Herald’s Brown smears fail to stick

Written By: - Date published: 12:27 pm, June 18th, 2010 - 27 comments
Categories: auckland supercity, C&R, local body elections, Media - Tags: ,

The Herald will be disappointed. Over the last two weeks it has been a willing soldier in John Bank’s smear campaign against Len Brown. It’s a desperate last ditch strategy by the right as it faces defeat. And it’s not working. Even on the Herald’s on online poll, which we all know leans about as rightwing as a meeting of Federated Farmers, Brown is still beating Banks.

As Brian Rudman notes: “I doubt many voters will begrudge him the odd filled roll and latte as he dashes from one mayoral appointment to the next.” And voters don’t like Banks “Asked to score both candidates out of 10, 46 per cent recorded negative feelings about Mr Banks (25 per cent of these “very negative”), more than double the 20 per cent negativity for Mr Brown.”

The Herald is now trying to write off Brown on the basis of its own scandal-mongering: “Manukau Mayor Len Brown’s credit card breaches and emotional mea culpa have some questioning his chances at winning the Super City mayoralty”. It’s akin to Colin Espiner writing off Labour for the 2011 because some second string ex-ministers misused credit cards years ago. It might suit the political purposes of the rightwing media, but the public aren’t falling for it.

27 comments on “Herald’s Brown smears fail to stick ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. A Post With Me In It 1
    18 June 2010 at 12:33 pm

    I think you underestimate the power of ignorance.

  2. mickysavage 2
    18 June 2010 at 12:34 pm

    There is a poll being run by the Herald right now at http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10652539

    Len is ahead although only by a bit.

    Edit oops same link as Marty’s.

    • crib 2.1
      18 June 2010 at 3:19 pm

      There are some brilliant parts in that story

      “”I think Mr Brown earns enough to buy his own lunch and snacks. And charity dinners. As an Auckland ratepayer, I don’t think it should be my job to subsidise his already handsome salary. There is no difference here to what the MPs have done with their credit cards,” wrote FW.”

      As an auckland ratepayer, you dont pay brown shit.

      Meanwhile, Tejopala Rawls, from Ponsonby, supported Mr Brown and blamed the media: “The right wing media should be more careful than to jump on board a right wing smear campaign. A sad day for NZ journalism.”

      Like this entire fucking story?

  3. gingercrush 3
    18 June 2010 at 12:48 pm

    Oh FFS. You go criticise the media and in particular the NZ Herald over jumping to conclusions in regards to Len Brown. And you base your whole fucking argument on an online poll. Are you serious.

    You’ve just demonstrated the stupidity of bloggers who on either side of the political spectrum make their own shitty claims on increasingly flimsy evidence. In this case a bloody online poll of little relevance.

    • Bright Red 3.1
      18 June 2010 at 1:14 pm

      The post notes that the Herald’s polls always lean right and still Brown is ahead.

  4. Jared 4
    18 June 2010 at 12:57 pm

    You failed to note that the poll was taken in May, by labour stalwart UMR, before Brown was left out to dry. “but the public aren’t falling for it” well we will see when the next round of polling is done won’t we. Otherwise your statement is baseless.

    • Bright Red 4.1
      18 June 2010 at 1:15 pm

      just trying to see where the post refers to the UMR poll…..

      nope, it doesn’t

      • TightyRighty 4.1.1
        18 June 2010 at 1:19 pm

        then which poll does this comment refer to?

        And voters don’t like Banks “Asked to score both candidates out of 10, 46 per cent recorded negative feelings about Mr Banks (25 per cent of these “very negative’), more than double the 20 per cent negativity for Mr Brown.’

        Edit: I can answer my own question, the UMR poll. Nom Nom Nom BR

  5. J Mex 5
    18 June 2010 at 1:44 pm

    Everything that I have seen on Brown is relatively small beer.

    Except for the $810 dinner, which he, in my opinion seems to have actively lied about. I am surprised in hasn’t got more press time.

    “”This is a bona-fide purchase of a table in support of a fundraiser for one of our excellent young musical talents coming through.”.

    Aside from the fact that he’s not local, not young and not really coming though, there is no advertising anywhere that it is a fundraiser or a charitable event. It appears to be a restaurant initiated dinner with entertainment provided. I’ve been involved in plenty of these types of nights through business, and when we hire and pay musicians to perform, it’s not fundraising or charitable – it’s business.

    It’s like paying for an Anika Moa concert on the mayoral card and saying that it’s a “bona-fide purchase in support of a fundraiser for one of our excellent young musical talents coming through.”

    As David Farrar points out, the unknown mayoral contingent theoretically contributed around $20 to the young (in his 40s) Australian based singer and $790 to the restaurant [and themselves!] for the five course dinner.

    In saying that, I think he will still win, but that particular one really does bother me. It seems to be an active reinterpreting of the facts surrounding that night.

    • Buster 5.1
      18 June 2010 at 2:02 pm

      J Mex, perhaps this story puts you right: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10652692 “Brown’s dinner helps ex-bikie sing new tune”

      And people wonder why all this is being called a smear.

      • J Mex 5.1.1
        18 June 2010 at 2:20 pm

        “”I managed to organise with [Nahkle] to do a performance at his venue…I said to him I could really use some financial help with anyone who is happy to get me along,” Knight said.

        “All I do is turn up and perform but I was very, very clear that if there are people who might be able to come along, potential investors anything else that in any way might be able to help.”

        That’s not a fundraiser. Like I said, I have worked with musicians who perform at bars and restaurants and venues. They get paid a fee for performing and might get tips or contacts. That’s not fundraising and it’s not charitable. Like I said, there is no difference between the Mayoral contingent going to this, or going to a concert.

        It’s a deliberate misrepresentation.

        As an aside, Brown was required under council regulations, and IRD regulations to note the nature of the function and the people who attended and their roles. He was also required to provide a GST receipt. Now I can accept that he was too lax to provide this – and nobody hounded him to produce it. The fact that he absolutely refuses to provide it now, does throw doubt on the fact that he forgot to do it originally, and does throw doubt on the legitimacy of it at all.

        His spending is private. Council spending is not.

  6. kerry 6
    18 June 2010 at 2:17 pm

    Banks will NEVER be Auckand Super City Mayor!

    Perhaps banks, fletcher and boag can start a sewing circle…….to pass the time.

  7. Anthony C 7
    18 June 2010 at 2:55 pm

    I enjoyed the Jonathan Marshall smear article the most though….

    Stuff: “Manukau ‘fundraiser’ was for Aussie singer”

    NZH: “Mr Knight, who has gone from being a member of the Highway 61 motorcycle gang in Manukau to an opera singer, said it was a successful evening.”

    Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story Jonathan.

  8. Evidence-Based Practice 8
    18 June 2010 at 3:02 pm

    Interestingly, in the current Herald poll, John Banks is on about the same percentage of the vote he got in the last mayoral campaign, and he won that because the vote split three ways. So for all the publicity and spin, he hasn’t increased his popularity with the populace. On the other hand, another strong candidate could soak up all the ‘neithers’ and Banks could win again. I wonder if someone is being set up by his campaign organisers to do that late run?

  9. peter 9
    18 June 2010 at 3:07 pm

    Funny how the media et al are not after Dick Quax about his $1500.00 cost for a no-show at a course he was to attend …

    Captcha – aiming !

  10. Zaphod Beeblebrox 10
    18 June 2010 at 4:24 pm

    Have some sympathy for the right bloggers and the NZ Herald- there is nothing else for them to talk about at the moment. Hence they resort to the macabe and creepy stalking of Chris Carter (obviously they have a case of envy of the UK press) and talking about cups of coffee purchased by mayors and council dinners.
    I suppose its boring to scrutinize things like how ATA is being run- look at who got the Auckland Council banking contract or what is happening at Queens Wharf (yes we will be paying) or a thousand other things happening as the existing councils wind down. Must be hard when your side is in power.

    • Draco T Bastard 10.1
      19 June 2010 at 12:19 am

      Have some sympathy for the right bloggers and the NZ Herald- there is nothing else for them to talk about at the moment.

      Well, they do but if they did then this government it’s complete incompetence would be shown and they can’t have that can they?

  11. tc 11
    18 June 2010 at 4:44 pm

    The line from Hugo Weavings Matrix character springs to mind ” Hear that Mr Banks….it’s the sound of inevitability”

  12. Crashcart 12
    18 June 2010 at 6:45 pm

    He did look as mad as a hatter when he started slapping himself in council. Perhaps you have to be to want the job of SUPER Mayor.

  13. Irascible 13
    18 June 2010 at 6:45 pm

    Interestingly, The Herald commissioned Neilsen to do an online poll asking about the perceptions about local body politicians and suitability for the roles. All the questions were directed to solicit remarks about Len Brown and did not solicit any commentary about John Banks or any other politician local body or MP.
    The poll was to inform the Herald for an article on Len Brown for the Weekend Herald.
    Makes one wonder how much further in the NACT swamp will the Herald allow itself to sink?

  14. G8 14
    19 June 2010 at 11:14 am

    Do not pass GO go straight to “Open Mike”

  15. Jay 15
    21 June 2010 at 9:05 am

    Watching this ‘scandal’ made me wonder if I’d somehow woken up in America, isnt that where you undertake slander politics? Have now lost all faith in the herald’s ability to report balanced journalism… mind you didnt have any faith in them to start with so guess they’re not worried.

    • Bored 15.1
      21 June 2010 at 9:12 am

      The interesting bit was in the SStimes with the amount Browns fellow councillors turned accusers had also expensed, seemed to me they were pots calling the kettle black.

  16. randal 16
    21 June 2010 at 12:50 pm

    this morning 9-n00n advertised a showdown between the left and right on the super city mayoralty but funnily enough it never took place.

  17. the pinkpostman 17
    21 June 2010 at 3:32 pm

    Never underestimate a cornered rat . The political Right desperately want and need to win the Super City election.They well know that if the Left wins it will certainly help Labour in the general election next year.So they will pull out all the stops. We need to be vigilant and alert to what will be a very ,very dirty election. Also remember they have pots of money , Crosby/Textor and most of the press working for them.Be ready and on guard .