuse if you have a spine.
Either he took part in the decision to send the nastygram to Edwards, or he wasn't even consulted. Neither option reflects particularly well.
-
Robert Urquhart, in reply to
The show is here on demand, for those of you who didn’t catch the broadcast.
Thank you for the reminder about the Swiftpoint Russell, I've been looking for something local to retail-therapy on. Order placed.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
Neither option reflects particularly well.
But he was hands on - and standing behind it - in the Braunias case. Apparently what Steve did was sackworthy and he was representing the paper whilst doing it in spite of being a contractor. Whereas Laws can accuse a reader of having caused her son's Asperger's because... why?
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
they’re afraid of upsetting him and his radio audience if they don’t.
This is the problem, isn’t it? Laws has a constituency.
So did Paul Henry. And Slime is still slime. Still, (out on a limb here I imagine) he should have the freedom to write his vomit for a paper who is prepared to employ him. Just that letters to the Editor should follow every crap piece complaining as I think RB just showed David Kemeys.He got the message loud and clear.Good show.
coat,getting....
-
Sacha, in reply to
he should have the freedom to write his vomit for a paper who is prepared to employ him
Not without the paper meeting their obligations as a responsible publisher. There is no license to say whatever you like about groups of people without facing consequences.
Laws is perfectly free to spread his vomit in person to whoever will listen. Just not necessarily to broadcast that same.
-
Che Tibby, in reply to
Just that letters to the Editor should follow every crap piece complaining as I think RB just showed David Kemeys.
just got the reply back to my complaint.
Kearney's is pretty reasonable about it. preci: don't necessarily like what he's says, but defend his right to do so [in my paper].
NOTE: this is better than the Minister of Corrections, who is yet to front any kind of reply.
-
Sacha, in reply to
defend his right to do so [in my paper]
Press Council, then
-
Michael Laws
17 Mar 2011 4:48p.m.Actually Dan Satherley (TV3 News) ... you are a liar. I said I didn't care what the abusive email correspondent said/thought ... again, your basic journo dysfunction ... and I repeat: you have deliberately misrepresented my reply email to the lady.
can't even spell Journalist LOL (Lawhs out loud)
Has a lot to say for one who doesn't care. -
he should have the freedom to write his vomit for a paper who is prepared to employ him
Just as the public has the right to contact companies that advertise in Kemeys' newspaper and tell them they'll boycott their products so long as they advertise in a medium in which Laws is published - which is, I think, the next logical step to take.
-
Paul Williams, in reply to
My impression from the interview is that the decision to fire Laws would be well above Kemeys' pay grade.
If Danyl's right about this, can we at least dispense with the title "Editor" as it is a term that implies a set of skills and responsibilities clearly not part of Kemey's performance.
Sacha said:
Not without the paper meeting their obligations as a responsible publisher. There is no license to say whatever you like about groups of people without facing consequences.
Which is why Rex's complaint, even if it doesn't succeed, is important. I'm all for boycotting, but I'd also like to the legal issues to be explored.
-
I've finally figured it out. Lhaws is on the Pipe.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.