John Armstrong – a person worth disagreeing with

25 comments on “John Armstrong – a person worth disagreeing with ”

• Comments are now closed

1. lprent 1

   17 October 2015 at 9:21 am

   Keep the robustness down a little on this one please.

   For those inclined to castigation and nice simple shots, please remember that this is my post and I liked reading John Armstrong’s analysis. I will mourn not having it.

   If you are inclined to simple-minded categorisation then your post is at Open Mike.
2. Tory 2

   17 October 2015 at 9:23 am

   Left or Right, Armstrong was a great writer and his thoughtful columns will be missed.
   • Leftie 2.1

     18 October 2015 at 5:35 pm

     @Tory.

     Disagree.
3. Blue 3

   17 October 2015 at 9:45 am

   I nearly choked when he apologised to David Cunliffe for that column demanding he resign. Better late than never, I suppose.

   Armstrong’s approach to political commentary was, in his own words, focused on the game of power, who was winning and how they did it. It’s not an approach I particularly like, believing that political commentators have a duty to analyse whether the things a government does actually work or not so voters can make more informed choices.

   I’m sorry to hear that he is battling Parkinson’s, and for the loss of his depth of experience, however.
   • geoff 3.1

     17 October 2015 at 9:40 pm

     Armstrong’s approach to political commentary was, in his own words, focused on the game of power, who was winning and how they did it.

     Agree. Armstrong’s style is to talk about politics as though he were commentating a boxing match.
   • Leftie 3.2

     18 October 2015 at 9:21 pm

     @Blue
     Not much of an apology when Armstrong downplayed the dirty politics of the Donghua Liu lies that was used to destroy David Cunliffe, as “relatively trivial.” Armstrong still can’t accept responsibility for the large part he himself played in that.
4. NZSage 4

   17 October 2015 at 9:48 am

   Better the devil you know and we all know John Armstrong. We may not have agreed but his writing had depth and he has integrity… a trait so often missing in many that run and support the National Party.

   He will be missed for if the Herald replace him it will surely be with one of the all to familiar, shallow, one eyed journalist that proliferate MSM today.
5. Ad 5

   17 October 2015 at 9:49 am

   Perhaps we could invite him to contribute here.

   He would at least be even handed in his annoyance capacity, and only a very few have his experience.

   He’s from an era in which the state was stronger, and where policy changes in Wellington were something to really take notice of. Personally I miss that the most.
   • lprent 5.1

     17 October 2015 at 10:21 am

     I am sure if he wants to then he will tell us and we will happily post it (and probably put some operational moderation on like we do with politicians).

     But Parkinsons is not a kind affliction. I don’t think it will give much room.
6. RedLogix 6

   17 October 2015 at 9:50 am

   The crucial pivot of this article is where Armstrong openly admits:

   Politics boils down to power – winning it and, just as importantly, retaining it. The fascination comes in watching how politicians play the game.

   In other words Armstrong, like all other long term Gallery journos, had become embedded in the institution. His fascination for the game meant he forgot it’s purpose. I often got the sense that for all his insider insights – he had taken his eye off the road.

   Too much of our political reporting is about the squabbling and manipulations in the front seat – and be damned where the driver might be taking us.

   I once argued that perhaps we should consider imposing mandatory time limits on the term a given reporter might serve in the Gallery to mitigate this almost inevitable capture by the game of politics rather than it’s substance.
   • lprent 6.1

     17 October 2015 at 10:17 am

     The embedding in parliament is why, apart from conflicts of interest, we don’t allow parliamentary journos, staffers, and MPs to author here except in guest posts for MPs.

     Parliament has always more than adequately covered. It is the other, more real and productive areas of our society whose views are inadequately rendered to the rest of NZ.

     But for a political site, we depend on getting insider views about the lawmakers and implementers whose decisions tend of impact so strongly on those with limited voice. The problem is that it takes a lot of comparative experience to be able to do that task. You can see it in the relative depths of the analysis of different journalists in the parliamentary gallery. It relates directly to their years of experience (and the type of media they do – TV journos seem to specialize in being shallow analysts).

     Offhand, in recent years the only journo with limited years in the gallery that I took much notice of was Vance. The others I took notice of were all grizzled veterans of the institution.
     • RedLogix 6.1.1

       17 October 2015 at 11:29 am

       I’m conscious that experience does count – but it always seems to come at this cost. The result is that our politicians are rewarded with media oxygen by all the wrong behaviours.

       The Gallery is a very important Parliamentary institution – and I’d argue we are being poorly served by it. How do we go about demanding better?
       • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1

         17 October 2015 at 3:36 pm

         To cater to both points you make it so that journalists can’t get into the gallery until they’ve got five years of journalism covering real economic and social issues first. Then they get a three year term in the Gallery followed by five years back out in the real world.

         Get the experience and the real world grounding.
   • Thinker 6.2

     18 October 2015 at 9:15 am

     “The crucial pivot of this article is where Armstrong openly admits:
     Politics boils down to power – winning it and, just as importantly, retaining it. The fascination comes in watching how politicians play the game” – Redlogix

     I was also pleased to see Armstrong saying that MMP has lifted democracy in this country.

     Parkinsons is debilitating and must be frustrating. I’d like to add my sympathies.
7. Colonial Viper 7

   17 October 2015 at 10:40 am

   Best wishes to John Armstrong.
8. ianmac 8

   17 October 2015 at 11:30 am

   At the end of a long career I guess one asks oneself was I true to my integrity and did I make a difference? John probably is able to say yes to both though it depends where the reader’s politics lie.
   Best wishes John.
9. Vaughan Little 9

   17 October 2015 at 12:27 pm

   I gave up reading him during the runup to last year’s election. still, he’s one of the better writers in nz journalism. knows how to wrangle paragraphs into articles. it strikes me as sad that at the end of his valedictory he notes the decline in voter turnout and then goes on to argue for a change in the flag. it’s like, he doesn’t realize that there’s no nation any more that a flag could meaningfully represent. as a commenter notes above, he was strong on the game but not the wider social implications.
10. millsy 10

    17 October 2015 at 12:32 pm

    Parkinson’s is not a disease I would wish on anyone. Best wishes to John and his family.
    • left for deadshark 10.1

      17 October 2015 at 5:29 pm

      I’ll tag on to that comment millsy, thanks.
11. b waghorn 11

    17 October 2015 at 1:32 pm

    A very good farewell article by Armstrong it’s just a shame he didn’t elaborate on the Cunniliffe accusations with regards to whether it was a honest mistake or was he meddling in an election campaign.
12. Jenny Kirk 12

    17 October 2015 at 3:20 pm

    I am sorry to see John Armstrong go from the Herald’s regular political commentary. I hope he is able to continue in some other form – his insight into the politics, and politicians, of this country will be missed.
    I noted his integrity when in Parliament myself during the turbulent Lange/Douglas power struggle, and I have always appreciated his articles – even when I have disagreed with his opinions.
    I wish him all the best for the future, and what it might hold for him.
13. Esoteric Pineapples 13

    17 October 2015 at 9:04 pm

    There’s a “business as usual” and “seen it all vibe” to a lot of New Zealand journalists of Armstrong’s generation. Except it isn’t business as usual. Decisions made in the next few months and years are going to have profound long term consequences. Once liberal journalists have become jaded conservatives incapable of recognising let alone engaging with this new paradigm making their opinions increasingly out of touch with the currents running through society.
14. Stuart Munro 14

    18 October 2015 at 2:08 pm

    We could never do the litmus test, but I suspect if Key had rolled into the house with Shearer’s fatal snapper, Armstrong would’ve laughed with, not at him. To me that’s fatal bias. Not a strong analyst or exemplary wordsmith that I saw – though I only saw him late career. This politics stuff affects people in the real world, so horse-race journalism is inevitably second rate.

Links to post

1. Twitter tributes to John Armstrong | Your NZ: posted on 17 October 2015 at 9:18 am
2. On John Armstrong – insightful and spiteful | Your NZ: posted on 18 October 2015 at 7:21 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS