web analytics
The Standard
Advertising

Well Done Paddy

Written By: - Date published: 1:12 pm, March 6th, 2014 - 55 comments
Categories: accountability, broadcasting, making shit up, Media, scoundrels, tv - Tags: , ,

Was Paddy Gower’s little hatchet job on TV3 News last night the final straw that broke the camel’s back? Was for me.

Bomber makes some good observations.

 

  • Paddy says: “yesterday Cunliffe admitted to two trusts”, yet the ICSL trust is not new. It was declared in the pecuniary interests register since July 2013 and Cunliffe declared it again in his 2014 pecuniary interests. There is no admission to make. His mention of it on Tuesday was in response to a question by 3 News about which trusts he had an interest in. The way Paddy has framed this is as if Cunliffe had rushed to confess a great sin, it’s been there on the record for 8 bloody months!
  • Paddy says Cunliffe was “forced to correct the register” like he was under duress. Cunliffe declared it last year after seeking advice from the registrar on whether he should! That’s hardly forced! He sought clarification and got it, the way Gower is framing it however is as some type of wrong doing that David is being punished for.
  • Paddy says: “ICSL is an investment company trust. David Cunliffe is one of 20,000 investors that manages $8 billion in investments. Evenly divided, that’s $400,000 each. Cunliffe refused to front.” This is then reinforced by a graphic with Cunliffe’s face next to a figure for $400 000, this despite 3 News being told by Cunliffe’s office that he had “much less than $100,000” invested. Something Gower admits at the end of the story, but the graphic has already done the damage.

What Paddy doesn’t say however is the number of National Party MPs who did the exact same thing as Cunliffe did and make supplementary declarations to the  pecuniary interests register in 2013.

So when will Paddy be doing the exact same story on Jackie Blue, Simon Bridges, Shane Ardern and Nathan Guy?

I’m cynical enough to expect a degree of bias in broadcasting, but this endless stream of crap from Gower has, for me, gone on long enough. I’ve had it.

Today, and for the first time I remember, I’m making a complaint to the BSA. How about you? You content to ‘switch off’ to Gower and TV3 and leave them to it? Or you want to try to bring a degree of accountability to bear on them?

Here’s how you make a complaint.

Here’s how you choose the standard you think has been breached. (In my mind, ‘accuracy’ certainly fits, and so, perhaps, does ‘fairness’)

Here’s TV3’s complaint page. (you have to file any complaint with them as well as with the BSA)

Okay. Now make sure you’re specific about the programme, the date and the time.

3News

5th March 2014

6pm

Listen. This nonsense where news is getting generated off the back of a journalist’s whim has to end. Is now not time to end it?

P.S. I should say that I’m well aware this somewhat echoes Karol’s post, but it really is time to up the ante.

55 comments on “Well Done Paddy”

  1. JanM 1

    I actually ‘complained’ about him to TV3 months ago – you can see how well that went! I’m sure I can’t be the only one.
    Let’s see if a blitz of formal complaints work – I have never before seen anything this bad, and we’ve had (and still have) some shockers

    • Bill 1.1

      Well, there are enough articulate people who read this blog and comment here. The post lays out all the steps that are necessary in order for thoughtful complaints to be laid. I just hope all those people with concerns take the time to click the links and do it JanM.

      • Clemgeopin 1.1.1

        Thanks for the article and the complaint links.
        My understanding is that you must do a formal complaint to TV3 first. They are obliged to investigate and reply to you (within 20 days?). Only after this process you could complain to the BSA. Am I correct in this assumption or not?

        • Anne 1.1.1.1

          My understanding is that you must do a formal complaint to TV3 first.

          Not quite.

          In the first instance the BSA will send a copy of your complaint to the offending body. – in this case TV3. They must reply within 20 days. A copy of that reply will be sent to the complainant and that person has a further 20 days to respond. If you are happy with the offending body’s response or don’t want to take the matter further that will be the end of it. If, on the other hand, you reject their response then you must reply with your reasons for doing so etc. within a further 20 days, and the BSA will then adjudicate on the complaint. The whole process can take up to 3 months but is well worth the effort.

          In matters political the BSA almost always come down on the side of the government or corporate body concerned, but that’s not the point. Once the BSA adjudicates the story is in the public domain and becomes part of the news harvest. That is where it’s real value lies. It will be embarrassing for Patrick Gower to have his name dragged through the mud, but it could be an experience that might turn him into a proper journalist and not just a muck raking ass-hole.

      • Skinny 1.1.2

        I just watch Gower make a total fool of himself interviewing the Head of TV1. Everyone burst into laughter when Paddy referred to people watching 3News lol. Chin up Paddy the penny will drop with your Bosses that your a liability they can least afford.

        Paddy G you should go comedian full time lol.

        • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 1.1.2.1

          I quickly went and watched the late version of TV3 (yuck) News to see if I could view that little segment

          TVNZ boss referring to a TV3 News item: “like many people I wasn’t watching that either”

          That was amusing – cheers for the laugh Skinny!

          • Skinny 1.1.2.1.1

            Don’t thank me thank Gower :)

            • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 1.1.2.1.1.1

              ….well then I’ll give credit to the TVNZ boss for quick thinking – not that silly Goblin Gower :)

  2. Colonial Viper 2

    Reduce Paddy’s access to the Leaders Office. Work through other 3 Reporters.

    • Ant 2.1

      I originally thought differently but I actually can’t see how it can get worse so why not. Maybe Paddy should sit on the naughty seat for a while.

    • Wonderpup 2.2

      Putting him in Time Out looks like a tantrum for his publishing a story that wasn’t positive. Journalists and Christians love to be persecuted, it makes them feel like they are doing the right thing. No, maybe the best way to approach this is through the standards complaints mechanism. What experience do people have with using this process, and is it effective?

      • Colonial Viper 2.2.1

        Putting him in Time Out looks like a tantrum for his publishing a story that wasn’t positive.

        Nah, just show a bit of strength and block Paddy from top level access to the Leaders Office.

        His unprofessionalism should have real consequences, forget the wet bus ticket BSA process.

      • rhinocrates 2.2.2

        OK, personally I’m in favour of the naughty seat, but a more subtle approach by Labour should start with offering exclusives alongside the standard press releases and conferences… and every time an invitation is handed out, that homunculus with the expression of a constipated rodent is somehow not on the list.

        Let him come to the usual press conferences and news releases, but simply STFU if he ambushes and offer face-to-face to others.

        A hack who can’t come up with exclusives won’t look good in the channel’s advertising and won’t find his career advancing.

        It’s standard strategy elsewhere.

        My experience with the complaints mechanism has inspired some cynicism on my part, but a lack of reply doesn’t mean that it wasn’t noticed – it just can’t be seen to be noticed. Everyone who’s had a cat will understand that.

        • rhinocrates 2.2.2.1

          but simply STFU if he ambushes

          That may seem arrogant by the way, but running along corridors, shoving microphones in people’s faces and getting SFA while another channel gets a soundbite would also make him look like an ineffectual fantasist in the long run.

        • rhinocrates 2.2.2.2

          Apologies if there’s any duplication, but comments seem to get eaten and sometimes show up late.

          STFU if he ambushes and offer face-to-face to others.

          That may seem arrogant, but the payoff is that Rat-boy will look ineffectual if a minute later another channel gets a quote.

          Cunliffe’s big mistake at the conference was to engage at all with him.

          There is used in (honest) journalism schools the example of the “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” question. If you say “Yes,” you’re a wife-beater. If you say “No”, you are definitely one. If you say “I’ve never beaten my wife”, you’re hiding secret abuse. That’s what Rat-boy kept repeating at the conference.

          Rat-boy’s ego depends on his influence and access. He’s too stupid and lazy to be a real investigative journalist, so he needs to be able to show that he has more access than his rivals, and TV3 needs to be able to advertise that.

          Shoving microphones in people’s faces as they walk on by without saying a word and then seeing them offer quotes to rivals will deflate his status as self-nominated celebrity and his bosses will notice that.

      • Anne 2.2.3

        What experience do people have with using this process, and is it effective?

        See my 1.1.1.1 above.

  3. John C 3

    If you are serious about tackling bias in the media you should also complain to TVNZ about Corrin Dann’s blatant pro Labour stance in most of his reporting. Or is it a case of when the media say what you want to hear it’s accurate and factual reporting, and when it’s not it’s media bias?

    [lprent: Get off your lazy arse and do it yourself. Why do you want us to do your work for you? Just like you appear to be too pig ignorant to read the about on this site. The last section was specifically written for gormless lazy fuckwits like yourself. ]

    • Mainlander 3.1

      I think complaining to TVNZ might be a bit of a waste of time, it is afterall the underground breeding ground for Labour reporters, maybe you should start with John Campbell cos we all know he has no biased whatsoeva just ask Len Brown, John Key etc

    • Bill 3.2

      Nah John C. Like I said in the fucking post, I – “expect a degree of bias in broadcasting.” But there’s a big difference between bias and essentially generating stories. One (the bias) can be attributed to ‘reporting the truth as you see it’. Scraping around to find scraps of nothing much that might be fashioned into some grossly misleading and fictional made up shit masquerading as important news – while, among other things, actual news goes unreported – is something completely different.

  4. Puckish Rouge 4

    :)

  5. idlegus 5

    i complained a couple weeks ago, got no reply, said i was switching off their news & ill take anything said by them with a grain of salt because gower has shown to be full of shit.

  6. anker 6

    I have to say, Clare Trevatt is coming a close second with her pieces, particularly this one on Stuff today “Cunliffe has a few things to learn”

    I find it vindictive, especially the very unflattering pic and then she follows it up at the end with a quote from Sean Plunkett Radio Live show about one caller, who votes depending on the politicians face and likes Mr Keys and David Shearers, but not David Cunliffe’s.

    I am complaining to the OMSA on this one and encourage others to as well. Click on Broadcasting Standards.

    Can we get a mass movement of complainants of this? On-line petition?

    • Jilly Bee 6.1

      I agree with the above posts – I presume Puckish Rogue is agreeing that PG should take time out on the naughty seat. I also emailed TV3 with my thoughts on the political news coverage and particularly Paddy Gower’s rantings a few weeks ago, with no response, surprise, surprise. I also said that I had been a 3 News watcher ever since TV3 came into being in 1989, but was sadly severing all links. I foolishly had a change of heart when Hillary Barry made a statement about that Air New Zealand safety video and have been watching the political slot with ever increasing incredulity lately. Claire Trevett’s pieces in the Herald are the also the work of someone tarred with the same brush as Paddy Gower – they make a wonderful couple. I am today making a complaint to the appropriate places re the TV3 political coverage and NZ Herald op eds. Like Bill, I’ve also had a gutsful of what passes for rational and unbiased political reporting of late. I find it’s just so bloody depressing.

    • Hami Shearlie 6.2

      Claire Trevett must be the laziest “journalist” in NZ, she never reports anything remotely important about policy, she is literally unbelievable!! I actually heard the elderly woman who made the comment to Sean Plunkett about David Cunliffe – She may actually have senility creeping up on her , I mean, who in their right mind would really announce to the whole of NZ that they vote, not according to any policy at all, but on a person’s face? Old Churchill would have been down the road if people were all as stupid as that old woman. Looks don’t count when it comes to improving the lives of the majority of kiwis, but if the vast majority of New Zealanders are really as shallow as that old woman, then John Key is screwed, after all, he does have dead creepy eyes just like a zombie doesn’t he?

  7. karol 7

    Formal complaints are important. But I also think this needs to be accompanied with a campaign for public service news media.

    It can’t be left up to the corporate run media because their profit-driven values have a tendency to undermine the critical role of a “4th estate”.

    • Bill 7.1

      If I lived in Auckland, I might be looking at the feasibility of running an effective, vibrant, fun and visible protest outside TV3 news offices over Gower’s b/s. And I’d be media bombing TV1 and whatever media including whatever local channels there may be on the promise of a good photo op.

      I admit to not too keen on a public broadcasting news media having suffered years of conservative and toadying bullshit from the BBC news. That said – still can’t believe I had to actually turned to the BBC in desperation for info after hitting NZ in the days before the net.

      • McFlock 7.1.1

        In the last few months I’ve actually gone back to TV1, if I bother with the TV news at all.

        I get the international stuff from some foreign policy email loops, the local stuff from the oddity online, the NZ political stuff mostly from here, and stuff to keep an eye on the tory line and do the sudoku.

        fuck 3news these days – between gower and paul henry, I’d rather watch a shitty sitcom.

  8. Tigger 8

    If complaining also choose balance, it’s unlikely to succeed with the current BSA board, but you’ll force TV3 to look at their other coverage and thats a good thing.

  9. Rox 9

    I also made my first ever BSA complaint. Against TV1 for showing Robertson spouting off in parliament then cutting the reply from Collins off. Is that the sort of “Fair” reporting you’re after? One sided? Can we not see both sides and make up our own minds?

    • Bill 9.1

      Hello Rox. You another brainless prick who can’t tell the difference between bias and making shit up? Bias exists in all reporting and is fine as long as it ain’t presented as objective. Making misleading shit up from scraps of nothing is making misleading shit up from scraps of nothing and should have no place in news programmes.

  10. Dave_1924 10

    Nice – Paddy is kicking DC and you don’t like it, but you know its called politics and TV3 makes money by getting eyeballs on its ad stream.

    Mr Campbell on Campbell Live constantly kicks the Natz and pushes Green policy but you seem happy with him. If we want balance in the media then maybe media people should forgo political memberships, aye Shane T, and focus on presenting a story with different angles balanced. And yes Henry is a Nat – but we all know that

    Now DC’s non-disclosure of an investment in a Investment Trust as one of 20k others is no big deal in and of itself. It just looks DUMB after his other series of mistakes and stumbles. Many MPs have to correct their disclosures – he did so, so its not news for me.

    David Shearer got knifed for not being comfortable on camera – but at least he seemed genuine. Dave Cunliffe just projects fake every time you see him.

    the real issue here is not the media reporting all this stuff – its who inside Labour is leaking this stuff to them. A house divided can’t stand… Enjoy the run in to the election – it will be interesting to see if Labour can get its self sorted out…

    • Bill 10.1

      And another brainless prick! Bias is bias. I don;t have too much of a problem with that (except when it’s couched in claims of objectivity). Seeing somebody in a paddock and reporting that they’re a serial sheep shagger isn’t bias though, and that’s the basic level Gower is operating at.

      • Rox 10.1.1

        And again with the abuse – I can see why people don’t come for the conversation. You appear to have a problem with anyone who doesn’t have your view. Enjoy your day.

        [lprent: Read the policy – especially the first few line “We encourage robust debate”. That doesn’t mean polite or mannerly. This site simply wasn’t set up for “conversation”. It was set up for raucous robust debate.

        I’d suggest that you try public address. But I suspect that you are a thin-skinned as crazy colin and even that may be too much for your delicate soul.

        If you are determined to find a quiet conversation pit, then the online sewing circles for mothers are pretty polite. ]

        • framu 10.1.1.1

          “And again with the abuse ”

          because dave is making the exact same error as you did – its tiresome because its so easy to understand that bias and invention are different things – could be why they have different words to describe them

          maybe stop making such stupid errors of comprehension and basic use of english and you wont get treated like a diversion trool

        • rox 10.1.1.2

          [RL: Nope. We don’t tolerate people who arrive here and tell us how to run our site in their first comment. And on a personal note – lprent is the least brainless prick you could ever hope to meet.]

  11. ianmac 11

    Have written to TV3 re ICSL misreporting by Paddy.
    On Morning Report David Cunliffe did a good job of clarifying the ICSL “Trust.”
    Hear him here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/2588003

  12. Tim 12

    I imagine they will do a story on Jackie Blue, Simon Bridges, Shane Ardern and Nathan Guy once Jackie Blue, Simon Bridges, Shane Ardern and Nathan Guy have spent years complaining about Cunliffe doing this and then conveniantly forget the fact they are against trusts and do it themselves anyway

    • Ant 12.1

      Labour aren’t against trusts they are against corruption, corruption like your mate John Banks and John Key and the fat $55,000 milk cheque.

      • Puckish Rouge 12.1.1

        Labour aren’t against trusts that benefit them

        • RedLogix 12.1.1.1

          The trust you are talking about was specifically set up to meet a Labour Party rule.

          What you are ignoring is that these kinds of ‘primary’ leadership races are a very new innovation in this country’s political life. Well The Greens have been electing their leaders from within their membership for a long time – but Labour were in a relatively new place given the unplanned resignation of Shearer.

          There is a real difference between donating to a party in the context of a general election and donating to support an individual in a primary. The latter being far more personal and potentially divisive than the former. It was quite reasonable for Labour to put a rule in place to help avoid this problem.

          It’s lazy thinking to assume that the rules which apply in the context of a General Election will automatically be the best rules in the context of a Party Primary.

          • North 12.1.1.1.1

            Agreed RL. The distinction is indisputable.

            Problematically lazy thinking begets lazy scrutiny which begets lazy de-facto acceptance of the constructed rubbish with which we are barraged.

            The reality upon which fake reporter narcissists like Gower rely.

            I suspect that Gower’s narcissism will have him purring at the attention – an unavoidable consequence of expressed angst that for Gower at least journalistic ethics are as meaningless as is the Cabinet Manual for ShonKey Python and Madame Hubris.

            My resolve is off with TV3 and adoption of the four letter word ‘FAKE’.

            • North 12.1.1.1.1.1

              Edit: because I’m a fairly garrulous type ‘FAKE’ is not enough.

              “TV 3 TV 3
              GOWER GOWER
              FAKE YOU BE”.

    • Tracey 12.2

      I believe they have indulged in late file of pecuniary interests which is not to do with trusts.

  13. Papa Tuanuku 13

    anyone want to meet about this in wellington? can someone set something up?

  14. Tracey 14

    not all lies are created equal…

    remember keys denial about meeting with tv3s brent impey?

    then he chanfed it when caught.

    is tv3 doing payback?

    http://thestandard.org.nz/key-caught-in-mediaworks-lie/

  15. finbar. 15

    Cunliffe!s biggest mistake was saying Paddy,As a politician there are times when i recognise you, and times when not,and the time of not is when being interviewed by a media person who!s track is im me ,im in charge.

    Gowers, interview way Cunliffe,reminded me of old school ruthless,a ruthless that Muldoon,stamped and turned on the interviewer.Possibly a skill that our youthful David should be advised of,other than friendly name chat.

    Cunliffe, came out of that harried interview with some dignity.We all know that Cunliffe,is not your factory floor battler,but among the Labour party ranks of career politicians.Yet he let his week side of the kiwi battlers defence waver as he was pushed by a interviewer who!s wage would exceed Cunliffs annual political wage.He got sucked in, protecting his wealth!s usury ,its investments but just managed to pull it back.

    Cunliffe is not one of Labours school of slaved usury,but he is the one that we think can challenge the users on the farm fence that show little compassion to the ones that create their wealth.

    The dog A.B.C.you are dogs time for yous to go.

  16. captain hook 16

    I never watch tv3. There is something fundamentally dishonest about their whole shtick. A TV Station that continually re runs the fast and the furious is sick in the fucking head and the so called journalists they employ are nonentities that just want to suck up so they can get a better job down the line. The whole thing stinks.

  17. Skinny 17

    I think there is enough punters that have had a enough of ‘fake’ reporting by Gower, and fully sanctioned by the TV3 Network. Collectively contact their advertisers voicing our disgust and urge them to consider the backlash if we first boycott TV3 News and then consider boycotting advertisers during the New breaks and stretching it out break by break. I recall their Radio arm got quite a working over by the revolt to the Ghost Buster idiots. We must level the playing field by taking a strong stance.

    Count me in to help, let’s get a Action Committee together to crunch a fight back. The Election is a high price to pay should we stand ilde.

    • Akldnut 17.1

      Sign me up Skinny, Pass me a placard – I’ll support the cause.

      If it’s in Auckland just let me know when and where.

      • Skinny 17.1.1

        Let’s see if TV3 and Gower get the message, great you and others are keen on leveling the playing field :)

  18. Lionel 18

    The big advertisers are the corporates who are dictating to the media outlets what there political content should consist of they also donate to the Nats get the picture I too have shunned TV3 news because of Gowers bullshit

    • Skinny 18.1

      They also use marketing agents who dictate the price paid for advertising on demand, any hint of a scandal and Media Works suffers in revenue. Worth a crack Nigel!

  19. finbar. 19

    Gowers, colours, shall be nailed to his flag if he interviews the Prime Minister,next week, with the same ferocity.If he does his colour shall be impartial..

  20. nadis 20

    just to add some real info to the debate….

    the ICSL trust is not in the same category as the other trusts being bandied abourt(ie the RT trust, and Nationals trusts from a few years ago prior to the campaign funding law changes etc).

    ICSL is just a legal vehicle used by financial planners, banks and investors to access investments. Each individual has a separate account under the ICSL structure to hold their own assets. ICSL provides access to bank accounts,stock exchanges, managed funds etc for each investor and then provides all the return and taxation reporting that is required.

    Holding an interest in ICSL is the same thing as owning a share – there’s nothing sinister in owning an interest in ICSL. Pretty much any NZer who has a financial planner or money managed by a private bank will have a similar arrangement with ICSL or one of the other custodian trusts.

    So raising the ICSL holding may (or may not) be an issue in terms of the pecuniary interests register but it has nothing to do with donor secrecy, campaign funding etc. Custodial trusts like ICSL are also now subject to pretty strict anti-money laundering regulations, any money deposited has to be legally identified in terms of source of funds, owner of funds etc.

  21. SEAWEED 21

    Those teeth no doubt come in useful for chewing through Shonkey’s trousers and undies so you can properly kiss his arse, eh Paddy ? That’s all Shonkey needs… another fawning kissarse…

Important links

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere