Worst Election News Coverage

154 comments on “Worst Election News Coverage ”

• Comments are now closed

1. lprent 1

   26 December 2011 at 7:51 pm

   I remember the face. But in my currently stuffed condition I’d have to agree with Zet.

   1. I failed to remember anything she ever did (newsreader maybe?)
   2. Results count. We had a great year

   I’d have to say that I am surprised that anyone thinks we tried to provide election news coverage. It was never our intent. We try to provide political opinion, not news. This appears to be a distinction that Janet Wilson fails to understand.

   Many people would argue that merely being an MP constrains the authors at Red Alert to the centre in their opinions (hadn’t noticed them trying to provide news either). We don’t have that constraint. We express more of the actual thinking of the left than a centre-left party.

   If Wilson thinks that the authors on this site are mostly hard left – then I’d have to say that says more about her weak-kneed politic of the centre-right than anything else.

   She should really read the comments. Blubberboy attracts the perverts even worse than himself, kiwiblog attracts the sleazy even worse than the author and I’ll leave the rest of the blog comparisons to the imagination. We delight in offering opinions and arguing about them – all sorts of opinions about all sorts of topics.

   What they aren’t is the type of sanitised pap that the MP’s are constrained to or that she is used to. This attracts people across the entire range of the left through to some of the more hard-nosed centre right. They come here to argue and disagree and it is mostly fun.
   • higherstandard 1.1

     26 December 2011 at 8:07 pm

     What she actually said was…

     ‘Worst Election News Coverage had to be The Standard whose hard left rhetoric rendered it blind to any rational coverage.

     Labour’s Red Alert was a much better and clearer standard bearer for the left and while right wing sites such as Whaleoil were almost as blinkered as The Standard, the blubbery one saved himself – just -by the liberal use of humour.”

     Seems fair to me.
     • lprent 1.1.1

       26 December 2011 at 8:13 pm

       I added a late paragraph in to point out that we don’t try to provide news coverage. Perhaps she should read the about. But there’s a hint on every post page on the site. The list of the posts on the right is called “opinions”.

       Same on Red Alert. Whatshername doesn’t appear to understand what blogs are about. Perhaps she should find out?
       • brett Dale 1.1.1.1

         27 December 2011 at 2:47 pm

         Iprent:

         Thats the same line that faux News uses.
         • McFlock 1.1.1.1.1

           27 December 2011 at 4:13 pm

           Fx news claims to not be a news service? Did they have an attack of honesty?
         • lprent 1.1.1.1.2

           27 December 2011 at 7:43 pm

           Perhaps they should remove the word “news” from their name to prevent false advertising. They don’t seem to want to do that? I wonder why?

           In this case, Janet Wilson is the dipshit who claims that we report news – something that I emphatically dislike. We’re not one of those numbskulls that can’t move far from a teleprompter like the TV news she lauds…
     • Ari 1.1.2

       26 December 2011 at 9:38 pm

       Cameron Slater doesn’t use humour, he uses derision and ad-hominem attacks, which only qualify as humour to audiences under the age of thirteen.
       • CnrJoe 1.1.2.1

         26 December 2011 at 9:45 pm

         and janet and bills age
         • Ari 1.1.2.1.1

           27 December 2011 at 10:32 am

           I like to think that Tory commentators just stop maturing at age 13. It would explain so much. 😉
   • mik e 1.2

     26 December 2011 at 8:11 pm

     when the MSM are guilty of blindly following the neoliberal cause and cowardly giving into the sponsors cause.The yellow press.
     Where were the hard questions from real journalists non existent.
     Isn’t JW’s partner bill right wing Ralston her partner.
     • Anne 1.2.1

       26 December 2011 at 8:30 pm

       Isn’t JW’s partner bill right wing Ralston her partner.

       The same one. I think she is/was also a talk back host on Radio Live so that sums up the level of her knowledge and political comprehension.
       • CnrJoe 1.2.1.1

         26 December 2011 at 9:47 pm

         shes scary looking – a radio face f’sure
       • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.2

         26 December 2011 at 10:58 pm

         The Right Wingers always cycle around and around in the establishment. They never seem to properly die off they just remain zombified pushing the same blinkered neo-liberal PR.
2. *_* 2

   26 December 2011 at 8:07 pm

   “We express more of the actual thinking of the left than a centre-left party.”

   No wonder the left lost then.

   “We delight in offering opinions and arguing about them – all sorts of opinions about all sorts of topics.”

   No, you delight in personally insulting anyone whose opinion differs from the party line no matter what their political beliefs – like calling people astroturfers when they have a legitimate criticism.
   • lprent 2.1

     26 December 2011 at 8:25 pm

     Me personally? I delight in calling idiots as being idiots without really bothering about their opinions.

     As a moderator I look at behavior. Since it is our site that is kind of our choice.

     As a commentator, I look at the misuse of ‘fact’ when what is actually being expressed is opinion. My guess is that you’re one of the idiots who do that, and get upset about being corrected with sarcasm. If you’d express it as opinion, I’d merely tell you why you are wrong. But as long as you act like a idiot by promoting something as fact when it is opinion in one of my areas of understanding, I will treat you as idiot and tell you why you are wrong with enough sarcasm it might make you check first next time.
     • *_* 2.1.1

       26 December 2011 at 9:10 pm

       No, I’m not one of the upset idiots you take much delight in bullying.

       I’m one of the happy idiots who are delighted to tell where you and the rest of you cowardly leftard socialist cocksmacks where to fuck off too.

       Wilson actually has a point which is that your opinion doesn’t seem to be based on any facts but wishful thinking. I suppose this is why your site attracts so much traffic from other fellow travelers – in their deluded state they’s rather hear lies than the truth because the grim reality that the voting public utterly rejects them is something too painful to bear.

       Merry Christmas
       • lprent 2.1.1.1

         26 December 2011 at 10:35 pm

         Whatever – sounds like your usual crap.

         The problem is that before people start to listen to you, you have to say something worth reading. So far you have done 7 comments. All any of them have done so far is whine pathetically that you don’t like the left or this site.

         You don’t offer anything except to reinforce the common viewpoint that the only thing the right has in common is a hatred of the left. It isn’t like their perception of the left bears any relationship to reality – you only have to read your comments to see that. It is full of myths from the last hundred years and is about as accurate as Wishart on climate change…

         With idiots like you arguing the case for the right, it isn’t hard to see why it sounds like puke regurgitated by a unthinking fool.
         • *_* 2.1.1.1.1

           26 December 2011 at 11:09 pm

           Here is the standard’s narrative:

           – the voters are deluded fools who must be made to see the error of their ways in voting National
           – all the polls are wrong
           – its not Labour’s fault that they are unpopular but the stupidity of the electorate

           Now regurgitate upon the internet again and again in a hopeless spasm of self-delusion.

           And then there is reality…

           I actually like this site, it reinforces everything that is wrong with the left – it’s arrogance, shrill scare tactics, the moral bankruptcy and duplicity and its sycophancy. It’s actually a pity that sites like this don’t get wider coverage then the electorate can truly see what the left is really like.
           • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.1.1.1

             26 December 2011 at 11:12 pm

             it’s arrogance, shrill scare tactics, the moral bankruptcy and duplicity and its sycophancy.

             Righties always project their own character on to others. You’re basically describing Crosby Textor, Farrar, Whaleoil and the like.

             Same with the Right Wing ‘envy’ meme. Neoliberals always look at their neighbours pad, their neighbours new car, with a sense of competition and yes…envy.

             More psychological projection from the Right in other words. Its scary what the world view they subscribe to must look like.
             • *_* …

               27 December 2011 at 4:08 am

               Actually that’s the left and why they want to tax the shit out of everything that moves and re-distribute this to more worthy causes. This comment is so full of shit and lacking a basis in reality that I for once are truly amazed.

               Nice try.

               Maybe you should look into the mirror and see some of that murderous left wing envy.

               [So far all I have seen from you is distemperate ranting and some very tired troll lines. If you want to continue commenting here you will need to lift your game. There are plenty of right-leaning commenters who have done so for many years, even though being a left-wing site The Standard is not naturally ‘friendly turf’ for them. However because they usually make some semblence an argument and sometimes back it with some references, they are welcome.

               On the other hand your behaviour so far doesn’t cut even this rather mild mustard. .. RL]
               • Jenny …

                 27 December 2011 at 7:43 am

                 Actually that’s the left and why they want to tax the shit out of everything that moves and re-distribute this to more worthy causes. This comment is so full of shit and lacking a basis in reality that I for once are truly amazed.

                 *_*

                 To paraphrase *_*, ‘That’s the Right and why they want to cut the shit out of everything that moves and re-distribute this to the more wealthy’

                 http://thestandard.org.nz/shearer-shows-he-means-it/#comment-421330
               • ropata …

                 27 December 2011 at 8:35 am

                 “*_*” : an interesting study in the myths of the right. Regarding “taxing the shit out of everything” …

                 National raised GST to 15% (a highly regressive tax)
                 Net result: tax cuts to the wealthy, tax increase to everyone else

                 Tax and regulation are necessary to balance out the excesses of capital, which prefers monopoly in its own vertical all the while preaching free markets for everyone else.

                 http://rwer.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/why-free-market-economics-is-a-fraud/

                 One day New Zealand will join the civilised world with CGT and tax free vegetables.
                 • Colonial Viper …

                   27 December 2011 at 8:48 am

                   FTT please. And a NZ owned and funded financial system. We’re going to need it.
               • Ari …

                 27 December 2011 at 10:43 am

                 So you’re acknowledging that what we want to spend taxes on is more worthy than people hoarding wealth and not caring about opportunity for others- but still trying to denigrate it as envy, when National’s envy landed people who can’t afford it with an extra 2.5% GST and more of the tax burden.

                 Here’s a tip for you: I honestly don’t mind if other people succeed. What pisses me off is those idiots who think they never relied on anyone else to succeed and are perfectly okay with making life worse for others in their success. We all rely on each other, all the time, and if you do well it’s likely got more to do with having great opportunities than with your personal strengths, and you should be willing to give that chance to other people.

                 I have zero problem with anyone getting wealthy if they do so in a way that doesn’t hurt or deprive others. But now we’re above the planet’s carrying capacity and causing massive environmental damage, it’s pretty clear that we’re reaching the point where any increase in wealth implicitly deprives others, and thus the burden of proof has dramatically shifted.
           • QoT 2.1.1.1.1.2

             26 December 2011 at 11:38 pm

             Well I’m confused. I’ve spent about the past two years saying Labour’s lack of popularity is pretty much entirely Labour’s fault, and even had a post published here arguing as much. I must have been a red herring or something.
             • lprent …

               27 December 2011 at 9:49 am

               Ah yes. But I think that you rile Labour parliamentarians less than Irish does.
               • QoT …

                 27 December 2011 at 9:50 am

                 Why you gotta burst my bubble, lprent?
                 • lprent …

                   27 December 2011 at 2:02 pm

                   I suspect that it is the repeated needles about performance that do it. Irish has been like a burr on a dogs arse for the parliamentary NZLP for more than 4 years in terms of their messages and delivery. Hard to argue with as well.

                   You just need to write more 😈
           • McFlock 2.1.1.1.1.3

             26 December 2011 at 11:45 pm

              

             – the voters are deluded fools who must be made to see the error of their ways in voting National

              Not quite. Although there do seem to be recurring themes here of deceit and bias in the media and campaigns, probably about the same amount of commentary revolves around what “the left” parties (for simplicity’s sake Labour & the Greens) should do to improve themselves.

             – all the polls are wrong

             Well, yeah. Pretty much all of them were.

              

             – its not Labour’s fault that they are unpopular but the stupidity of the electorate

              A proposition which is pretty much a repitition of your first point. And you’d have to be blind not to realise that “left wing” (however you want to define it) commenters here are routinely pointing out what is wrong  with labour.
               
             And they do it more constructively, more logically, and more coherently than you.
              
           • lprent 2.1.1.1.1.4

             27 December 2011 at 1:02 pm

             Well each mention in the mainstream media does increase our readership. However at present it is well behind new readers from Google, Facebook, and other blogs.

             Overall Facebook is the best source of new readers – as you’d expect. Google is the next best despite its bounce rate – we get a lot of hits from search engines. However the media is definitely the worst.

             We still haven’t “marketed” to the political parties of the left. Probably less than 10% of the Labour party people I run across are even aware of blogs, let alone our site. I think it is time to rectify that for all of the parties of the left.
             • seeker …

               28 December 2011 at 1:01 pm

               @lprent

               “We still haven’t “marketed” to the political parties of the left. Probably less than 10% of the Labour party people I run across are even aware of blogs, let alone our site. I think it is time to rectify that for all of the parties of the left.”

               Just catching up on comments after a few days of Christmas celebration and thought this was a great idea to widen and explore the ‘conceptsphere’.

               The Standard site is vitally important when one comes across such ‘minds’ as *_* 2.1.126 December 2011 at 9:10 pm
               whose ‘digustorant’ comments made me flinch with nausea. However I tried to remember that they came from another human being who might just become ‘educated’ and aware of better values by interacting with the smart minds on this site as opposed to another couple of right wing sites that I briefly visited and which seem to support and encourage this crude ‘foul mouthed’, less than type of commenting.
     • aerobubble 2.1.2

       28 December 2011 at 10:26 am

       The left failed because it argues too much. Take freeview, claims of 20+ highdef channels but they count radio national as well in the 20! Now in a world awash in content how can an opposition noy be railing against the govt????

       Take the election, not one wince at how Key choose to place the election right after the rugby and how the msm dumped all real independance to glow in Keys shadow. WTF! NZ said no to three tax reliefs, on food, on income and raising more revenue for non-home capital gains.

       Thats why the left lost, they weren’t trusts to standup and be mean to Key for them, rather they are ean will lots of frilly words about isses the publib is not engaged with.

       Geez how could you loss when you offer across the border taxs cuts!!!
   • McFlock 2.2

     26 December 2011 at 8:34 pm

     Which party and what line, doofus?
     • Descendant Of Smith 2.2.1

       26 December 2011 at 9:56 pm

       Actually the only people who have abused me on this site have been right wing.

       Feel free to check out my comments and responses over the last couple of years and you’ll find this is the case.

       I also find it’s the right on this site who abuse the people in my neighborhood continuously whether they be on a benefit, belong to a union, are happy paying tax, are sole parent, and so on.

       Usually they seem to mainly get abused back when they make such comments or after a sustained period of adding little but repeating the same rhetoric over and over again.

       I generally feel much more respect from the left than the right here.
       • Vicky32 2.2.1.1

         3 January 2012 at 5:26 pm

         I generally feel much more respect from the left than the right here.

         Sadly, my experience has been otherwise – it irks me very much to be called a right-winger, which I adamantly am not – and being told that I am a rich white RWNJ, because I am a Christian!
         I spent years on a DPB, and am on a UB now. I come from a poor family, and am part of a poor family now. Certain lefties here need to realise that the left is a “broader church” than they realise, and that beneficiaries and working class people have views that sometimes vary from what they think is left orthodoxy. 🙁
         I have actually had some supportive remarks from the right, which is worrying, but from maybe one left wing person? Sad…
3. McFlock 3

   26 December 2011 at 8:16 pm

   Joy to the World – another unspectacular journalist becomes a spin doctor / “media trainer”.  
     
   At least Brian Edwards’ site has a bit more effort put into web presentation so it looks lke something corporate, rather than a hobby-type blog about puppies and that jerk who cut me off in traffic last week.
   • Populuxe1 3.1

     27 December 2011 at 12:29 pm

     Much as I adore Brian, to be fair:
     http://brianedwardsmedia.co.nz/2011/05/a-little-message-for-the-owner-of-a-2006-silver-aston-martin-v8-vantage-registration-v8vntg/
     • McFlock 3.1.1

       27 December 2011 at 4:20 pm

       yeah, but it doesn’t look like that sort of site 🙂
4. Tiger Mountain 4

   26 December 2011 at 8:46 pm

   Janet is well off track really as others have drawn attention to, perhaps she ala WH Auden, enjoys the aroma of her own bottom burps.
   • *_* 4.1

     27 December 2011 at 1:16 am

     Sorry forgot to include another excuse

     “It’s all the MSM fault’
     • Spratwax 4.1.1

       27 December 2011 at 12:55 pm

       That is not an excuse- that is fact!- and I’d like to see you prove me wrong. Sad sack’s like you wish for a return to Dickensian times, where we have child labour, no labour laws, poorly paid masses to feed the capitalist machine, and the death penalty and severe justice for petty criminals to protect property rights and keep the seething masses under control! Right wing excuses include ‘politics of envy’ and ‘conspiracy theory’ and ‘unions have forced employers…..’.

       It seems that all MSM ‘journalists’ (a rather spurious title when refering to MSM people) wind up having right-wing principles after having to tow the RW line of their employers – not to mention mingling with RWJ’s in their overpaid jobs- for years.
       • seeker 4.1.1.1

         28 December 2011 at 1:46 pm

         Excellent comment Spratwax-spot on with every word particularly :
         “Right wing excuses include ‘politics of envy’ and ‘conspiracy theory’ and ‘unions have forced employers…..’.” with special emphasis on “Rightwing excuses..”

         I also loved this observation, “MSM journalists (a rather spurious title when refering to MSM people)”. Actual journalists do appear to be becoming an ‘endangered species’.
5. Rob 5

   26 December 2011 at 8:50 pm

   It’s going to be an issue for the likes of J Wilson et al as their hero peaked two weeks prior to the election and it will be all down hill from there.
   She and others that inhabit the MSM will have to be careful in future
6. james 111 6

   26 December 2011 at 9:32 pm

   I must say I agree with her the stand adopted on here by the left if that is carried through to the Labour Party in General , is why the lost the Election ,and had one of their worst results ever. They are blind to the way they are peceived by the Public in general,

   There are none so blind as those that dont wish to see. I believe most people got totally sick of the I hate John stuff ,and Character assisnation we all remember how touchy you were if any one did any thing like that with Dear Hulun. Seem king of hypocritical for The Standard to stoop so low as you would call it
   • lprent 6.1

     26 December 2011 at 9:41 pm

     Only a few of the authors are members of the Labour party, most are not. And I have never noticed a preponderance of commentators being strong Labour supporters.

     But I guess that you tend to be quite representative of the stupid end of the right. So you are unlikely to understand the subtle political differences when they cannot be presented as simple hero worship… But like all of the stupid right, not understanding has never prevented you from making a dork of yourself.
     • McFlock 6.1.1

       26 December 2011 at 9:49 pm

       There are none so dumb as those who don’t wish to think.
       • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1

         26 December 2011 at 11:07 pm

         I believe most people got totally sick of the I hate John stuff

         Do I hate John Key? No, for he is just another man. I hate however what he stands for and what he champions. The weakening of NZ capabilities in order to benefit the 1%. The unpicking of NZ society in order to benefit the 1%. The selling off of strategic NZ infrastructure in order to benefit the 1%.

         John Key is smart enough, rich enough and charismatic enough that he could help build a NZ for all, for the future, capable of facing a turbulent decade without fear or hesitation.

         Instead he chooses to weasel his way forward, divide and conquer in order to profit international banksters and the already wealthy.

         So not worthy of hate, just worthy of pity, for him and for the rest of us.
         • seeker 6.1.1.1.1

           28 December 2011 at 1:57 pm

           Very well put CV. I woke up sad on Christmas morning as I remembered the poor state of New Zealand and wondered what New Zealand had done to deserve such a weak, selfish, unprincipled man as John Key for leader, who, with such a character, could only take us on the ghastly path he and his likeminded cronies have chosen.
   • Lanthanide 6.2

     26 December 2011 at 11:01 pm

     The Labour Party might have had one of their worst results ever, but “the left” did not.

     In fact “the right” have come perilously close to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
     • Colonial Viper 6.2.1

       26 December 2011 at 11:09 pm

       I always think to myself that National couldn’t even make 21% in 2002. Even in the pits of electoral defeat, Labour look like comparative champions.
       • Ari 6.2.1.1

         27 December 2011 at 10:48 am

         Yep, and unlike National, Labour has a stable and large coalition partner that will naturally make its numbers look smaller. Can you imagine a similar narrative being trumpeted around if National were at 40%?
   • QoT 6.3

     26 December 2011 at 11:31 pm

     Given your choice of the spelling “Hulun”, one can only ponder that it is you who is “king of hypocritical”. /obscurelivejournalmeme
7. QoT 7

   26 December 2011 at 11:32 pm

   Labour’s Red Alert was a much better and clearer standard bearer for the left

   Oh look, the precious widdle journo believes that Labour represents the sum total of leftwing thought in NZ. I think that about says it all.
   • Fotran 7.1

     27 December 2011 at 1:04 pm

     The Standard was way above Red Alert, which I now assume will die gracefully. Trevor and Clare – good try – It did not work.
8. mac1 8

   26 December 2011 at 11:41 pm

   Oh well, you win some and you lose some. It would have been far worse if Ms Wilson had thought well of The Standard. So, in that way, The Standard wins. Have a good New Year, you of The Standard. I have enjoyed my daily visits and the chance for political debate out here in the provinces.
9. ak 9

   27 December 2011 at 2:34 am

   Expect much more of this mindless abuse fellow progressives, but resist the urge to pay heed. We belittle ourselves and the blood of our forbears by even visiting the sewerblogs or giving any credence at all to the tiny, semi-literate cabal of fear and hatred still hired by the forces of greed. This woman and her repulsive ram are simply scum: venal tools not worthy even of contempt.

   Instead, relish the season and count our considerable blessings: ACT is dead, and along with it more than a century of racism and hatemongering a la Orewa One. The forces utterly dependent on our mild-mannered manager know that his best shot fizzled; their golden idol now a lame duck limping on the backs of decrepit kupapa, any remnant intellectual credibility soon to be dashed on the global financial astrolabe reef.

   There’s a new, salubrious, wind blowing through these green progressive isles; the dregs of the final reaction now swirling down the drain. Imagine, a political nano-second ago, National dependent on a maori party and the focus groups demanding a poverty commission! Progression accelerates in exponential fashion and the media attack-dogs scatter in confusion; beaten by a tiny lprent armed with the truth and pure motivation.

   The light of love and joy shines in the east, brothers and sisters: a child is born, temples crumble, and David loads his sling. Blessed are all Standardistas who suffer persecution for justice’s sake: for ours is the kingdom of heaven. A very happy Christmas and a wonder-filled, progressive year to you all.
   • ropata 9.1

     27 December 2011 at 8:00 am

     Great comment ak. RW pundits love making self-congratulatory nonsensical criticism of the Left and offering useless “advice” to the Labour Party or “The Standard”, advice which coincidentally requires a move to the Right. The RW commenter above seems to dislike free speech and freedom of association. Readers of this site can say what they wish and political parties can organise however they like so “*_*” can take his authoritarian scold and shove it.

     I for one think the left is on the side of the angels. The debates on here are not just about winning elections thru media smarm, they are about values that progressives and indeed most Kiwis care about.

     PS: Agree with ak’s sentiment that there are great historical forces at work and very soon there will be dramatic changes in the political and economic landscape. Elections aren’t “won” by the challenger they are lost by the incumbent becoming intolerable to the public.
10. Pete George 10

    27 December 2011 at 7:48 am

    This thread illustrates one of the main deficiencies of political debate, especially online. It’s playground level argument and abuse, common here and just about any active political blog, including Kiwiblog Whaleoil, Dim-post, Trademe MB etc etc.

    There’s no point trying to judge which blog is worse, it’s all in the eye of the commenter and the reader.

    It mostly revolves around left versus right nonsense, where the other lot are regarded as wrong/evil/dumb/any derogatory term abusers choose.

    It’s not based on reasoned argument – there are some of those but they are often overwhelmed by petty bitching. It’s most often based on a perception or assumption that the target is of the other lot. Sometimes it’s individual attacks, often it’s swarms of attacks.

    It’s common here on The Standard, not sure if claims of innocence are denial or a failure to recognise as a part of the attack side of the game. It’s also common elsewhere, I’ve experienced it on most other blogs I’ve participated on – I can be attacked as a leftie and as a rightie on the same day.

    It’s similar to how party politics has operated for a long time, the Internet just opens up opportunities for more participants to be openly involved (as open as anonymous allows).

    I’ve been involved in it too, it’s hard not to get drawn into the pettiness. But I do try positive as much as possible (and have been attacked on that too) and try not to react in kind as much as possible.

    Each blog chooses if it wants to be a back alley scrap or a means of civilised debate.
11. Zetetic 11

    27 December 2011 at 8:03 am

    I’ve just had a wee look at our archives from the campaign. Got news of the day covered from a left angle. Got pieces on major issues like asset sales every few days. Got a range of voices. Got a bloody good amount of humour with witty stories or funny excerpt pics and titles, or caption contests (have to remember to try my hand at some more satire).

    What we don’t have is a single reference to Janet Wilson. Maybe that’s what she means by “rendered it blind to any rational coverage” – we didn’t cover her sycophantic, smug, elitist angles.

    She goes on to say that there’s no way the teacup tape was accidental. As Eddie noted on The Standard at the time (nice funny title http://thestandard.org.nz/insert-tea-related-pun-here/ ), you would have to be nuts to believe that someone intentionally (and, therefore, illegally) tried to tape a conversation which everyone assumed was going to be completely banal and that their method of breaking the law would be to leave a mic in a little black bag in plain sight millimetres from the PM’s cup of tea.

    Eddie’s critical analysis of whether it might sense to believe that Ambrose purposely recorded Key and Banks. That was rational coverage. Wilson’s coverage – “the “accidental” (yeah, right) taping of the conversation” – is the opposite.

    And, news to Wilson, using the ‘yeah right’ cliche just makes you look hackneyed and unimaginative.
    • Colonial Viper 11.1

      27 December 2011 at 8:16 am

      I heard that the top 0.1% in France was genuinely surprised when their heads started appearing on pikes.

      Your ability to respond to life is affected when you insulate yourself in a well protected, money layered high societal bubble.
    • deuto 11.2

      27 December 2011 at 9:14 am

      Good morning Zetetic

      Do i need more coffee or tea or do you mean Janet Wilson rather than Jane Clifton in your comment?

      I was trying to recall Janet Wilson when I first saw this post – face is familiar but no immediate recall as to why.

      I was unimpressed with the overall opinions in Janet’s post and obviously she has no idea of the purpose or policy of the Standard, or the range of commentary on it.

      To put things into perspective, I had a quick run over Janet’s blog and note that in 2011 (I could not be bothered going back further), she wrote only 8 posts with a grand total of 75 comments.

      Most of the posts related to media (eg TVNZ’s Breakfast programme, Anthony Flannery’s departure, Christchurch earthquake coverage etc) and none of them were posts I would bother reading again. Personally, I won’t be visiting her site again or putting any worth on her opinions.

      As I have only just surfaced from the Christmas obligations and celebrations, I would like to wish all on The Standard very best wishes for 2012 – and to thank you all (regardless of whether I agree with your comments or not!) for providing a haven to read and occasionally comment on subjects close to my heart.

      My particular thanks go to Lynn P and the others involved in running TS – take care and keep up the good work. We need you!

      Zet: Cheers, and yes I did mean Wilson. Call it holiday brain. I’ve fixed it now.
12. Colonial Viper 12

    27 December 2011 at 8:12 am

    There’s no point trying to judge which blog is worse, it’s all in the eye of the commenter and the reader.

    It mostly revolves around left versus right nonsense, where the other lot are regarded as wrong/evil/dumb/any derogatory term abusers choose.

    I don’t buy into this post-modern ‘its whatever you think it is’ crap. Now, I am not blind to ‘moral relativism’ but some sets of attitudes and policies actually hurt people and cause harm in the real world, and some attitudes and policies actually do give even more to people who already have far in excess of their daily needs.

    While other policies and attitudes can provide a helping hand up to those struggling but capable, and can attempt to balance out the structural inequities of a capital favouring, labour disempowering economic system.

    If you can’t recognise this why are you even in politics.
    • McFlock 12.1

      27 December 2011 at 4:27 pm

      Fuck. Yes.
13. Carol 13

    27 December 2011 at 8:35 am

    Janet (never heard of her before) Wilson says:

    Worst Election News Coverage had to be The Standard whose hard left rhetoric rendered it blind to any rational coverage.

    A media trainer who doesn’t know the difference between news coverage and blog posts, dissing the Standard that provide a declared partisan (in this case the by the left) discussion of politics. the election and news coverage.
    Media trainer? The mediocre leading the mediocre.

    And what rational argument is Ms Wilson providing in her analysis of the Standard’s election coverage? Some unsupported claims of hard left rhetoric. What does she mean by this? Something do do with a blinkered approach. But there are no examples or reasoned analysis presenting a rational case/argument for this.

    As Wilson seems to prefer the centre left Red Alert to the Standard, I can only assume RA is nearer to Wilson’s centre right position. So the soldily left wing Standard is just a step too far for Wilson, which she brands negatively, using right wing rhetoric, as hard left.

    Pot… kettle… indicative of NZ’s MSM news coverage slipping further and further into neoliberal mediocrity and doublespeak.
    • Colonial Viper 13.1

      27 December 2011 at 8:51 am

      A media trainer who doesn’t know the difference between news coverage and blog posts,

      Here’s an interesting thought – maybe amongst Wilson’s tight little circle, The Standard is indeed viewed as a news outlet and much more than just a group blog. This would be an interesting wrinkle.
      • Olwyn 13.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 10:37 am

        “A media trainer who doesn’t know the difference between news coverage and blog posts.”

        What is interesting is what a supposedly trained journalist now takes coverage to be: the presentation of the right sort of opinion. Her perspective is one that, prima facie, has forgotten the old “without fear or favour” standard, and has settled into a role that is more like a neoliberal priesthood than anything else, whose job is to deliver suitable homilies rather than the truth. On this criterion, where the facts are no longer significant by themselves, The Standard’s so-called “coverage” is heterodox rather than orthodox, and rejected on these grounds.
        • seeker 13.1.1.1

          28 December 2011 at 6:25 pm

          +1+1Olwyn
14. newsense 14

    27 December 2011 at 9:16 am

    haha

    Maybe she was trying to raise her profile among sub-45 RWNJ by pannning The Standard and getting a reaction.

    certainly hadn’t heard of her prior to now…

    edit: oh Ralston’s wife?
    • Lanthanide 14.1

      27 December 2011 at 9:46 am

      She used to be on TV3 as a presenter, hence where this rather dated photo has come from.

      http://nz.linkedin.com/pub/janet-wilson/20/9a8/98a
      • Carol 14.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 9:53 am

        Or here :

        http://www.3news.co.nz/Nightline-20th-Anniversary-Gallery/tabid/1381/articleID/151979/Default.aspx#30
15. ropata 15

    27 December 2011 at 9:54 am

    Trying to figure out who is Janet Wilson? Just look at the company she keeps: Nikki Kaye, Mai Chen
    • higherstandard 15.1

      27 December 2011 at 10:29 am

      What’s the name of the bay on your homepage Ropata ?
      • ropata 15.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 11:05 am

        Otehei Bay, Urapukapuka Island
      • ropata 15.1.2

        27 December 2011 at 10:56 pm

        was that meant as a subtle dig??? it’s a DOC island not a fancy resort despite the attempts of a certain immoral tourism operator to turn it into an elitist playground
        • higherstandard 15.1.2.1

          28 December 2011 at 11:42 am

          Most of the time a simple question is a simple question.

          In this case I was wondering where the lovely bay was.
16. burt 16

    27 December 2011 at 10:38 am

    I’ve all but stopped visiting The Standard after the election coverage. People who don’t like critics should seriously listen to them from time to time – they are not always wrong.
    • IrishBill 16.1

      27 December 2011 at 11:07 am

      “All but stopped”? C’mon Burt you can do better than “all but”.
      • burt 16.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 12:43 pm

        IrishBill,

        Sure, enjoy the echo chamber of “It’s OK when Labour do it”.
        • QoT 16.1.1.1

          27 December 2011 at 12:45 pm

          Oh burt, it’s so cute when you run your really-obviously-bullshit lines in the vain hope people will ignore the evidence of their own mouseclicks.
        • mik e 16.1.1.2

          29 December 2011 at 9:44 am

          you should take your own advice burt
    • Akldnut 16.2

      28 December 2011 at 4:57 pm

      People who don’t like critics should seriously listen to them from time to time – they are not always wrong.

      You should try sending this little gem to the current National Govt Burt, see if they listen. Good luck with that. BTW I notice criticism of your comments haven’t done much and you still sprout the same BS lines time and again, fast with the advice and slow to take it.

      I’ve all but stopped visiting The Standard after the election coverage.

      Don’t let us keep you here mate, why come back. Have a year or two off and get ready for 2014.

      Errr Janet Who? never heard of her!
17. deuto 17

    27 December 2011 at 10:41 am

    Forget Janet Wilson’s 2011 list, Bomber Bradbury’s Tumeke 2011 War on News Awards at http://tumeke.blogspot.com/ are well worth a read.

    Made my morning for both a good laugh and their insight. Typical colouful and straight to the point Bomber language. No mention of The Standard, but Farrar, Cactus Kate, Sainsbury and Ralston all get mentions. I will forgive Bomber for his hit on baby boomers….
18. Shona 18

    27 December 2011 at 11:27 am

    I thinks all Standardista’s should be chuffed . Clearly we have got up the power elite’s probiscus! Long may it continue to be so! Hell I betcha 12 months ago Janet whatsherface wouldn’t have known who the Standard was. Sad that she believes she is relevant.
    Compliments of the season to all.
    • seeker 18.1

      28 December 2011 at 2:10 pm

      Some very good points Shona., cheers.
19. Jenny 19

    27 December 2011 at 11:32 am

    (to Janet Wilson)

    Worst Election News Coverage, commentary, ever!

    Comic Book Guy
20. randal 20

    27 December 2011 at 11:45 am

    if she is still going on about it now then she must have been sh*t scared during th election.
    anyway she looks like she needs a good pork chop as the dieting seems to be doing something funny to her perception of reality.
21. Blue 21

    27 December 2011 at 11:55 am

    I think Janet Wilson’s blog has just been overwhelmed with more traffic than it’s had since…ever.

    Not much point giving her oxygen by putting her on the front page of The Standard.

    Personally, I love the fact that The Standard is totally, completely and utterly left-wing biased. That is what we’re all here for, after all 😀
    • deuto 21.1

      27 December 2011 at 12:11 pm

      “I think Janet Wilson’s blog has just been overwhelmed with more traffic than it’s had since…ever”

      LOL. As mentioned in my comment at 11.2, “To put things into perspective, I had a quick run over Janet’s blog and note that in 2011 (I could not be bothered going back further), she wrote only 8 posts with a grand total of 75 comments.”

      The grand total of comments in 2011 is now up to 78, as my earlier total of 75 included 7 comments on her latest post linked to above. This has increased to 10 in the last hour or so.
      • newsense 21.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 12:15 pm

        :equals getting oxgen via being slashdotted…

        perhaps what she really meant was at the election The Worst News. Covered by the standard
    • the pink postman 21.2

      27 December 2011 at 2:42 pm

      The same here Blue my main reason for supporting The Standard is because of its Left-Wing bias and information. If Iwant Right-Wing news then I watch Holmes , Garner and Plunket .
      • LynW 21.2.1

        27 December 2011 at 2:54 pm

        +1 Blue & TPP
22. randal 22

    27 December 2011 at 1:54 pm

    who is that poster who looks like his face has launched a thousand fists?
23. chris73 23

    27 December 2011 at 2:28 pm

    Saucer of milk?
24. swordfish 24

    27 December 2011 at 2:52 pm

    Seem to remember Morrissey taking a (well-deserved) pot-shot at dear old Janet in comments a few months ago.

    I’m pretty sure Janet gives her “media advice” EXCLUSIVELY to the Right of the political spectrum. So, we’re clearly not talking about some sort of objective, non-partisan journalist, here.
    • Cactus Kate 24.1

      27 December 2011 at 4:03 pm

      Aren’t you shooting yourselves in both feet here? If you really didn’t care about what she thought, why so many comments? Indeed why a whole post? At the end of the year it is blogger tradition to spout what you think of others and give awards. Mine were fairly distributed this year. I even named a left wing blog the blog of the year.

      Some insignificant fool wrote about me as mentioned here, I chuckle about how that fool has no tv show left, spent months begging for Whaleoil to come back on it, was invited to an adult party as comical value after being used as cheap labour by the host to front a show on all things markets, won’t shut up about what didn’t happen at it despite spending the entire time I was there in the kitchen, is up to his arse in letters from a certain government department after putting his pecker where it wasn’t wanted, generally his life is one of dependency on NZ on Air and industry big wigs who think he’s unemployable and unmarketable, so I ignore his abuse, do not even respond to it on his blog or mine and go back to my holiday and smile as my pay rise and end of year bonus come through as planned.

      Which is what Zetetic should have done.
      • QoT 24.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 4:10 pm

        I admire your stance, Kate. It takes serious badassitude to so completely not care about someone dissing you that you write huge paragraphs about how stupid and insignificant they are on other people’s blogs. And dropping in a few juicy details so those in the know will know exactly who it is and those who don’t will be titillated? A genius display of how little something matters to you.
        • IrishBill 24.1.1.1

          27 December 2011 at 4:16 pm

          I’m tempted to put that comment up as a Cactus Kate guest post. It’s such a good cry.
        • Cactus Kate 24.1.1.2

          27 December 2011 at 4:27 pm

          Not understanding are you. A blog is your own work. Posting on it means you care. Commenting on a blog is a peripheral activity. Takes two seconds and means nothing, see comment 25 below.
          • McFlock 24.1.1.2.1

            27 December 2011 at 4:37 pm

            Nah, that paragraph took a wee bit longer than two seconds to type.
             
            • Lanthanide 24.1.1.2.1.1

              27 December 2011 at 9:11 pm

              She’d be the fastest typist in the world if she could do it in 2 seconds.
              • Colonial Viper …

                27 December 2011 at 9:27 pm

                Cut and paste?
                • Lanthanide …

                  27 December 2011 at 10:44 pm

                  Still has to be typed up once along the line.
          • QoT 24.1.1.2.2

            27 December 2011 at 4:54 pm

            So, just to be clear:

            Brain => keyboard in editing window => hit “post” = cares
            Visit another site => read their posts => brain => keyboard in commenting window => hit “post” =/= cares?

            I mean, you’re still having to put together an expression of your thoughts in order to be read by others, and commenting requires engagement, and God knows I’ve written more than enough crappy posts based on a moment’s thought and a humorous link.

            But wait, sorry. We were on the topic about how much you don’t care about this guy whose life totally sucks anyway thus proving his low opinion of you didn’t matter AT. ALL. Carry on.
25. Cactus Kate 25

    27 December 2011 at 4:23 pm

    No you won’t as it will prove you accept that I am more important than those who post at The Standard. Which will be embarrassing for you. Are you not learning anything?
    • McFlock 25.1

      27 December 2011 at 4:48 pm

      What are you, six? Are you really that insecure about status?
       
      This was an almost humourous post along the lines of “look at this silly misconception from a RWNJ in the ‘oh wow, are they still working (if you’ve heard of them)’ category”, and now it’s about you and how high up some imaginary hierarchy you are.
        
      Jerk.
       
      • Colonial Viper 25.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 5:01 pm

        RWNJs are always envious of societal status and position on the totem pole.
    • Jackal 25.2

      28 December 2011 at 10:47 am

      Cathy Odgers

      No you won’t as it will prove you accept that I am more important than those who post at The Standard.

      I will never know why Bomber sometimes speaks highly of your political commentary… as to me it seems juvenile without a modicum of intelligence.

      so I ignore his abuse, do not even respond to it on his blog or mine and go back to my holiday and smile as my pay rise and end of year bonus come through as planned.

      Despite your attempt at nonchalance, your display of financial arrogance vs Bombers writing ability is feckless. How idiotic to believe that your wealth makes you right… it’s irrelevant in the blogosphere… where words rule.
      • Gosman 25.2.1

        28 December 2011 at 10:51 am

        States the person who decided to show off his amazing intelligence by going on Kiwiblog and making inane Zombie comments about eating brains then threatening to take David Farrar to court over the matter.
        • Jackal 25.2.1.1

          28 December 2011 at 11:21 am

          Best troll award of the year… are you jealous Gosman?
          • Gosman 25.2.1.1.1

            28 December 2011 at 11:33 am

            Did you get best troll of the year from Kiwiblog for that infantile outburst? Funny I can’t find any mention of it on his site. Perhaps you would be kind enough to post a link. Or is this a self appointed title along the lines of you believing you had some freedom of speech right to make a tit of yourself on some elses blog and not get banned for it.
            • Jackal 25.2.1.1.1.1

              28 December 2011 at 12:02 pm

              I got banned from Kiwibog because the DF didn’t follow his own policy… an award from him is meaningless.
              • Gosman …

                28 December 2011 at 12:40 pm

                You got banned because you were being an infantile twat who threw his toy’s out of the cot and threatened to take David Farrar to court for breech of your supposed right to free speech on his private blog site (or do you deny making this legal threat?). If you did the same here I would expect you to get banned for a long time as well. The fact that you fail to see the irony in your claim that Cactus Kate’s commentary is “juvenile without a modicum of intelligence” just serves to highlight your lack of self awareness.
                • Jackal …

                  28 December 2011 at 1:42 pm

                  Why would I deny it? I still find it amusing!

                  The DF took the bait hook line and sinker, “it’s my blog” he yelled “mine mine mine”.

                  I looked into a test case, as I believed all public forums should not be entirely self-regulated. You might note that my sentiments will soon be enforced in law… gone will be the days of Farrar etal hate speech fomenting isms.

                  The difference between myself and Odgers, (which you seem incapable of seeing Gosman) is that I intentionally trolled Kiwibog with juvenile comments, whereas Odgers is naturally inclined to comment in an idiotic fashion. I was most aware of what I set out to achieve at Kiwibog. The RWNJ attempts pale in comparison.

                  Anyway, get over it already Gosman… It’s almost a year ago since I trolled Kiwibog. Surely you have some better ammo than that?

                  PS Please don’t start barking up the wrong tree like those you idolize.
                  • Gosman …

                    28 December 2011 at 2:14 pm

                    Test case – WTF?!?

                    You are seriously self deluded if you think your childish antics led to anything other than you getting a well deserved ban from Kiwiblog.

                    The thing is you openly admit that you were being a dumb ass troll yet you still think you shouldn’t have been suspended from participating on the site. I’m amazed that the level of stupidity you seem to operate somehow enables you to manage to survive for longer than a day.
                    • Jackal …

                      28 December 2011 at 4:05 pm

                      Gosman

                      You are seriously self deluded if you think your childish antics led to anything other than you getting a well deserved ban from Kiwiblog.

                      At the time, I thought about blogging the emails between the Press Council and myself about Farrars contemptuous emails. But don’t let your lack of knowledge stop you from undertaking a personal attack… by all means carry on. It seems to be the only thing you’re good at.

                      The thing is you openly admit that you were being a dumb ass troll yet you still think you shouldn’t have been suspended from participating on the site.

                      Fixated much? Why do you continue to tell me what to think? Do you have an inferiority complex or something? How do you function in everyday life with such a huge chip on your shoulder?

                      I admit to trolling Kiwibog for two days specifically to get up the nose of the DF and his idiotic followers. I don’t particularly care that I was banned, as there are far better places to find intellectual stimulation.

                      I’m amazed that the level of stupidity you seem to operate somehow enables you to manage to survive for longer than a day.

                      I’m actually above average intelligence… which you would realize if you weren’t thick as a brick Gosman.
                    • Gosman …

                      29 December 2011 at 10:02 am

                      Go on and release the e-mails between the press council and yourself. Then we can see for ourselves if your rather pathetic cry baby antics achieved anything like what you claim they did.
                    • Jackal …

                      29 December 2011 at 4:21 pm

                      Cry baby antics? You’re commenting on something you have not seen… what a dick.
              • Gosman …

                28 December 2011 at 12:42 pm

                So who awarded you the title ‘Best troll of the year’ then?
26. Cactus Kate 26

    27 December 2011 at 4:54 pm

    Yes McFlock Janet Wilson’s higher up the hierarchy than all of you as you’ve invested so much bile and time proving her entire point. Good, you’ve finally worked it out.
    • QoT 26.1

      27 December 2011 at 4:56 pm

      So, chaps, anyone mind if I take the first “Oooh, touched a nerve?” turn?
      • McFlock 26.1.1

        27 December 2011 at 5:12 pm

        What I find fascinating is that RWNJs are so homogeneous that they even find themselves indistinguishable – CK seems to flip seamlessly between JW as the subject at hand and herself.
         
        Either that or her train of thought is so convoluted it’s more akin to bumper cars.
    • Colonial Viper 26.2

      27 December 2011 at 4:58 pm

      Wilson’s two dimensional misconception of The Standard deserves swatting down – not politely bending over for, as you seem to imply.
    • Jackal 26.3

      28 December 2011 at 11:18 am

      Let me get this right… Cathy Odgers’ hierarchical system is dependent on the level of abuse somebody gets? This could explain her continued trolling and antagonistic posts… which display a narcissistic attention seeking mentality.

      In the comment below, McFlock highlights another deficiency in many right-wingers, in that they cannot differentiate between each other. Their lack of inductive reasoning, should be considered a mental illness that allows them to ignore reality and perpetrate untruths.

      People like Cathy Odgers should seek the help of a good psychologist… and perhaps be medicated. Unfortunately there’s not much that can be done for Janet Wilson. As far as I’m aware… stupidity is still an incurable disease.
      • hs 26.3.1

        28 December 2011 at 11:26 am

        “As far as I’m aware… stupidity is still an incurable disease.”

        That’s a bugger [deleted], perhaps you should consult a new physician that can offer you more hope for a less stupid future.

        [lprent: Next time I see you repeat another of whale’s half arsed characteristically stupid and invariably inaccurate outings (because that is the only place I can see that association made), I will start with long bans. I am tired of cleaning it up and that will relieve me of the need to do it.

        It is a stupid and silly practice that only a juvenile would find of any interest. It violates normal net standards and violates the rules ofthe site. The only observable reason for outing others appears to be for intimidation.

        I can’t be arsed explaining why anymore, so from here on out, I am just going to ban anyone doing it. I will enter that into the policy once I get agreement from the other moderators.

        As far as I am concerned, the only way that people may use real or imagined names on this site is if the person named outed themselves. It is up to the person outing to prove that the psuedonym has been outed voluntarily to my satisfaction with a link.

        I am debating with myself that if I find people doing outings elsewhere referring to commentators or authors here, then I will just ban them permanently as being unfit to associate with other bloggers. And before any dickhead starts waffling about it – yes that applies for the outing of right wingers just as much as those of the left. There doesn’t seem to be nearly as much of that from what I can see. ]

        From RL

        [I agree with the sentiment. There is never a good motive for ‘outing’ a blogger. As far as I am concerned this was always one of the non-negotiable site policies that’s pretty straightforward to implement. Currently I don’t muck with ‘outings’, they just get deleted on sight and usually a banning follows if there is any hint of maliciousness or stupidly arguing with it.

        In that sense I don’t feel the need to up the ante as far as behaviour on The Standard is concerned. As for ‘outings’ on other sites, that gets a little trickier. For a start I don’t generally scan other blogs on a regular basis, so it’s harder to know what’s been going on and to act consistently. For a second it’s a little tricky to argue that if we have autonomy to determine what’s acceptable on this blog, that we can then extend that to what other people permit on theirs.

        For instance do we extend the ban to not only the offending commenter, but perhaps the blog owner who allows it to happen on their blog? It would be logical but could get messy fast..

        At the same time I agree with your sentiment. I can’t see any reason not to act against the most obvious and blatant offenders, even if it’s not achievable on a wholly consistent basis. And yes I’ll cheerfully ping any leftie stupid enough to try it on as well…. RL]
        • Jackal 26.3.1.1

          28 December 2011 at 12:12 pm

          I’m a little concerned that Slater, Odgers et al are outing the wrong person and their deluded minions might try to intimidate an unsuspecting person who is not associated with The Jackal.

          I apologize for the actions of any RWNJ’s that in some way may be attributed to what I write.
          • hs 26.3.1.1.1

            28 December 2011 at 6:53 pm

            Apologies, I have mistaken you for the Todd who used to post here frequently.

            [lprent: I see what you mean – same gravator -> same underlying e-mail. Ok – withdraw that. But I will leave the note up because I’m getting irritated at how much time gets wasted by moderators on outing stupidities. ]
27. Pete 27

    27 December 2011 at 5:17 pm

    To be honest, I come to The Standard because it is a left leaning blog, but the left is a pretty broad thing. I consider myself a social democrat, but there’ll be Greens, and hardcore socialists here too amongst other strains construed as “the left”. There is nothing wrong with bias in a blog and it is abundantly clear where The Standard is aligned. Because of that, there is the occasional troll – not, I hasten to add someone who just happens to have a different political alignment, but people who come in to get a rise out of the rest of us.

    If I want something a little closer to the centre, I go and check out Pundit or Public Address. If I want to weep for the future of New Zealand, I go and check out the boards on TradeMe. I very rarely check out Whale Oil or Kiwiblog. Generally there’s an ugly vindictiveness and self-centredness, particularly amongst the comments, that I find very unappealing. The only blog on the right of the spectrum that attracts any reasoned debate from its readership that I can think of is Interest.co.nz – maybe that’s due to Bernard Hickey’s profile as an economic commentator.
    • mik e 27.1

      27 December 2011 at 7:56 pm

      here here pete
28. randal 28

    27 December 2011 at 8:36 pm

    cue: I got sotned and I missed it.
    docotr hoook!
    good read though.
    five stars for flair panache and cackle tit cake gittin’ her rattlesnakin’ ass kcicked.
    the nashnil gubmint is in disarray and in the hands of dangerous fools who have been watching too many pschotic spie thrillers and then the other side go ape and so do they.
    so.
    happy new year.
29. randal 29

    27 December 2011 at 8:40 pm

    and if the gsb doesn’t do soemthing about my security certificateerror then I am going to pull rank and kick some asses myself.
30. illuminatedtiger 30

    28 December 2011 at 1:26 am

    I had no idea who she was until I read this post. Why are you giving her the extra publicity?
    • *_* 30.1

      28 December 2011 at 5:39 am

      Because they have nothing else to be but blog about reporters whom they they were surprised to find were still around.

      Pathetic really, having to defend you reputation against someone whom you think is a journalistic non-entity. It just shows how petty and small you are.

      Thanks for the laughs.
      • Colonial Viper 30.1.1

        28 December 2011 at 8:36 am

        No, thank you.
      • illuminatedtiger 30.1.2

        28 December 2011 at 4:11 pm

        Weren’t you warned against trolling?
        • *_* 30.1.2.1

          28 December 2011 at 8:15 pm

          ROFL What makes you think I care about what you all think?

          Do you really think I’d take your ‘warnings’ seriously when I disregard most of what is written here are garbage?

          [lprent: In the 11 comments on the site, 12 including this one; you haven’t managed to argue your opinions once. You just make assertion statements without backing them. You either attack the site or abuse other commentators. In no comment have you stated an opinion and then either provided substantiating detail or made an argument for tat comment. You appear to be incapable of doing so.

          So fine – permanently banned for inflicting garbage on everyone reading your comments. Since you find the site so offensive, then I will take you at your word and will ensure that you don’t have to read it from tomorrow. I will help you resist temptation by blocking you at a firewall. ]
          • dv 30.1.2.1.1

            29 December 2011 at 7:44 am

            good response LPent
            • Ianupnorth 30.1.2.1.1.1

              29 December 2011 at 8:43 pm

              +1
          • QoT 30.1.2.1.2

            29 December 2011 at 11:40 am

            While acknowledging that tragically *_* is no longer with us, this needs to be highlighted for its wonderful illustration of paradoxical troll thinking:

            What makes you think I care about what you all think?

            Because, as Cactus Kate has been so eager to explain upthread, taking the time and thought to enter a comment and post it in order to make one’s view public on another blogger’s post totally doesn’t mean you care or anything. You just, um, need to make it really clear that you don’t care. *head explodes*
            • Puddleglum 30.1.2.1.2.1

              29 December 2011 at 12:34 pm

              Well spotted QoT.

              A lot of people still don’t get the fact that words don’t just ‘speak’, they also ‘show’.

              You’ve highlighted a sentence that self-contradicts because what it shows belies what it says.
              • QoT …

                29 December 2011 at 1:20 pm

                Thanks, Puddleglum. My instinct for spotting these things was well-honed by many a pointless Livejournal flamewar in my teens.
                • lprent …

                  29 December 2011 at 2:50 pm

                  I started on the BBS’es – but they were relatively civilised (in retrospect). After I started getting into the comp. and alt. streams on usenet. I gained an abiding dislike (maybe even a hatred) of the pointless wadda nah nah ‘debates’ and the trolls who like them.

                  Reminds me. I have to save *_* from himself and add him to the don’t read list that otherwise contains spambots and intrusion networks.
                • Puddleglum …

                  29 December 2011 at 2:50 pm

                  From your comments and posts I’d say “very well-honed”.

                  Practice is the key to just about every skill.

                  What I really appreciate about commenters like you is that your skills fit the medium without sacrificing intelligence, (com)passion, insight and humour.

                  It’s something I admire and hope rubs off on my comments a bit – but not until I reach the 10,000 hour mark, I guess. 
31. randal 31

    28 December 2011 at 9:30 am

    whats faceache doing hanging around?
    another tory knowall?
32. Armchair Critic 32

    28 December 2011 at 11:01 pm

    Yeah, blah blah blah, Janet Wilson, a has been with demonstrably questionable taste etc. Easy enough to run her down on this, but does she have a point? Perhaps she does, without actually knowing it.
    Let’s run with the “The Standard is the most [debatable statistic] blog in NZ” line; I have no evidence otherwise and accept that The Standard is widely read, for a blog. I come here for political news, and use news sites for verification. To some extent The Standard is used as a source of news by its readers, I recall reading comments of others who do the same. I would guess that this is in part due to the relative homogeneity of the MSM; people seek an alternative perspective and, for people who find it, The Standard provides an alternative.
    There are at least two avenues for growth, as I see it.
    First, The Standard could add a news-type service, from a left/labour (movement, not party) perspective. Maybe without comments, just information. That way, at least things like a “Worst Election Coverage” award could be earned. I note that the About says the original The Standard was a newspaper.
    Second, The Standard could provide commentary (as David Farrar and Scott Yorke do) for other media outlets from some of its authors. This could bring the general direction of the blog to a wider audience, which is also mentioned in the About section.
    Something for the team that run The Standard to consider, and implement over a few years?
    • lprent 32.1

      29 December 2011 at 1:05 am

      Oh it is widely read. The statistics will probably be debatable until I get around to putting in sitemeter (or kiwiblog installs statcounter) so we can compare apples with apples. I dumped Sitemeter on the last test at mid-year and put Statcounter in because Sitemeter’s async operations interfered with other async operations on the pages.

      If I implemented the first (news option), then I’d probably provide a system to have a subscribable e-mail / facebook / autopost to The Standard. The hassle would be getting someone to write a version of Bryce Edwards Herald column that concentrated on left news rather than his rather androgynous waffle. Remember none of us get paid for what we write and a daily news column like that is a daily drudgery because skipping it would piss off readers. At present there are usually people to fill in the posts when holes happen (except for the xmas/new year period). I’d have to be sure of at least two and preferably three people willing to commit to co-authoring it (because we’d want a range of opinions for selection).

      The known authors can write for whomever they please (since media don’t seem to like pseudonyms apart from The Economist). So far there has been a notable lack of interest from either authors or those nice media outlets.

      I suspect that most of the authors are a bit like me and have better things to do with their work time than hang around on a phone or fight traffic to get to a studio. I did just one interview on radio live with Russell Brown in 2008. To do it, I had to take a few hours for ‘lunch’ so I could drive from Albany to Khyber Pass, do the interview, and drive back again – in Auckland’s chaotic workday traffic. Didn’t do my programming any good because it buggered up the concentration required to write good code. And I’d take a bet that now there have been more people who have “heard” that interview now by listening to the MP3 off the net rather than listened to the whole of the broadcast.

      There have been various attempts to haul me on TV at various stages for ‘blogger input’. They have faltered because I value my visual anonymity and I’m quite uninterested in my face being broadcast. Quite simply I really can’t see the point of my being a “personality” for short Q&A’s. I have absolutely no interest in being on the list of soundbite providers. Besides I’m pretty sure that my undiplomatic opinions would get cut. I don’t like the time it takes away from the things I’m interested in doing. And I find that the information density of the broadcast mediums tends to be somewhat lean – there is bugger all information in most talking head sessions.

      Authors could write print because it really isn’t that much different from what we do now. But can you imagine any of the authors here being that interested in a tedious procedure of running through editors etc when normally we just write post, plug it into the schedule, and then get back to whatever we were doing when inspiration hit us? To me it seems simpler to just keep pushing up our readership. As a group we literally haven’t bothered to do ANY marketing or self-promotion yet. People hear of us from friends or mentions and links in other places. I’ve been around lots of marketing campaigns and helped strategy on quite a few. It isn’t hard to think of ways to easily kick up our new reader rates.

      But most of the bloggers who do self-promotion in the media have reasons (often ego or consulting businesses) and more importantly the time to do so. We don’t – this isn’t our lives – it is just where we express one part of our nature in snatches of time taken from other more interesting things like work, families, or study. We are here precisely because we can give a blog a small fraction of our time if we operate as a cooperative and do it entirely on our own terms and schedules.
    • Colonial Viper 32.2

      29 December 2011 at 1:47 am

      I reckon a small budget of say, $125,000 pa would make a big difference in extending The Standard on to YouTube and into the physical world. I’m thinking here as an adjunct, extension or expansion, not as a replacement.
      The budget would fund a 3/4 time co-ordinator-spokesperson-interviewer. Plus pay for some basic site maintenance freeing up volunteer time to advance other areas, develop marketing initiatives and of course paying writers a few hundy per piece for opinion items and investigative news articles that they generate. And which could be syndicated out.
      Picking up a news feed from Al Jazeera English, Russia Today, etc would also fill out a lot of international news coverage and opinion that todays MSM plain ignores.
33. chris73 33

    29 December 2011 at 8:13 am

    Yes well The Twilight series is also well read and is quite popular with the younger generation so quantity and age of readers doesn’t always equal quality of writing (though I’m sure thats not the case here ;))
34. randal 34

    29 December 2011 at 9:17 am

    in my opinion the Standard is just fine the way it is. perhaps lprent could include a coffee bar a creche and a shop selling collectibles from the revolution.
    in the meantime us plebs just keep up the work of making the tory neanderthals shit themselves everyday when they know that there is resistance to their unhealthy desires to rule over everything and everyone.
    mouthpieces like wilson and cakle tit cake are vital to the money grabbing enerprise but in the end they are just like baubles.
    you can create wealth by burying them in a deep hole and digging them up again ad infinitum.
    • chris73 34.1

      29 December 2011 at 10:01 am

      Snigger
35. randal 35

    29 December 2011 at 12:31 pm

    whatever.
    wilson is a scrawny old crow and if she wants to pontificate in the belief that somehow her words have meaning, resonance, going forward and all that crap to the population at large then she should be sadly disabused of that notion by now.
    she should stop whingeing.
    she just like all the tories.
    they think they can tell everyone else how to live when they are nothing but parasites themselves.
    • warren 35.1

      29 December 2011 at 5:03 pm

      I have to say I am not keen on the name-calling. It just makes The Standard look like the Whale, or Trademe Opinions. And that is not a good look. Wilson’s age and build are irrelevant. Play the ball not the (wo)man. We are better than Them 🙂
36. randal 36

    29 December 2011 at 5:12 pm

    I’m not better than them.
    I’m worse.
    much worse…
    • chris73 36.1

      29 December 2011 at 5:34 pm

      Snort
37. randal 37

    29 December 2011 at 7:06 pm

    whatever noises may issue from your orifices the fact is that janet wilson took it upon herself to make a qualitative list of her opinions including the standard and publish them.
    surprise surprise but readers of the standard offered their rebuttals and the majority say that wilson is a raddled old hack from way back and would be better off keeping her opinions to herself.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS