Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
5:30 pm, December 2nd, 2016 - 50 comments
Categories: Daily review -
Tags:
https://player.vimeo.com/api/player.jsKatherine Mansfield left New Zealand when she was 19 years old and died at the age of 34.In her short life she became our most famous short story writer, acquiring an international reputation for her stories, poetry, letters, journals and reviews. Biographies on Mansfield have been translated into 51 ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
National’s Welfare Reforms should be examined for their effectiveness too after the policy they copied from UK does not measure costs and benefits but merely estimates them – there is no evidence of value for money, but perhaps that was never the intention:
Allegations of dirty tricks and a smear campaign during the run-up to the Mt Roskill byelection.
Andrew Little: There’s been some pretty ugly things going on.
From what I have been given to understand that is no over-statement.
Lets hope the truth comes out in due course.
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/replace-phil-goff-in-mt-roskill
Scoop Launches HiveMind Interactive Discussion Platform
Looks to be an interesting discussion platform.
This reminds me of slug-boy’s reaction when advertisers directed Google Ads against advertising their product on his hate-site.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/world/breitbart-declares-war-on-kellogg-after-cereal-advertising-pulled-from-site-2016120218
Not really the same since it could be said that Breitbart, while extreme in many regards, produces actual news.
This:
https://rdln.wordpress.com/2016/12/02/labours-continuing-malaise-good-for-the-left/
I wasn’t expecting to like a link to a blog from you Robert – but that was excellent thanks.
It’s hard to put much store in a political commentators ramblings if he had no idea labour were about to wallop the nats in the by election
A sad troll piece from Garner. Almost identical in content and tone to another Mediaworks hack’s effort the other day.
Question is, should the Labour comms team be taking advice from a guy who can only keep his TV show running for one year?
Even Andrew Little has done better than that.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/local-body-elections/87115662/duncan-garner-after-nearly-3000-days-in-opposition-littles-labour-has-lost-the-everyman
Great link. Thanks for that enjoyed it immensely.
As for how long he held a show (as opposed to a job) its inconsequential.
It’s ironic that you mention comms staff and length of employment in the same paragraph given littles turn over in that department.
I think you have to be careful with Garner. A lot of what he says appears to be socially conscious, and holding administration to account, but as he gets more desperate to make an impact in his chosen field he’s turning into more of a shock-jock.
I think Garner needs to be careful with paragraphing.
Because while he often carries ideas and topics across multiple paragraphs.
He writes in tiny chunks aimed to aid the digestion of his journalism by the lowest common denominator.
And provide a sense of gravitas.
Or, y’know, like, convey the impression that he knows what-the-fuck he’s on about.
Which, as may now be obvious, I don’t think he does.
His political journalism is pretty shit.
But he is good at writing about his farting while stuck in an elevator.
Yes, saying Labour is in trouble and out of touch and Little has no charisma is pretty shocking.
From the link:
That sentence says a lot about the writer of that piece, doesn’t it? Did I not recently read somewhere that Mr Garner is super ambitious? Ah yes, I did, here it is:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11744267
Children to three different women, eh? He’s like the brown DPB child factory women he likes to bash every now and then.
No morals. Only ambition.
Didn’t know that about his children; I guess he’s got a big heart as well as a big head 😉
When someone says something you don’t like – you seem to go on the personal attack. It’s not an attractive quality.
So what about the kids – you know nothing of the circumstances – and to be honest what’s it got to do with anything.
Oh and before you make smares about him having children to three different mothers and being a brown DPB factory – how about backing that up – because it’s bullshit.
Making lies about his kids is pretty low.
Is the man on the left the infamous ‘prominent person’? The former mp of the Northland electorate now held by Winston Peters?
The guy who was sacked for some as yet un-named crimes forcing an expensive by-election.
Is it the guy whose crimes and trial are completely off limits and about which absolutely no details are to be discussed?
No. It was the guy found innocent. (Or not guilty for the more pedantic)
Not guilty of what? All the details have been covered up as far as I know.
Suppression is not a cover up.
He was not guilty of what he was falsely accused of. So who cares what it was.
It’s there to stop people trying to smear his name for something he didn’t do. Like, gee,I dunno.
I think you’ll find the suppression is there to protect his victims. And probably because Key’s office insisted upon it to protect the National Party brand.
His victims of what. He was found not guilty.
You tell me. Start by saying what he was charged with.
I’m not going to get the blog in potential trouble by breaking suppression orders. And I am sure the mods would you prefer you don’t either (or try a 1/2 assed troll attempt to get someone else to do so).
You can’t. Thought as much.
Not often I agree with James, but he is right on this. Settle please Muttonbird.
I think I’ve made my point.
I think you’ve managed to make a rightie look reasoned and considerate on a leftie blog……congrats.
Wait, the prominent New Zealander was found not guilty? When did that happen? I can’t find news reports on it because suppression makes googling difficult. If prominent NZer was, then honestly, fuck our justice system, it’s a pile of shit.
Amazing that this building is literally a stones throw from parliament yet illegal tenancies flourished there.
I remember as a student visiting a similar building on Wakefield Street in the mid 90s and finding all sorts of fellow students and transients living/squatting in these seemingly abandoned office blocks.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/nznews/more-people-living-in-condemned-molesworth-st-building-2016120218
Editorial: More scrutiny needed of why synthetic cannabis laws aren’t working
Well, I suppose we can say that they’re working about as well as other laws that prohibit drugs.
Now, these things should never have been legalised but simple marijuana should have been. If it had been, we wouldn’t now have this fuckup courtesy of this rather stupid government.
Call me a grammar Nazi, whatever, I don’t care.
But I’m going to highlight this infotainment piece from Lynch for its crude structure and its sloppy, error-ridden writing. It is truely pathetic in content – not much more than a glorified tweet really – but there are two basic errors making the whole thing more clumsy than it already is. There’s already been one attempt by someone to fix one of the screw-ups but it didn’t help.
It is Newshub’s final article on the Mt Roskill by-election and this is what she came up with? I’d like to know where Jenna went to school.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/mt-roskill-candidates-push-final-day-of-campaigning-2016120220
Maybe the errors have been tidied up by now. Can you please point out the sloppy basic errors?
Even if the content is crappy, send-it-in-while-having-wines rubbish, I like it to at least make sense.
OK, ‘to’ his birthday should have been ‘for’. Minor – the sort of slip we often forgive.
Totally agree about the unlikely outsider sentence – I missed it on first skim reading. Poorly expressed.
Similar reaction to mac1: ‘fellow-candidates’ would indeed have made sense.
But the ‘each other/one another’ rule seems to me a pedantic point – no harm is ever done to meaning when that nicety is ignored.
Overall, two bad failings, and the grammar Nazi is quite right!
Keep it up – our dumb journalists need prodding, and the even dumber editors and proof-readers who let this crap through should be shot – except that they are probably not there any more because staff numbers have been reduced in the cause of efficiency…
Two further errors.
“Meanwhile Ms Parmar’s reaction to Michael Wood on Friday may have looked like a snub, but she says she does respect her candidates.” The addition of the word ‘fellow’ would make sense of this statement.
And earlier in the article, the writer has three people bumping into each other, when strictly they should be bumping into one another.
When a person writes poorly, it does call into question either their intellectual grasp, or their spell checker.
Very impressed with those points mac1. You take it to a level I’m not capable of. Remind me never to get into an argument with you on grammar 🙂
Nah, it is not incompetence or lack of education; it is a new form of ‘journalism’ to directly capture reality and represent it truthfully, and to question the relationship of reality with MSM as a counter-measure against the rise of “fake news” and dilettante bloggers. It allows for more ‘intimacy’ with the reader whilst upholding the golden ethical rule of journalism, which is to uphold objective truthfulness.
[Shamelessly ripped off from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Cinema ]
Interesting how she found the time to put in an Obama clip in the edit around accusing Andrew Little of stealing a line. Surely we all know ‘the sun will come up in the morning’ is an old and positive expression owned by no-one and used by everyone.
Must be the National Party in her and her ignorant youthfulness which makes her think Obama can own that phrase.
Shouldn’t that read “youthful ignorance”?
If she has the National Party in her I urge an aggressive exorcism ritual, which starts with numbing the senses and loss of all human dignity by forcing her to sleep in a car for two nights followed by a mandatory visit to a WINZ office.
It should have been ‘youthful ignorance’, but then I’m not getting paid for this.
Lynch would do well to spend some time in South Auckland. It might improve her dress sense.
It is not her dress sense I’d be mostly worried about …
This is why Little, as Cunliffe to his detriment failed to do before him, needs to cut this career politician cancer out the labour party before it’s overrun by lack wits who have achieved absolutely nothing during their time at the tax payers expense whilst in opposition.
Sh1t, what I’d give for a labour leader with balls to do the job properly.
“Jacinda Ardern: It’s clear she and Labour finance spokesman Grant Robertson are waiting till after the 2017 election for their best chance of succeeding with a change in the party leadership.”
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/local-body-elections/87115662/duncan-garner-after-nearly-3000-days-in-opposition-littles-labour-has-lost-the-everyman
I’m sure Grant Robertson and Jacinda Ardern will have a great time losing the 2020 election.
I was reading the article “Demolition of Molesworth St building begins to reveal extent of illegal residential tenancies” in the NZ Herald,
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759450
and it got me thinking. If they had a supposedly vacant office block in Wellington being used as an illegal residential tenancy block in a city that is not as bad off for housing as Auckland, I wonder just how many illegal residential tenancies there might be in supposedly vacant Auckland office blocks? There is no way an illegal scheme like that was just going on in Wellington. As the tenancies are illegal, I doubt they would be paying tax on the money received as income from the rentals either.
I also feel sorry for those living there that because its residential use was illegal they are no covered by insurance.
I also feel sorry for those living there that because its residential use was illegal they are no covered by insurance.
Who are not covered by insurance?
The squatters or the owners?
One of the tenants was paying rent of $300 to live there and so was not a squatter.
The building had been illegally been converted from offices to apartment.
According to the news article because the building was illegally being used for residential use the tenants could not get any household insurance. They have lost all their household possession and have no insurance to claim on. Even if they did have some form of insurance they have been paying for, now the insurance company knows the building was not a legal residential residence, they have a way to get out of having to pay any insurance money.