Open mike 09/04/2024

140 comments on “Open mike 09/04/2024 ”

• Comment on post

1. Ad 1

   9 April 2024 at 6:46 am

   Hoping everyone in Otago and Westland has provisions and a full fuel tank. That's a mighty system coming down.

   Reply
   • Sanctuary 1.1

     9 April 2024 at 7:29 am

     What is the Kepler going to be like today and tomorrow? Asking for a friend….

     Reply
     • weka 1.1.1

       9 April 2024 at 8:38 am

       at this stage it looks like the heavy rain will be Thurs. forecasting isn’t very accurate under this El Niño.

       https://www.metvuw.com/forecast/forecast.php?type=rain&region=nz&noofdays=7

       Reply
     • Ad 1.1.2

       9 April 2024 at 9:38 am

       I talked to your friend this morning and suggest they start going over that Kepler ridge early tomorrow morning.

       Also be assured DoC team are in hourly contact with each other, and everyone will get a briefing morning and evening.

       Thursday they will be in strong beech forest with good cover and no stream crossings of note.

       Very experienced team rest assured.

       Reply
       • Sanctuary 1.1.2.1

         9 April 2024 at 9:44 am

         More worried our English academic friend will be carried off unnoticed in the wind and rain and mugged by a pair of rambunctious Keas….

         Reply
         • aj 1.1.2.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 3:48 pm

           Hourly rainfalls in mm from Milford since 10am. Looks a lot, but pretty common there. At least the Kepler isn't prone to flooding like parts of the MF track, but pretty exposed to wind up on the ridges.

           9.1

           11.8

           15.1

           18.1

           14.7

           14.9

           Reply
2. Bearded Git 2

   9 April 2024 at 7:38 am

   No Right Turn has it right on methane emissions. More Luxon lies.

   https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/04/climate-change-bad-faith-from-national.html

   Rod Carr was interesting on this issue on Morning Report just now. Listen here.

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018933455/nz-should-strengthen-2050-climate-target-says-climate-change-commission

   He is coming up soon on RadioNZ's Nine to Noon to do a much longer interview today.

   Reply
3. Phillip ure 3

   9 April 2024 at 8:15 am

   Peters did ok…@ the u.n….

   (Better late than never..)

   Reply
   • Bearded Git 3.1

     9 April 2024 at 9:32 am

     Yep…just 5 months too late.

     Reply
     • Phillip ure 3.1.1

       9 April 2024 at 10:06 am

       I was surprised/pleased by his denunciations of the illegal israeli settlements..in land occupied in israeli military actions…and his call for a two state solution…

       Reply
       • Bearded Git 3.1.1.1

         9 April 2024 at 10:49 am

         Yep all good…Biden has been utterly useless….while the American's back Israel and keep sending arms and money nothing will happen.

         Reply
         • Subliminal 3.1.1.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 11:07 am

           The US seems to be getting the message that the brutality shown by their support of the Israeli genocide in Gaza is going to cost them dearly at the elections. First Schumer and now Pelosi. The deliberate killing of workers from a US NGO and the bombing of Iranian embassy in Damascus are bridges too far even for them. It appears that negotiations between the Iranians and US have come to the point that Iran will not retaliate if the war in Gaza comes to an end. This leaves Israel as the only nation now comitted to escalation as a path out of their abhorrent mess. It also shows that the US could have ended this at any time simply by withdrawing Israeli support. The build up of international repulsion has left the US with no other choice and has demonstrated the potential of the UN even when constrained by UNSC vetos

           https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/04/two-israeli-actions-misfired-pushed-netanyahoo-into-retreat-.html#more

           Reply
           • Bearded Git 3.1.1.1.1.1

             9 April 2024 at 1:39 pm

             Whoopee….it's only taken 6 months and 33k deaths…but then they are only Palestinian women and kids.

             Reply
           • Michael P 3.1.1.1.1.2

             9 April 2024 at 1:39 pm

             So if Hamas agrees to simply hands the hostages back, then they do that, the war will end.

             When are they doing that?

             Reply
             • Subliminal …

               9 April 2024 at 6:59 pm

               Sadly, Israel would only agree to a temporary cease fire which goes to highlight their bad faith bargaining and intention to continue with their genocide after the hostages were released

               Reply
               • Mikey …

                 9 April 2024 at 10:55 pm

                 If genocide was the goal there would have been far more deaths.

                 Reply
                 • subliminal …

                   10 April 2024 at 5:49 am

                   I'm gobsmacked to think of what your "more deaths" means. Also, genocide does not mean complete eradication of a population. You do understand that the ICJ has determined that Israel has a case of genocide to answer? And that the killing in Gaza was at a pace far exceeding any modern conflict??

                   Reply
         • FFonTS 3.1.1.1.2

           9 April 2024 at 2:30 pm

           The problem Biden has is that if takes too strong an anti-Israel stance, he will lose a large enough percentage of the population (not just Jewish Americans, but Christians as well) that he will be handing Trump a victory. A Trump presidency would let Netanyahu off the leash, which will be much worse for Palestinians.

           [Please stick to your approved user name, thanks – Incognito]

           Reply
           • Incognito 3.1.1.1.2.1

             9 April 2024 at 2:42 pm

             Mod note

             Reply
           • Subliminal 3.1.1.1.2.2

             9 April 2024 at 7:04 pm

             In fact, the opposite is the case. As with the whole world outside of Israel, repulsion of Israels actions in Gaza is the majority amongst US Jews and the younger they are, the more this horror is felt and expressed. What may dry up is money from the super wealthy who are generally older and more likely to be strongly Zionist.

             Reply
             • Bearded Git …

               9 April 2024 at 8:33 pm

               That sound more logical Sub….who needs the money if you get the votes?

               And Biden's campaign is already much better funded than Trumps and the polls are now neck and neck where previously Trump was ahead.

               Reply
4. Robert Guyton 4

   9 April 2024 at 8:36 am

   Rod Carr on farming and climate:

   "If everyone in the world contributed the same level of warming per capita as New Zealand, total warming would peak with a temperature rise of five degrees and decline to around 4.3 degrees by 2100, the Commission said. Even more embarrassing, if global emissions were allocated to countries entirely on a per capita basis, New Zealand would emit way above the global per capita allocation in 2050. Because 51 per cent of New Zealand’s warming emissions come from livestock farming, the Commission has focused much of its advice on this.

   Continue reading at https://www.politik.co.nz/why-rod-carr-is-optimistic-farmers-can-beat-climate-change/ | Politik"

   Reply
   • Bearded Git 4.1

     9 April 2024 at 9:36 am

     "Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide over the first 20 years after it reaches the atmosphere. Even though CO2 has a longer-lasting effect, methane sets the pace for warming in the near term."

     "About 30% of today’s global warming is driven by methane from human actions."

     https://www.edf.org/climate/methane-crucial-opportunity-climate-fight

     Reply
     • Michael P 4.1.1

       9 April 2024 at 3:01 pm

       Am I reading the data correctly that is associated with this report.

       So for example in the worst case scenario of the modelling data (low technology and low systems change so basically if we do nothing from now on?) New Zealand's estimated contribution to all global warming from 1850 up until 2020 was approximately 3 / 1000th's of 1 degree C or 0.0003 degrees C ?

       Further in the same scenario that assumes we do nothing to address emissions, New Zealand's contribution to all global warming from 2020 up until 2050 is projected to be approximately 1 / 10,000th of 1 degree C or 0.0001 degrees C ?

       This worst case scenario is a pretty miniscule contribution, but regardless this is the only scenario out of the 4 in which we are actually projected to contribute to any warming at all which happens between now and 2050. Even the the high technology / Low systems change scenario expects us to be negative or non contributors in the future.

       Is that what the modelling data says? If so then doesn't that mean we are on the right path for net zero by 2050?

       Data found here:

       https://www.climatecommission.govt.nz/public/Uploads/EB4/supporting-docs/EB4-15-Temperature-modelling-full-results.xlsx

       Reply
       • Drowsy M. Kram 4.1.1.1

         9 April 2024 at 4:54 pm

         approximately 3 / 1000th's of 1 degree C or 0.0003 degrees C ?

         "3 / 1000th's of 1 degree C" is 0.003°C, not "0.0003 degrees C".
         Probably just a typo – it'll be fune

         Not sure I'm interpreting that spreadsheet data correctly either, but here goes.

         Using the data in, say, the "NZ_ssp126_EB41990" sheet (that's the first sheet to the right of the "Readme" sheet) to calculate the contribution of NZ's methane emissions to global warming over the last 30 years, I'd add up the annual contributions in the "NZCH4" column ("Contribution to global warming from biogenic CH4 emissions since 1850 to 2300 in Aotearoa New Zealand") from 1994 to 2023 inclusive, which sum to +0.06°C. That's a large fraction of the contribution of NZ's total emissions (+0.087°C) over the same period – seems a bit much tbh.

         Still, the point is that on a per capita basis, NZ punches well above its weight in anthropogenic emissions, particularly methane. How could it be otherwise, given the amount of ruminant meat and dairy Kiwi farmers produce – and I do love dairy.

         https://genless.govt.nz/climate-change/new-zealands-emissions/

         https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/

         Reply
       • Drowsy M. Kram 4.1.1.2

         9 April 2024 at 6:45 pm

         Michael, my initial interpretation must be wrong – NZ's contribution to global warming would be way to high, maybe 6% of the total ~1.5°C.

         So maybe the numbers are cumulative, in which case according to the spreadsheet data NZ's contribution to global warming (to 2023) is +0.0031°C (so your intepretation is correct), with methane making up +0.002°C of that? Help!

         Reply
   • Michael P 4.2

     9 April 2024 at 3:12 pm

     "If everyone in the world…."

     "…, if global emissions were allocated"

     Hard to take the commission completely seriously when they start throwing in so many "if's" for scenarios that don't exist.

     I think it says that emissions targets are allocated based upon economic capacity not per capita.

     Regardless it's not that embarrassing when you take into account that NZ has a small population but is a global food producer via our dairy and to a lesser extent meat exports. Regardless the commission says we can reach net zero in terms of our food production emissions and farmers have already begun to make the necessary changes.

     I find these reports and the modelling data quite difficult to read and understand clearly so please don't abuse me if I'm wrong.

     Reply
   • bwaghorn 4.3

     9 April 2024 at 5:12 pm

     Fuck I hate the per capita argument, most of our methane is from food production, we produce somewhere between 30 to 40 million peoples worth of food, so if ypu being honest divede our methane buy 30 million people

     Reply
5. Robert Guyton 5

   9 April 2024 at 8:51 am

   Fyi

   The Taxpayer's Onion send out emails such as this to those they believe support their fomenting 🙂

   "Hi Friend,

   Look, I know we've been giving Finance Minister Nicola Willis a hard time in recent months for the various tax u-turns and backdowns, but, actually, right now I think we need to swing in behind her.

   Here at the Taxpayers' Union, we'll stick up for taxpayers no matter who is in charge, but reading the media over the last few weeks, it's like Wellington lives in a parallel universe.

   The media and so-called 'pundits' are falling over themselves to call on Ms Willis to cancel her long-signalled tax relief.

   In fact, the only exception I've seen to the chorus of howls to cancel tax relief was none other than my colleague Callum! He had a cracker op-ed in Stuff's The Post last week.

   In politics, the squeaky wheel gets the oil – and unless we make a song and dance too, there is a real risk Nicola Willis takes the 'easy road' and kicks tax relief into the long grass.

   That would mean the Government wouldn't need to go as hard or fast in tackling wasteful spending – that's exactly why Wellington's self-interested bureaucracy are trying to sink Ms Willis' plan.

   That's why I'm emailing to ask you to join us in telling Nicola Willis to hold firm and deliver tax relief as part of May's budget. "

   Reply
   • Bearded Git 5.1

     9 April 2024 at 9:39 am

     If the TU is so supportive of tax cuts now it must consider that Robertson did an excellent job in controlling government spending.

     Reply
6. Reality 6

   9 April 2024 at 9:11 am

   Every day we seem to be waking up to Luxon, Seymour and others behaving increasingly like dictators, constantly lecturing and haranguing New Zealanders on how awful we are. Am sick of it.

   Reply
7. Robert Guyton 7

   9 April 2024 at 9:26 am

   David Farrar reckons:

   More thoughts on free speech and Rainbow story time

   "First my personal view on Rainbow story time is that in NZ it is pretty harmless. My kids have been to a couple of them, and they enjoyed them. They were totally non-sexual and they are more akin to children’s pantomimes where leading female characters are often played by men for humorous effect."

   Read more, if you care to, here:

   https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2024/04/more_thoughts_on_free_speech_and_rainbow_story_time.html

   Reply
   • Sanctuary 7.1

     9 April 2024 at 9:38 am

     Farrar is a fucktard who piously offers up his liberal credentials on the targets of right wing culture war hate while vigorously pumping out the bullets to be fired via his various grifting cronies and comments sections.

     He can take his so-called liberalism and shove it up his blue arse.

     Reply
     • AB 7.1.1

       9 April 2024 at 9:54 am

       Always found Farrar's cultivated tone of sweet reasonableness on mainstream platforms like RNZ irritating. A right wing janitor who superficially tidies up the bathroom, but leaves pathogens on every surface.

       Reply
       • Phillip ure 7.1.1.1

         9 April 2024 at 10:11 am

         Yr janitor metaphor deserves to be shortlisted for metaphor-of-the-week..

         Reply
         • Sanctuary 7.1.1.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 2:14 pm

           One of those sit back in your chair and go "Dang! I wish I'd thought of that!" metaphor moments followed by a secret resolution to steal it and use it on every occassion as if it was yours.

           Reply
       • Tiger Mountain 7.1.1.2

         9 April 2024 at 1:13 pm

         His mincing pronunciation makes him difficult to listen to on any subject. He is a classic right opportunist and crawler, feigning reasonableness depending on his audience.

         I have not forgotten “Dirty Politics” and his Slateroil days.

         Reply
     • Robert Guyton 7.1.2

       9 April 2024 at 10:12 am

       That's the spirit!

       Reply
   • Anne 7.2

     9 April 2024 at 9:56 am

     He's trying to have a foot in both camps. It starts off reasonably and ends reasonably but in the middle he gets into the political element of the matter.

     I think local councils have every right to have a say in who is allowed to speak at council owned venues – within reason of course and bound by rules which ensure the right cannot be abused.

     If some outfit invites an off-shore nut-bar [or two] to come here and incite racial hatred or crackpot theories designed to generate civil unrest, then they would be failing in their duty if they allowed them a platform to spread disinformation and create widespread disorderly conduct.

     Reply
     • Nic the NZer 7.2.1

       9 April 2024 at 11:29 am

       The court case brought by the 'Let Women Speak' group in Wellington appears to indicate that councils don't have that right at all.

       Reply
       • weka 7.2.1.1

         9 April 2024 at 11:54 am

         Palmerston North, or was there another case?

         depends on the situation I think, but yes.

         The Court applied the recent CA judgment in Moncrief-Spittle v Regional Facilities Auckland [2021] NZCA 142 which dealt with similar facts. Nation J concluded that the Library’s decision to cancel the event was reviewable and engaged the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

         Nation J found "There is sufficient evidence before me at this stage to be clear that SUFW cannot rationally be described as a "hate group"". He found that this cannot affect whether SUFW should be allowed to exercise its rights to free speech and freedom of assembly.

         Nation J found the Council's decision was a "significant failure to recognise SUFW's right to freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful assembly." SUFW did not in any way mislead the Library as to the nature of the event or the particular views they wished to discuss. Library staff had no safety concerns for themselves or anyone else and there was no evidence of a threatened protest.

         However, the Council's decision put conditions on the event which insisted that SUFW could only present their views on the Bill if they were countered by speakers with an opposing view.

         Result

         The High Court found the cancellation decision was not a rational and reasonable limitation on rights and ordered that the event proceed, which is reportedly did, without protest.

         https://www.franksogilvie.co.nz/news/case-brief-whitmore-v-palmerston-north-city-council

         Reply
         • Nic the NZer 7.2.1.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 2:04 pm

           Was thinking about the Wellington event, but from memory the Mayor decided it was allowed (though he personally would have preferred it not be allowed) after the SUFW court case.

           Reply
     • David 7.2.2

       9 April 2024 at 1:17 pm

       Anne, who gets to decide if someone is a “nut-bar” and should not be allowed to speak in a publicly owned venue?

       Maybe we should all be vetted to ensure that we have the correct opinions and views?

       So who gets to decide?

       I don’t know if you will agree with me or my views, so maybe you should be sent to a facility where your thinking can be re-calibrated.

       We could call these facilities Gulags.

       I believe Uncle Joe used them with great success…

       Or maybe we could just ignore people whose opinions and views differ from ours.

       Reply
       • Robert Guyton 7.2.2.1

         9 April 2024 at 1:24 pm

         Let's start with the obvious "nut-bars":

         earthquakes are caused by homosexuals

         Who said that?

         Reply
         • Tiger Mountain 7.2.2.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 3:00 pm

           The Bish’, one Mr Brian Scamaki.

           Reply
           • Robert Guyton 7.2.2.1.1.1

             9 April 2024 at 3:02 pm

             In a nutshell.

             Reply
         • weka 7.2.2.1.2

           9 April 2024 at 3:10 pm

           obvious cases are easy. Try ones that are less clear.

           Reply
           • Robert Guyton 7.2.2.1.2.1

             9 April 2024 at 4:07 pm

             What does that mean, weka?

             Reply
         • David 7.2.2.1.3

           9 April 2024 at 5:56 pm

           Okay Robert, so who gets to decide if someone is allowed to speak at a public venue?

           This should be a serious discussion, ignoring other people's or groups views only results in further resentment, alienation, division within society.

           Reply
           • Robert Guyton 7.2.2.1.3.1

             9 April 2024 at 7:15 pm

             Who, David?

             Not my call.

             You reckon, free-for-all?

             Wahoo!

             Can children attend?

             Reply
           • Drowsy M. Kram 7.2.2.1.3.2

             9 April 2024 at 7:32 pm

             This should be a serious discussion, ignoring other people's or groups views only results in further resentment, alienation, division within society.

             Imho, some views are soooo wack that if I didn't ignore them, then teasing would be a rational response. Maybe there's a chance a patient person could persuade a Destiny Church member that earthquakes are not caused by homosexuals – a remote chance.

             Why Do So Many People Believe Nonsense? [19 Sept 2022]
             If you believe in truth, you are not free to choose the truth you want. You are obliged to choose the truth that is true, the one that is based on the preponderance of evidence-supported conclusions.
             …
             Why do people believe nonsense? Again, because they want to. Studies have revealed a statistical personality profile for folks that embrace false conspiracy theorists. They are often people who feel that they have little control over their own lives. Perhaps believing they have an esoteric peek behind the curtain to see the guy manipulating the switches gives them a sense of empowerment. And joining with others, who in their minds, have also dared to look behind the curtain, gives them a sense of belonging. Hence the QAnon slogan, “Where we go one, we go all.”

             Reply
       • Michael P 7.2.2.2

         9 April 2024 at 3:27 pm

         "Or maybe we could just ignore people whose opinions and views differ from ours."

         Or better still, listen to them and try to understand why they have those differing opinions and viewpoints

         Reply
     • Michael P 7.2.3

       9 April 2024 at 3:16 pm

       How's he trying to have a foot in both camps. It says in the post that he believes in NZ it is non sexual and harmless. That to me would fairly clearly show him to be in one camp, the yep it's fine nothing to see here camp?

       How do you figure councils have a right to not allow anyone to speak at a publicly owned venue???? People who have viewpoints you don’t like pay rates as well you know….

       That’s exactly how you create division by not allowing viewpoints to be heard which are different from your own.

       As long as they aren’t inciting violence, anybody has a right to promote their viewpoint. If people disagree with that viewpoint then they should give an argument that people will listen to and agree with. Banning speech only ever leads to polarization and worst still extremism.

       There’s absolutely nothing to be afraid of when it comes to people having many different ideas and viewpoints.

       Reply
       • Anne 7.2.3.1

         9 April 2024 at 4:39 pm

         It's got nothing to do with what I might think, and everything to do with the intention of the person/persons who come here to create unrest. The case I was thinking of was a couple of dubious characters from Canada who came here to spread extremist ideology. I don't remember their names but, iirc, the owners (don’t think it was council in this case) of the venue cancelled the hall hire and they flounced off in a raging sulk.

         While they were here, they ridiculed a Maori cultural mural at the airport. They thought they were being funny.

         Good riddance to bad rubbish I say.

         Reply
         • weka 7.2.3.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 6:02 pm

           Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux. Auckland Council cancelled a venue hire booking. Two men took that all the way to the Supreme Court and lost.

           https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130655335/supreme-court-dismisses-appeal-after-lauren-southern-stefan-molyneux-barred-from-venue

           Of interest is that when Palmerston North council tried the same thing with Speak Up For Women, the council lost. The judge said there was no evidence that SUFW were a hate group. I linked elsewhere on this page.

           It would be nice to think the courts are drawing a useful line in the sand, but I think the Southern/Molyneux case was more to do with threats of violence from people protesting the event.

           Reply
           • Traveller 7.2.3.1.1.1

             9 April 2024 at 6:55 pm

             Southern and Molyneux had another venue cancel on them – The Powerstation in Auckland. Cancelled: Alt-right activists Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern in limbo after venue backs out of hosting event – NZ Herald

             "It would be nice to think the courts are drawing a useful line in the sand, but I think the Southern/Molyneux case was more to do with threats of violence from people protesting the event."

             It was. "Before Southern and Molyneux could share their deeply unpleasant worldviews in Auckland (an indication of its likely content here, with strong trigger warnings for racism), the protest group Auckland Peace Action promised to confront the pair in the streets and blockade entry to their speaking venue. Those promises raised concerns about whether the event could be safely held at the Bruce Mason Centre, which in turn caused Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) – the Auckland Council-owned company running the venue – to cancel the contract to use it." A commonsense conclusion to the sordid little Southern/Molyneux saga | The Spinoff

             FWIW I happened upon this piece on TS that was written at the time of On ‘free speech victims’. « The Standard. It covers some discussion (including comments from you) about SUFW.

             I’m not a fan of cancelling opinions we disagree with, even if we find them abhorrent, primarily because these assessments are often subjective and the risk of the thugs veto is always in play. And then there’s this – it seemed to me at the time that Southern and Molyneux received more attention by being cancelled than they ever would have by being allowed to speak.

             Reply
             • Anne …

               9 April 2024 at 10:28 pm

               …. it seemed to me at the time that Southern and Molyneux received more attention by being cancelled than they ever would have by being allowed to speak.

               There is truth in what you say. Thank-you for the reminder. However some of that attention was the result of their ridiculing antics over the Maori mural at the airport and that was what pushed them over the line for me. I was glad they were sent packing because of that behaviour alone.

               Reply
         • David 7.2.3.1.2

           9 April 2024 at 6:40 pm

           Okay Anne, who should get to decide whether or not someones views or opinions should not be heard?

           How do you know that someone has extremist ideology? And who gets to decide what an extremist ideology is? Or is it just what some random group of people believe?

           Personally I’d like to know who these busybodies are, so I can if possible avoid them. I generally don’t like to be told what to think, say or do, however I’m usually open to a discussion.

           Reply
           • Traveller 7.2.3.1.2.1

             9 April 2024 at 7:23 pm

             "Personally I’d like to know who these busybodies are, so I can if possible avoid them. "

             The problem is that it if you want to have the discussion, simply avoiding the people you label 'busy bodies' isn't enough. They are taking a position that you are to be prevented from listening in person, devoid of censorship or context editing, to people they disapprove of. That rather renders redundant your desire to discuss or even, God forbid, challenge the ideas (e.g. by way of Q&A).

             Reply
   • Visubversa 7.3

     9 April 2024 at 12:25 pm

     Pantomime "Dames" you mean? And how did they portray women? "Widow Twankey" etc were shown as unattractive older women, usually sexually frustrated, and the butt of sexist jokes. OTOH – the "Best Boy" (played by a woman) was cast as the "Hero".

     At the same time – Asian characters like "Wishy Washy" were also the subject of racist stereotyping.

     "Yellowface, Blackface" and "Womanface" – all equally offensive.

     Reply
     • Robert Guyton 7.3.1

       9 April 2024 at 12:45 pm

       ""Womanface" – all equally offensive."

       And Mrs Doubtfire?

       Dame Edna?
       Then there’s the Top Twins’ Ken & Ken.

       Reply
       • Tabletennis 7.3.1.1

         9 April 2024 at 3:44 pm

         "and Mrs Doubfire" Robert, once again you participate in matters concerning women and girls but seem to have little empathy and understanding for nuances.

         "Drag queens take the trappings of femininity and exaggerate these to create a grotesque caricature which, at its core, humiliates women. "
         "But it is also highly sexualised adult entertainment, which many people feel is pretty misogynistic"

         "Mrs Doubtfire and panto dames are nothing like RuPaul’s Drag Race. Paul O’Grady was a brilliant performer, wholly respectful of the women he drew on for his inspiration for Lily Savage."

         https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2024/apr/07/drag-a-sexist-caricature-or-a-fabulous-art-form?

         Reply
         • Robert Guyton 7.3.1.1.1

           9 April 2024 at 3:59 pm

           " once again you participate in matters concerning women and girls"

           Oh, I see. It's a "women and girls-only" space.

           Got it

           Reply
           • Tabletennis 7.3.1.1.1.1

             9 April 2024 at 5:16 pm

             "Oh, I see. It's a "women and girls-only" space."

             No Robert Drag Queens are not a women's place.
             and no Robert, you do not 'got it'- still some way off

             Reply
           • weka 7.3.1.1.1.2

             9 April 2024 at 5:54 pm

             I suspect being only able to read half a sentence is why you don't get it.

             Reply
         • Robert Guyton 7.3.1.1.2

           9 April 2024 at 6:53 pm

           Is Mrs Doubtfire not "women face"?

           Reply
8. ianmac 8

   9 April 2024 at 9:58 am

   It is ominous that this Government cuts data collection so I guess that they can claim that there is no problem, in say Child Poverty.

   Sharon Brettkelly writes;

   The uncertain future of two comprehensive studies on children and poverty has sparked fears that data gap will lead to leaky sieve policies. How can we fix problems we don't know about?

   https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/04/09/when-its-too-expensive-to-measure-poverty/?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=9e2d04f920-Daily_Briefing+09.04.2024&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_71de5c4b35-9e2d04f920-95522477&mc_cid=9e2d04f920&mc_eid=88a3081e75

   Reply
   • Obtrectator 8.1

     9 April 2024 at 11:39 am

     Was the chocolate ration increased to 20 grammes, or reduced from 30 grammes to 20? Who would be able to tell?

     Reply
9. joe90 9

   9 April 2024 at 11:06 am

   Oh joy…

   /

   @davidho@mastodon.world

   In the nearly 70 years between 1950 and 2019, the world produced a total of ~9.5 billion tonnes of #plastic.

   That's equivalent in weight to the amount of CO₂ we emitted to the atmosphere during the first three months of 2024.

   

   https://mastodon.world/@davidho/112198484934191221

   https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-plastics-production

   Reply
10. observer 10

    9 April 2024 at 11:29 am

    After thinking it through, I've decided I'm in favour of less crime. And I think healthcare should be good. Education is also good. And when it comes to the environment, I will be bold and honest. I think it should be nice and green.

    I am courageous. Vote for me.

    Reply
    • Robert Guyton 10.1

      9 April 2024 at 11:36 am

      Did you, in the past, run an airline?

      Reply
    • ianmac 10.2

      9 April 2024 at 1:02 pm

      Me Me. I'll vote for you because you are a visionary and a doer.

      Reply
    • newsense 10.3

      9 April 2024 at 1:18 pm

      Luxon is doing a terrible job representing business people to New Zealand with his incredible tone deafness and unpopularity.

      He’s like a cartoon villain from a 1980s cartoon.

      Mr. Lux is helping tobacco companies get more smokers addicted.

      Mr. Lux is giving all the money to landlords.
      ‘No, citizens you are feeble in economics and don’t understand the blessings this will bring you’

      Mr Lux is mining on special conservation land and destroying marine reserves.
      ‘We need more space for my friends yacht races. The lack of pollution is red tape holding back our empire.’

      Mr Lux doesn’t like his house, it needs more servants! CEOs aren’t like us, they’re a kind of royalty. CEOs are entitled, citizens.

      ‘We consulted on rentals and environmental reforms, citizens. Arrhahaha!’

      Reply
      • newsense 10.3.1

        9 April 2024 at 1:23 pm

        Agriculture is your friend. Dumped tree waste is your friend. The floods will not return. Pay no attention to those insurance companies. We don’t need scientists. We have a plan!

        Reply
      • bwaghorn 10.3.2

        9 April 2024 at 5:23 pm

        He's sending nz into depression, he's convinced everyone the country is fucked ,he's putting people on the unemployment benefits, he's forcing more people to aussie, housing projects getting canceled left right and center, fuckers are up to something, or just incompetent?

        Reply
11. Incognito 11

    9 April 2024 at 12:02 pm

    In fact a short article on the Generation Zero site ties together decolonisation here and climate concerns in a manner that resonates with many. Hence why one sees tino rangitiratanga signs at Palestine activities and Palestine signs at climate activities or demonstrations of mana motuhake.

    Rob Campbell tackles head-on the misguided criticism (by older generations, I assume) of youth activism by Generation Zero, and SS4C, I assume. I stress that he avoids making this an inter-generational issue.

    https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/04/08/single-issue-activism-gets-joined-up/

    When younger activists talk about the related nature of many injustices that surround climate, they should not be rejected or scoffed at but welcomed and supported. After all, they are right.

    Reply
    • newsense 11.1

      9 April 2024 at 1:24 pm

      Non-violent direct action is close to failing on climate change.

      Reply
12. Dolomedes III 12

    9 April 2024 at 12:40 pm

    So Callaghan Innovation is spending $170K on a rebrand while shedding about 30 staff. What the ….?

    https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2404/S00034/revealed-callaghan-innovation-wastes-over-170000-on-rebrand-as-staff-call-out-job-cuts.htm

    Reply
    • Incognito 12.1

      9 April 2024 at 1:13 pm

      The Taxpayers’ Onion are such a bunch of disingenuous shit-stirrers aided by useful RWNJs and idiot trolls for spreading their spawn. As usual, they’re trying to connect dots in the time-space continuum by digging wormholes that only exist in their pubescent little brains that boil over with premature excitement at the idea or mental image of scoring a point with their willy-wads. Of course, they cannot figure out the difference between past tense (date of RFP well over a year ago and date of tender award more than 9 months ago) and future tense (what may, or may not, happen with Government-ordered cuts by the new shambolic Coalition of Charlatans).

      Reply
      • Robert Guyton 12.1.1

        9 April 2024 at 1:16 pm

        Brings tears to my eyes, Incognito.

        Reply
        • Shanreagh 12.1.1.1

          9 April 2024 at 2:12 pm

          I agree Robert. Incognito is on a roll. Please supply lots of material so he can continue.

          As usual, they’re trying to connect dots in the time-space continuum by digging wormholes that only exist in their pubescent little brains that boil over with premature excitement at the idea or mental image of scoring a point with their willy-wads.

          This for brilliance and I like the 'Coalition of Charlatans' as well!

          

          Reply
        • Tabletennis 12.1.1.2

          9 April 2024 at 5:30 pm

          "Brings tears to my eyes"

          Are they wet and real or are they your crocodile tears.

          Reply
          • Incognito 12.1.1.2.1

            9 April 2024 at 5:44 pm

            tears for fears

            Reply
          • Robert Guyton 12.1.1.2.2

            9 April 2024 at 6:27 pm

            Tears of laughter, tears of joy – Incognito can wring water from a stone, TT. Did they elicit a giggle from you, you ol' chunk'a granite?

            Reply
        • Anne 12.1.1.3

          9 April 2024 at 10:33 pm

          Incog. @12.1 beats lprent on that one.

          Reply
    • tWig 12.2

      9 April 2024 at 2:30 pm

      A science research fulltime equivalent costs around $250k pa. The rebrand is only half a person's worth.

      Reply
13. dv 13

    9 April 2024 at 12:44 pm

    GEEZ Fair Go canceled!!!

    Reply
    • Robert Guyton 13.1

      9 April 2024 at 12:50 pm

      It's only right – after all, New Zealanders aren't getting a fair go (under this Government).

      Reply
    • Peter 13.2

      9 April 2024 at 12:53 pm

      Yeah, Fair Go gone but Country Calendar gets to live.

      Reply
      • Robert Guyton 13.2.1

        9 April 2024 at 1:00 pm

        Coz, agriculture.

        Reply
      • Tiger Mountain 13.2.2

        9 April 2024 at 1:07 pm

        For sure, have watched CC since a kid and still do. The funny thing is these days they include more new age farmers running on solar, horticulturists with interesting crops, more women involved in farmwork, organic growers–and they get complaints sometimes from the Groundswell lot for doing so. Farms in picturesque or high country locations get shown too.

        The giant industrial waterway ruining Dairy lot are rarely covered from what I have seen the last couple of years. But they are still there…

        Fair Go challenges con artists and poor business practice and holds people to account–or did…

        Reply
        • Robert Guyton 13.2.2.1

          9 April 2024 at 1:18 pm

          "The giant industrial waterway ruining Dairy lot are rarely covered from what I have seen the last couple of years. But they are still there…"

          Keeping their heads down. Have you noticed they succeeded in killing the "dirty dairying"meme?

          Reply
          • Tiger Mountain 13.2.2.1.1

            9 April 2024 at 1:39 pm

            Yep, effective comms people and deep pockets, it is almost seen as unpatriotic to criticise dairy.

            “They” grabbed the narrative on Three Waters also, which sees people the country over facing substantial rate rises, with still no clear solution to the crumbling infrastructure. I collect rain water with two tanks and filter it, didn’t use to bother filtering, but it tastes good and I don’t get “boil water” notices.

            Reply
      • SPC 13.2.3

        9 April 2024 at 4:41 pm

        The staff can go independent and produce a programme online.

        They can set up a Friends of Fair Go site for donations.

        They can work with Consumer Magazine, Ministry of Consumer Affairs.

        They can do stories on landlords and tenants – no doubt plenty about.

        News staff and others from Newshub have the option of bringing "video" skilled staff to various online media and or making that a point of difference, with their own on-line media site.

        Reply
        • SPC 13.2.3.1

          9 April 2024 at 4:55 pm

          Maybe not, TVNZ has prevented the Fair Go brand leaving the stable.

          https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/04/09/tvnz-cuts-fair-go-gets-partial-reprieve-midday-and-tonight-axed/

          Reply
    • Obtrectator 13.3

      9 April 2024 at 4:12 pm

      Well there's one spot of good news in all this darkness: Reality Check Radio is off the air and having to rattle the old begging-bowls (you'll need to scroll down a fair bit):

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350239818/live-tvnz-officially-cancels-fair-go-midday-and-tonight

      Reply
      • Robert Guyton 13.3.1

        9 April 2024 at 4:33 pm

        Bye; don't let the door hit you on the way out.

        Reply
14. weka 14

    9 April 2024 at 12:58 pm

    the conflict between women's rights and trans' rights, in an Australian court today. Do women have a right to female-only spaces?

    Tickle v Giggle

    Live tweeting for those that want to follow,

    https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets2/status/1777327982321041588

    Reply
    • weka 14.1

      9 April 2024 at 1:03 pm

      this seems key: should woman be defined by gender identity or biological sex?

      Tickle's counsel (Tickle is a trans identified male/trans woman) argues,

      GC references AHRC remarks. Refers to AB case in South Australia – 'gender is not merely a biological question – its part psychological part social…

      https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets2/status/1777497626503794982

      Reply
      • weka 14.1.1

        9 April 2024 at 1:07 pm

        should the word 'woman' be legally defined by gender identity or biological sex.

        My take,

        Historically, when laws were written around this, woman mean adult, human female. It wasn't defined in law, because everyone understood what woman and female meant. In recent decades, gender identity has been written into law to give trans people some protections. But this was done without addressing the sex/gender/gender identity definitions and what the conflict might mean for other rights and legislation.

        Reply
        • Traveller 14.1.1.1

          9 April 2024 at 1:39 pm

          The battleground has shifted from merely a fight for gender identity rights to the erasure of the sex binary. IMHO this is an attack on both the scientific/biological basis for the sex binary (In Humans, Sex is Binary and Immutable by Georgi K. Marinov | NAS) and of same sex attraction (Trans activism is homophobia in drag – spiked (spiked-online.com)).

          So I'll stick my neck out. Where the rights of trans people can be protected they should be, but never, ever at the expense of 'biological women', or of the meaning that very phrase.

          Reply
          • weka 14.1.1.1.1

            9 April 2024 at 1:49 pm

            Seems to me like there are two distinct aspects to the trans rights side. One is establishing that it's illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender identity for things like housing, jobs etc. This makes sense to me, given the antipathy towards gender non-conforming people generally.

            The other is the push to colonise women's spaces and culture. Some of that is justified as affirming trans women, but it's also clear to me that some of it is just straight out misogyny. Neither are justifications for removing women's rights.

            Reply
            • Traveller 14.1.1.1.1.1

              9 April 2024 at 3:39 pm

              Agreed. My view is the 'colonising woman's spaces and culture' bit is (or at least appears to be) a dominant force in the 'trans rights side' atm, which seems to me to be problematic for the rights of both gender non-conforming people and biological women generally.

              Reply
        • Michael P 14.1.1.2

          9 April 2024 at 3:49 pm

          This is probably pie in the sky and wouldn't necessarily be effective in a legal sense, but in theory….

          That's why a solution could be for the vast majority to grit their teeth and give up on the words 'man' and 'woman'.

          If everyone starts using only 'male' and 'female' where 'man' and 'woman' have traditionally been used then it could solve a lot of arguments. If a tiny minority are using words that the majority don't understand the meaning of so don't use things would quieten down pretty quickly maybe?

          It would mean giving up part of the English language which could be difficult for some to stomach but it wouldn't be to appease a certain group of people it would be to simply remove the arguments.

          If you don't know what a woman is (and who can these days) just start always using 'female'.

          Of course in that scenario we may end up with people starting to yell and scream about trans females… hehe

          Reply
          • weka 14.1.1.2.1

            9 April 2024 at 6:07 pm

            a few problems with that.

            the word woman has a lot of usage where female is inappropriate. We don't say 'see that female over there' because that's kind of rude/weird.

            not all females are women. Female applies to other animals, and plants. This is why the word woman means adult human female, and why giving up the word woman is a terrible idea. There is not really any other word we can use to name women.

            at least half of TRA politics is about colonising. Everyone else changing their language won't make that go away.

            TWATW. There was a period of time when most women would have been fine with old school transsexual/trans identified males. The arising of AGP culture changes everything. No way are women going to let men with the need to exhibit their sexual fetish into our spaces.

            Reply
        • Obtrectator 14.1.1.3

          9 April 2024 at 3:57 pm

          I believe body-shape has to come into it somewhere. No-one who went through puberty as a male and/or still has functional male genitals should be allowed to colonise spaces reserved for cis-women, against the occupants' will. No male-bodied people in women's toilets, changing-rooms or prisons.

          That said, I'm easy about how people want to define or identify themselves.

          Reply
          • bwaghorn 14.1.1.3.1

            9 April 2024 at 5:26 pm

            Exactly, got dingle , go dangle it some other place!!

            Reply
    • weka 14.2

      9 April 2024 at 1:45 pm

      Tweet thread unrolled of the first bit of the hearing,

      https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1777327982321041588.html

      Reply
    • weka 14.3

      9 April 2024 at 1:50 pm

      Part 2 starts here

      https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets2/status/1777513716101341645

      Reply
15. ianmac 15

    9 April 2024 at 1:05 pm

    Four of the first 5 Questions today are aimed at the PM.

    10 points for each time the PM answers a question.

    Nil points are expected.

    Reply
    • Robert Guyton 15.1

      9 April 2024 at 1:19 pm

      Gerry reckons; It's all good!

      Reply
    • veutoviper 15.2

      9 April 2024 at 1:22 pm

      It will be "interesting" LOL; and today he will not have Winston Peters sitting next to him propping him up and/or raising/causing diversions. I wonder who they will have in Winny's seat …

      Reply
      • Robert Guyton 15.2.1

        9 April 2024 at 1:26 pm

        Rest easy.

        He's got Gerry.

        Reply
        • aj 15.2.1.1

          9 April 2024 at 3:45 pm

          It may be my imagination but is Gerry getting tougher? But previous speakers would never allow a minister to keep talking over him when he's trying to cut political comments short. What's happened to the ability to cut a mike?

          Reply
          • Robert Guyton 15.2.1.1.1

            9 April 2024 at 3:52 pm

            I don't think the Speaker "cuts the mike". Some technician, I'm guessing.

            Gerry relies upon bonhomie to get through. Soon, that will be challenged.

            Reply
            • Vivie 15.2.1.1.1.1

              9 April 2024 at 4:42 pm

              I notice that Gerry Brownlee frequently interrupts Opposition MPs when they are starting to ask a question. He comments about supposedly "too much" background noise from other MPs, then asks the questioning Opposition MP to start again. I feel this is a tactic, to try to unsettle the questioner and to interrupt the flow of the question. However, it doesn't seem to be effective.

              Reply
              • mac1 …

                9 April 2024 at 5:04 pm

                The rule is that questions are heard in silence. Brownlee is insisting on that. He's starting to crack down on Ministers 'attacking' the previous government and today asked a government patsy questioner to ask her supplementary question without being a leading question opening up a further attack. Hopefully, he's starting to grow into the role.

                Reply
                • Vivie …

                  9 April 2024 at 6:06 pm

                  Yes, I realise questions are to be heard in silence. However Brownlee does not consistently apply this requirement when Government MPs ask questions. Their colleagues are at times speaking to each other during these questions.

                  Reply
                  • Phillip ure …

                    9 April 2024 at 6:09 pm

                    I think if you paid closer attention you would see his insistence applies to both gummint and opposition…

                    Reply
                  • mac1 …

                    9 April 2024 at 8:26 pm

                    The issue was highlighted in The House on RNZ Nights at about 8.15 pm.

                    This is the link. However, being just minutes ago it's not yet on screen to be listened to…..

                    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/the-house

                    Reply
      • Incognito 15.2.2

        9 April 2024 at 1:42 pm

        I wonder who they will have in Winny's seat …

        Statler or Waldorf

        Reply
16. newsense 16

    9 April 2024 at 1:31 pm

    Cuts to two child poverty reports today. That was holding the country back.

    Listened to a chap from CAB on the radio. No wonder they are always wanting to cut them and libraries. They give advice to under -25s and immigrants on casual work issues such as holiday pay and in tenancy issues. Particularly when flatting with the landlord it seems they’re exempt from a lot of the legal protections.

    Reply
17. observer 17

    9 April 2024 at 1:57 pm

    New poll shows 4 leaders all with negative ratings (coalition trifecta, plus Hipkins).

    NEW POLL: More Bad News For Centre-Right As Government Parties Drop In Support | Scoop News

    The public are looking for leadership, and if Labour can offer it, the Red-Green alliance will win the next election. The Greens are doing their bit already.

    Reply
    • Tiger Mountain 17.1

      9 April 2024 at 4:00 pm

      Call me old school, but the rule of thumb from a class left view is to unite all who can be united around certain things to build organisation and success.

      Mr Hipkins sunk NZ Labour with his Cap’n’s Call from afar on wealth tax and CGT and will be replaced in due time. Te Pāti Māori and Greens get out and about and are leading the way at the moment–politics is way more than just Parliament and comms.

      Green Co Leader Ms Swarbrick seems to eat Govt. MPs for breakfast going by any interview I have seen. So…Labour, Green, TPM need to get a combined move going and State Sector Unions might consider finally electing a CTU leader as good as Hellen Kelly and taking some direct action against the COC Govt.

      Reply
    • SPC 17.2

      9 April 2024 at 4:00 pm

      L-G-TPM now lead NACT (45 to 44).

      NZF at 6% over the threshold – taking the coalition to 50%.

      One wonders how they will fare once NACT tries to bring in changes to foreign investment rules …

      Reply
    • ianmac 17.3

      9 April 2024 at 4:27 pm

      Interesting that Act + NZF combined is less than the Greens.

      Reply
18. tWig 18

    9 April 2024 at 2:36 pm

    Paul The Other One discusses NZers' decrease in media trust, media literacy, and social media algorithms that encourage bias confirmation.

    I wonder how much of this is the decrease in tone-neutral fact reportage, and the rise, begun by Paul Holmes in feely news and op-ed infotainment, vs. thinky news?

    Reply
    • Dolomedes III 18.1

      9 April 2024 at 3:54 pm

      Here's the report itself, showing plummeting public trust in the news media.

      https://www.jmadresearch.com/_files/ugd/a95e86_cc317afe8a414d69a47c034735e58854.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

      Although the trend is worldwide, New Zealand is a trend leader, along with UK and USA.

      Could it have anything to do with the Public Interest Journalism Fund? The PIJF required news media to show “commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and to Māori as a Te Tiriti partner” i.e. to support the previous government's promotion of the treaty as a "partnership". The report also cites public concern about censorship of the news, bias, and dumbing down.

      Reply
      • Robert Guyton 18.1.1

        9 April 2024 at 4:05 pm

        "Could it have anything to do with the Public Interest Journalism Fund? "

        Nope. It's entirely down to the agents who seek to undermine public confidence in the media they trusted for so long; that media hasn't betrayed the public, they've just been vilified by those who will benefit from insecurity in the populace.

        Reply
        • Incognito 18.1.1.1

          9 April 2024 at 4:17 pm

          Claims were also made by some that the news media was captured by government funding through the pandemic-related Public Interest Journalism Fund. At present, this theme is weaker than last year.

          Bottom of pg. 27 of the Report.

          Reply
          • Traveller 18.1.1.1.1

            9 April 2024 at 4:21 pm

            Sorry – posted my reply to Robert before I saw yours.

            Reply
        • Traveller 18.1.1.2

          9 April 2024 at 4:20 pm

          "It's entirely down to the agents who seek to undermine public confidence…"

          The authors provide a number of reasons for the drop in public confidence, including this: ( a95e86_cc317afe8a414d69a47c034735e58854.pdf (jmadresearch.com))

          "In 2022, the JMAD trust in news report noted that one of the main reasons for distrust in news media was the government’s support for news media, in particular the $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund that was launched during the pandemic and that included direct monetary support for newsroom roles and projects.9 The scheme was disestablished in June 2023."

          Reply
          • Robert Guyton 18.1.1.2.1

            9 April 2024 at 4:31 pm

            "one of the main reasons for distrust in news media was the government’s support for news media"

            Idiot conspiracy-theorists.

            You running with them, Traveller?

            Reply
            • Dolomedes III 18.1.1.2.1.1

              9 April 2024 at 4:52 pm

              Shooting the messenger again Rob? Or then again, the left could take notice and learn something useful.

              Reply
            • Traveller 18.1.1.2.1.2

              9 April 2024 at 4:58 pm

              The report is about public trust in the news. in response to the question "Could it have anything to do with the Public Interest Journalism Fund?" you replied "Nope" and "It's entirely down to…"

              Based on this research, in 2022 the PIJF was clearly a factor, and it remains so in the latest report, albeit (as pointed out above) "this theme is weaker than last year".

              I don't know who you are referring to as "Idiot conspiracy-theorists". If you explain, I can answer your question to me.

              Reply
              • Robert Guyton …

                9 April 2024 at 6:35 pm

                You're unaware, Traveller, of the idiot conspiracy theorists making crack-pot claims about the MSM?

                Reply
                • Traveller …

                  9 April 2024 at 9:59 pm

                  There are 'idiot conspiracy theorists' pontificating about all manner of things, Robert. Some clam the MSM is systemically left or right wing. Some claim the MSM is in the grip of evil global corporates or shadowy secret societies.

                  I understand your point to be that the public loss of confidence in the media was unrelated to the PIJF, and that criticism of the fund was the work of 'idiot conspiracy theorists'.

                  Assuming I have represented your position correctly, the problem you have is that with reviews such as the Sapere report (The-implications-of-competition-and-market-trends-for-media-plurality-in-New-Zealand-November-2021.pdf (srgexpert.com))

                  Specifically in relation to the PIJF, the report found (both on P42):

                  "Some stakeholders also expressed reservations that public funding of media firms may make those firms beholden to the government of the day and public officials might be reluctant to fund proposals that will be critical of government policies – which would undermine a key plurality objective of the media being able to hold public institutions and elected officials accountable." (Emphasis added). Unexpectedly, 'most news firms' denied that would be the case.

                  "However, several stakeholders expressed concern that funding decisions had crossed into editorial decision-making, with New Zealand On Air effectively holding a ‘beauty contest’ to choose which proposed stories/investigations merited support. It was suggested that funding these one-off incremental outputs will produce marginal public benefit and does little to encourage the industry to confront the true challenges of producing sustainable news." (Emphasis added).

                  The report raised other concerns with the PIJF, but I would argue that the issue of editorial independence is key to public confidence.

                  Reply
                  • tWig …

                    9 April 2024 at 10:53 pm

                    That's several stakeholders' opinions. Where's the actual information on specific projects which these stakeholders objected to?

                    Have a look here where all projects funded are listed. (See section on Detail of funding- projects only). Which were problematic in their outputs? There's quite a few NZME and other non-state media that got funded.

                    It was made clear many times as I heard in this discussion that, once funding was approved, the media content produced had full editorial independence.

                    If the general media fill their on-air hours with outrage content, like much of NewsTALK ZB, or private investors fund conspiracy channels like The Platform and Counterspin, then a balance of some sort is essential for healthy democracy.

                    Reply
                    • Traveller …

                      10 April 2024 at 8:39 am

                      "That's several stakeholders' opinions."

                      Of course. And 'opinions' are what public perception (in this case "NZers' decrease in media trust" (from your comment above) is all about.

                      "Have a look here where all projects funded are."

                      Although the Sapere report raised other concerns, this conversation is about how public perception of the media was influenced by the PIJF. In that regard, the issue is not so much which projects were funded, but the conditions placed on editorial content to access that funding. Graham Adams (Graham Adams: Has government money corrupted journalism? – The Common Room (commonroomnz.com)) has a piece at The Common Room that outlines the 'instructions' and 'guidance' in the expanded criteria in 2022. The document providing this 'guidance' was titled “Te Tiriti Framework for News Media”, and amongst other things includes this "For news media, it is not simply a matter of reporting ‘fairly’, but of constructively contributing to Te Tiriti relations and social justice” and "Repeated references by the government to the English version [of the Treaty], in which Māori supposedly ceded sovereignty, have created systematic disinformation that protects the government’s assumption of sole parliamentary sovereignty.” Whatever you think of Adams' conclusions, the criteria, instructions and guidance provided are IMHO easily construed as editorial interference, whether they acted as such or not.

                      "It was made clear many times as I heard in this discussion that, once funding was approved, the media content produced had full editorial independence."

                      Well, that's what the media claimed. It may well be correct. However the Sapere report shows that there were concerns about how providing funding to media with (non-financial) strings attached that go specifically to editorial coverage was be perceived.
19. twig 19

    9 April 2024 at 2:52 pm

    NZ videogame spoof from Tavola for a little giggle…

    Tavola NZ facebook Sunday 7th April 2024

    Reply

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS