VOTE NATS

[Wolf]

Labour are running 2 to 3 polls per week at the moment

All of them equally pointless - WTF do they know about conducting a proper poll that would have meaningful results? Any poll conceived with a prior bias has within it the seeds of its own destruction - the results returned will be biased and therefore not remotely accurate.

[Lou Girardin]

That is 'normal' democratic behaviour anyway - that's what lobby groups are for! There is no requirement for a private individual or business to stay politically neutral.

No, it is not. This is neither a lobby group nor is it political donations. This is a company publicly broadcasting just prior to an election. Not forgetting for a moment that it was the leaders debate 3 years ago that boosted United Futures vote enough to increase their seats in Parliament.

[ManDownUnder]

No, it is not. This is neither a lobby group nor is it political donations. This is a company publicly broadcasting just prior to an election. Not forgetting for a moment that it was the leaders debate 3 years ago that boosted United Futures vote enough to increase their seats in Parliament.

Just to go waaaaaaaay out on a limb here...

IF no-one wanted to place advertising in that timeslot due to the present of Political party ABC (which they would be entitled to do)

Should the TV station be forced to run that program at a loss, or would they be entitled to protect their revenue and act in a manner dictated by the advertising public at large?

[Phurrball]

My only comment on the subject of this thread:

Has anyone else noticed the Nats 'future eating' at the moment? All this talk of 'abolishing' the Waitangi Tribunal, Te Mangai Paho, Te Puni Kokiri etc and rolling back the 'grievance industry' at a time when the Maori population is increasing as a proportion of the general population and will continue to do so as a matter of population dynamics... Seems rather like the way the early Maori population engaged in 'future eating' by hunting Moa to extinction...Anyone else spot the irony there?

Think on that, and the impact on National's support base over the next 50 years or so

I'm done. No more will be said by me [even though there is much to say].

Disclaimer: I may have made some minor generalisations, or glossed over some finer details here. I am not interested in the minutiae, rather the broader picture - where I think my comment is valid.

[Lou Girardin]

Just to go waaaaaaaay out on a limb here...

IF no-one wanted to place advertising in that timeslot due to the present of Political party ABC (which they would be entitled to do)

Should the TV station be forced to run that program at a loss, or would they be entitled to protect their revenue and act in a manner dictated by the advertising public at large?

Going further out on a limb. Is broadcasting an essential public service or not?
Judging by the fact that broadcasters are always the first target in a coup de tat, I'd say yes.

[ManDownUnder]

Going further out on a limb. Is broadcasting an essential public service or not?
Judging by the fact that broadcasters are always the first target in a coup de tat, I'd say yes.

Good question - highly influential yes - but "essential"... I think I'd draw the line at that one (i.e. if we lost them all... who would die?)

[Lou Girardin]

Good question - highly influential yes - but "essential"... I think I'd draw the line at that one (i.e. if we lost them all... who would die?)

Broadcasting Winnie's speeches helped the Poms in '39 to '45.
Broadcasting helped Hitler too, until he lost.