Journalism

1. What a wonderful bizarre world we live in!

   Published on Wednesday, March 10th, 2010

   There are occasions when you can only but shake your head in disbelief at the antics played out in our media.

   Take for example the reaction by the majority of the media to the suggestion by ACT MP David Garrett that there might be some value in considering paying ‘bad parents’ $5000 if they agreed to be sterilised.

   The media went berserk, making it the leading news item of the day. Politicians and every sort of self appointed social or liberal commentator climbed into the debate. Someone even managed to manufacture a link with Hitler.

   You could be forgiven for believing that the suggestion was on the verge of becoming law rather than the musings on a blog by a MP who was unknown to the majority of us.

   The most poignant comment that I saw was that from the Herald’s Fran O’Sullivan, who quietly pointed out that many middle class parents pay for their own sterilisation once they have completed their families.

   Shame on you Fran for effectively killing off the debate when your colleagues were just getting started! And shame on the middle class for following the teachings of Hitler!

   Having recovered our breath we then moved on to the Destiny Church’s ‘cash cult’ expose. Not to worry that we have heard it all before, including stories about the extravagant living style of its leader Bishop Tamaki.

   It all started because part of the Brisbane congregation did what every right minded person would do if they disagreed with the ‘cult’s’ requirements around tithing and gifting – they walked out.

   The only nugget I gathered from the coverage was that TV3’s John Campbell has now adopted the practice of gate crashing other presenter’s interviews (Willie Jackson’s) to get a story if anyone dares to decline his demand that they appear on his show.

   Can we now look forward to the day when Willie gate crashes John’s programme?

   To mimic the words taken to the world by the late Paul Fuemana, ‘how bizarre, how bizarre’.

   

2. Has our media diet become unhealthy or are we being fed what we are asking for?

   Published on Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010

   Is there a disturbing trend towards tabloid style news items taking precedence over the real news?  Just a few weeks ago the possibility that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie had broken up was in our six pm news bulletins.  Don’t get me wrong I have been known to read the odd gossip magazine but a good diet is all about balance, variety and moderation. 

   Dee Dee Myers’ piece in Vanity Fair discusses trivialisation of news as she examines the Tiger Woods story.

   The entire country stops for Tiger yet when President Obama makes more important announcements the country barely pauses for breath. Her article concludes with the fact that finally the National Enquirer has been deemed eligible for a Pulitzer Prize. Now that is real news.

   The Tiger Woods saga highlights the potential crisis we are facing in the world of news – that of tabloid style stories stopping the real news stories taking center stage. Rosemary McLeod’s column in the Sunday Star Times was right on the money.   

   Today’s Toyota story relating to their faulty vehicle accelerators is as important as the collapse of Enron, yet was second or third in the morning news items.  The bigger story was a claim that Air New Zealand has a culture of excess drinking despite facts to the contrary being communicated clearly by their CEO. (Declaration of interest here, we do provide PR support to Air New Zealand.)

   Given Tiger’s speech and Robin Brooke’s Close Up interview, is Performance Media a new art form?  For audiences this is something we can watch and critique more easily than substantive news? In Tiger’s case we seem entirely focused on how he, and his team, is handling this crisis and how genuine the apology is.  All know his speech was scripted, rehearsed and stage managed. 

   If the media and public know this, then who is to blame – why did the media cover it?  For the simple reason they knew they could get an audience because it is just the sort of thing we love to watch.  In today’s commercially competitive environment what will sell is what will make the news.

   How can we make sure our media diet is balanced without it being so boring we simply gorge on junk or become undernourished and miss out on essential news and information that could be more relevant to our lives?

   

3. Government showing deft communication touch

   Published on Friday, February 12th, 2010

   The Government’s handling of the tax changes to be announced in the May budget show a masterly understanding of managing long term communications.

   Delegate the task of putting forward ideas to a third party (a commission) and then immediately reject the most controversial (phew, it’s not going to be as bad as it could be!); talk up some of the remaining unpalatable ideas, and then in the first formal statement of the year reject them too (saved again!).

   Now we have a pretty clear understanding of what will be in the budget some three months in advance, even if we don’t have the detail. By the time the announcements are made in May all the best emotional and rational condemnations from opponents will be out in the public domain, and Government can fine tune its final decisions to ease back on those that will upset us most.

   By the time the changes are finally introduced in October (10 months from raising the issue to their implementation) we will have mentally adjusted, and rather than outrage we will take them in our stride.

   It is good strategy, and the Government’s media managers are demonstrating a deft implementation touch.

   Cast your mind over some of the other contentious issues – mining in conservation reserves; fundamental economic reform to ‘catch up with Australia’ and even the national standards for primary schools have been on the agenda for months.

   When the going started to get tough over national standards, Key & Co showed their ability to up the game aggressively with a ministerial realignment, Key personally entering the confrontation, and outspoken challenges to the teacher’s union and boards of trustees.

   Labour will undoubtedly have the skills to win a few skirmishes as we move into the year, but they are going to need to be at the top of their game to outmanoeuvre National.

   

4. Curious questions for a new decade

   Published on Monday, January 25th, 2010

   1. Where did the man on the street go?

   Web 2.0 where? We wondered if the exuberance around the democratising power of the all-access-internet we saw mid-decade hasn’t become a bit deflated in the past year or so. Could the man on the online street have been shouted out by the noisier and better resourced?

   With a host of new web tools and loads of corporates, newsmakers, brands, politicians and NGO’s joining in the discussions, there is real concern over authenticity of content.

   We need the man on the street to speak out to ensure the balance of power remains fair.  We need genuine two-way conversations, or this fantastic medium will become another advertising forum with one-sided conversations.  Certainly the economic downturn has redirected people’s focus, but we are predicting a comeback of the everyday opinionated. And what a comeback it will be!

   2. Will the media make it? 

   Of course they will, but in what form? They have copped it with both barrels and boy it shows.  Barrel one – technological change has seen news content migrate online without a viable commercial model. Second barrel – audiences largely want their news ‘without’ advertising at a time, place and in digital format of their choice. Add in the reduced effectiveness of traditional advertising, which bankrolls most media, and ouch.

   Some outfits will no doubt falter, but by the decades end we are likely to be paying for quality news one way or another, and we won’t mind or probably even notice. Check out the New York Times who are on the brink of making it pay and they need to, because let’s face it, delivering real news real well costs a packet.

   3. Why are we more interested in the fallen mighty than the mighty issues?
    
   Despite the scary state of the world (think world peace, climate change and economic upheavals), celebrity news will always win the day.  The value in seeing the private foibles of the mighty such as our media stars, politicians, business leaders and sports stars played out in public is immense.  We think it might have something to do with the fact that it makes people feel better about their own lives, knowing that even the rich and famous don’t get it right all of the time.

   To err is human and to recover is clearly seriously divine. Unfortunately the message to the impressionable is that professional success allows for serious personal failures – providing we apologise.  All it takes for those in the public eye who have been caught out is to make a heartfelt mea culpa, fall on their sword or better still, check in to rehab, and all is forgiven – eventually.  While it might take our mind off the real issues at hand, it prompts real concerns for the impact it might have on younger generations.  Do some media not have a responsibility to truly hold these people to account in the people’s court?

   4. Is there a journalist in the house?

   The principles of the 4th estate are to hold the powerful accountable, to scrutinise and to provide transparent information on behalf of the citizenship so we can all choose how to vote, work, or shop.  This scrutiny requires experienced, thoughtful people working in an environment free of hefty commercial imperatives.  That’s a big ask given an environment where newsrooms are stretched to their limit, and media owners are screaming for more efficiencies to drive profit they now can no longer raise from advertisers.

   But never fear, journalists are a nuggety lot, and while it will take some time, we predict the next decade will see the rise and rise of the individual journalist.  Once the true value of their content is understood, and we have a workable way to pay for it, the face of news is set to change for the good.  This new breed will be real life crusaders with massive spheres of influence standing clear of news organisations to become brands in their own right, and they will cover the gamut of political viewpoints, single handed.

   5. To Blog or not to Blog?

   Our final question is an easy one really and the answer is an emphatic yes! While we may be a tiny drop in the Blog Ocean of billions, we are determined to shine in our own way.  We hope you keep following us and using your people power to ask the questions and pose new issues.

   

5. The News Truce

   Published on Wednesday, December 23rd, 2009

   In Ypres, 1914 a Christmas Eve ceasefire became the stuff of yuletide legend.

   The truce began when German troops decorated their trenches, the soldiers placed candles on trees and sang Christmas carols. Not to be outdone British troops responded singing their own carols back in English. In no time the two sides were shouting greetings to each other, there were calls for visits across No Man’s Land where small gifts were exchanged. Whiskey, jam, cigars and chocolate was shared and the artillery in the region fell silent that night.

   This exceptional outbreak of peace reminds me of the news over the summertime here in New Zealand, it’s as if our world stops speaking for a month. Could this outbreak of ‘nothing happening’ be because all of us in the information exchange business have waved a white flag and sent the news on holiday?

   The news goes soft. Not a peep is heard from the courts or councils, the lobbyist and legislators languish. Business leaders too are mute, our captains of industry have headed off in the caravan and so have the agitators and activists. The Beehive itself is silent. Even the sports reporters have given up the ghost.

   The papers are scrawny and the news bulletins truncated. They will contain stories from the seaside, teens running amok, cute kiddies frolicking, kooky animal stories, a freak storm perhaps, sunscreen warnings, surf beach rescues and the road toll.

   The lifestyle pages will be chocka with recipes for leftovers, anniversaries of other things, musings on the future or the past from famousish New Zealanders and book reviews. The news in other words – will be nice.

   This is not a global news-truce, the Northern hemisphere draws a breath for Christmas but their news-machine barely misses a beat. It is us who have a full hiatus of real news and maybe that’s just the way we like it.

   

6. Media serves up hard economic information … but are we interested?

   Published on Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

   The economist Edgar Fielder, who served under Presidents Nixon and Ford, is quoted as saying ‘ask five economists, and you’ll get five different answers – six if one went to Harvard’.

   This self deprecating comment would draw mirth from his peers because they understood the complexities and intricacies of taking historical economic data, and trying to forecast what it means for the future.

   For those of us who are not economists, and who try to make sense out of what will happen on the basis of the media coverage of economists’ comments, the result can be bewildering.

   We are no sooner buoyed by headlines proclaiming New Zealand’s recession is ‘over’ than we are brought down to earth by headlines elsewhere forecasting the economy is going ‘nowhere fast’ over the next 18 months or that unemployment will ‘continue to rise’.

   How can this be? Well, the answer certainly isn’t the economists are playing mind games with us, or the media is misquoting or misunderstanding what the economists are saying.

   In part it is the price we pay for trying to understand an issue as complex as the economy on the basis of sound bytes, or a 250 word précis of a 60 page report.

   It is also a reminder that we should view potted media coverage of most topics as the start point – and that there is far more to the full story than the media will ever give us.

   If we want that full story, then we are required to go out of our way to learn more.

   Which bring us round to the issue of whether it is the media’s role to inform us, or to report what others are saying?

   It can be argued that economics is one area where the print and online media in particular do try to inform and give a balanced view, through comment by in-house and external columnists, and by in-depth coverage of personal finance, business and agricultural items.

   Whether we choose to read the in-depth economic stuff with the same desire for knowledge as when we are looking at the All Blacks’ performance or nutritional and health issues, is another matter.

   

7. A happy slip of the tongue

   Published on Thursday, September 17th, 2009

   Let me get one thing off my chest, whether it was on the record, off the record, a throwaway comment, a personal observation or an official declaration, fortunately for President Obama he was right on the money. Kayne West is a jackass.

   The golden boy rapper’s churlish treatment of country singer Taylor Swift at the MTV awards was pure-fool, and he may never live the moment down.

   In the aftermath, ABC News employees overheard a conversation between the President and CNBC’s John Harwood on the matter, where Obama called West a “jackass”.

   The comment was recorded, tweeted and lit up the internet.

   The television network has since apologised and said that it was wrong for its employees to tweet the comment, but they didn’t realise it was considered off the record.  But was it?

   Obama is the President of the United States, and his words, every one of them is newsworthy. He’s gained much of his popularity because he’s used online social networks with real savvy, and this time it’s no different, because unlike many nasty asides that have been recorded during on-mic mishaps, Obama got it so right.

   As one web commentator put it, “just when I thought I couldn’t love Barack anymore!”

   Another world leader making headlines is French president Nicolas Sarkozy. He’s said that gross domestic product, inflation, and unemployment are all old-fashioned, Anglo-Saxon indicators of national wellbeing, and from now on, the country’s economic progress will be measured in terms of happiness – bonheur.

   The French president has some heavyweights to help him back up this new measure, Nobel Prize-winning economists, the American Joseph Stiglitz, and India’s Amartya Sen, who have concluded that new indexes are needed to measure wellbeing and environmental sustainability.

   Surely he’s hit the nail on the head, as isn’t this what corporate social responsibility programmes should be all about, creating bonheur for all?

   

8. Does a rugby final justify silence in the face of bad behaviour

   Published on Wednesday, August 19th, 2009

   Given the public discussion around the Kelston Boys vs. Auckland Grammar rugby game brawl it has been interesting to see the marked difference between how the two schools have reacted through their communication with their pupils and the wider public.

   I was initially disappointed to hear the principals of both schools, in the first interviews I heard on Monday morning, defend their school and blame the other for inciting the incident. Neither one made the obvious point that no matter what the provocation, such violence is not acceptable. 

   However Kelston Boys Principal, Steve Watt is to be congratulated because he did just that later on that Monday.  What’s more, he took action against his own boys before they had even faced the Rugby Judiciary.  Their website shares their statement to the judiciary and the school and firmly puts the blame on all involved.  Although they do hold to the view that Grammar incited the incident.

   Compare this to Auckland Grammar who has, to my knowledge, so far made no public statement and taken no action against the boys who were involved in the fight – whether they started it or not. Surely the same situation applies and retaliation was not acceptable.  Even more for their team, who as the clear winners on the day could have been a little more magnanimous?

   One wonders if Grammar’s upcoming final, and the need to ensure they have a full team available, might have influenced their response. Grammar prides itself on its rugby heritage and is known for being the secondary school responsible for producing the most All Blacks. Is this a lesson we want to set for future All Blacks? And what message does it send to the pupils of the entire school.

   Furthermore, what has been done about claims that the Grammar Old Boys contributed to the heat of the situation?

   When we are constantly hearing about bad boy sports stars misdemeanours in the media, the chance to teach these emerging sports stars about the real consequences of actions has it seems been lost.  We have surely shown them that it is about winning the game at any cost.

   

9. An orchestrated litany of fables

   Published on Tuesday, July 21st, 2009

   The teenager who sold raunchy photos of his mum on TradeMe after discovering them in the family garage caused something of a kafuffle this week.

   After his TradeMe inspired notoriety, Michael Chal appeared on Close Up last Wednesday to give an account of his TradeMe experience.

   Soon after this appearance, Close Up learned that despite Chal’s assurances to the contrary, it had been duped.  The programme’s producer, Mike Valintine, seemed more than a tad miffed about the deception, and was reported as saying Chal “lied through and through”.  This behaviour was described as “despicable”, and the Chal was called a “fool”.

   After this outburst, and the headlines labelling Chal an “internet liar”, it was surprising to see him, together with his co-conspirator, again on Close Up last night.  Here we learned that Chal had not lied, he’d merely presented a fable.  Just like 20-year-old French Rugby centre Mathieu Bastareaud!

   Chal and his mate proudly told us that they’d had job offers arising from their fables. So, the end does justify the means after all, and liars do prosper.  Social media is setting new standards, but let’s be careful where this takes us, as Michael Chal’s story was nothing but an orchestrated litany of fables.

   

10. Because we’re worth it

    Published on Friday, July 10th, 2009

    It’s with some dismay that we read that women in this country earn on average 12 per cent less that their male counterparts. And now, over three decades since legislation designed to remedy the un-equal pay, the unit set up to address the problem has been scrapped.

    This country has built a reputation for fairness. New Zealand led the world in giving women the vote, enshrining the 40 -hour working week and protecting the community’s safety with ACC. So why has the push for pay parity fallen off the menu?

    We hear it is because we have no successful role models to aspire to. This claim wears a bit thin when we’ve had near 30 years of the ‘girls can do anything message’, a woman Prime Minister, Governor General and Chief Justice to boot.

    Mai Chen is actively addressing the ‘no role models’ claim by heading the New Zealand Global Women group. This fine collection of power women is in serious catch up mode if they want to inspire a fresh crop of lady-leaders because the situation is actually getting worse.

    In 2004 New Zealand was ranked 4th in female representation in business management, now we have dropped to 10th place.  Fran O’Sullivan in the NZ Herald points out that just 54 out of 624 director positions on NZX companies are held by women.

    Invisible glass ceilings have been blamed for keeping women down, sticky floors too, and that women bully each other, or are too cooperative and empathetic to truly succeed. We hear that men are genetically privileged so especially tall ones get the top jobs, that they are bred to lead. Women who take time out of their careers to have children can blame biology for losing their place in the promotion queue.

    Surely the communication message is quite simple: an equal day’s work deserves an equal days pay no matter how you put your trousers on in the morning. Alternatively as one leading business woman suggested more than a decade ago, if women’s pay can’t go up, perhaps men’s pay should come down!