Who will win the 2011 election?

[Winston001]

You suspect (Green Party involvement in poster defacing) - what evidence do you base that suspicion on?

I don't think protestations of innocence by the Green Party serve much point. The stickers required planning, printing, money, and people so they could be used. Green members and sympathisers carried it out.

TBH I don't think it was a big deal - wrong but not savage or nasty like some defacing can be.

The hypocrisy arises in the context of the Exclusive Brethren support of the 2005 National campaign. Apparently that was a terrible wrong...but Green supporters are ok...??

he probably listened to it and heard something that was highly contentious. As a member of the media his job is to put the spotlight on politicians, so he was doing his job. You would have loved it if it had been Phil Goff and Russel Norman being taped, only I doubt they are stupid enough to say anything dodgy in a setting like that.

I know you mean well but this is the slippery slope of "the means justify the ends". Secretly recording anyone without their consent is illegal. Ok, accidents happen etc and no real problem arises if the recording is deleted.

However to publish the illegal recording to a third party is a second and much more serious breach of the law. Its legally morally and ethically wrong. I really cannot understand how any journalist or cameraman can believe otherwise.

So you didn't like them saying nice things about someone you don't like. That would make them an organ of communist propaganda.

I happen to agree with Robert that our media has a leftish bias but I don't think it is sinister or overt. And the bias is slight. IMHO it arises because rightwing issues make for dry reporting. Leftwing issues by contrast often involve human stories of deprivation and unfairness. They readily fit the "if it bleeds, it leads" ethos ergo we get more emotive news than factual information.

[shrub]

I don't think protestations of innocence by the Green Party serve much point. The stickers required planning, printing, money, and people so they could be used. Green members and sympathisers carried it out.

I have spoken to a Green MP and the party were completely unaware of it because the people who were doing it knew that if the party found out they would do their best to stop it because it would have been a strategically stupid act and no matter what you think of their policies, the Greens are a very smart bunch and had a carefully planned campaign. Some of the perpetrators were Green party members and sympathisers, but apparently most were Mana and Labour supporters, and as you might remember the Greens outed the main organiser and suspended a valuable and skilled member of Russell's team right when she was needed the most because she knew about it and hadn't told Russell.

I think blaming the Greens is clutching at straws.

The hypocrisy arises in the context of the Exclusive Brethren support of the 2005 National campaign. Apparently that was a terrible wrong...but Green supporters are ok...??

The big difference there was the Brethren leaflet was done with the knowledge and support of Don Brash, yet when challenged he denied all knowledge.

I happen to agree with Robert that our media has a leftish bias but I don't think it is sinister or overt. And the bias is slight. IMHO it arises because rightwing issues make for dry reporting. Leftwing issues by contrast often involve human stories of deprivation and unfairness. They readily fit the "if it bleeds, it leads" ethos ergo we get more emotive news than factual information.

I disagree with you there. While many journos are left leaning, the editorial control excercised by all major media outlets strives to be as neutral as possible. There has been quite a lot of content analysis done on political reporting in NZ, and every report I have read has found that any bias is slightly to the right in a conscious attempt to balance any unintentional bias demonstrated by the journos. There is a perception with the right that it is left biased, but much of that is crying "it's not fair" when they get challenged instead of countering the challenge, and some comes from the issue you point out. A lot of the bad news we get is a direct result of right wing policies, so even a completely unbiased report looks like a criticism of right wing policies.

It's very hard to describe a pig accurately and make it sound like a fish.

[Winston001]

I have spoken to a Green MP and the party were completely unaware of it ..... and as you might remember the Greens outed the main organiser and suspended a valuable and skilled member of Russell's team right when she was needed the most because she knew about it and hadn't told Russell.

I think blaming the Greens is clutching at straws.

No worries. I appreciate the official Green Party did not approve and organise the poster stickers. But you know, that's beside the point. Nobody thinks the stickers were paid for and applied by anyone other than Green people. The guy who owned up was a Party member. His significant other was a high placed Green employee - and she knew about it.

There really isn't anything more to know. I'm not even particularly bothered about it. I simply think trying to construct a Chinese Wall between the Green Party and its members - as if they were separate and different - is unbelievable in the political arena. Legally correct yes - morally, ethically....no.

Whatever, I'm impressed by Russell Norman anyway.

A lot of the bad news we get is a direct result of right wing policies, so even a completely unbiased report looks like a criticism of right wing policies.

It's very hard to describe a pig accurately and make it sound like a fish.

Nice analogy but lets do a test:


A pig is a large fatty omnivore with particularly smelly faeces which enjoys rolling in mud.

A pig is a highly intelligent mammal which fiercely protects its offspring and is capable of fighting off wolves.


Both are correct statements but convey quite different images. The power of language available to the media colours our thinking even as we strive to be objective.

For example, property tycoon and magnate Sir Bob Jones....(many will have a visceral sneering response at this point) is self-made, has a huge library which he actively reads, supports NZ ballet and Womens Refuge, and tried to expell the Fijian Embassy from his building after the 1987 coup. But how many people know the last bit? Journalists never get past the first part. That induces bias in the rest of us.

[oldrider]

The big difference there was the Brethren leaflet was done with the knowledge and support of Don Brash, yet when challenged he denied all knowledge.

Correct, an intelligent academic whiz kid but poor old Brash is the consummate loser when it comes to street smart and common sense!

ACT has lost it's way completely now with Banks pretending to be the leader, he was the final nail in the coffin, what a sick joke!

[shrub]

No worries. I appreciate the official Green Party did not approve and organise the poster stickers. But you know, that's beside the point. Nobody thinks the stickers were paid for and applied by anyone other than Green people. The guy who owned up was a Party member. His significant other was a high placed Green employee - and she knew about it.... I simply think trying to construct a Chinese Wall between the Green Party and its members - as if they were separate and different - is unbelievable in the political arena. Legally correct yes - morally, ethically....no.

I know one of the people who did it, and he used to be a Green member but is now Mana because he sees the Greens as having sold out. He proudly calls himself an activist, and is the kind of guy who chains himself to railway lines, lies down in front of bulldozers etc, and he reckons the Greens have lost most of the activists to the Mana party, so you'd probably find that more of the perpetrators were either Mana or in the process of leaving the Greens. And they were the ones who paid for it.

Nice analogy but lets do a test:


A pig is a large fatty omnivore.... and is capable of fighting off wolves.


Both are correct statements but convey quite different images. The power of language available to the media colours our thinking even as we strive to be objective.

For example, property tycoon and magnate Sir Bob Jones....(many will have a visceral sneering response at this point) is self-made, has a huge library which he actively reads, supports NZ ballet and Womens Refuge, and tried to expell the Fijian Embassy from his building after the 1987 coup. But how many people know the last bit? Journalists never get past the first part. That induces bias in the rest of us

Let me offer a couple of more relevant examples:

John Key grew up in a state house with a solo mother.
John Key grew up in a warm, well built house in one of Christchurch's more sought after suburbs and his mother was a widow on the widow's benefit. BTW, you have seen where I live - nice area, mostly big 2 story architecturally designed houses - we looked at Burnside where John grew up and it was well out of our price bracket.

John Key is a successful businessman who understands the needs of New Zealand business owners.
John Key made his money while he was living and working in Singapore for Merrill Lynch. He was on a base salary of around USD $250k with bonuses and shares bringing it up into the millions - he purchased as many shares as he could trading cash bonuses for more shares. He made most of his money because his Merrill shares skyrocketed in value, just like all the other Wall Street banks.

I could go on, but New Zealanders have been fed a very carefully constructed John Key with his minders on the 9th floor keeping a very close eye on what he says and who he says it to. For instance, he is kept away from interviews with the National programme because it is pretty well agreed that he would inevitably be asked something he couldn't answer in the way his minders want. The majority of the media report what they're told to report which is why all we see is the official John Key brand.

[short-circuit]

For instance, he is kept away from interviews with the National programme because it is pretty well agreed that he would inevitably be asked something he couldn't answer in the way his minders want. The majority of the media report what they're told to report which is why all we see is the official John Key brand.

This despite the fact that RNZ is now run by former National PR man Richard Griffin:

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/richard...board-ne-90806 and some critique http://blog.labour.org.nz/tag/richard-griffin/

Oh well - maybe sell that one off too.

[short-circuit]

RNZ will no doubt go the way of the Listener which used to be a genuine alternative to the business driven shite fed to us through all the major broadcasters in NZ and the Harold.

National also have two great stooges in Duncan Garner and Guyon Espiner respectively. Not really a surprise though is it when you prop up the likes of Canwest financially behind the scenes

[Oscar]

Let me offer a couple of more relevant examples:

John Key grew up in a state house with a solo mother.
John Key grew up in a warm, well built house in one of Christchurch's more sought after suburbs and his mother was a widow on the widow's benefit. BTW, you have seen where I live - nice area, mostly big 2 story architecturally designed houses - we looked at Burnside where John grew up and it was well out of our price bracket.

John Key is a successful businessman who understands the needs of New Zealand business owners.
John Key made his money while he was living and working in Singapore for Merrill Lynch. He was on a base salary of around USD $250k with bonuses and shares bringing it up into the millions - he purchased as many shares as he could trading cash bonuses for more shares. He made most of his money because his Merrill shares skyrocketed in value, just like all the other Wall Street banks.

I could go on, but New Zealanders have been fed a very carefully constructed John Key with his minders on the 9th floor keeping a very close eye on what he says and who he says it to. For instance, he is kept away from interviews with the National programme because it is pretty well agreed that he would inevitably be asked something he couldn't answer in the way his minders want. The majority of the media report what they're told to report which is why all we see is the official John Key brand.

I'm not sure what you're saying here - he was brought up in a state house, but it was a nice one?
Most state houses of that era were well built, large and warm (very similar to the dairy company house that I was brought up in). The fact that the house is now in a sought after area is completely irrelevant, at the time, a state house was a state house. I'm sure that a single parent family at that time would have had a reasonably hard time of it.

Also, what are you trying to say about his sucess as a share trader? The fact that he was good at that job in that era really means nothing other than as an indication of his acumen and intelligence. It's not as if he was a slavetrader or drug dealer, and I can only imagine what his detractors on the left would be saying if he failed at it.

As for National Radio, I can understand why a politician of any stripe would stay away from Kim Hill and her ilk. National Radio may be public funded, but it is rarely anything but left leaning.

Finally, your comment about the media being told to write stuff is just silly. Have you not seen any of the reportage on the "Cup of Tea"? What about the coverage given to Winston Peters' rantings on the subject? It cetainly cost the Nats votes and if the PM does have an all powerful media guru, I'd sack 'em.

[shrub]

I'm not sure what you're saying here....

I was responding to something Winston said about how one way of identifying media bias is in the language used to describe a situation, and I used John Key growing up in a state house with a solo mum as an example. Factually correct, although when he grew up the term solo mum was not in common usage and living in a state house was very common and as you pointed out, state houses were pretty bloody good compared to a lot of houses people lived in. The point I was making was that the media have reported that ad infinitum, and it has been a major part of creating Brand Key as an ordinary man with the common touch who rose from the gutter to greatness. Today a solo mum has a significantly lower income than John's loving mother, and state houses are where the really disadvantaged and poor live, so the language has created a distorted picture.

And what is so important about that anyway? DOes anyone know where Phil Goff grew up? Or anything about his childhood?

[Brian d marge]

Sold the schools yet???

its been nearly a week ....

Stephen

[oldrider]

So why can not National call on the services of Labour members for specific support and assistance to govern under MMP?

Where is it written or decreed that this can not happen ... if cooperation and "real" interest in the country is at stake?

More people voted for Labour than any of these piddling little minor parties who end up holding posts way above their public support & standing!

If MMP is supposed to be so much about cooperation and compromise ... let it happen amongst the major parties instead!

That is what the voters have said, these are the people we most want to govern and lead us so lets get cracking and start putting the country first for a change!

[short-circuit]

So why can not National call on the services of Labour members for specific support and assistance to govern under MMP?

Where is it written or decreed that this can not happen ... if cooperation and "real" interest in the country is at stake?

More people voted for Labour than any of these piddling little minor parties who end up holding posts way above their public support & standing!

If MMP is supposed to be so much about cooperation and compromise ... let it happen amongst the major parties instead!

That is what the voters have said, these are the people we most want to govern and lead us so lets get cracking and start putting the country first for a change!

According to you they are already in coalition so make up your fucking mind

[oldrider]

According to you they are already in coalition so make up your fucking mind

So you do read my posts,

Well I did say coalition by default so why don't they come out from under the covers and start doing what the electorate puts them there to do and use the best of all that's available!

We pay a lot of money to politicians and every party has some very capable people and if they are not inside the tent they are too expensive to waste pissing on the outside!

Key has at least looked a bit further out than any other prime minister since the advent of MMP came into being!

If we are going to be stuck with it (MMP) it would be nice to see it used to it's maximum for the "benefit" of the country.

I must admit that the coalitions have changed somewhat since the first stuttering steps of learning to live with Winston!

[short-circuit]

So you do read my posts,

And I agree with you on this point for the most part....however there is difference and I'd rather have the slower, gentler version or what is not in mine or NZs overall interest than what we have currently.

Like I said earlier - madness electing the rip shit and bust version in a recession where they have every excuse. Enjoy the reaming people.

[Oscar]

I was responding to something Winston said about how one way of identifying media bias is in the language used to describe a situation, and I used John Key growing up in a state house with a solo mum as an example. Factually correct, although when he grew up the term solo mum was not in common usage and living in a state house was very common and as you pointed out, state houses were pretty bloody good compared to a lot of houses people lived in. The point I was making was that the media have reported that ad infinitum, and it has been a major part of creating Brand Key as an ordinary man with the common touch who rose from the gutter to greatness. Today a solo mum has a significantly lower income than John's loving mother, and state houses are where the really disadvantaged and poor live, so the language has created a distorted picture.

And what is so important about that anyway? DOes anyone know where Phil Goff grew up? Or anything about his childhood?

I agree that the National Party are using his background to best advantage, but why ‎wouldn't they? Especially with the opposition attacking him for his success in ‎business (ref. Michael Cullen's "Rich prick" comment). ‎But it’s funny that you think that telling a simple truth is creating a distorted ‎picture. Why? He did grow up in a state house with a single mother, and his ‎situation at the time was pretty dire by contemporary standards, so where he is now is ‎light years away from that. ‎

As for Phil Goff, his background (and his personality) is so boring that it would ‎detract electorally – which is why he is constantly shown on his Triumph so as to ‎make him seem windswept and interesting.‎

What I particularly‎ disagree with is your assertion that "..the majority of the media report what ‎they're told to report..". This is patently silly, given some of the ridiculous reporting ‎about the “cup of tea” immediately prior to the election. ‎