Did Key try to get ‘wage drop’ journalist sacked?

53 comments on “Did Key try to get ‘wage drop’ journalist sacked? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. out of bed 1

   4 March 2008 at 6:54 pm

   So why would they think they could get him sacked?
   Unless ….. gee that explains a lot
2. Billy 2

   4 March 2008 at 6:55 pm

   I suppose a precedent was set when Cullen threatened to change the APN’s tax status unless the Herald stopped being so mean to him.
   • Muttonbird 2.1

     16 May 2017 at 8:54 pm

     Citation? You could get banned for not putting up evidence.
3. Scribe 3

   4 March 2008 at 6:55 pm

   I will admit if I end up being wrong on this, but common sense suggests there is NO WAY John Key would have asked for Robertson to be fired or had his people make such requests.

   Why would he do that when the story has come to nothing? Why would he do that in an election year, when doing so would lose him countless votes and be totally hypocritical? And when his party is 20 points ahead in the polls? Think about it.

   As you say, Tane, Cullen made these remarks in the House, where one can say whatever he likes without a shred of evidence and get away with it, e.g. “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?”
   • Muttonbird 3.1

     16 May 2017 at 8:57 pm

     Oh dear. In retrospect, how naive were you posters back in that day?
4. Concerned from Tawa 4

   4 March 2008 at 6:55 pm

   If true this is nearly as bad as Cullen kicking out Chinese journalist Nick Wang from the beehive because of pressure from the Chinese Government.

   For once I agreed with Russell Norman: “a sad and desperate attempt to win favour with the Chinese so that they will sign a trade deal with New Zealand”

   Oh and while we’re on bullying and cronyism any chance of a post on the Hawkes Bay DHB-King-Haussmann crisis?
   • Muttonbird 4.1

     16 May 2017 at 9:06 pm

     More conjecture without support in linking references.

     I can’t believe RWNJ trolls got away with this in 2008.
5. Tane 5

   4 March 2008 at 7:02 pm

   Scribe, I’m not convinced he did try to get Robertson sacked and certainly I’ve seen no evidence (other than gossip around the traps) to suggest it happened. I do think an allegation like that deserves some investigation though.

   Concerned, I didn’t like what happened to Nick Wang either. We’ll probably talk about the HBDHB controversy when we have some information to work on. In any case, there is no ‘we’ in these things, so it’ll depend on one of us being sufficiently interested and informed to post on it. And please do try to keep the misdirection down to a minimum.
6. higherstandard 6

   4 March 2008 at 7:11 pm

   Tane if you’re not convinced Key tried to get Robertson sacked why did you put up this post which is insinuating he did – why not put this to bed once and for all and get someone in the house or otherwise to question him on it a get a clarification on the matter you can then fuck him over or not depending on his answer.

   I would persoannly would find it very concerning if any politician was meddling with the freedom of the press.

   captcha council time …..anythin but that
7. r0b 7

   4 March 2008 at 6:13 pm

   I wonder if the Herald will be launching an investigation into this particular attack on free speech?

   It’s a very interesting allegation, and it’s very telling if it’s true. Odds on the Herald doing its job? – I feel a Tui moment coming on.
8. BoomTownPrat 8

   4 March 2008 at 7:26 pm

   Nothing but a timely diversion from the real issue. The tabled emails proving a Labour party political appointee and business partner of the then misister of health, “adjusted” correspondence and tender forms for his and the ministers financial gain.

   Hollow Hollow Labour. What corrupt games we play
9. Tane 9

   4 March 2008 at 7:28 pm

   Um, first of all I can’t get someone to ask anything in the house. Secondly, Key doesn’t have to answer questions in the house, as we saw with the original wage drop comment.

   As for why I posted this, it’s simple – I think it’s a serious allegation that deserves investigation.
10. Concerned from Tawa 10

    4 March 2008 at 7:35 pm

    Tane there are a few serious allegations flying around these days that you seem very keen to avoid.

    You don’t seem to be in such a hurry to post anything on Kings cronyism and the serious issues coming out of the Hawkes Bay DHB.
    I’m sure you’ll “probably talk about the HBDHB controversy when we have some information to work on” but you haven’t extended the same to John Key.

    Smell something bad?
11. Robinsod 11

    4 March 2008 at 7:51 pm

    I see the trolls have crept over here waiving Davey’s talking points as if they are some kind of talisman that will protect them from the truth. Here’s a reality check fools – there is no evidence of corruption at the DHB.

    There is however a report that all parties in the debacle seem intent on suppressing. I wouldn’t get my hopes up if I were you kiddies ‘cos my information is that there is serious embarrassment all around on this issue that even goes into some interesting financial issues concerning senior Nats. I guess we’ll just have to wait for the report, eh?

    Oh and when DPF sends you over does he say like, “fly my pretties” or something?

    And while I’m at it – yes. I’m pretty sure from what I’ve sniffed out that Key did try to get Robertson disciplined and perhaps fired – he is desperate to get that comment discredited because he knows it will haunt him this year…
12. mike 12

    4 March 2008 at 7:52 pm

    Yawn…more diversion tactics from Sullen and te Standard.
13. Robinsod 13

    4 March 2008 at 7:58 pm

    Hey Mike – you made a comment without telling a lie. You’re losing you touch, bro.
14. the sprout 14

    4 March 2008 at 8:01 pm

    Key proves yet again just what an amateur he really is.

    Did anyone see Key on One news tongith talking about the auckland airport issue? English was in the background, visibly wincing at Key’s comments about asset sales until he saw he was in the shot.
15. burt 15

    4 March 2008 at 8:21 pm

    Tane

    there is no ‘we’ in these things, so it’ll depend on one of us being sufficiently interested and informed to post on it.

    But on your “about” page it says….

    We’re The Standard – a collective who saw a gap in the New Zealand political blogosphere and decided that we should have a go at filling it….

    So a collective isn’t a “we”, decided that we should….

    Why not just say we – the collective are deliberately keeping well away from the HBDHB corruption fiasco?
16. the sprout 16

    4 March 2008 at 8:26 pm

    burt how does it feel to know your saviour is such an amateur?
17. Tane 17

    4 March 2008 at 8:30 pm

    Burt, stop being a dick. We run this site collectively and consult each other from time to time, but we don’t run it like Stuff.co.nz where we assign stories and make sure we cover everything. How it works is I come up with an idea, I write it and I publish it. If something isn’t touched on it’s highly likely becaue no one’s got around to doing it.
18. burt 18

    4 March 2008 at 8:30 pm

    the sprout

    Tane is not my saviour, but yes he’s an amateur.
19. Tane 19

    4 March 2008 at 8:33 pm

    Sprout, just saw the TV3 footage and it was painful. Poor old Johnny Key, just so hopeless under pressure. By the way, I wouldn’t worry too much about burt, I think the old fella’s been on the sauce again.
20. Robinsod 20

    4 March 2008 at 8:33 pm

    Oooohh, Burty made a funny! Good boy burty-boy, good boy… who’s a good boy? You’s a good boy burty…
21. burt 21

    4 March 2008 at 8:41 pm

    Robinsod

    Thanks sod, praise means a lot coming from you. You’ve brightened my day.
22. the sprout 22

    4 March 2008 at 8:56 pm

    it was kind of funny in its childishness
23. Murray 23

    4 March 2008 at 8:57 pm

    What no post on Cunliffe sacking the HBDHB. I am pissing myself, some of your idols will be shiting themselves.
24. Tane 24

    4 March 2008 at 8:59 pm

    Murray this is getting tiring. Your lame misdirection was addressed earlier in the thread.
25. the sprout 25

    4 March 2008 at 9:03 pm

    murray how does it feel to have such an amateur for a leader?
26. Murray 26

    4 March 2008 at 9:21 pm

    Looks like the “neutron” bomb back fired. FYI Tane, my last post was my first post today so I have misdirected nothing prior. There is more than one person in this country named Murray. I know somebody else called Tane. You really wouldn’t want to be confused with him. He is pathetic, worthless, parasitic piece of shit.
27. Tane 27

    4 March 2008 at 9:25 pm

    Muzz, I’m talking about the misdirection getting tiring. It’s common courtesy to read down the thread first in case your point has already been dealt with. You’re like the guy at the party who always walks in half way through a story and asks everyone to go back to the beginning for his benefit.

    Your comment about a ‘neutron bomb’ is baffling.
28. The Double Standard 28

    4 March 2008 at 9:48 pm

    Honestly, don’t you guys think that six Key/National attack posts a day is getting a little tiresome?

    And isn’t this newspaper thing getting a bit old – have you heard the term ‘beating a dead horse’
29. Inventory2 29

    4 March 2008 at 9:49 pm

    Tane said “Sprout, just saw the TV3 footage and it was painful. Poor old Johnny Key, just so hopeless under pressure. By the way, I wouldn’t worry too much about burt, I think the old fella’s been on the sauce again.”

    Hey Tane, where was the 3News footage on Cunliffe misleading the Hiouse, and the leaked e-mails, and the urgent debate over the Hawkes Bay DHB etc etc – oh, that’s right, Duncan Garner!

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2008/03/what-media-bias-helen.html
30. Daveo 30

    4 March 2008 at 10:05 pm

    Inventory- Until the document is released there is no story, it’s as simple as that. What we have now is the Kiwiblog right getting overexcited about what the story might be.
31. Daveo 31

    4 March 2008 at 10:18 pm

    TDS- Take a look at Farrar’s (or no minister or whale) some time if you think the standard is alone in attacking a party it doesn’t like.

    You should also remember the standardistas can post about whatever they like. It would actually be quite a big deal if it transpired Key had tried to get this journalist fired.
32. Inventory2 32

    4 March 2008 at 10:31 pm

    Wrong Daveo – Ryall tabled a number of e-mails – they are now public property
33. Historian 33

    4 March 2008 at 10:43 pm

    Leaked e-mails? But surely they are “a work of fiction”? Or “stolen”? And of course, “I did not open that e-mail …”
34. Concerned from Tawa 34

    4 March 2008 at 11:00 pm

    Does that mean Creative NZ will fund a play based on the emails tabled by Ryall? The Hollow Women?
35. burt 35

    4 March 2008 at 11:17 pm

    Historian

    Can you please clarify. Are you saying Labour will say what National said and therefore such behaviour will be acceptable from Labour or do you think we should hold Labour to account the same way that Don Brash was held to account?
36. Dancer 36

    5 March 2008 at 8:27 am

    this was an editorial from the Bay Reporter last week. At the very least the locals see it as bad judgment in terms of political management from Key:

    Bay Report (editorial):
    “Suddenly the Bay Report’s journalist was getting calls for transcripts of the interview, requests for witnesses to the interview, and, in an indictment on the National Party and it’s leader, observations that journalism standards in papers such as the Bay Report were inferior, as well as calls for a retraction

    While all of us should be excused those little verbal indiscretions that does not excuse an attack on the person who heard that statement even if that person had the nerve to include it in an article. For most people the concept of political interference is an anathema. In this situation the leader of the opposition, who could quite possibly be the leader of the next National-left government may have done his cause less harm by accepting that he had made a verbal slip-up rather than trying to “shoot the messenger’ (28 Feb 2008)
37. george 37

    5 March 2008 at 8:34 am

    I suppose that one might point out that for a national party person to release leaked emails about Labour would fit in this world ,but what about a national party person(front bench?) releasing emails about their OWN leader which meant Don Brash was held to account.
38. insider 38

    5 March 2008 at 9:55 am

    “that does not excuse an attack on the person who heard that statement”

    So now he heard it not taped it? Is there a subtle shift here? FWIW I agree with the last sentence in Dancer’s quote.

    Funny that the Standard has shown such a strong interest in the issue, with outrage and strong pronouncements on it and drawn such complex inferences and with some claims of inside info, yet still don’t appear to have actually gone and spoken to RObertson to get the information from the source. The nearest thing we have to a primary source is Barnsley Bill and a report from David Slack.

    And I’ll repeat despite all the interest from the media quoted above and egging on from Labour, none of them have felt the story has legs. Why would that be? ARE they all worried about losing out on tax cuts?
39. james 39

    8 March 2008 at 7:16 am

    i want know from national if there going to bring back the employment contracts act keys statement proves to me there is a hidden agenda in national they just dont learn i heard this week english supports assets sales that party never learns.
    if keys tried to get this reporter fired this is very very serious that is what dictators do john keys is same as vladamire putine.

Links to post

1. Some questions at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 5 March 2008 at 9:57 pm
2. What Is Going On Behind The “Wage Drop” Story? « KiwiBlogBlog: posted on 6 March 2008 at 4:25 pm
3. Key’s Australian excuse at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 8 March 2008 at 3:27 pm
4. National continues attacks on media freedom at thestandard.org.nz: posted on 13 March 2008 at 1:38 pm
5. Nats to journos: say what we want or shut up at The Standard 2.01: posted on 28 May 2008 at 1:03 pm
6. Protecting ‘brand Key’ at The Standard 2.01: posted on 26 June 2008 at 6:54 pm
7. Bullies at The Standard 2.01: posted on 13 July 2008 at 4:54 pm
8. Nevermind » Say What We Want Or Shut Up: posted on 17 September 2008 at 10:42 am
9. No more Mr Nice Guy at The Standard: posted on 30 June 2009 at 3:06 pm
10. Bullying the media at The Standard: posted on 22 September 2009 at 10:46 am
11. National’s long history of intimidataion « The Standard: posted on 16 May 2017 at 9:29 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS