Question 2

Written By: - Date published: 10:42 am, July 11th, 2008 - 14 comments
Categories: Media - Tags:

Why was the report on government spending from ANZ Chief Economist Cameron Bagrie blindly accepted by the media at first, when anyone with a basic understanding of how government works (or accounting or statistics or economics) could see it was fundamentally flawed?

Why did it take press releases from unions and blog posts and interviews with a minister to discredit something that was not deserving of any credit in the first place?

Could these be answers: ‘Foreign media owners slash journo numbers, again’ and ‘Fairfax milks the cash cow’

Make no mistake, our media is being asset-stripped by foreign owners who care only about profit. The remaining journos are over-worked and under-resourced. The quality of our news and, thereby, our democracy suffers for it. 

14 comments on “Question 2”

  1. “Why did it take press releases from unions and blog posts and interviews with a minister”

    All of these parties having a vested interest in attempting to discredit the report. Labour can’t seem to catch a break at the moment 🙂

  2. Bryan. And you’ve got a vested interest in talking it up but you know the report is flawed and today’s media on it thoroughly discredits it. the question is why did it get picked up as gospel in the first place?

  3. roger nome 3

    jesus bryan, stop embarrasing yourself. It really is painful to watch you know.

  4. Steve: “today’s media on it thoroughly discredits it.”

    ” “The economist’s analysis is unfortunately very lightweight and shows a lack of understanding of what departments’ budgets actually pay for,” Mr Mallard said. ”

    One article from the NZPA with no journalistic analysis in the NZ Herald and quoting Trevor Mallard is hardly the media thoroughly discrediting it.

    “Core public servants earn on average almost NZ$8 an hour more than those in the rest of the economy, including those working at the coalface for government as teachers, road workers, nurses and police officers.”

    I wonder how the PPTA feels about teachers earning less than the clever people at the Ministry who waste money on badges and can’t fix a schools sewerage system ?

  5. Bryan – it’s already been explained to you that the article you cite is using the wrong data (ie the QES rather than the more accurate and appropriate LCI). I note you haven’t responded to that clarification. Might I politely suggest you are retarded?

  6. Steve: “today’s media on it thoroughly discredits it.”

    No sign of any fisking at all of Cameron Bagries report over at the politics page at Stuff: http://www.stuff.co.nz/0a6160.html .

    I’ll check out TVNZ & TV3.

    Robinsod: you appear to be using the wrong end of the horse in your Gravitar 🙂 Haven’t you got a lecture to attend or an assignment to complete?

  7. Bryan – the last lecture I attended I delivered. So tell me why you are still trying to pass those stats off as correct when they have been proven to be based on the wrong data? Or do you not understand the difference between the QES and the LCI?

    Oh and bryan? It’s an ass not a horse – go feed your monkey…

  8. TVNZ & TV 3 don’t seem to be “thoroughly discredits it.” either.

    Ponsonby News perhaps ? That always has glowing articles about Judith Tizard.

  9. Robinsod: “when they have been proven to be based on the wrong data?”

    Don’t you mean: the data that most embarrasses the Labour government ?

    “”The economist’s analysis is unfortunately very lightweight and shows a lack of understanding of what departments’ budgets actually pay for,’ Mr Mallard said.”

    Trevor Mallard’s response is classic PR company spin. Whatever you do don’t go anywhere near the facts. Discredit or belittle the authority of the person.

  10. Don’t you mean: the data that most embarrasses the Labour government ?

    No – I mean the wrong data. As in the data that is not considered by any credible expert (and most casual observers) as the best fit measure for the situation under discussion. Tell you what mate – I just undertook a survey in my office (of one) and got a 100% response rate concluding you are a retarded pig-f*cker. I realise you may disagree but it must be true. I’ve got the data to prove it.

  11. Pascal's bookie 11

    ‘sod, I just replicated that result over here. Must be true.

  12. bill brown 12

    Excellent, 200% of people can’t be wrong!

  13. Now, come on a little less of the personal abuse.

    But Bryan, you’ve got to start trying to contribute at a more sophisicated level or you’re just a troll and people will get annoyed. We don’t want, or need to permit, our threads to dominated by trolling.

    There are a number of sources offering crtiques why this report has no crediblity, how about you engage in actual debate with those critiques rather than attacking the people voicing them?

  14. Ari 14

    Bryan, those releases all contain enough fact-checking that even if there is spin buried in there, it’s pretty transparent that they’ve debunked the original report quite easily.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Growth in Police deployments
    The first Police graduation for 2019 creates a new total of 1,101 frontline officers deployed around the country since the Coalition Government took office. Police Minister Stuart Nash today presented awards to the top recruits of Wing 322, whose Patron ...
    6 days ago
  • Andrew Little to lead delegation to UN Human Rights Review
    Justice Minister, Andrew Little, lead a delegation to New Zealand’s third Universal Periodic Review at the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on 21 January. ...
    1 week ago