Posts Tagged ‘media’

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’.
Fair Play or Out Of Bounds
Published on Thursday, January 28th, 2010

The ability of the media to ‘spark’ a controversy, and that of social media to ‘fuel it’ has rarely been better illustrated than the histrionics raging in Australian over the comments made by the new Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, when asked the question: what advice would you give your daughters about sex before marriage.

The question was posed by The Australian Women’s Weekly when doing a personality piece on Abbott. His response [not to give away their virginity lightly] is, I would have thought on face value, acceptable enough fatherly wisdom.

However, when you are a politician, nothing is taken on face value.

As would be anticipated, the reaction to his comments has been as diverse as ‘a brilliant answer’ to ‘yet another self-acknowledged one-time drug-taking, Vatican roulette-playing, shagabout, white, middle-aged male telling young women not to do what he did when he was their age’ (an Australian comedian).

Now Abbott is an experienced politician, and his media minders are hardly likely to be lightweights, so it’s not unreasonable to assume he knew what sort of reaction he was likely to generate. The decision to answer the question the way he did had to be deliberate, and was designed to achieve a specific result.

Post coverage analysis will tell him whether he obtained what he set out to achieve.

By and large, New Zealand politicians have steadfastly refused to allow or inject their families into media coverage to raise their profile. In Australia, some at least are obviously not so reticent.

I think the Kiwi approach is the wiser.

What is of real interest to those of us who work in the media world is the power social media has to take the initial story, and fragment it into stories about politics, parenting, morality, religion, feminism, manipulation (of the media), hypocrisy and personal choice, to name a few.

For those who have doubts about the power of social media, have a read.

One only hopes that the media does not seek to prolong the controversy by asking Mrs Abbott and her three daughters as to their views on Mr Abbott’s musing. Enough is enough!
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.
Pearls before swine
Published on Thursday, October 8th, 2009

Ever had a press release sink like a stone? It can be heartbreaking when the intrinsic worth and value of beautifully crafted, timely and interesting key-messages get soundly ignored by the media.

Well our newest heroine was not prepared to take it anymore. After Anna Wilding’s media release was spurned by the Christchurch Press, she took this rejection to a higher authority. Anna has chutzpah in spades. Take a look at the Press Council’s ruling out yesterday.

Case Number: 979 ANNA WILDING AGAINST THE PRESS
Council Meeting MAY 2004

Anna Wilding laid a complaint against The Press because the Editor, Paul Thompson, would not interview her or publish her media releases sent to him in February and March this year. The Press Council did not uphold her complaint.

Anna Wilding had returned to Christchurch from Los Angeles where she is based. She expected The Press to publish her photos and details of her professional career as a local interest story. The Secretary of the Press Council advised Ms Wilding that the Council had consistently stated that editors were responsible for deciding the content of their publications and that such a complaint was unlikely to succeed. However she wished to pursue her complaint on the basis that other media overseas had published a portion of her press release, proving that it was newsworthy.

Paul Thompson responded to Anna Wilding’s complaint that, as editor, he had sole discretion on the content of The Press and was not obliged to publish any news releases or interview her.

The Press Council agreed with Paul Thompson and saw no grounds on which the complaint could be upheld.
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.
Media training lessons from another country
Published on Thursday, September 3rd, 2009

A propensity to blame others and our environment while avoiding personal responsibility has become a national trait. It now appears however, that we do not have this on our own…

We are all familiar with the allegations of corruptions and the dalliances of the 72-year-old Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, and his apparent shameless predilection for what Italian call “veline”. This is a term that has come to mean young girls with no talent (but other endowments) except for appearing on television.

Well in his hour of need, the philandering PM has adopted a media strategy that takes some beating. Firstly, he uses his lawyer as his third-party advocate (this man is also a parliamentarian); who, secondly, explains that all the allegations are flawed because they are against him – and that’s just anti-Berlusconi-ism!

We know this because there is this fascinating article about Berlusconi’s scandals in the September issue of Vanity Fair entitled, “All Broads Lead to Rome”.

Let’s look at some of the key messages in response to Vanity Fair’s questions.

His separation from his wife? Response: He still loves his wife. Perhaps if he was able to involve his wife more in his life. But this is not so easy, because he is a very busy man, and also a man with a strong character.

His relationship with 18-year-old (barely) Noemi? Response: He has a long relationship with her family. It is common for people to remember things differently.

The allegation that a British lawyer took bribes from Berlusconi, in exchange for giving false testimony in an investigation into Berlusconi corruption. Response: But you see he was the main witness, so that must be proof that he was not given money.

If only dealing with our media was that simple.
Focusing on what’s worth it
Published on Friday, June 5th, 2009

There is nothing like a good whiff of alleged sexual impropriety to liberate the minds and pens of our parliamentary hacks, and titivate the masses.

Regrettably in the early stages of such sagas there are always more questions than answers, and as our fledging Prime Minister has found no sooner is one curly questions or innuendo dispatched, than his answer has spawned a dozen more.

It is not our intention to make light of the plight of the hapless and now ex-minister Worth, or those he’s alleged to have pressed his unwanted-ness upon, but there is one emerging aspect of this matter that deserves a quick squashing.

Sadly when a feeding frenzy is on, anything and anyone associated with the target may appear fair game. This led to the media to seize upon Worth’s engagement of professional communications support as though this were another indiscretion. The truth is when all hell has broken around you, that’s exactly when you need professional advice and support, including assistance in dealing with the media.

So, to the media we would say, let’s keep things professional and focused on the real issues.
Poorly served by media accuracy
Published on Thursday, March 12th, 2009

We have no right to expect accuracy from the media. And the media has no right to promise that they will give us accurate reports.

I came to this Damascene realisation only recently, or more correctly, I only recently faced up to this realisation. This is tough when you’ve spent a career working with the media and for a time even being part of it.

What brought this on? Well, in fact it was media’s treatment of the teacher stabbed at Avondale College, a person known to me through a shared recreational pursuit over a couple of years*.

The stabbing occurred late morning on Tuesday, March 3. By the next morning it’s hard to believe that anyone following the story did not think that the incident was in large part due to racism. Indeed, most people would have tended to believe this teacher was prone to racist comments.

This is because in their pursuit of this story the media recorded the comments of anyone prepared to say anything, and if they did not have the comments first hand, to leverage the report of other media. Those making such statements were guaranteed anonymity.

Under these circumstances it was impossible to present an accurate report, so in the circumstances why impugn someone’s reputation? For the sake of a story I guess, regardless of accuracy and integrity.

In its own defense, the media insists that it searches out balance, by getting comment from or on behalf of the victim. When they can’t, it is a matter of editorial judgment – or lack of it – to go, or not, with what they’ve got.

In such cases, the media tends to justify its position by stating the obvious: These are the statements of those we interviewed; we do not vouch for their accuracy.

Following the earlier media reports, we learned through the court process that the stabbing was premeditated and, through a report of what police told the school community, “racism was not a motive”.

Inevitably this does not resonate as deeply and widely across the media as the earlier, lasting accusations.

Not trusting the accuracy of media is one thing, but not trusting the statements made by a government department is quite another. In Tuesday’s Dominion Post I read the disturbing report of how the strategic communications manager for Internal Affairs, according to his boss, seemed to be “talking at cross purposes with the media” over the timing of the return of Winston Peters’ ministerial vehicle.

‘Talking at cross purposes’ is a euphemism for avoiding factual, accurate responses.
The comment of the Dominion Post’s chief reporter on this sad incident was (in part) that the public should be able to expect civil servants… to give straight answers.

I agree whole heartedly. I hope he will agree with me that consumers of the news media have a right to fairness, balance and good editorial judgment.

* I visited my paddling buddy in recent days, but we did not discuss any details of the incident, aside from the bodily impact and affect of the stabbing, or the likely causes.
Dear Mr Holmes, thank you for the memories
Published on Thursday, December 18th, 2008

With tomorrow being your last day as the voice of Newstalk ZB morning radio it seemed appropriate to dedicate this, the last posting on the Network PR blog for 2008, to you.

You have not only made a huge impact in your field but overseen tremendous growth and change in our nation. As one of my colleagues said, “Holmes was NZ’s first celebrity broadcaster. He heralded a whole new era in New Zealand broadcasting and – for better or worse – the birth of celebrity culture in NZ.”

I imagine there are very few PR consultants in New Zealand who have not had reason to deal with you over the years and undoubtedly opinions will vary as to how “satisfactory” this experience was. But I am sure that each and every one of them would agree that you are a true star in your field.

As a seasoned listener of ZB I must confess that I have waxed and waned in my affection for you. But the retrospective discussions during the past few weeks have reminded me of the reasons that make you so special. On occasion I’ve considered that your musings have ranged from arrogant and to downright sentimental. But through it all you clearly made an impact. I often talked about what you had said to others and although I might have been tempted at times to switch off or change channels, I didn’t. Because for every moment of irritation there were many, many more moments of sheer genius.

You will likely agree that your job is not to be universally liked, but behind the broadcaster there has always been the man who really did just want to be appreciated. So it might interest you to read some of the comments my PR colleagues had to make about you.

“Paul Holmes was a controversial, loveable and hateable character – to me he embodies that ‘old school’ sense of the media.”

“It’s testament to his talent that, despite a number of high profile ‘incidents’, Paul Holmes has had such a successful broadcasting career. He is certainly a fighter – he is frank and intelligent – and while his departure from Newstalk ZB tomorrow will be a loss for the station, and no doubt many loyal listeners, it opens the door for other emerging talent to follow in his footsteps.”

I am particularly pleased that you are around to hear this praise being heaped on you. You deserve to hear it. Too often in New Zealand the only time we say nice things about people is at their wedding or funeral! I sincerely hope this is the start of another long and significant phase in your life.

The oldest child in the family breaks down the barriers, and as NZ’s first true media celebrity you did that in spades. You weathered criticism along the way – some warranted and some not – but you always remained true to your own style.

So Mr Holmes, thanks for the memories and for the many special moments you have shared with us.
Shining a light on the sunset
Published on Friday, October 24th, 2008

Last weekend I attended the jubilee conference for the Guild of Agricultural Journalists and Communicators. Although a lapsed member of the Guild, it was refreshing to be among such a dedicated and passionate group of people.

The Guild was formed 50 years ago to help give voice to the research and business of agriculture in New Zealand in a largely secular world. Then, as now, this special fraternity encourages and recognises the work of those often marginalised in the mainstream media despite the fundamental economic importance of the sector of their expertise.

The conference was a way to celebrate agriculture and those journalists who know the most about it.

As much as past governments may have wanted otherwise – with dreams of New Zealand as a regional finance hub, or a centre of IT excellence – agriculture continues to underpin the economy. Why has it not lived up to the tags of a sunset industry? Simply because agriculture and food are New Zealand’s natural competitive advantage.

In this context it was with some relish that the Knowledge Wave was recalled for its paucity of agribusiness representation. Around that time agriculture was popularly portrayed as the sunset industry.

Maintaining New Zealand’s edge in agriculture – and preserving our economic wellbeing – will depend on a debate we are still to have: the acceptance or not of GM technologies. Such technologies are fundamental to mitigating some the cost increases facing the sector.

We are now past the time when the country should be bullied out of resolving our position on such an important issue by a noisy minority which, until now, has successfully drowned out the principal finding of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification (2001), which was “proceed with caution.”

It is time for a grown-up debate on the role of GM in New Zealand Agriculture. Our future prosperity depends on it.