Nick Smith Auckland Nat meeting open to public

[GOONR]

I'm amazed at the ammount of utter drible in the media regarding this meeting.

I listen to Big FM here at work (don't ask) and was intrigued by the young chicky reporting at great lengths about "the group of 100 angry motorcyclists who gate crashed the meeting and abused Nick Smith while he attempted to answer their questions"......

Does anyone know how the media obtain their sounds bites... It seems to me that there are probably one or two (possibly independent) reporters who show up then on sell their version of event's. If you read related article's but on different websites they are almost 'copy' 'paste'. As mentioned in various other threads, there seems to be very little real reporting / journalism going on here.

[MSTRS:Me]

Great turnout for the meeting and well done to everyone who attended. Nick Smith is getting the message even if he doesn't like it.

I'm not sure that the use of the word "insurance" by ACC will capture public attention. It is a type of insurance after all - you make a payment to cover yourself for an unknown future event. We don't like to think of ACC as insurance but it meets the definition.

As I've said before, in US states, people pay for unemployment insurance with their taxes and no-one objects. Lose your job and you get a weekly payment. No law suits, no no-claims bonuses etc.

I'm not sure that he is. Or, more likely, he doesn't care.

The lay definition, maybe. true insurance is based on actuarily projected averages, factored by individual history or responsibility. EG - You keep your bike in a locked garage = lower premium (or excess).

So do we. Part of our PAYE goes to Winz for UB, so it's there if we need it.

[MadDuck]

The best bit of the whole meeting was when the compere gesticulated to a member of the audiance to speak into the microphone by giving him the 'blow job' sign fukin hillarious...........I guess you had to be there.

...was fine until you big, bad, angry bikers started giggling. That sent a chain reaction off I think!

Tops to those who asked the questions. Sometimes it was a bit tough to understand what was actually being asked.

[mashman]

The perennial problem with the media is that their idea of 'juicy' is so far out of whack, it's not funny.

I beg to differ (semantics). Mainly because "juicy" media is nothing but entertainment these days... and that's what people want from the TV/Radio/Film etc... It has no affect on people, i'm not talking desensitisation, more that the media is all about $$$... advertising, filling column inches with stories that are no better than those found in a glossy mag or a gossip column... Media is here to entertain, not to offer opinion, just to titilate, give people something to talk about, it's about papers sold, getting the best story for tomorrows fish and chip paper, making the good guy look bad, allowing you to "think" that you're with the herd, dumbing "news" down to a level that all can understand.

[k2w3]

Surely you jest? Hairy-arsed bikers don't giggle. I think you must have mistaken a chortle for a giggle.

[k2w3]

God, mashman, when you put it like that it's too depressing for words. The real newspapermen (of whom there are few) must be shaking their heads in dismay.

[Maha]

The best bit of the whole meeting was when the compere gesticulated to a member of the audiance to speak into the microphone by giving him the 'blow job' sign fukin hillarious...........I guess you had to be there.

I had to turn around at that point, highlight of the night...

...was fine until you big, bad, angry bikers started giggling. That sent a chain reaction off I think!

I dunno, I saw a few smaller non-hairy bikers with the shoulder shakes also...

Damn that was funny, even a cop thought so....

[Ixion]

Great turnout for the meeting and well done to everyone who attended. Nick Smith is getting the message even if he doesn't like it.

I'm not sure that the use of the word "insurance" by ACC will capture public attention. It is a type of insurance after all - you make a payment to cover yourself for an unknown future event. We don't like to think of ACC as insurance but it meets the definition.

As I've said before, in US states, people pay for unemployment insurance with their taxes and no-one objects. Lose your job and you get a weekly payment. No law suits, no no-claims bonuses etc.

I don't think legalistic definitions actually matter here. My perception is that the public have established a dichotomy : ACC or insurance company. Insurance company isn't really a legal definition in this paradigm, it's an encompassing term for privatisation/user pays/selling bits off/higher levies/lower cover.

[k2w3]

I hate the word 'paradigm'.

[mashman]

God, mashman, when you put it like that it's too depressing for words. The real newspapermen (of whom there are few) must be shaking their heads in dismay.

I was cross at the time... needed a rant...

but where the hell did they go? No wars, no news maybe? Perhaps noone finding out what the people want, or they do and it conflicts with their views, heaven forbid one of them might actually have an opinion and disagree with someone...

[NONONO]

Does anyone know how the media obtain their sounds bites... It seems to me that there are probably one or two (possibly independent) reporters who show up then on sell their version of event's. If you read related article's but on different websites they are almost 'copy' 'paste'. As mentioned in various other threads, there seems to be very little real reporting / journalism going on here.

Gotta own up.
I 'hurled abuse" at him, even some 'obscenities" so the Herald report is only partially wrong.
I also managed a quick "fuck off" before leaving.
Childish? Give a fuck!
He lied, wriggled, blushed and lied some more.
Those women from Rape Crisis showed real courage confronting the bastard and he could only glare at them.
How about a fund raising collection for Rape Crisis at the next protest?
I was fascinated by the movie extra (security man in suit) who kept running up and down the aisle to my right. He really thought he was the star of the show!
Hey drummer, this time we were very polite....next time it's all fair game.
Time to up the anti.

[idleidolidyll]

I beg to differ (semantics). Mainly because "juicy" media is nothing but entertainment these days... and that's what people want from the TV/Radio/Film etc... It has no affect on people, i'm not talking desensitisation, more that the media is all about $$$... advertising, filling column inches with stories that are no better than those found in a glossy mag or a gossip column... Media is here to entertain, not to offer opinion, just to titilate, give people something to talk about, it's about papers sold, getting the best story for tomorrows fish and chip paper, making the good guy look bad, allowing you to "think" that you're with the herd, dumbing "news" down to a level that all can understand.

close but no cigar: the media exists to make money and that is the key

they don't make money off subscriptions; they make money off advertising and that will always be where their allegiences lie

If the corporates want the media to give our story air; that's what will happen

they influence by withdrawing advertising or with the implied threat of it


Perhaps we should be sending bulk mail to Fulton Hogan etc: all the roading contractors and councils who don't sweep up after themselves voicing our anger.

after all; the motorcycle road toll would be a lot lower if the roads were safe for us

[twistemotion]

Here's my email to Mathew Dearnaley, the Herald (mis)reporter:

Hi Mathew, I found your article in today's paper - "Slight ACC easing won't stop bikers" lacking in proper journalism.

I assume you were not present at the meeting at the yacht club, judging by the way you reported about it. I suggest you improve the accuracy of your reporting.

There were some very pertinent questions being asked of Nick Smith at the meeting, and all you did was quote government press releases and tarring motorcyclists as "gate crashing" (it was a public meeting) and "shouting". It's just lazy reporting, and you are missing the point that ACC is changing in a fundemantal way that will affect ALL New Zealanders.

Forget about the amount of the levy rises, and look deeper into the meaning of the disproportionate levies and proposed ACC changes before the select committee, as well as the subtle hints that indicate the change that National intend to make to ACC. That is of course, if you are willing to put a little effort into journalism, instead of just mindlessly quoting dubious government statistics and press releases.

Actually, just use Google to find out what's really happening, investigate that, and add some real value for a change.

[idleidolidyll]

How about a fund raising collection for Rape Crisis at the next protest?

Bloody good idea

Make a spectacle of it in front of one of them (Smith, Key etc): I'll chuck in my $20

Bikers support other ACC clients ripped off by Nationals changes to ACC

[flyingcrocodile46]

I agree that's the best report I've yet seen from TV3 I think - I loved the inclusion of the "Nix figures are inaccurate" (who was that?) bit and the lack of rebuttals aired from the nixter

Loved the sexual abuse campaigners raising the banner in front of nick

Did anyone ask him how he reconciles his role a climate change minister with his agenda to price the most fuel efficient transport off the road?

That was probably me. Explaining how his claim that every other motorist would have to pay an extra $77 was bollocks... I played his game a bit by overstating our existing contribution by $6 million and claimed the remaining shortfall of $43.5 million ($6 mill light) divided by the 2584509 registered light passenger vehicles was $16.85 not the $77 that he claimed car drivers would have to pay for our share. I should have made a big deal about how that was obviously a lie that was designed to alienate car drivers from our cause.

I then claimed that if the shortfall had to be funded by motorcycle registration increases for the 75140 registered bikes (not sure that shouldn't be 105000??) that the total levy increase only needed to be $85... not the $498 he claimed. However that was a bullshit claim as it is closer to $385. He didn't pick it up... I don't think anyone did. Goes to show that it isn't just ministers that can get away with publicly quoting bullshit figures if they do it enthusiastically.