Written By: - Date published: 5:56 pm, March 4th, 2008 - 39 comments
Categories: john key, Media, workers' rights -
Tags: john key, Media, workers' rights
Michael Cullen made an interesting remark in the House today in response to a question on John Key’s statement that he “would love to see wages drop“.
Here’s what Cullen said:
I think they would be appalled to learn that the Leader of the Opposition proposed that New Zealand wages should drop, then tried to explain himself by saying he meant that Australian wages should drop, then tried to say he did not mean it at all, then tried to say he did not say it, then got people to ring up the newspaper to try to get the reporter sacked.
That last line – accusing Key of trying to get Bay Report journalist Greg Robertson sacked – tallies with what I’ve heard around the traps from a few of my journalist contacts, and if true is a very serious matter indeed.
It may also explain some of Key’s cryptic remarks on Havoc last week, where he repeatedly attacked and denigrated Robertson, then added ‘there’s more to this than meets the eye’ and ‘we’re taking our own issues with it.’
This is all very interesting given how upset some people get when Helen Clark criticises the media. I’d say trying to get a journalist sacked for presenting you in a less than favorable light is a far more serious issue. I wonder if the Herald will be launching an investigation into this particular attack on free speech?
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
this was an editorial from the Bay Reporter last week. At the very least the locals see it as bad judgment in terms of political management from Key:
Bay Report (editorial):
“Suddenly the Bay Report’s journalist was getting calls for transcripts of the interview, requests for witnesses to the interview, and, in an indictment on the National Party and it’s leader, observations that journalism standards in papers such as the Bay Report were inferior, as well as calls for a retraction
While all of us should be excused those little verbal indiscretions that does not excuse an attack on the person who heard that statement even if that person had the nerve to include it in an article. For most people the concept of political interference is an anathema. In this situation the leader of the opposition, who could quite possibly be the leader of the next National-left government may have done his cause less harm by accepting that he had made a verbal slip-up rather than trying to “shoot the messenger’ (28 Feb 2008)
I suppose that one might point out that for a national party person to release leaked emails about Labour would fit in this world ,but what about a national party person(front bench?) releasing emails about their OWN leader which meant Don Brash was held to account.
“that does not excuse an attack on the person who heard that statement”
So now he heard it not taped it? Is there a subtle shift here? FWIW I agree with the last sentence in Dancer’s quote.
Funny that the Standard has shown such a strong interest in the issue, with outrage and strong pronouncements on it and drawn such complex inferences and with some claims of inside info, yet still don’t appear to have actually gone and spoken to RObertson to get the information from the source. The nearest thing we have to a primary source is Barnsley Bill and a report from David Slack.
And I’ll repeat despite all the interest from the media quoted above and egging on from Labour, none of them have felt the story has legs. Why would that be? ARE they all worried about losing out on tax cuts?
i want know from national if there going to bring back the employment contracts act keys statement proves to me there is a hidden agenda in national they just dont learn i heard this week english supports assets sales that party never learns.
if keys tried to get this reporter fired this is very very serious that is what dictators do john keys is same as vladamire putine.