The timing, and things get messy

The timing of the hair pulling story has been criticised, but that’s nonsense. So what if someone timed it for maximum attention? That’s hardly uncommon.

Sure it could be awkward for Key to deal with the flak while travelling around the world. But it also gets him out of most of the firing line. By the time he gets back to New Zealand the story will have at least calmed down a bit.

Perhaps the story could have been put out in the news vacuum over Easter. That might have reduced attention. Or it could have festered and grown because there wasn’t much else to be indignant about.

The timing is a non-issue.

While the victim is a victim if unwanted physical attention she is a victim. That isn’t diminished by the way the story plays out.

I think she was unwise using The Daily Blog and Martyn Bradbury as her medium for her revelation. It guaranteed a highly charged partisan reaction before any facts were known or confirmed. It’s a side issue but it’s an issue.

The waitress used Bradbury – but Bradbury has used her too. I hope he warned her about the inevitability that her anonymity wouldn’t last long. I hope he warned her how she would be labelled politically by using him.

It didn’t take the Herald long to out the identity of the waitress and her workplace – see Waitress: ‘I felt NZ should know’.

She has complained about this coverage in detail at The Daily Blog – UPDATE: The Prime Minister and the Waitress Part 2 – Dirty Politics?

She says she was aware of some of the risks but she has been clobbered.

She claims that her employers and Rachel colluded to dupe her into an interview. But retracting something from the media is futile. Especially once it’s been published.

Out of respect for my employers, and what seemed like their genuine concern for my well-being along with the future of their business (a business doing good things which I fully support), they introduced me to Rachel, by name as the employee behind the story, and Rachel said she would put together a statement for us to proof.

As we waited for Rachel to e-mail the draft proof one of my employers read aloud to the other Rachel’s e-mail address. It began… RACHEL.GLUCINA and alarm bells went off. Sounded familiar, and I felt sick to my stomach – more than you’d ever imagine, a feeling I simply could not ignore.

Rachel’s story changed. RAPIDLY. Now she couldn’t possibly supply us with a proof because she would lose her job. She was absolutely acting in her capacity as a journalist for the New Zealand Herald and claimed that my employers had known all along, which they denied.

I made it absolutely clear that all and any comments I had made were given under false pretences, not to mention completely out of context, and questioned whether her supposed story would still be published if I withheld my permission.

Rachel simply responded that she would come back to us and read to us what was to be published, although she had no control over editors and sub-editors, and that she had to get in touch with the Prime Ministers office, and then they quickly ended the conversation. I later contacted my employers reiterating that I revoked any permission to use my photo or comments for any press release, and my disappointment that I had been mislead to such a gross degree whilst having my identity knowingly confirmed with the New Zealand Herald at the same time.

If she’s correct this is a bad look for the Herald. More collateral damage. What the hell were her employers and Glucina up to?

This could get very messy.

When the Prime Minister is involved behaviour has to be carefully considered. He stuffed up.

When the Prime Minister is involved the media and the victim get embroiled as well in what now looks like becoming substantial side issues.

While I think Key’s behaviour was poor it wasn’t dirty. But it’s triggered what could be a bloody big dirty mess.

Leave a comment

24 Comments

  1. Brown

     /  23rd April 2015

    A victim breaking news via Bradbury has to be dim or a leftie. Or both.

    Key shouldn’t have done it – beyond shaking hands touch no one except your wife.

    Reply
  2. Mike C

     /  23rd April 2015

    This is par for the course daily behaviour for slut-bag ho-har Rachel Glucina.

    It was Glucina who set-up and ambushed John Keys son at an Auckland Night Club last year, and managed to manipulate poor young naive unsuspecting Max into having his photo taken with Mona DotCom.

    Reply
    • Shagger

       /  25th April 2015

      i always laughed when i saw that fat old pigs photo in Guess Who F**K You when she looked about 1500 Kgs lighter than her ass really was.

      Reply
  3. Concerned Kiwi

     /  23rd April 2015

    More devious and left-wing crap set-up by radicals . . . this little mare even demonstrated outside JK’s home. Hope she is fired, and would like her to come to us looking for work . . . yeh right! It shows the Herald and its stable of Labour sycophants wanting.

    Reply
    • traveller

       /  23rd April 2015

      Didn’t Audrey Young show her colours. Everything she’s written for years shouts that she’s anti-Key anti-Nat, but she’s managed to keep her hatred under wraps until Ponytailgate, whereupon she admits what we all suspected anyway that Key “hasn’t been running the country well for 6 and a bit years”.
      News for you Audrey. We are at the top of every stat for the world in the developed world and we’ve improved in every area imaginable, socially and economically. Key has a few laughs, is disarmingly irreverent and self-deprecating and he hams it up and even tugs a ponytail. So he’s cringeworthy – but he’s human, he loves his family, he dotes on his wife and he’s generous, an excellent friend to those lucky enough to be in his circle and kind and considerate boss to those he employs. In addition he is a widely respected man in business and politics round the world. Audrey on the other hand is a bitter and hateful journo who has shown her true colours and everyone who reads the Herald from her on in needs to know where she stands – that is a position of intense dislike, distrust and disrespect for the PM.
      I’d sack her myself

      Reply
    • Shagger

       /  25th April 2015

      god Key is SO lame – at least Bill Clinton actually shagged the tart and got her to put a cigar in the clacker !

      Reply
  4. Dumb Blonde

     /  23rd April 2015

    You can bet Angela Merkel is feeling pleased she decided to snub the Gallipoli Commemorations.

    She just wouldn’t feel comfortable about having to put her hair in a bun. 🙂

    Reply
  5. Alan Wilkinson

     /  23rd April 2015

    I think Bradbury is more or less irrelevant. He was just a conduit. Bailey had a political axe to grind and was too clueless to see how it would look to the normal world and how hot the political kitchen gets. Now she is just media fodder.

    Reply
  6. Mike C

     /  23rd April 2015

    The Owners of the Restaurant will end up regretting the fact that they contacted and involved that scum-bucket Rachel Glucina, because they will now lose the patronage of many of John Keys very wealthy A-List celebrity friends and acquaintances 🙂

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  23rd April 2015

      Maybe. Though they have been in damage control in the Herald. However, having a waitress who runs tell-tale to Bradbury will certainly not be a marketing success story.

      Reply
  7. Alan Wilkinson

     /  23rd April 2015

    Some context from Kiwiblog:

    kaykaybee (137 comments) says:
    April 23rd, 2015 at 12:14 pm
    I know that waitress well enough from Rosies. In my opinion she is cheeky and sassy and I’d go as far to say overtly familiar – you know the tip dancing sort, the one that at every single table delivery asks how everything is. On a recent occasion I ordered the fish, declined everything else on the meal and ordered the avocado salad to accompany it instead. However what I got was the original accompaniments plus another salad but NO fish. When she came back to ask how it was I told her it was very nice, but not what I ordered. Quick as you like she replied that the fish I’d ordered and the new salad would have been too big for me to eat! I was gobsmacked. As I was with a group of people celebrating an occasion I didn’t create a fuss and let it slide. She’d always seemed pushy but in no way is she the shrinking violet she makes herself out to be, and that event sealed it.
    As for Rosies itself, it’s excellent. I am a semi-regular and the staff generally very friendly. It’s a very nice place to visit, with a local crowd all knowing each other and it feels more like a club than a cafe. The food is extremely good. It’s a pity they employed a political operative.

    Reply
    • kittycatkin

       /  23rd April 2015

      What a cheek. It’s not up to the waitress to decide what the customer should have, I would have insisted that she take away the meal and bring me what I’d ordered-and hoped that she’d have to pay for it. If I ask for a particular thing, it’s because I want that thing. I usually have a muffin/coffee combo at my favourite cafe. I do not expect to be brought & charged for a plate of nachos because the waitress thinks that a muffin is not enough for someone’s lunch.

      It can be very intrusive when the staff keep asking how the meal is-especially when they interrupt a conversation. She sounds a very annoying person.

      Reply
  8. Goldie

     /  23rd April 2015

    1. Key was behaving like a jerk. As PM he should know better.
    2. The coverage by the NZHerald and TV3 shows how media coverage of politics in this country has become a purely destructive game. I am not sure that it is because NZHerald is necessarily left-leaning, but their coverage of political events is to treat it as a zero-sum game of personal destruction. Covering policies about bettering New Zealand don’t matter for the mainstream media.

    Reply
  9. kittycatkin

     /  23rd April 2015

    I see that the waitress has ‘strong political views’. How astonishing-I wonder which way she leans. Could it possibly be left ? I also wonder what would have happened if Andrew Little had done it. If she accepted John Key’s apology, she has no business making a big drama out of what is a big non-event.

    The people who are calling this violence (albeit at the lowest end of the scale) and sexual harassment make me really angry. What an insult to the people who have really suffered violence and harassment. I doubt whether anyone who has been on the receiving end of a violent attack would regard this as one.

    ‘I thought that NZ should know about this.’ Know about what ? That John Key misread the atmosphere in a cafe and joined in the fun, as he thought ? That he apologised and thought that it was over ?

    All that blah blah about how she felt powerless etc is absurd. If this is the worst thing that ever happens to her, she will be very lucky.

    I was walking down the street a few years ago and a stranger came up behind me and gave me a blow that almost knocked me down-and it hurt. He then stood there laughing stupidly. I didn’t bawl about how I felt powerless etc, I just walked on. Maybe I should have gone to the police, but I couldn’t be bothered to spend all that time on it. But that was violence, a tug of a pony tail isn’t, unless it’s really hard and vicious and I bet it wasn’t. I could imagine it being annoying, but can’t believe that it would have continued if she had said so.

    I also think that the remark that she called after the Key party left may well be an afterthought in case people ask why she said nothing.

    Reply
  10. Mike C

     /  23rd April 2015

    I do hope that the conniving leftie waitress bitch loses her current job, along with any future employment options 🙂

    She has used up her 15 minutes of fame, and will now fade into total obscurity for the rest of her unimportant life.

    Reply
  11. kittycatkin

     /  23rd April 2015

    The expression ‘nine days wonder’ has become a cliche, but it’s a true saying. When one thinks about it, 9 days is about as long as these things last. I would think that other cafe owners might well be cautious about employing her-I would.

    Reply
    • jamie

       /  24th April 2015

      How does such a moderate blog attract such hateful commenters? And why are they published?

      Reply
      • jamie

         /  24th April 2015

        Sorry kittycatkin I did not intend to reply to your comment in particular.

        Reply
      • It attracts a range of commenters.

        They are published because there is open posting of comments here. I’l; sometimes warn, and I encourage decent dialogue.

        But I think it’s important to show what a range of people think and how they express themselves without censorship. If they were prevented from speaking you may not get a balanced view of what’s being said.

        Free speech is important, and as a result you’re free to judge that speech.

        Reply
  12. Mike C

     /  24th April 2015

    @Jamie. What John Key did was silly and stupid and a big social mistake, but he meant no harm.

    However, the Waitress and Restaurant Owners and Martyn Martin Bradbury and Rachel Glucina and Graeme McCready all have malicious intent.

    Reply
    • I’d cut the waitress a bit of slack, she had reason to feel pissed off, although her choice of medium was not very smart and counter productive.

      But yeah the rest have not done themselves any credit on how they have dealt with this.

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Brown Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s