Media watch – Monday

27 November 2017


Media Watch is a focus on New Zealand media, blogs and social media. You can post any items of interested related to media.

A primary aim here is to hold media to account in the political arena. A credible and questioning media is an essential part of a healthy democracy.

A general guideline – post opinion on or excerpts from and links to blog posts or comments of interest, whether they are praise, criticism, pointing out issues or sharing useful information.

Next Post


  1. David

     /  November 27, 2017

    The slapping of the new government continues, totally self inflicted and a hypocritical move. I expected better and especially from the Greens who always tout their virtuousness on these issues.

  2. David

     /  November 27, 2017

    Looks like Barry,s missus got a workover on twitter for daring to raise questions about St Jacinda, probably from the same people who are outraged at Trump,s tweets. Barry himself has said nothing but lovely things so must be a bit miffed Heather is copping it.

  3. Corky

     /  November 27, 2017

    All grist for the mill. When journalists like Barry Soper start reporting like this, Labour should take heed. Of course they wont..and that’s cool. Barry also confirms what many already know- Lefties are a nasty breed. It just confirms to people like me, we aren’t reading the
    situation wrong. 🐵 🙈 🙉 🙊

  4. Blazer

     /  November 27, 2017

    [Deleted, misuse of names x 2]

  5. Blazer

     /  November 27, 2017

    McDonald is a serial appellant.Involved in the Bain case and…others.

  6. …and over at Whale Oil we see there’s what seems like a high degree of sensitivity around impending legal issues. Potential extrapolations given the blog’s political stance? No conclusion arrived at but much conjecture.

    Moderation rule 1

    ” The worst thing a commenter can do is try and be funny around ongoing court cases. There is no sense of humour with this. It will result in a permanent ban and carries with it the possibility of legal action. I have seen this personally.”

  7. Blazer

     /  November 27, 2017

    oh dear me Mr Bridges…what a sneaky,barstido you are…more to come doubt..

    • You’re kidding – a throughly emotive and self interested report commissioned by the CEO of KIWI Rail.

      • duperez

         /  November 27, 2017

        Is there an implication there that the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) should never commission reports or say or do anything because they are throughly emotive and self interested? So totally independent people, like say yourself, should make reports on their doings, dealings and development?

        • No, but it’s expected that people should view any report using natural intelligence and a fair degree of skepticism

        • High Flying Duck

           /  November 27, 2017

          How seriously would you take a report from Mobil or Shell on the environmental benefits of oil?

          • PartisanZ

             /  November 27, 2017

            The supposedly independent NZTA is a contradiction in terms. No such independent agency could conceivably have come up with an idea like Roads of National Significance … that is unless the ‘National’ has a meaning other than “nation-wide”?

            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 27, 2017

              Are you talking about the new roads that have been proven to be far safer, to reduce travel times and to allow vastly increased volumes of vehicle movements between main centres?
              You’re right – the bastards who came up with that should be shot!

          • Exactly HFD

            • PartisanZ

               /  November 27, 2017

              Far safer … okay … but including the upgraded $80 million backside of the Brnderwyns which were safe already from the previous upgrade … still leaving the South side in roughly the same condition as it was in 1953 when the tragic bus crash happened …

              Reduce travel times … Why? I know, because “time is money” right? Except it isn’t. Time is time and money is money.

              Vastly increased volumes of traffic movements … Why is this good? Safety perhaps? Fossil fuel use? Pollution? I know, it creates demand for more second-hand Japanese cars?

              Between main centres … but neglected roads beyond main centres and the people who live on them pay the price too … in more ways than just dollars …

              See also –

            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 27, 2017

              Small steps Parti.
              NZ has had a woeful roading network for decades. We are finally getting roads that enable safe transport and will lead to growth in the regions – especially the North when the Puhoi, then Wellsford, the Whangarei links are completed.
              With growth comes the funding to improve the infrastructure elsewhere.
              Cars are becoming more safe and more efficient at exponential rates. There is a big future in roading as the most efficient way to travel.

            • PartisanZ

               /  November 27, 2017

              Yes … precisely 3.3 decades …

              Can’t find the stats but I wonder what the proportions of passenger & goods transport split between rail and road were in say 1980 and 2015?

              Mark my words HFD, even if you are correct, the links beyond Puhoi will NEVER be completed …

            • High Flying Duck

               /  November 27, 2017

              Puhoi to Warkworth is already under construction and the next step, to Wellsford, is under investigation for preferred routes:


              This Government will probably back burner it, but it is far too important to stay in abeyance for too long. The current road is a disgrace.

              I read that article above you posted, and the fact anyone thinks you should be able to put a pedestrian crossing on SH1 (even in town) says all there needs to be said about the need to upgrade.

              Rail carried approx 30% of all goods in 1980 (heavily subsidised of course…). Not sure about passengers.

              There is definitely a place for rail – especially for freight – but that does not diminish the need to bring NZ’s roading infrastructure up to an adequate standard.

              Re Government department inefficiencies, you’ll find little argument from me on that…

  8. PartisanZ

     /  November 27, 2017

    “Almost all of the growth in top American earners has come from just three economic sectors: professional services, finance and insurance, and health care, groups that tend to benefit from regulatory barriers that shelter them from competition”

    Interesting article in the NY Times, although it’s premised on the orthodox [neoliberal] economic model’s idealized myth of a ‘free market’, despite the same model having installed the very regulations which do the protecting. [Deregulation was in fact Re-regulation]

    The article ends with this extraordinary statement –

    “Reforming relevant laws can make markets more efficient and egalitarian – (read competitive) – and in contrast with trade, immigration and technology, the political causes of the 1 percent’s rise are directly under the control of citizens”

    Rothwell has got to be kidding … Law reform is “directly under the control of citizens”!?

    For a complete refutation of that, have a look at Robert Reich’s recently released film ‘Saving Capitalism’.

    Rothwell does usefully dispel some myths about income inequality though … one being immigration (leastwise on the macro statistical level) …

  9. PDB

     /  November 27, 2017

    Great post on Kiwiblog…is Ghahraman the new Ron Mark of CV deception?

    • PDB

       /  November 27, 2017

      For the likely screaming of those poor Green party supporting souls on this site Farrar sums up the issue nicely;

      “Now imagine this isn’t a Green MP. Imagine this is a National MP who had defended war criminals and genociders in Rwanda. Do you think Labour and Green MPs would say “Well someone has to do it, and it was good work experience, so that’s fine”. Or would they be condemning them at every turn?”

      “Now again a legal system needs prosecutors and defenders. The issue for me isn’t that she worked as a defence lawyer for war criminals, but that all the promotional material to date has given the impression she was prosecuting in Rwanda, not defending. Sure if you look all the way down the Linked In profile, you see the details. So it isn’t that she personally has made a false statement about her work. It is that the narrative built around her has been incomplete and misleading. The Guardian article is a great example of that – makes you think she was a prosecutor in Rwanda. The Greens website states her work in Africa was putting on trial world leaders – highly misleading.”

    • Ray

       /  November 27, 2017

      Not a good look, waiting for Robert’s spinning on this with some glee
      Apparently the defence cost half a billion dollars