Posts Tagged ‘Winston Peters’

1. Is Rodney Hide the consummate PR man or just someone looking for attention?

   Published on Monday, November 2nd, 2009
   When a child does something they know is a bit naughty and are likely to get found out, we call this attention seeking behaviour.  So could it be that the Hon Rodney Hide was seeking more than a suntan when he took his partner on the now contentious trip overseas?

   Was the ministerial trip yet another clever PR strategy to remain in the public eye, or perhaps Rodney Hide was boldly stating that he does whatever he wants and the consequences be damned? Apparently he has been forewarned of the potential public scrutiny now also being suffered by his partner and family.

   Whatever the motivation this time, Mr Hide does do headline-catching with aplomb; I mean who could forget the yellow jacket he sported continually during the election period? The man was a walking rosette for the Act Party and prior to this I would’ve been hard pressed to name their party colour, but now it is burnished in my mind – permanently!

   His stint on Dancing with the Stars was impressive and revealing in more ways than one. Rodney is not averse to getting some of his kit off. That said, the pre-transformation body of Mr Hide made the front page when his attempt at the Auckland Harbour crossing came unstuck a few years ago.

   So perhaps one can appreciate his motivation for wanting to show the world his physical improvements. The Act website shows a lovely picture of Mr Hide at the opening of the Diocesan School for Girls Aquatic Centre in March this year.  It offers the perfect combination of children, community spirit in his electorate and an opportunity to see the real man.

   So I do take my hat off to Mr Hide for his efforts in keeping his name in the media, but as the equally press-friendly populist Winston Peters learnt at his peril, not all media coverage is good coverage.

2. 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.