Media Government stoolies - rant

[candor]

Disgusted - says it all. It all began 2 weeks ago when I took the unusual step of writing a letter to a major papers Ed to say how appalling that papers coverage of an issue (road safety) was. It was definately too scathing to be published.

Fast forward. Several days ago while preparing a fairly urgent Press release I get a ph call from jaded (known to me) reporter from that very paper. "we didn't publish your letter" "Funny that as I did write at the top not for publication - so to what do I owe this pleasure".

"Editor wants a story so told me to call you" (I Musta wounded his Eds ego with my accusations of biased pro govt coverage).

Next ensues much talk, a request to sit on current press release as he wants the scoop. He says it could be in Saturdays paper. Nothing so I wait. He calls and says will work on it Monday for Tuesday paper. Monday I give lots of help. It better be in next day as story getting stale.

He assures me it will and he tells me it will now be one of 2 stories as its big subject and he's stillgathering info etc etc.

Tuesday says it wasn't in as "paper full". It is apparent he has been talking to the opposition ie Govt people I'm trying to throw mud at as he tells me their meanderings. He makes some much less enthused and convincing noises about "sometime... over the rainbow".

I ask what is going on exactly. He mumbles (pretty inaudible) then slips out at 7pm at night "Oh you might be best to put that Press release out, you know tonight or tomorrow - yes go ahead, I don't know we'll do anything ".
If he had told nme this at 4pm the PR might have still been relevant. But for it not to get noticed till next day as release after hours means would just kill it.

I have obviuosly just got screwed by a govt stoolie who milked me for what info we had, fed it back to the Police and vulnerable Ministers so they could prepare defenses, strung me along till the story was no longer hot - then dumped me.

Many hours were wasted by a few people bending over backwards to help said reporter as it was a leading rag. I have only been working with PR type stuff about a year but I tell you the crookedness of media relations and the games that go on are unreal. Seems cops get veto rights with said paper and even use it to spy on people as maybe they grease papers palm with occasional leak

These people in parliament and lurking assiciates are devious as foxes. Aaaargh

[RantyDave]

screwed by a govt stoolie who milked me for what info we had, fed it back to the Police and vulnerable Ministers so they could prepare defenses, strung me along till the story was no longer hot - then dumped me.

Hey,

I hate to sound like your mum, but you're going to get really angry doing this shit to yourself. Not the "driving on drugs is bad" part, but the "assuming the very worst of everyone" part. The newspaper business is very fickle and by definition nobody can tell what's going to happen next. Quite possibly you just got bumped - I notice that John Key gave a speech telling the unemployed to get off their arses ... perhaps that's what (unfortunately) pushed you off the bottom of the list.

It also sounds like you're suffering from the same problem experienced by people trying to get a new business going - that something which to you is the most important thing in the world, is of almost no relevance to everyone else. It drives you (one) nuts.

So, seriously, as someone who in the past has driven himself completely bonkers on both of the above affects, you need to chill out. I know it sucks, and I know it's wrong, but if you don't (in particular) start looking for reasons to believe the journalist really had no choice ... for example ... and that he's actually really sorry he's had to bump your story... Well, it's a pretty shitty road. So chill.

Dave

[Switch]

Where does he live? Does he have anything he REALLY cares about...cause that could go missing

Sorry to hear about what happend. Hopefully you can get back at them

[candor]

Hmm, not so sure about the paranoid Ranty. Would this conversation not make you suspicious

One Provides facts to journo - crashes / injuries up several thousand in 5 years, hospitaisations and injuries up hundreds = hard statistics

Previously excited reporters response after talking to Police
But... uuumm..... aaaahhh..... Mr Policeman said his guys have just learnt to count better the last 5 years

My reply - "they are not responsible for counting Ministry of Health hospital discharges"

Reporter "Mmmmmmm.... yes.... well.... I talked to a trauma surgeon who says from what he can see things have been pretty quiet.... ummm you can't always trust the statistics - he's been keeping a bit of a database himself" Nb. Said in the shiftiest or most squirming way poss - I think he was political meat in the sandwhich and maybe did feel bad about it too.

The issue here is that average rural speed dropped 4% to about 97 since 2000
and ACC and LTNZ say this should mean an 8% drop in injuries. Well a 40% overall rise (15% in serious injuries ie 330 people yearly extra) kind of disproves the 'speed kills' and 85th percentile BS doesn't it.

BS that ACC and LTNZ have literally written screeds and book size volumes of propaganda based around it.

I believe that is an interesting story of ongoing revenue raising and damn harmful deception. How many cop hours were used issuing 100g extra tickets on the 2000 rates last year - without safety excuse??? And why can't the tax collected be redistributed somewhere useful instead of recycled into speed ads. It puts you off watching telly.

Famous Knackstedt quote "the majority of speeding related crashes occur at or near the limit'. LTNZ thesaurus - speeder / mover non-speeder / parked

The reason I suspect collusion is because I have had a couple of journos give me the newbie sermon about how it all works lately. Mary Poppins darn left the house.

[Brian d marge]

Ahh press releases, if you knew how many releases they get ,, and yes its a game .. trouble is I KNOW they have lost sight of the REAL reason they are there

To SERVE the public

having been to the behive ( great food at Belamys ) and seen the shit that goes on ,,,

Your screwed .

BUT have hope aparantly its Speeding that causes the problems , ( please tell canada they have just Raised their speed limit )

So sleep safe ,, Knowing that NZ ers will never get motivated to actually say no and that the intelligencia from the failed , will be giving the same good advice as they always have done

So hug your kids, eat the meal on the table , and treat the rest as a not a problem , ie enjoy it ,,

Stephen

[Dafe]

The media is government owned and funded.

If you write something anti-government, don't expect to find assistance in any form from the media. They won't bite the hand that feeds them.

Thats why anything you read in the standard newspapers is always one eyed. Pro-Government crap.

You could consider discussing this topic on a privately funded media channel - e.g. Radio Pacific.

[Lou Girardin]

The media is government owned and funded.

If you write something anti-government, don't expect to find assistance in any form from the media. They won't bite the hand that feeds them.

Thats why anything you read in the standard newspapers is always one eyed. Pro-Government crap.

You could consider discussing this topic on a privately funded media channel - e.g. Radio Pacific.

Really?
Does Rupert Murdoch, et al know this?
Of course, talk-back, the ill-informed talking to the ignorant, is a much more credible source.
What is actually needed is the 'scandal' approach to be taken. That is, exposing the establishment lies supporting their revenue grab.
BTW candor, the drug/driving thing is never going to fly. People know that it is a minor cause of accidents, much like exceeding the speed limit.

[McJim]

The Newspaper is trying to run a business too mate - they have people to pay - could be someone you were trying to sling mud at made a career limiting comment ot the reporter. Even someone who thinks thay have all the facts rarely does.

Tell people your point of view - you'd be surprised at the power of word of mouth.

[ManDownUnder]

My thoughts - and possibly teching you to suck eggs (if so - I apologise)

Retain the story, keep the facts on file and use them as background info to be release in a timely manner... i.e. just ahead of the next "Speed kills" campaign or at a time the govt is a bit sensitive (why does election time come to mind?)

Update the story closer to the time of release with a whole "this was then - which debunked the myth, and this is now - FURTHER debunking the myth".

If it's a myth, and safety is not being compromised I have no problems with such a story personally, and it hopefully gets to see the light of day at a time of most effect.

[candor]

Good advice man down under

Lou - you crack me up...
"BTW candor, the drug/driving thing is never going to fly. People know that it is a minor cause of accidents, much like exceeding the speed limit." I invite you to hear the crash war stories at an NA meeting!

As the latest statistics/studies say other wise. Here and in every similar country.

That WAS the thinking about 5 years ago - experts THOUGHT (past tense) that the high prevalence of intoxicant drugs in dead drivers was insignificant, as they thought drugs did not effect driving AS badly as alcohol.

But much study and investigation has since altered their prior opinions - that is the consensus now among experts at the Internat Council of Alcohol and Traffic Safety of which our Govt depts are members. Drugs are a very significant factor in the toll and nowhere more than in New Zealand I might add.

I for one am not going to dispute expert opinion whatever my views may be.

The reason it might not fly with the new law is not that the need for this probvlem to be reduced is lacking - that is just what the Govt WANTS you to believe. The reason the govt wants to sweep the issue under the carpet is that random testing is costly (and a vote loser I add)so the Min of Police says.

It doesn't work to reduce drink driving (but checkpoints do look good and got entrenched) and Govt knows this so they aren't interested in a similar effort re drugs. We have 24 x the checkpoints of the UK yet more drink driving deaths - go figure.

However the trucky unions - gofd bless them - are pushing for random testing as they think cage drivers are a pack of stoners. Myself - I'd just like to see crashers tested, then those who are guilty properly hammered in the DUI charge system which can get them disqualed or (bleedingh heart idea) referred to 'get help' instead of a string of 'careless' charges after many random wrecks, leading up to a kill.

Food for thought - 47% of dead drivers in NZ police study had alcohol in them (over limit was prolly half that but I dunno), Only 14% had just alcohol alone. 70% had one or more of the 4 risk drugs (drugs of abuse) aboard - 10% had abused street bought pills (no prescription held). People on the risk drugs exceeded the numbers who had been drinking.

More had smoked pot than drunk! Marijuana is not the most impairing of risk drugs but the more impairing ones were very well represented. Its wel established anyway that smoke plus alcohol sublimit is equivalent in risk to high alcohol levels. The govt has plenty of info like this but its not going to share it willingly which is why people continue to believe the myth 'no problem'. Sme level of awareness as existed with alcohol in the 1950s - those who said it was bad were nearly thrown in the looney bin.

[Beemer]

Many hours were wasted by a few people bending over backwards to help said reporter as it was a leading rag. I have only been working with PR type stuff about a year but I tell you the crookedness of media relations and the games that go on are unreal. Seems cops get veto rights with said paper and even use it to spy on people as maybe they grease papers palm with occasional leak

That's the biggest load of crap I've ever read! You - by your own definition - work with "PR type stuff" - in other words, you get paid to put a positive spin on information, you are not a journalist.

Cops do NOT have veto rights on stories - they may request that certain information NOT be used but they do not get to veto articles once they are written. A few reporters may have a good rapport with some cops and be given information but that's what happens in other areas as well.

If you lot spent hours bending over backwards to help a reporter then aren't you as bad? You obviously wanted your side of the story heard which is why you 'wasted' all that time.

If you want to have your views heard, write a blog or get a real job, one where you can make a difference. Or would you miss your high-paid lackey's salary too much?

[candor]

Some of your tongue lashing is likely spot on beemer. Still you have made many assumptions there that aren't correct. The story was near complete and had much time invested in it by the journo. When I said 'veto' that was perhaps too strong a word. But as you say - sometimes consideration is given to regular sources. I have every reason to believe that is what happened here. Fine - that's the way of the world but... have you heard of - honor!

When someone requests an exclusive after they phone you out of the blue and you withhold releasing a planned PR at their unsolicited request based on a verbal promise they will use the material on a set day - well.... I think I have a right to be P'ed off. That's not professional conduct. I do believe there is such a thing a journalistic ethics and that this behaviour would probably fall foul of them. But then only a journo could tell you if the line was crossed here. But thems the breaks as you say though. I just do not think it was a good look for the paper - at all.

And I know if they'd mucked you around the same way that you would not be happy becos no-one sane could think that sort of carry on is OK.

Of course it was not like hiroshima or anything, just an unnecessary nuisance as no - none of the volunteers who worked to help this journo with his requests are paid high salaries. One is retired actually. The 4 who had input all took the time because they have lost people in the road toll.

It is quite standard to help journos when they are including you in a story so I don't see why you are so denigrating toward us about that. I'm sure none of us think writing a blog will be very effective as an educational toll and prefer to print and circulate brochures and have exhibits at events. And to deal with professional acting journalists, of which we've dealt with many.

Where do you get this negativity from?

[Beemer]

I'd be worried about any journalist requesting you hold back a press release - especially considering press releases are rarely the source of good stories in any case. How did they find out about what was in the press release in the first place?

Even though I hate the word, both sides need to be proactive - you in putting out interesting information that will be used and the journalists in seeking out interesting information BEFORE it is released by a PR person.

Where did I get the negativity from? Years of being a journalist I suppose.

[candor]

He learnt what was in the PR by happening to phone me when it was about to get released - I told him. Yes I think journos get cynical very fast - its prolly a benefit in the trade would you say?

[Steam]

Maybe the journo thought he was onto a good story, then it turned out to be boring and not really worth following up? There are heaps of people moaning about the government already, it's hardly news.