Congratulations to Nicky Hager and Jon Stephenson for reminding us, once again, how vital fearless investigative journalism is to the health of our democracy.
This posting is exclusive to Bowalley Road.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ruminations of an Old New Zealander
About Me
- Chris Trotter
- Chris Trotter has spent most of his adult life either engaging in or writing about politics. He was the founding editor of The New Zealand Political Review (1992-2005) and in 2007 authored No Left Turn, a political history of New Zealand. Living in Auckland with his wife and daughter, Chris describes himself as an “Old New Zealander” – i.e. someone who remembers what the country was like before Rogernomics. He has created this blog as an archive for his published work and an outlet for his more elegiac musings. It takes its name from Bowalley Road, which runs past the North Otago farm where he spent the first nine years of his life. Enjoy.
Bowalley Road Rules
The blogosphere tends to be a very noisy, and all-too-often a very abusive, place. I intend Bowalley Road to be a much quieter, and certainly a more respectful, place.
So, if you wish your comments to survive the moderation process, you will have to follow the Bowalley Road Rules.
These are based on two very simple principles:
Courtesy and Respect.
Comments which are defamatory, vituperative, snide or hurtful will be removed, and the commentators responsible permanently banned.
Anonymous comments will not be published. Real names are preferred. If this is not possible, however, commentators are asked to use a consistent pseudonym.
Comments which are thoughtful, witty, creative and stimulating will be most welcome, becoming a permanent part of the Bowalley Road discourse.
However, I do add this warning. If the blog seems in danger of being over-run by the usual far-Right suspects, I reserve the right to simply disable the Comments function, and will keep it that way until the perpetrators find somewhere more appropriate to vent their collective spleen.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2017
(213)
-
▼
March
(18)
- Centaurs Need Not Apply.
- Us and Them: The Fatal Divisions of Exploitative C...
- Everyone Owns The Water.
- Blowback.
- Nothing To Them: Tim Keating Hits Back at "Hit & R...
- Not Being Venezuela: The Political Logic Of The La...
- New Zealand’s First “Revenge Raid” – Surafend, Pal...
- This Is What Real Journalism Looks Like!
- John Key's Legacy - A Protected Status Quo.
- The Maori King's Over-Mighty Subject.
- New Zealand’s “Non-Negotiable” Mythology: Deconstr...
- Divergent Generations.
- Why is the Neoliberal Establishment so Pissed-Off ...
- The Superannuation Crisis Nobody's Talking About.
- A Gut Feeling.
- Abandoning Key’s Pledge: An Act Of Astonishing Pol...
- Rebooting The Red Menace.
- Fortune's Favourite: The Rise And Rise Of Jacinda ...
-
▼
March
(18)
16 comments:
Compared to the legions of uneducated pointless lackies that call themselves 'journalists', Hager & Stephenson are modern-day champions.
With ease.
Armed with a sharp-looking degree in English from the University of Otago, an Editor from a major NZ newspaper told me that I was 'over qualified by a long way for journalism.'
He went on to say that journalism writing in New Zealand had to be targeted to the average reading ability of a twelve year old.
Speaks volumes as to what the mainsteam media is in New Zealand - both in newspapers and on television.
It is striking that some mainstream media outlets have given scant coverage of 'Hit & Run.'
Odd what can be said in boardrooms and thus ordered by editors and producers to shape the narrative.
Good journalism. The two or them have worked well together. It's a pity that we don't stay away from the wars of the USA that they blackmail small countries into assisting with. The dingy dinghy behind the fabulous computer operated battleship - What's that bobbing along behind? - oh that's New Zealand, they come along for the OE.
"He went on to say that journalism writing in New Zealand had to be targeted to the average reading ability of a twelve year old."
Probably fair enough. I believe the average reading age is, possibly even today about 14. because after all, they are a business and they have to sell newspapers. And however much they pontificate about being the 3rd estate and so on, they never lose sight of that.
That reading age of 12 for the general public has been quoted since Adam was a cowboy. Have any super-literate educational people got up-to-date evidence on this and can quote the links so we can get updated? It sounds like a meme, a cliche. We should be looking at average reading age, then the band with the oldest majority, not the lowest level of comprehension.
I'm not even sure they use reading ages anymore. But here is a site. And "we" should maybe be looking at those things you mention, but as I said – newspapers exist to sell newspapers. Not inform the public.
http://oag.govt.nz/2013/ageing/our-ageing-population/indicator-9
To be honest I think Hager has fired a blank. If he had discovered collusion between National and Chinese interests people would have sat up and taken notice.
Regarding journalism and English ability, this is a red-herring. People seem to confuse well written with well argued. Take the Guardian for example, their angle is always predictable but we never get beyond that to self refection.
@ GS 07.47: Media exists to sell advertising that's all GS. 'If it bleeds, it leads' and 'Sex,sensation sells' are their mantra. It's all about the profit margins not about informing the populace except when there is a sensation like the recent event in London.
Remember when we had "7" on TV? 24 hour news and some docos, the Govt. decided that it wasn't profitable so they dumped it.
Dear Hager (I don't know how many kilometres apart his and John Key's family lived in Vienna)is our 5th estate. I thought when the Min of Defence had to work from home after the big Kaikoura earthquake how much easier it would make his communications with his excellent sources there. Long live the best of us NZers, often first generationers like (the incredibly handsome younger) Hager, and still so thick on the ground around the ankles of the plutocrats.
If you were a National Party acolyte you would have to give big ups to Wayne Mapp. His retrospective on the issue at hand quite literally has saved other people from digging in and denial. His stating a case with "mitigating circumstances" might not save a few military hierarchy from a slap with a wet bus ticket, but it will take the focus away from Key and others role. And the front line troops dignity despite their actions can remain intact as the red faces are transferred to the generals and our foreign allies.
The latter issue (any possible SAS complicity) is a bit of a worry: the likes of our recent VC winner are the idols with the public, and to attack the troops is also to attack the prevalent public opinion. Politically criticising the troops gets the public's back up regardless of the reality of the SAS actions. Which in turn leads to another issue: the Rambo type self image and bullet proof self justification of actions this particular force may take from public image. Time to get both their hierachy and the troops back under control.
I'm glad I did not react quickly to the latest Hager saga.
The news today that the military say he has the wrong village is stunning. Either they are right and Hager has had it, or they are going to be shown to be a combination of idiots and crooks. I have an idea which it is but sitting in the jury box as we are, it has my full attention still so I am waiting to see and hear the evidence.
Yes evidence. This firstly has to come from H & S. They are the prosecution & say they have solid first hand knowledge from SAS people who were there, took part. So if there is an enquiry it will want those men's direct evidence. Without them H & S have no case. Same applies to the military claim there was another village but as the defence, they don't have to prove that just yet, but in due course they will have to because they have now gone and said it.
The persecution has to show us their witnesses now or it is almost over already. If they can't then perhaps there is a pattern here to Hager books. No direct evidence. Really at the end of the job an investigative journalist has to produce evidence which stands up in Court. Otherwise he ain't one is he.
Like in Spotlight. Like in an excellent documentary I saw the other day called Deep Web about Silk Road. We get to hear from (and see at least some of) the witnesses, and there is a trial. Not just quotes in a book from confidential sources. This time perhaps he can produce the evidence.
If he can I shall apologise for past dismissal. Big deal perhaps. Well actually it is. For him and for our military.
Since when has a journalist job being to produce evidence that will stand up in court? I suggest since never.
No actually, on further reflection in this particular case evidence that will stand up in court is probably a must. But if Hager was such a bad journalist, he would have had his socks sued off him by now. Particularly considering that the libel laws in New Zealand are modelled on those in England. If this was the USA they wouldn't stand a show.
There are a lot of people in National with personal integrity, it's the lack of knowledge that marks them. Wayne Mapp is an idealist, who hits his head against reality, hence his non -reaction to my suggestion the lower third were left out of 1984 NZ in one of your columns. Yet, an honest man, Chris, will you now admit, who in our everyday life we'd buy a grilled sausage from.
Post a Comment