Wow. Better than a fascist Buffy. Plenty of the US didn’t like Jews and supported Hitler. The Southern reconstruction was fairly fascist. Especially if you were black and from Tulsa.
Check yourself hard, pal.
Your argument is ‘yay they got the journos!’? Jesus wept.
Not bothered about name calling from a Rupert Murdoch apologist tbh, pal.
Can you read? Everything I’ve posted has been about the importance of newsrooms and fighting the influence of billionaires on crusades on them and the news in general.
Newshub does not equal Fox News. Fox News is not a msm outlet, it is an entertainment news channel.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
WTF are you talking about? Rupert Murdoch is not involved in the NZ media market. Newshub is not run by the Murdochs. What have I said defending Murdoch’s use of the press?
I’ve been saying the opposite. Fox News has weakened and corrupted the respect for journalism in the States.
Listen to that Vice News report-
“Why did you call in [to harass election officials]? Well, I was watching One America News and they put his phone number on there and they said ‘give the man a call.”
That’s the supplier of your information now the Newshubs of the world are being cut and curtailed. Places that deny election results and facilitate the harassment of election workers with death threats.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
You keep saying that. Without any sources or evidence included. It’s like a bully saying stop hitting yourself and you deserved it.
This is not regulation in response to quality. It is the whole system that supports democracy being undercut by the social media billionaires and then being bought out by other billionaires.
This is opportunism in response to a drop in ad revenue, by a company which has been interfering with centerist and credible news elsewhere.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
You keep saying that. Without any sources or evidence included. It’s like a bully saying stop hitting yourself and you deserved it.
This is not regulation in response to quality. It is the whole system that supports democracy being undercut by the social media billionaires and then being bought out by other billionaires.
This is opportunism in response to a drop in ad revenue, by a company which has been interfering with centerist and credible news elsewhere.
I'll name names then, noone has time to troll through all the "news" reports to point out opinion over fact, Tova O'Brien, Jenna Lynch, Jessica Mutch, Lloyd Burr. All good reporters in their own right, but their reporting style has been heavily opinionated for a number of years now - very anti government (not just holding the govt to account - neither left or right). Maybe it's just me noticing this, but I doubt it or why is everyone supposedly looking for their news elsewhere nowdays to the point that WarnerBros arent making money from advertising.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
You keep saying that. Without any sources or evidence included. It’s like a bully saying stop hitting yourself and you deserved it.
This is not regulation in response to quality. It is the whole system that supports democracy being undercut by the social media billionaires and then being bought out by other billionaires.
This is opportunism in response to a drop in ad revenue, by a company which has been interfering with centerist and credible news elsewhere.
I'll name names then, noone has time to troll through all the "news" reports to point out opinion over fact, Tova O'Brien, Jenna Lynch, Jessica Mutch, Lloyd Burr. All good reporters in their own right, but their reporting style has been heavily opinionated for a number of years now - very anti government (not just holding the govt to account - neither left or right). Maybe it's just me noticing this, but I doubt it or why is everyone supposedly looking for their news elsewhere nowdays to the point that WarnerBros arent making money from advertising.
We’re still very much in your opinion, though!
The advertising collapsing has nothing to do with the content or very little. It has to do with the model breaking. Advertising is bought on international social media platforms, some of which also harvest or share content for free.
Advertising on TV supported journalism, advertising online never has. The audience has vanished almost overnight. The advertising has gone to international companies.
It’s like a dude in Pompei assuming that because he didn’t say his prayers the volcano erupted. The content or style isn’t the issue (and I’d say it probably may have got more tabloid, but probably, as I haven’t watched a lot, that your dissatisfaction likely falls under editorial opinion.), it’s the volcano of the destruction of the whole system.
That being said people still watch Newshub. It’s being cut to zero. This is not a necessity. It’s happening because the government hasn’t done anything to help the media. In fact it has taken away funding and not reacted to any previous plans such as mergers or gathering revenue from social media companies and redistributing it except to scrap them.
Long term it may not be viable, but it should be viable now in a slimmed down form.
But, if the government of the day had helped the media in someway - I guess with a cash bail out. That then makes it far easier to question the media's independance. TVNZ for example, funded by Govt and is openly questioned by one of the three leaders in charge of the country as being a bribe. From July we only have state funded local MSM News, if WarnerBros was given a hand out to keep Newshub would they not just become less independant version of themselves?
But, if the government of the day had helped the media in someway - I guess with a cash bail out. That then makes it far easier to question the media's independance. TVNZ for example, funded by Govt and is openly questioned by one of the three leaders in charge of the country as being a bribe. From July we only have state funded local MSM News, if WarnerBros was given a hand out to keep Newshub would they not just become less independant version of themselves?
I mean this is true. And a good objection. And not a new one either. Though often too politicians are afraid of interviewers on public TV who have a bit of job security comparatively.
But if, for example, some kind of bi-partisan policy was set up, that was perhaps a waiving of fees or a tax break that took the proceeds of the taxation of foreign online social media and redistributed it specifically for news without involvement of the government of the day…we can also look overseas cos they’re all having the same issues!
Actually there are some interviews with the CEOs of all the major media organisations coming out- they have been thinking about this for a while and might have some ideas.
I’m no expert, I’m just following the story too. And it has been pointed that it’s a very unfair market. The same way a lot of online retailers can get around GST, labour and environmental standards, and we’ve tried to protect them, we should do the same for our media and screen production market. That’s not a government hand out, but ensuring fair competition.
In the end it can’t be a bail out, but a series of sustainable measures to create a new media environment that allows for private companies doing public interest journalism somehow. That’s the amazing trick yet to be done. But it’ll be much harder to do if Newshub is completely gone already.
And New Zealand content on screens whatever the size, not just news, so we don’t forget who we are!
Martin, you say "Fox News has weakened and corrupted the respect for journalism in the States" because blaming the evil righty fits with your ideology. Meanwhile, as the NPR editor discusses, it's actually outlets like NPR who, in trying to force their own narrative, eroded their own credibility.
This exactly attitude is the problem. "It's not us, it's them."
Martin, you say "Fox News has weakened and corrupted the respect for journalism in the States" because blaming the evil righty fits with your ideology. Meanwhile, as the NPR editor discusses, it's actually outlets like NPR who, in trying to force their own narrative, eroded their own credibility.
This exactly attitude is the problem. "It's not us, it's them."
NPR isn’t reporting things they know to be untrue and they don’t have the reach that FOX does.
FOX broke the media landscape and created a worse right such as the story I posted with One America News and the rest.
I mean if you live in a world where NPR is evil, insists upon itself and is more influential than FOX you are impressively flexible.
Are you okay with Clarence Thomas? Are you okay with Trump, twice impeached, facing a bunch of criminal and civil prosecutions, promising to use the mechanisms of state like his own hit force? Are you okay, as FOX is, with the constant refrain of a stolen election? This is the rallying call of an authoritarian dictator. Destroy the system or its credibility.
No, there is no equivalence with NPR. I don’t know what their faults are (though I will go and read that letter you’ve posted.), but there you’re playing the man not the ball. The enormous elephant in the room sized one above.
Martin, you say "Fox News has weakened and corrupted the respect for journalism in the States" because blaming the evil righty fits with your ideology. Meanwhile, as the NPR editor discusses, it's actually outlets like NPR who, in trying to force their own narrative, eroded their own credibility.
This exactly attitude is the problem. "It's not us, it's them."
It’s fair to look at Trump as something that further broke the system and is intent on doing so further.
Lol- some of that NPR stuff does remind me of this brilliant piece of Aussie publicly funded TV. I think you’ll like it:But I’d say that most of it came from asking legitimate questions such as how do we still have so many police killings of restrained people of colour, which then came up with a solution which was overreach or failed it’s mandate.
That’s a fairly legitimate question. As is the one about serving all communities. But, unlike Fox, I see this as something that will be rowed back and find something more in the middle.
As well I’d disagree with his characterisation of stories. The Mueller report was written in such a way as to leave the rest to the relevant committee to follow its prosecution, rather than his view that it had nothing.
Similarly I listened to on going interviews with a scientist based in a university in the UK and he gave the reasons it was believed that the disease hadn’t come out of the disease centre. With its medical system and its marketing of drugs, the US has hurt the prestige of its doctors and scientists. But I believed the chap from the UK. He seemed sincere in his public information role and his explanations. As well the prediction of a pandemic (in the presidential briefings) arising from a similar cross species event and the diseases of the past decades fit that explanation. I don’t think it possible to judge that it came from a lab. And the reasons scientists gave for it not being so were reasonable.
Hunter Biden’s laptop is one I don’t know a lot about. From what I’ve understood there was nothing incriminating linking the son to wrongdoing by the president. I think a few minor tax matters have come up? But when you are barraged by, for example, Benghazi and other constant nonsense it makes separating a legitimate story harder.
All of which is to say, these are some fair and some unfair criticisms of a weedy, weakling public news organisation. There’s no equivalence to reporting the election as stolen on no evidence or giving time to those spreading that absolute canard.
Sometimes the left is the turkey. But here it’s not the case, in my opinion. It’s a false equivalence.
Every country has different press regulations and different libel laws for example. But usually even the Murdoch press still had journalists who were held accountable to some kind of code of ethics. These new self funded and ‘independent’ sources are dangerous because they don’t subscribe to any of that. As you can see with One America News listing a phone number for an election worker and telling its audience, who they’ve already falsely told that these officials are committing election fraud, to call them.
You're just repeating the same fallacy that the MSM has been telling themselves for years. Trust in these organisations has nose dived, not because of what Fox News has reported, but because they no longer have the ability to objectively cover the news.
You're also under the belief that misinformation is exclusive to the right-wing:
How bad is legacy media disinformation? It’s so bad that a sizable chunk of liberals think the true number of unarmed Black men killed by cops is in the thousands.
Closer to home, an AUT survey shows 75% of NZers actively avoid MSM and of those 85% don't trust them.
Do you think 75% of New Zealanders are victims of right-wing misinformation and are basically a right-off? Or do you think 75% of NZers perhaps have a fairly decent grasp on reality and have noticed that the MSM is nonsense?
You're just repeating the same fallacy that the MSM has been telling themselves for years. Trust in these organisations has nose dived, not because of what Fox News has reported, but because they no longer have the ability to objectively cover the news.
You're also under the belief that misinformation is exclusive to the right-wing:
How bad is legacy media disinformation? It’s so bad that a sizable chunk of liberals think the true number of unarmed Black men killed by cops is in the thousands.
I mean it could be. And I have referred point by point to the three or four examples you gave, none of which were disloyal opposition or attempting to break the system. I didn’t make any claims beyond that.
You’re not addressing the key point (or any points in fact) I made of the purpose of these things to destroy the system or suppress votes by creating false equivalency or the idea that both are equally bad. In this case that is simply not true.
But the group making that case, the ones attacking the system have succeeded to a degree.
And now we’ve jumped to racial politics in the US. I’ve done some debating in good faith here. I’m skeptical this last bit is quite so much. And I was talking about media in NZ before and wasn’t really up for the full force of US politics. Maybe another time! But it’s tough bringing on Rashford and Sancho cold for a pen shootout. Bad call that imo. So enjoy this and firing up for the Nix!:
Closer to home, an AUT survey shows 75% of NZers actively avoid MSM and of those 85% don't trust them.
Do you think 75% of New Zealanders are victims of right-wing misinformation and are basically a right-off? Or do you think 75% of NZers perhaps have a fairly decent grasp on reality and have noticed that the MSM is nonsense?
That’d be an interesting survey to see. You didn’t link to that. I was again speaking specifically about the lie that the US election had been stolen, and the encouragement to threaten election workers by OAN. No engagement with that specific point. That’s kind of bad faith debating and whataboutism of a high caliber.
Do you think it is okay for a candidate for election to threaten to use the machinery of state to enact revenge on those prosecuting him?
That’s beyond a debate about state spending or tax rates.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
You keep saying that. Without any sources or evidence included. It’s like a bully saying stop hitting yourself and you deserved it.
This is not regulation in response to quality. It is the whole system that supports democracy being undercut by the social media billionaires and then being bought out by other billionaires.
This is opportunism in response to a drop in ad revenue, by a company which has been interfering with centerist and credible news elsewhere.
I'll name names then, noone has time to troll through all the "news" reports to point out opinion over fact, Tova O'Brien, Jenna Lynch, Jessica Mutch, Lloyd Burr. All good reporters in their own right, but their reporting style has been heavily opinionated for a number of years now - very anti government (not just holding the govt to account - neither left or right). Maybe it's just me noticing this, but I doubt it or why is everyone supposedly looking for their news elsewhere nowdays to the point that WarnerBros arent making money from advertising.
Isn't that their job? I don't know about anti-government, but they should be asking tougher questions of the Govt than the opposition for instance.
Personally I'd prefer a journo/host asking tough questions of the Govt no matter if they're red or blue, than the likes of Hosking who only asks tough questions of Labour, or the equivalent of some of the RNZ Hosts re Nats.
The demise of Newshub robs us of some of that, and the next election coverage will be markedly the worse for it.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
You keep saying that. Without any sources or evidence included. It’s like a bully saying stop hitting yourself and you deserved it.
This is not regulation in response to quality. It is the whole system that supports democracy being undercut by the social media billionaires and then being bought out by other billionaires.
This is opportunism in response to a drop in ad revenue, by a company which has been interfering with centerist and credible news elsewhere.
I'll name names then, noone has time to troll through all the "news" reports to point out opinion over fact, Tova O'Brien, Jenna Lynch, Jessica Mutch, Lloyd Burr. All good reporters in their own right, but their reporting style has been heavily opinionated for a number of years now - very anti government (not just holding the govt to account - neither left or right). Maybe it's just me noticing this, but I doubt it or why is everyone supposedly looking for their news elsewhere nowdays to the point that WarnerBros arent making money from advertising.
Isn't that their job? I don't know about anti-government, but they should be asking tougher questions of the Govt than the opposition for instance.
Personally I'd prefer a journo/host asking tough questions of the Govt no matter if they're red or blue, than the likes of Hosking who only asks tough questions of Labour, or the equivalent of some of the RNZ Hosts re Nats.
The demise of Newshub robs us of some of that, and the next election coverage will be markedly the worse for it.
For me, and bear in mind this is my opinion, holding the government to account is the opposition's role/function, not necessarily the media/news. The news media are there to report on the events of the day, ask some tough questions covering who, what were why etc. But so often what we get fed is a barrage of harrassment from journos asking the same question phrased so many ways trying to catch an MP out on some little thing. Like the recent scandal around the PM receiving accomodation funding - every night for a week this was reported on, with nothing new ever really reported, just a barrage of questions around whether he though it was ok and if he'd pay it back. It's not the medias job to force an MP into doing something.
Wow- didn’t realise how low journos had dropped on the most trusted professions index. For me that’s staggering.
I can’t seem to access much more than a decade ago. So I can’t tell if they’ve always been held in such contempt by the public. I certainly remember lawyer jokes, but not journo ones.
And in some surveys there’s a split between TV newsreaders who are still surprisingly low and journalists.
I think the story on accommodation was important for several reasons- but mainly it was a test of political skill. Sir John rarely had such issues. It follows a pattern with PM Luxon where he digs his heels in only to change his mind later. At a time when he’s ordering cutbacks and telling cops they can’t get decent pay rises, it would be only sensible not to be getting paid an average starting salary to live in your own house. It’s a bad look, even if the supplement may be fair enough. Certainly the difference between it being fine in the rule book and it being a bad look were slow occurring to him.
Still, somehow a bit higher than journos ministers. Both fairly reviled though.
Teachers are kinda high though!
For me I want to hear the news as close to the horses mouth as possible and if someone claims something I want them to back it up. So I probably want a journalist to ask questions about it. And I want to know if the politicians running he country are competent enough to be across their portfolio.
But yeh I can see a lot of people for at least ten years have really disliked journalists.
Martin, I'm purposefully avoiding arguing specifics (e.g. Trump) because the core of those points are addressed in Uri's letter where he acknowledges it's not the media's place to try and control the narrative, but instead investigate and report objective facts. And that they failed to give proper effort into things like Biden's laptop.
I'm also not particularly interested, purely from a "I can't be bothered" POV, in getting into a shark slinging competition of Trump vs Biden.
There is a good article here from Henry Cooke, and I think this is a excellent point he makes here...
News websites do feature more opinion content than traditional outlets used to, and every opinion article is a chance to make someone hate you. This is because opinion is cheap and often very well-read, while journalism is expensive and sometimes unpopular.
Martin, I'm purposefully avoiding arguing specifics (e.g. Trump) because the core of those points are addressed in Uri's letter where he acknowledges it's not the media's place to try and control the narrative, but instead investigate and report objective facts. And that they failed to give proper effort into things like Biden's laptop.
I'm also not particularly interested, purely from a "I can't be bothered" POV" in getting into a shark slinging competition of Trump vs Biden.
No, I don’t think so.
In a democracy there’s two types of opposition- loyal and disloyal. It’s like the difference between Uffie giving the officials stick from the sideline and a Sunday league free for all where they have to call off the game.
When you are attacking the system you are disloyal opposition. You are in effect attacking the country from within. This is the point you are avoiding, and I believe you’re avoiding it because you’re a good guy, but you don’t want to admit the team you identify with is waaay off base here. We’re not only talking individuals here, but overall strategy.
And I’m not sure that that is a fair characterisation of the article you’ve posted either. He’s not discussing media as a whole, he’s talking about the responsibility to the public of a public broadcaster.
I think you missed the point I made about that, which has been a Republican strategy too and makes getting to truth more difficult, is the constant muddying of the water, not in order to find truth, but to smear everyone, spread confusion and move on quickly. This is also a form of disloyal opposition because it is designed to suppress engagement and voter turnout as it attacks the system.
And Trump has been the centerpiece of the American right for 9 years. It’s a bit strange to just discount the main stay of modern Republican success.
I’m not judging player v player, I’m asking you if you think that what is being done both by Fox and the MAGA movement is disloyal opposition and if that’s something you’re fine with?
My answers are clearly that it is and that it is an appalling thing we should keep as far from NZ as possible.
There are plenty of examples of the Democrats being "disloyal opposition", they are just less publicised and given less credibility because they have a MSM that is willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and/or literally registered Democrats.
Trust isn't low because of Fox, trust is low because the news doesn't match what people are seeing with their eyes.
If the standard is madder than the maddest football fan in Britain…
Not one of them would lose a game on the weekend and on Monday morning say they’d won and organise a trot downtown and occupy the League Head Office until every body else did too.
Or alternatively Warner Brothers is run by a very right wing billionaire who is currently gutting media organisations who used to say things he didn’t like or had credibility.
I’m not sure where this opinion as news stuff comes from, but frankly some of it is libelous and it wasn’t newsrooms run with journalistic ethics which have been running insane anti-vax BS.
While you’re all dancing with glee, these journalists were the difference between our response to the pandemic and the over a million deaths in the US.
There’s a difference between reporting news from a perspective and running propaganda and insanity. We’ve been lucky here not to have had billionaires with agendas intrude on our news so far. The unnecessary dismantling of Newshub and Melissa Lee’s support the the tobacco industry, but free market for news shows our luck running out.
Don’t go confusing an editorial stance with authoritarians and fascists buying the whole thing.
‘A trend in general’? That the world trembles at the might and power of NPR? Or that FOX the most watched ‘news’ in the US is now frequently not ideologically pure enough for the MAGA crowd about their catechism such as the stolen election crap? Which is authoritarian playbook 101- destroy the credibility of the system, both the checks and balances and the mechanisms. But hey, those NPR fusty librarians! FFS…
I dont't think anyone is "dancing with glee" at the loss of news media in NZ, it's a terrible look and feel for NZ. But, you've not been watching the NZ news closely enough if you don't think opinion based reporting hasnt crept in over the last few years then you're probably agreeing with the opinion being represented.
You keep saying that. Without any sources or evidence included. It’s like a bully saying stop hitting yourself and you deserved it.
This is not regulation in response to quality. It is the whole system that supports democracy being undercut by the social media billionaires and then being bought out by other billionaires.
This is opportunism in response to a drop in ad revenue, by a company which has been interfering with centerist and credible news elsewhere.
I'll name names then, noone has time to troll through all the "news" reports to point out opinion over fact, Tova O'Brien, Jenna Lynch, Jessica Mutch, Lloyd Burr. All good reporters in their own right, but their reporting style has been heavily opinionated for a number of years now - very anti government (not just holding the govt to account - neither left or right). Maybe it's just me noticing this, but I doubt it or why is everyone supposedly looking for their news elsewhere nowdays to the point that WarnerBros arent making money from advertising.
Isn't that their job? I don't know about anti-government, but they should be asking tougher questions of the Govt than the opposition for instance.
Personally I'd prefer a journo/host asking tough questions of the Govt no matter if they're red or blue, than the likes of Hosking who only asks tough questions of Labour, or the equivalent of some of the RNZ Hosts re Nats.
The demise of Newshub robs us of some of that, and the next election coverage will be markedly the worse for it.
For me, and bear in mind this is my opinion, holding the government to account is the opposition's role/function, not necessarily the media/news. The news media are there to report on the events of the day, ask some tough questions covering who, what were why etc. But so often what we get fed is a barrage of harrassment from journos asking the same question phrased so many ways trying to catch an MP out on some little thing. Like the recent scandal around the PM receiving accomodation funding - every night for a week this was reported on, with nothing new ever really reported, just a barrage of questions around whether he though it was ok and if he'd pay it back. It's not the medias job to force an MP into doing something.
this is an interesting point which I hear a lot and fundamentally disagree with.
IMO the oppositions role isn't to hold the government to account. It's to represent the voters that gave them positions in government.
To oppose bills they disagree with and to try to pass bills that their voters want, etc.
The opposition is an inherently biased role and not what should be holding politicians to account.
Generally I would agree with your example, except the government is constantly talking about axing wasteful spending, and talking about giving the money to the middle class. Meanwhile the PM was doing the most obvious example of wasteful taxpayer money while gutting public services. If the government wasn't constantly parroting those lines then I would agree but since they were, it made sense for media to constantly criticise their hypocrisy.
We need a strong independent media, and the only way to be independent is to be publicly funded.
And sure, Winnie was trying to sow doubts about media being funded as corruption, but that's what Winnie does to get votes. When NZ was unprecedentedly unified, he didn't get a seat. When we are divided he gets his power and job.
The opposition should also be doing what's best for the country, taking an opposite position just for the sake of it is damaging. There aren't two sides to things like climate change, for instance, all side should work together on it.
Martin, you say "Fox News has weakened and corrupted the respect for journalism in the States" because blaming the evil righty fits with your ideology. Meanwhile, as the NPR editor discusses, it's actually outlets like NPR who, in trying to force their own narrative, eroded their own credibility.
This exactly attitude is the problem. "It's not us, it's them."
This is entirely untrue. The article to which you refer describes as artefacts of "Left-wing bias" the following:
a) reporting that Russia promoted the Trump campaign in 2016. b) soft-pedalling the story about Hunter Biden's dodgy laptop. c) reporting that COVID-19 had a natural origin.
ALL THESE THINGS ARE TRUE unless you're already a Trump partisan and a conspiracy theorist. This is just working the ref, beating up journos until they start toeing a Right-wing line, and since that's the line which is going to burn the planet, brutalise migrants and queer people, fudge that.
Finally read the Uri Berliner piece on NPR biasand I'm baffled by how little the enormous media controversy it spawned has resulted in scrutiny of its claims for factual accuracy. There are significant problems with the piece including obvious, verifiable falsehoods https://t.co/gZJp8Masd1
HOWEVER: there is a point about Left-wing opinion media doing the FOX News thing in stoking up panics about how the bad guys are all coming to get us and we have to be ready to start a war. This is a very good, balanced article.
I'd also like to note how hilarious it is that the fascists at Reality Check Radio have been forced to shut down through lack of funds. By the logic in the thread, they are being punished for pushing a partisan narrative and ignoring reality lololol.
Complaining about the slight bias that traditional news organisations have justifies the extreme bias that "new" news organisations have. It's just the normal projection and misinformation.
Martin, you say "Fox News has weakened and corrupted the respect for journalism in the States" because blaming the evil righty fits with your ideology. Meanwhile, as the NPR editor discusses, it's actually outlets like NPR who, in trying to force their own narrative, eroded their own credibility.
This exactly attitude is the problem. "It's not us, it's them."
This is entirely untrue. The article to which you refer describes as artefacts of "Left-wing bias" the following:
a) reporting that Russia promoted the Trump campaign in 2016. b) soft-pedalling the story about Hunter Biden's dodgy laptop. c) reporting that COVID-19 had a natural origin.
ALL THESE THINGS ARE TRUE unless you're already a Trump partisan and a conspiracy theorist. This is just working the ref, beating up journos until they start toeing a Right-wing line, and since that's the line which is going to burn the planet, brutalise migrants and queer people, fudge that.
Finally read the Uri Berliner piece on NPR biasand I'm baffled by how little the enormous media controversy it spawned has resulted in scrutiny of its claims for factual accuracy. There are significant problems with the piece including obvious, verifiable falsehoods https://t.co/gZJp8Masd1
HOWEVER: there is a point about Left-wing opinion media doing the FOX News thing in stoking up panics about how the bad guys are all coming to get us and we have to be ready to start a war. This is a very good, balanced article.
I'd also like to note how hilarious it is that the fascists at Reality Check Radio have been forced to shut down through lack of funds. By the logic in the thread, they are being punished for pushing a partisan narrative and ignoring reality lololol.
I don't believe the intent behind Uri's essay is arguing the truths/falsehoods of the items, but more highlighting how they were willing to go all-in against Trump. But were more than happy to ignore credible leads / possible stories when it went the other way.
"By the logic in the thread, they are being punished for pushing a partisan narrative and ignoring reality lololol"
