Big Business wants First Past the Post to Privatise

Last Saturday the NZ Herald published a column by deputy editor Fran O'Sullivan which revealed that Cabinet was to begin discussions on a public referendum on Mixed Member Proportional(MMP) this week. O'Sullivan makes it clear she supports First Past the Post as an electoral system, if in a runoff against MMP.

O'Sullivan also stated a referendum on MMP is "clearly unfinished business for many Kiwis". Its interesting she used Roger Douglas' turn of phase here, as when she mentions Kiwis she means the section of the business community who genuinely believe the country should be run for their benefit foremost, and ask the rest of us to believe in the trickle down theory. O'Sullivan concludes:
"Fighting the next election on an electoral system - even First Past the Post - which gave more power to the major party to implement sensible policies would do more to even the gap with Australia than endless horsetrading."

Horsetrading, in this context means that annoying thing called democracy - ie the thing we did not have when the Labour Government of 1984-1990 and National Government of 1990-96 used cabinet majorities to push through far right neo-liberal 'reforms'. Funnily enough the gap with Australia became significantly wider in these twelve years. Not that the new right would ever be intellectually honest enough to admit it might have been a combination of their chosen polices and the method of their execution.

In a later interview with Larry Williams on NewsTalk ZB (hat tip Frog), O'Sullivan described what she meant by 'sensible policies', explaining what MMP had stopped for the last decade or so.
"…various single issue or smaller parties will be able to point to wins they have had through [their] influence on the major parties that happens to be in power. But there are also some big things that aren’t happening – there are things from a business perspective. No-one can talk about privatisation… "

So there you have it - the sponger side of business community wants a return to First Past the Post in order to restart the privatisation agenda. The business community do not believe they can convince over 50% of New Zealanders to adopt their chosen policies based on a system where votes are of equal value.

In 1993 the Anti-MMP campaign was headed by Telecom Chairman Peter Shirtcliffe who bankrolled the misnamed Campaign for Better Government (CBG) along with other big business backers. I really hope some of the 1993 advertising is replayed and replayed - as it will completely do in Shirtcliffe's crediability. In 1993 CBG warned MMP would put our future at risk alongside the chorus of crying babies - yes really - see here. Now it can be seen for the scaremongering nonsense it is, as well as a dummy run for the National party's Hollow Men campaign of 2005.

Fran O'Sullivan quickly responded to Frog's post. She clarified that she only became aware of the forthcoming cabinet discussions following a question raised by a participant at business breakfast meet in Auckland. In second comment O'Sullivan said:
"To clarify – Personally I favour either FPP or STV – I do not like a system where the party vote delivers half the MPs. Would prefer to tick a candidate."

Yet there is only one system that will deliver the 'unfinished business' of privatisation that Fran champions above - a rotten borough system* known as First Past the Post. This impression is also reinforced by Fran's endorsement of Shirtcliffe's timetable for a referendum - a single referendum held in 2010, and applied at the 2011 election. O'Sullivan says "Frankly, Key should adopt Shirtcliffe's timetable. If past polling is anything to go by, many Kiwis would vote MMP down if given the chance". Clearly Shirtcliffe can't wait, and sees an opportunity to remove MMP by doing it quickly - this was also the strategy of Roger Douglas to avoid the interference of democracy.

That said, on this occasion I am prepared to give Fran the benefit of the doubt. I note she sometimes uses her columns to channel the views of others, and sometimes this can give the strong impression these are the views she also supports. Yet if Fran was being a complete partisan hack it is likely she would have downplayed the reemergence of Peter Shirtcliffe and not raised the "fundamental issue of fairness" raised by the differing treatment of Act and NZFirst at the last election, where Act remained in parliament despite receiving around 10,000 less votes than NZ First.

I would suggest people look at the campaign to keep meaningful proportional representation in New Zealand as a long game. Having journalists write stories about 'the other side' can at times be useful, as well as adding to the debate in a useful way. If Fran found out more about who was funding the anti-MMP campaign - this would be worth a few hail Mary's would it not?

* I am defining rotten borough in this context to mean any system where a vote is not necessarily of near equal worth. John Key's preferred option of Supplementary member is just a rotten borough with a thin layer of icing designed to cover up the rottenness.

PS: Fran in case I have your attention I would appreciate it if the next time you wrote one of your fawning columns about the 'benefits' of free trade with the USA you would also mention the potential costs. This comes from a solid source, the US Trade Representative's publication 'Foreign Trade Barriers', but the majority of pro-free trade business journalists either don't know, or perhaps more likely don't want to know such a document exists - if the risk is Kiwis paying more for their medications surely the public deserve better than journalists who stick their fingers in their ears and chant 'see no evil'.

This blog is now five years old

This blog is now five years old. I don't think I will be in trouble with the Ministry of Education if I do not enroll my blog at school, even though it has reached the age it should start compulsory education :)

Sitemeter Hits since May 2, 2004: 42876
Hits last month: 932

I know by the standards of some blogs these numbers are small, but I am happy being in the little leagues. I know I could get much higher traffic if I changed format to a high number of short postings, instead of blogged down long ones. I don't intend to, as I see no point in being a news service - there are plenty of websites that cater for that. Instead I saw more value in reflections and analysis after the immediacy of the news had died down, as I don't think this is something the mainstream media do particularly well. So I aim to write the kind of things I value myself, in the hope there a few more people in the world who value the same kind of thing.

Comments and feedback from readers is welcome :)

PS: This post is a little late as I had a fun weekend at the MayDay celebration at Blackball on the West Coast - 101 years since the famous miners strike. Yeah, I know, most people would head along to the 100th anniversary instead :)

Listener reaches a new low

The Listener with Princess Diana on the cover. Nothing much more needs to be said.

Pamela Stirling as editor of the Listener has been a destructive disaster. She has proudly taken the Listener downmarket, with the senseless aim of making the Listener just yet another meaningless 'lifestyle' magazine. The last vestiges of investigative journalism have been excommunicated, as quality writers like Gordon Campbell and Bruce Ansley have run out the door.

Occasionally a freelancer might get a good story in, but I suspect this is only when the lifestyle pontiff is not looking.

Rather than inflict editorial terrorism on the previous good name of the Listener, why didn't Pamela Stirling just apply for the Women's Weekly job?

Rudman on Jenny Gibbs and Telecom

Good to see Brian Rudman in yesterday's Herald taking up a couple of points I made on Thursday last week about Jenny Gibbs and her inability to access broadband internet on the leafy Paratai Drive.

This is worth noting in the context of the venomous Herald on Sunday editorial criticising blogs for "rarely researching" their offerings, when the editoral itself was really just a poorly researched rant.

I regularly see more evidence of research on the blogs than I do in the newspapers these days. Pushed for time many journalists are forced to spout the public relations lines given to them by newsmakers. Could it be the editors of the newspapers are feeling a bit sensitive on this point as they rarely give their journos the time to adequately research their stories?

But back to Brian Rudman's column on Telecom.

A) Jenny Gibbs, former wife of Telecom privatiser Alan Gibbs, gained some of her wealth from the privatisation of Telecom

"Not until Mrs Gibbs, angered by weeks of Telecom come-on promotions for broadband, came to the Herald, with the damaging publicity for the company that ensued, did the monopoly lines provider leap into damage control and suddenly do the impossible.

Sadly for the rest of suffering humanity, Mrs Gibbs was not set on becoming the people's champion. As soon as she gained the ability to download art prints from foreign parts at high speed, it was up with the drawbridge and, "Sorry, I'm all right, Jack, I don't want to talk to the media any more."

Which was a shame. Telecom would have found it harder to flannel the rest of us with one excuse after another if one of the privileged class was there to keep them honest. It seemed so little to ask of someone whose wealth, in part at least, derives from former husband Alan Gibbs' part in the privatising of Telecom."

B) If Telecom shareholders like Ms Gibbs had taken less out of the company in terms of dividends Telecom would have had more capital to invest in infrastructure and the residents of Paratai Drive would be more likely to be able to access decent broadband services.

"One can only assume that, like the privatised rail system, Telecom has been squeezed for profits by its new shareholders, at the expense of basic infrastructural maintenance and improvement. Meanwhile, while the infrastructure groans and splutters, the Telecom sales staff are pitching away like used car salesmen, promising Rolls-Royce performance from a secondhand Lada network."

BBC World Service only leads to Ping Pong

I found something I like about being in Auckland. As I was driving to work today I channel surfed in the hope of finding a decent National Radio FM signal.

To my surprise I came across the BBC World Service on 801 AM - great - I now have a choice between two commercial free newsgeek stations. I stopped listening to commercial radio a long time ago as I find saturation level advertising intrusive and annoying.

Tonight I camped at a pub in Onehunga to watch the cricket. On my way home, just after 11pm I put my radio back on the Beeb and found an interesting technology programme, Digital Planet. Today they looked at the growth of open source software, including discussion of a European Union Commission report that found that in 'almost all' cases long-term (business) costs could e reduced if businesses dropped proprietary software (such as Microslop) in favour of open source solutions. I am sure there is probably some right wing fruit loop somewhere in the world who thinks open source is a front for communism.

They also had a bit of discussion on how bloggers are holding big business to account, which certainly caught my attention :) Sadly I missed some of this item as I was unable to tune my home radio to the same frequency. But on going out to the car I ended up meeting one of my new neighbours who invited me to meet the flat and have a game of ping pong. Great to find the neighbours so friendly

Stella the cat is also very friendly, in fact I met her almost as soon as I arrived here :)

So if my car stereo had not randomly stumbled across BBC World Service this morning, I would not have met the neighbours, making it highly unlikely I would have finished the day with a midnight game of ping pong. Funny how things work out sometimes.

Corporate welfare for commerical radio operator Cam-West

During some quite random web surfing, I came across a very interesting interview with NZ musician Neil Finn criticising the recent Government decision to bail out the failing Kiwi FM, a station owned by transnational broadcasting operator Cam-West.

"I can't understand how [Cam-West] can be that the main opponent of youth radio and the main opponent of any Government interference in radio is now the recipient of three frequencies and courtesy of NZ On Air a whole lot of free programming."

"...I think Brent Impey, I've got a letter from him saying that a YRN– - a youth radio network - would ghettoise New Zealand music by putting it, by separating it. Well, I think that's exactly what Kiwi has done."

Finn long championed the idea of a national youth radio network, to be run in a similar fashion to National Radio and Concert FM. Laila Harre strongly pushed the idea while she was Minister of Youth Affairs, and I heard at the time both Steve Maharey and Trevor Mallard were supportive of the idea. Cam-West CEO, Brent Impey strongly opposed the youth radio model, no doubt keen on the income Cam-West gains from the overload of advertising broadcasts on its commercial stations.

Finn also told the NZ Herald
"It really irks me that [CanWest's] Brent Impey is basically getting frequencies that he very strongly argued should never be given by the Government to anybody for free."

According to Finn the youth radio network
"...was effectively sidelined by the Labour Government after eight years of putting together forums and advisory groups and with the overwhelming result from all of those that young people wanted it and that it was the best idea out there to improve radio services for young people. I took part in a few of them, some of them were without me, but certainly the Government got plenty of incentive and very good information and a model was drawn up, but they just ignored it and there'’s been no movement whatsoever."

Now as Broadcasting Minister Steve Maharey has propped up a failing Cam-West station. So its a complete dole out of corporate welfare for a company that opposes Government interference in radio. Neil Finn can't understand it either.

"So, you know, it just makes you ask the question what are the Government hoping to achieve from it, other than currying favour with a commercial broadcaster?"

I also loved Neil Finn's suggestion of how to help New Zealand bands make it internationally.

"Well, get Air New Zealand to provide a few empty seats to musicians and buy a big hostel in London that people can hunker down in and stay there for, for as long as it takes. Because that's what it takes, you have to go there and be in their faces and hunker down. That would be a very practical way of helping a lot of different people. They've never really taken that idea on board."

That could so work. Thousands of young pilgrims from New Zealand on their OE's could visit the musicians to give them an enthusastic crowd away from home!

Take action: Pro-democracy movement in Nepal needs your support now!

Earlier this week I received an email from Lee Yu Kyung, a Korean journalist currently reporting from Nepal. Lee highlighted how the Nepali army and the police are attempting to supress the efforts of independent journalists currently working in Nepal - by beating them up.

In the email Lee also stressed the need for the international community to show its support for the Nepali people through solidarity movements, solidarity messages and whatever else people could do.

So I sent a message of solidarity to Lee, and wished both Lee and the Nepali pro-democracy movement "kai kaha" for the days and months ahead. I also asked where people would be best to send messages of solidarity, and for any suggestions of good Nepali media to 'keep up with the news', saying I would be happy to publicise both on my blog if it would help.

I received the following reply from Lee Yu Kyung (penseur21@hotmail.com) last night.

"Hi, Joe Hendren
thank you so much for this reply. i don't mind anything! you can put down my email or whatever from my appealing message. and the message, i think, should be delivered to the both, people as well as the government. but people are now thirsty for solidarity message from international community."

Lee suggested sending solidarity messages to the two main political parties, who are part of the seven party coalition calling for the resumption of democracy.

These are
Communist Party of Nepal (UML): uml@ntc.net.np
(have been part of government before)
Nepali Congress: ncparty@wink.com.np
(looks like equivalent of the Labour party, including a liking for privatisation during the 1980s!)

"For media, 'Kantipur publication' is most popular daily with best coverage. it publishes also 'kathmandu post' which is english paper. here some journalist contacts. they can use the international solidarity message. i strongly believe. more soon...the cafe is gonna close for day curfew..sorry! best Lee.

kanti@kpost.mos.com.np, bimal_fnj@hotmail.com, bimalgautam2042@yahoo.com, bishnu@yahoo.com, kanti@kpost.mos.com, karkig@gmail.com, khanalgopal@hotmail.com, nirmalaji@mos.com.np, pahadib@hotmail.com, rb.khatry@gmail.com "

After a bit of hunting I found the Kantipur website in English. I also found this fantastic recent editorial from the Kathmandu Post. Well worth a read!

"Currently, Nepal stands at a crossroads. On the right side of it is a new Nepal where people are fully sovereign; insurgency is resolved and the Maoists join the political mainstream; the state is restructured to accommodate the disfranchised populace; and the society makes a peaceful transition towards prosperity. On the wrong side of it is the status quo, where the fundamental issue of sovereignty remains unresolved; the Maoist insurgency continues; state, under the direct control of the king, remains unitary and unwilling to address the issue of widespread exclusion. As Nepal has entered the final stage of the labor pain, the international community, unfortunately, seems to be supportive of the status quo. The international community's euphoric reaction to Friday's royal address is ludicrous, to say the least. It also shows how shallow is their reading of Nepali history and how far removed they are from the present ground reality.
...
If the [countries of the world] do not review their stance immediately, and continue to dishonor one of the most peaceful and colossal uprisings in modern history, they will soon find themselves on the wrong side of Nepali history."

Through my own searching around I also found another couple of useful sites, including Nepal News and United We Blog for a Democratic Nepal. The blog includes some photos of recent pro-democracy demonstrations.

Dear blog readers, please consider sending a message of solidarity to the political parties or email one of the journalists listed by Lee. Also feel free to pass on/link these contacts - it would be great if we could get a small solidarity movement going - the people of Nepal and the independent journalists in the country need our support.

Violent suppression of independent media in Nepal

Interesting first hand account of recent events in Nepal by a Korean journalist, detailing how the Nepali army and police (no doubt under orders from the King) are attempting to suppress negative media coverage, by beating up journalists and refusing to issue a 'curfew pass' to media not thought to be sympathetic to the King.

Dear, All

It’s Lee (I am leaving out last names until I hear from him/her), a Korean journalist, your friend or comrade, currently covering the ongoing people’s movement in Nepali soil. As you all probably informed, things have been terrible here in Nepal over the last more than 2 weeks, though some calm period has passed for a few days. The armed force, whoever the police or the army (but more police till now in terms of the number) have suppressed the peaceful demonstrators by beating terribly, fire hundreds of tear gas and shot at them with rubber bullet as well as live one. It’s routinely seen that a demonstrators who desperately appeals with extreme fear was beaten more than 4-5 police surrounding him (or her). Journalists (both Nepali and Foreign media), aid workers, human rights activists are not exception from the brutal action. Especially for local journalist, they got daily arrest and much harassment.

No press freedom respected. Whenever journalists take photo of brutal actions by police, he or she could be beaten or get threatening being beaten at least. Since the police start to beat the people, they care almost no one. Yes it’s their job! The other day, one American doctor who did volunteer for the injured was also beaten by the police and arrested on 12th and the next day deported to Bangladesh, where he lives. It’s done indiscriminately. But I must clarify that those who’s been worst dealt are demonstrators in general.

On April 20, when another biggest rally was held all over the country as the seven political parties’ alliance(SPA) decide, the authority declare a day curfew again and doesn’t issue ‘curfew pass’ for anyone, such as medias (there’s a rumor that only some Indian media that reportedly is favorable King, got it. but let me confirm it later soon), aid workers, human rights activists, who all got it last week curfew. Less journalists, therefore, could manage to get the venues with some questionings or harassment to cover it. I, myself faced that situation, in which my camera was “almost” taken by the police and told I must be taken to their place, ie..police staion. But I managed to avoid it. Human rights activists who used to watch the human rights violation in protest (but, honestly, it looks powerless before the armed force), and even the UN staffs couldn’t be issued a ‘curfew pass’. Logically, the suppression was highest ever on that day with less witness. In Kalanki, the west-south of Kathmandu, 3 were declared to be killed. But rumor says it’s 6 people as of this writting. In Gongabu, the northern part of the capital and once called a ‘war-zone', the police harassed journalists more than ever. I got threatened (reads “positioning to beat in a very threaten manner” by the cop) to be beaten 3 times when I tried to take photo of one poor guy beaten terribly with bloody by 5-6 police. A Japanese journalist told me the similar experience in the same area.

Now, I’d like to urgently & kindly request you to try to organize some solidarity movement, message or whatsoever which is badly needed at this moment for the Nepali people struggling against the autocratic King, Gyanendra and his royalist government. Please, keep watching the news from Nepal. This is “priority”. Thanks.

This morning I emailed Lee to pass on a message of solidarity and kai kaha from New Zealand. I have also asked him/her where people would be best to send messages of support for the pro-democracy movement and independent media currently reporting from Nepal. If he/she gets back to me I will post his/her suggestions.

New blog Mirage Media on attitudes to mental illness

New media watch blog Mirage Media includes a great post about the census worker who was forced to resign from his job after it was discovered that he had previously escaped a murder charge on the grounds of insanity (he killed three members of his family). Mirage Media points out insanity is not an easy defence - less than 1% of those who claim insanity in murder cases escape conviction on these grounds.

Strictly speaking, the census worker had no criminal convictions to disclose, and therefore no grounds for losing his job. The Mental Health Commission regards the case as a breach of the human rights act and is taking up the issue with the Human Rights Commissioner.

"Praising_idleness" of Mirage Media takes Radio Live breakfast host Martin Devlin to task for dismissing the possibility that a "murderer" should be allowed to get a job after 13 years of rehabilitation.

"Devlin often makes the assumption that mental patients are intrinsically morally corrupt. In his eyes, mental health patients are 'bad eggs', and should be stripped of basic human rights. He willingly ignores evidence which illustrates mental patients too, are victims of their illness. That they can be rehabilitated. And they are no more likely than anyone else to commit an act of violence in the first place. Instead, he maintains a bigotry which perpetuates a sceptical untrustworthy view of individuals with mental illness."

Actually there is considerable evidence to show that those who experience serious mental illness are, on average, more likely to be victims of violence than its initiators. A 2005 study found that one forth of individuals with severe mental illness were victims of violent crime in the previous year, eleven times the rate of the general population.

In response to an email from Praising_Idleness Martin Devlin said "Hmmm Somewhere in the middle lies the answer? I actually think we almost agree.. Thanks for your mail son...". In other words Devlin completely failed to engage with the issue. "Somewhere in the middle lies the answer" reminds me of the sort of meaningless nonsense that might come from the keyboard of Peter Dunne. Why is it those who attempt to position themselves in the so called "centre" of politics so often end up sounding intellectually and morally vacuous?

Welcome to the blogsphere Praising_Idleness :)

Categories: Media, Mental Health, Human Rights, Discrimination

TV3 cites Wikipedia

TV3 News tonight had a story looking at legal recognition of "civil unions" in New Zealand and other parts of the world.

When listing some of the other places that have legalised either civil unions or same-sex marriage the reporter made a very interesting citation - "according to internet encyclopaedia Wikipedia".

Is this the first time TV news in NZ have cited Wikipedia as a source? Does anyone know of any other similar televised citations? I have no doubt reporters have used for stories in the past, so its quite nice for this to be acknowledged. Was this "slipped in" during the quiet summer break?

For my own writing I find Wikipedia a valuable source of "research leads" - that is I look at Wikipedia for the overview and then try to confirm the information from another source (I am generally looking for more detail anyway). Come to think of it, this is not too different to how most people would use a paper based encyclopaedia.

John Campbell rocks

Congratulations to John Campbell for comforting a dying motorcyclist after he crashed at an Auckland intersection.

"Campbell jumped out of a passing taxi and held the hand of Piripi Pokaitarawikiriwhi, 29, as he died. The broadcaster was first on the scene of the crash in Grey Lynn a week ago. "

Piripi's family have thanked Campbell for his actions.

While I did not know Piripi, I would say its a fair bet a unionist for Unite would have been driven by compassion and a genuine desire to help others. While it is sad someone with so much to give lost their life so early, there is a nice synchronicity in that in his final moments he gained reassurance genuine compassion exists in this world.

It also appears Piripi may have been an honourary member of the Order of the Chicken. At one picket outside KFC in Balmoral he protested against youth exploitation and low wages dressed in a Chicken suit. This makes me wonder if this was the same famous chicken suit used by the Alliance in the King Country byelection, and even more ironically, send out to meet Jim Anderton in 2002 when the partyhopper refused to debate an Alliance candidate.

Often it is so hard to know what media personalities/politicians are really like in 'real life'. It's reassuring to know John Campbell is a decent compassionate human being.

Update: Fixed spelling of synchronicity, I went looking for a Police discography to check!

Is Maxim Director Bruce Logan also a plagiarist?

Last week the Press sacked one of its regular columnists following a letter to the editor which demonstrated that Alexis Stuart was guilty of plagiarism, directly lifting some of her wording from an article earlier published by her father, Maxim Institute director Bruce Logan.

Paul of About Town has uncovered many more examples of Stuart's 'liberal' use of the cut and paste. While Stuart and Logan endlessly talk about values, neither appear to possess basic journalistic values such as acknowledging your sources. Paul demonstrates several examples where Bruce Logan also appears to be guilty of using the words of others as his own. Like father, like daughter.

An absolute first rate piece of work Paul! :)

Meanwhile, Comrade Tweek has proclaimed Bruce Logan as 'Tweek of the Week' (17th October 2005). Entirely deserved I must say.

Update: After checking the dictionary it does not appear 'plagiarising' is a word, so I changed some of my wording above. But I was interested to note that our word 'plagiarism' derives from the Latin word 'plagiarius', meaning 'kidnapper'. Kind of an ironic association, given Maxim's emphasis on traditional family values and defending the right of parents to wallop their offspring. 'Plagiarius' is all about kids after all!

All axes to the bigotry of Stuarts

Russell Brown quotes an internal Press email informing staff Alexis Stewart's would "no longer be writing her fortnightly column for The Press, because of concern that has been raised about the originality of some of her material in her most recent column".

The editor of the Press, Paul Thompson goes on to explain how a correspondent to the Press noticed that the some of the wording used by Stuart in her last column was identical to an article written by the Maxim Institute's director Bruce Logan. Mr Logan is Alexis Stuart's father.

The gist of the email quoted by Russell also appeared in the Press today, as a response from the editor to the following letter.

Alex Stuarts column (Oct 4) was a revelation. The same old Maxim Institute propaganda masquerading as personal opinion, but more cogent than usual. Both style and content reminded me of Bruce Logan. You know Bruce, the MI's director who wrote a similar article in the Northland Age (Sept 8). In fact, so similar some of it is identical. For example, both wrote: "Diversity is not a value, its a description of reality. One cannot display diversity as a value, let alone a virtue. Neither is community a value - how does an individual display community?...Excellence is an outcome; it is certainly not the possession of human character." Either Alexis wrote Bruce's article (unlikely), Bruce wrote Alexis's (sic) column (possible), or Alexis cribbed from Bruce's article and did not acknowledge her source (possible). Whichever, just how many mouthpieces for the Maxim Institute does the Press need - or is it want?
Lynn Williams

Thank you Lynn Williams, you have done Christchurch Press readers a huge favour.

For several months Alexis Stuart's columns have attracted a great many letters to the editor - many have questioned the need for the Press to print Stuart's nasty, simple minded and ill informed bigotry. Others have felt to compelled to write in to point out where Stuart has made obvious errors of omission, and worst of all, simple errors of fact.

Perhaps the Press continued to publish her columns because they attracted 'controversy'. I am glad they have finally realised not all 'controversy' is good 'controversy', especially when it turns out their columnist is not only a charlatan - she is also plain lazy.

Avoid the sports news for more politics

As a regular viewer of TV3 news I sometimes find myself a little bored when the sports news comes on. I really enjoy the cricket and sometimes the soccer, but I am afraid all the endless analysis of rugby and motor racing and the like bores me.

I find it an irony politicians are often accused of being experts at 'saying nothing', when the All Black coach gets away with saying a lot less, uttering meaningless nonsense such as 'it was a game of two halves' and 'rugby was the winner on the day'.

I don't think its the sports news itself - its the timing. When I am getting my daily fill of televised politics, the sports news sometimes feels like an interruption before the 'real news 'continues on Campbell Live. Noam Chomsky suggests one of the reasons spectator sports are encouraged by the dominant institutions is that it occupies the population, and keeps them from trying to get involved with things that really matter :)

But never fear friends, I found a solution. At 6:30pm on weeknights Southland TV hosts the excellent 'DW-World News'. Its a bit like a German equivalent of BBC World, and yes, it is in English. Lately I have been able to enjoy extended coverage of the German elections and coverage of international news leap years ahead of anything on TV1 or TV3. Each edition includes a special indepth report - allowing much more satisfying coverage of an issue.

Last night Deutsche Welle-TV looked at the two sides of Germany on the 15th anniversary of reunification, following the paths of two industrial towns, one in the west, one in the east. Some Westies complain too much public spending is sent to the east, while a far greater proportion of East Germans are without jobs (18%; double the rate of Western Germany).

This made me wonder two things - do German politicians attempt to use 'the east' as an excuse to cut public spending in the west, and are some of the complaints about high public spending in the east just a veiled form of beneficiary bashing?

DW World News - 6:30 weeknights, Southland TV (Sky Channel 90). Recommended!

Cricket PS: As the sole kiwi representative in the World XI playing Australia tonight, Dan Vettori turned out to be the absolute star with the ball. Vettori took four wickets for 33 runs, including one maiden. Playing in a team alongside Flintoff, Kallis, Akhtar, Muralitharan and Pollock, gaining the standout figures of the innings is no mean feat.
Cricket PS2: Brian Lara just got a duck. Boo! :(

Misleading Headlines in the Herald

Nick Eynon of Three Point Turn does a good fisk on the Herald story headlined 'Greens withering in new poll'.

In fact, the Herald's own polls show the opposite effect. Compared to the last Herald-Digipoll the Greens actually went up from 3.2% to 4% in the poll reported on Sunday.

It is possible a subeditor is to blame here - they often tweak headlines without checking with the journalist to make sure it accurately reflects the story.

Could Watergate be uncovered today #2 - Palast reaches similar conclusions

Following the revelation that Mark Felt was 'Deep Throat', Bob Woodward now tells his side of the story in a fascinating article 'Deepest Secret' reprinted in this yesterdays Press.

It turns out that Woodward knew Felt a some time before he became a journalist, in a chance meeting in 1970 while Woodward was still a lieutenant in the Navy. One evening he was sent to deliver a package to the lower level of the West Wing of the White House. While in a waiting area near the Situation Room he introduced himself to the man sitting next to him. Mark Felt.

The autobiographical aspects of the article are also interesting. Woodward calls his chance meeting with Felt as a "crucial encounter - one the most important in my life - I see that my patter probably verged on the adolescent. Since he wasn't saying much about himself, I turned it into a career counseling session." Somehow, Woodward succeeded in obtaining Felt's phone number.

The picture Woodward paints of himself as a younger man is not entirely flattering - in a time of his life of "considerable anxiety about his future" he expended "a lot of energy trying to find things or people who were interesting". In other words, he sought people he thought had power, such as the volunteer work he undertook with the office of his local Republican congressman.

In my earlier post, I doubted whether modern commercial newspapers would today dedicate the same level of resources to a story like Watergate, especially if that story happened to threaten the powers that be. In his scoop column, Greg Palast reaches similar conclusions, and goes further. He provides an 'investigative reporter body count' - journalists who have found difficulty in their careers once they had broken a major investigative story.
"There's Bob Parry forced out of the Associated Press for the crime of uncovering Ollie North's arms-for-hostages game. And there's Gary Webb, hounded to suicide for documenting the long-known history of the CIA's love-affair with drug runners. The list goes on. Even the prize-laden Seymour Hersh was, he told me, exiled from the New York Times and now has to write from the refuge of a fashion magazine."

Palast says "access" is now a disease epidemic in US journalism, and not even the Washington Post's Bob Woodward is immune (Woodward is now managing editor).
In return for a supposedly "inside" connection to the powers that be, the journalists in fact become conduits for disinformation sewerage. And woe to any journalist who annoys the politicians and loses "access." Career-wise, they're DOA.
...
After the September 11 attack, when we needed an independent press to keep us from hysteria-driven fascism, Woodward was given "access" to the president, writing Bush at War,a fawning, puke-making fairy tale of a take-charge president brilliantly leading the war against Terror.

The issues with "access" go right to the heart of the highly partisan coverage of the continuing war in Iraq, where news organisations overly rely on so called 'embedded journalists' who accompany US soldiers on their missions. The military gain editorial input, discourage 'unhelpful' stories about civilian casualties and encourage journalists to adopt the dictionary of the occupier, dismissing the Iraqi opposition as terrorists, insurgents or militants, often with a 'helpful' suggestion of a possible connection to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

While the Defence Science Board report (Sept 04) contains some valuable analysis of America's relationships with the Muslim world, it says the use of embedded journalists in Iraq has won broad support in government and the media, as it “reduced the potential for Iraqi disinformation (e.g. on civilian casualties) that could have undermined political support in the U.S. and in other countries.‚”. But on the few occasions such journalists did report civilian casualties, their figures are implausibly low, especially when compared to more credible casualty surveys such as the Lancet report.

From a cynical PR perspective (and PR types are notorious for cynicism) it is in the interests of the US to keep things dangerous in Iraq in order to discourage real journalists from discovering what is really going on. It certainly seems to me that news organisations are more dependant on 'embeddeded journalism' now than at the start of the war, especially since the re-invasion of Fallujah.

Could Watergate be uncovered today - some reflections on the media

Today I was interested to hear that Mark Felt, former deputy director of the FBI has confirmed he was 'Deep Throat', the inside source who leaked the secrets of the Watergate scandal and helped bring down President Nixon. Only last week I was watching 'All the Presidents Men' - the 1975 film which tells the story of how two junior Washington Post journalists uncovered Watergate. 'All the Presidents Men' is a top notch drama, and best of all, its all true.

Could journalists uncover a scandal like Watergate today? Would we see a major commercial newspaper dedicating two staff reporters to a story for more than two years? Somehow I doubt it, especially if such an investigation was seen to challenge the traditional powers that be. Advice to 'follow the money' now means something quite different in journalism - just ask Rupert Murdoch.

Would a genuine whistleblower be treated any better today, if they made themselves publicly known at the time? While it does depend on the attitude of individual countries to 'official secrets' and the provision of adequate legislation to protect genuine whistleblowers - the attitude they face is usually pretty hostile. Consider the case of GCHQ worker Katherine Gunn, who revealed that UK intelligence services were bugging the United Nations.

The modern media appear to place a higher value on an instant stream of new facts instead of hard slog investigative reporting and analysis. Similarly, scientists are encouraged to immediately find 'commercial applications' for their work, with lower 'value' attached to 'blue skies research'.

Sadly there appear to be few opportunities to be involved in genuine investigative reporting without doing years of inconsequential human interest stories. This, in a nutshell, is the reason I have not applied for journalism school.

Occasionally there are some notable and worthy exceptions, such as the recent series in the Press uncovering the dodgy Transpower cross border lease, but this investigation was not led by journalists within the newspaper. The key research for this story is due to work carried out by Sue Newberry as part of her role as a senior lecturer in accountancy at Canterbury University.

Thoughts on Tamihere's terrible tirade

John Tamihere is in trouble once again for shooting his mouth off, this time in an interview with Ian Wishart of 'Investigate' magazine. In a sheer act of political hari-kari Tamihere lays into the Prime Minister, calls one cabinet minister a "tosser", and another "smarmy".

Tamihere's excuse that he thought the interview was off the record simply does not have any credibility. Especially when the journalist reports "I put the tape recorder down on the table and away we went". I find it very hard to believe an experienced MP and former cabinet minister would talk to a journalist in this way, unless it was part of a deliberate political strategy.

My guess? While he intended to undermine a few select colleagues, once he got going he just got carried away.

In the interview, Tamihere claims 10 MPs out of the Labour caucus of 51 back him "to the hilt". This gives a pretty good indication of the size of the right wing 'backbone club' within the Labour party. When John Tamihere resigned from cabinet in November, I predicted George Hawkins was likely to lose his place in cabinet in Clark's Christmas reshuffle. Ok, I might have been a little premature, but only by a few months. Apparently Tamihere and other members of the backbone club kicked up a stink when rumors started to fly that Clark was about to drop him. With Tamihere gone, Clark has been more able to act.

Tamihere's outburst appears to be partly motivated by the recently announced party list, suggesting he is rankled by the rankings given to his mates.

"When you look at the (party) list, the union movement have got four new members coming in, end of story... They don't deserve to have that level of influence. I'm going to lead a charge against that, very shortly.."

It may be significant that Tamihere chose to talk to a journalist who he thought might be sympathetic to his views. In January Xavier of About Town wrote a good piece on the conversion of Ian Wishart from a respected investigative journalist to a dogmatic Christian fundamentalist who no longer lets truth get in the way, especially if helps a story preach moral conservatism. Given that an article titled 'Helen's a Dyke' appeared in Wishart's 'Investigate' magazine it is possible that it was Wishart who drew out Tamihere's offensive paranoia about butch lesbians and the "wimmim's" division of the Labour party.

Ironically, JT's upfront moral conservatism places him closer to the views of a centrist, morally conservative Maori Party. Had he not been so quick to bag them so publicly, he could have hinted to Helen he was considering jumping waka, thereby creating a combination that would have done the most damage to Labour. Instead, he now desperately attempts a similar trick by promoting the future of the National party, a stance highly unlikely to help his re-election chances in a Maori electorate.

Come the election, could we see Labour leftists supporting Pita Sharples* in Tamaki Makaurau, in a campaign reminiscent of the successful attempt to oust Richard Prebble from Auckland Central in 1993? Perhaps that comparison is a little harsh, but you get the point. Roger Douglas appointed Hawkins to be his successor after all....

* From what I have heard from Pita he seems decidely less keen on a coalition with National than other Maori party candidates, and from what I can make out seems to be more of a lefty.

The herald poll is a fruitcake

Today the Herald released the final results of its final poll. My phone rang last week, making me one of the 800 people they polled.

To my dismay, the Herald released early results of its poll, based on 302 of 800 respondents, despite this being highly likely to affect the results. This also surprised DPF and Left and Lefter.

Seems to me the Herald is more interested in creating polls to sell newspapers, than accurately reporting public opinion. If it was an attempt to drum up more column inches out of Brash's speech, or even tacitly support his proposals, the attempt appears to have failed, even though they asked some mightily leading questions.

When asked which party I would vote for if an election was held tomorrow I said "Alliance". In any case, as a political geek with an interest in polls, I knew that showing my support for a small party would show up more about the poll than supporting a major party (not that I would in any case).

I was then asked if I knew the subject of Don Brash's latest speech. I immediately clarified whether they were asking me whether I knew the subject of Brash's speech or whether I agreed with his proposals. They were asking me what his speech was about. Considering the questions that followed, I thought this question was more than a little leading.

I was then asked whether I thought welfare was the most important "problem" facing New Zealand, one of the important "problems"...or not an issue. Describing welfare as a "problem" is leading also. I said it was one of the important problems, but for entirely different reason to Brash - I think many benefits are too low. While the question is open to different interpretations I knew this was unlikely to be represented in any reporting of the poll. When I was asked what issue did I think was the most important I replied "Student loans" - surely it would have been better practice to ask this question BEFORE mentioning Brash?

I was then asked about whether I supported some specific ideas in the speech. I was disappointed not to be offered a scale. I replied 'strongly opposed' to these three questions just to make sure! Interestingly, the Herald did not appear to print the final results of these questions today, based on what I could find in the online version, even though the Herald reported the following on the 29th, based on meaningless partial results.

But some specific policy ideas found little favour, particularly his view that adopting out babies should be a more acceptable option than it is now. A majority of 74.5 per cent disagreed, while 15.7 per cent agreed.

The opposition to his policy of stopping women on the DPB getting any extra money if they became pregnant while on the benefit was 44.1 per cent. However, 46.9 per cent agreed with him.

Dr Brash said he would make it harder to get the sickness benefit - a view supported by 56.6 per cent and opposed by 33.6 per cent.

I wonder what the full results said? Given the final results of the poll showed greater support for the left, I would expect the percentages supporting Brash's policies to fall. One wonders what results would have ensured if they had asked relevant, but different questions. "Do you support refusing extra help to families with newborn babies on account of the family gaining its primary income from the DPB?"

I never regarded Brash's advocacy of encouraging adoption to be a serious proposal, as I believe this is far more likely to be a sop to anti-abortion National supporters who regard Brash's socially liberal instincts with suspicion. But they need not worry, as Brash is likely to flip flop further, based on this voting record on the Civil Union Bill.

I would be very keen to get my hands on the full statistical breakdown of this poll, as I would like to have a closer look at the questions and the order of questions. ATM I am relying on memory and a few notes I scribbed while I was on the phone. Does anyone know of a link of the web where I might be able to access this?

Left and Lefter suggests an alternative poll based on google results. I wonder why Labourities Just Left and NZ Political Comments fail to list the Alliance in their reports of the poll, but include the Progressives. The Alliance (0.6%) got three times as much support as the Progs!(0.2%) - grin! - :)

'Are we seeing a popular revolution in Iraq' now online

I have added my article from the June issue of Peace Researcher, 'Are We Seeing a Popular Revolution in Iraq' to the articles section of the site.

At the time I wrote the article it was a given 'truth' in the general media that the insurgents active in Iraq were not Iraqis fighting for the liberation of their country, but foreign terrorists and former Baath party supporters. Most of the media still seems to swallow this line without critique or comment.

Since I wrote the article I have discoverd some very interesting figures courtesy of Empire Notes. On July 7 USA Today reported that:

"Suspected foreign fighters account for less than 2% of the 5,700 captives being held as security threats in Iraq, a strong indication that Iraqis are largely responsible for the stubborn insurgency.

Since last August, coalition forces have detained 17,700 people in Iraq who were considered to be enemy fighters or security risks, and about 400 were foreign nationals, according to figures supplied last week by the U.S. military command handling detention operations in Iraq. Most of those detainees were freed after a review board found they didn't pose significant threats. About 5,700 remain in custody, 90 of them non-Iraqis."

According to an AP article, 22,000 have cycled through US prisions. US military analysts also estimate that around 20,000 are involved, including 'part-timers'. These are probably good indications of the real size of the insurgency.

The claim that the insurgents are former supporters of Saddam is hardly likely to apply to the Shia cities such as Najaf, given that Saddam brutally put down Shia armed rebellions on many occasions throughout the 90s. Al-Sadr's father and uncle, who where both leading Shia religious leaders, were both put to death by Saddam, so Al-Sadr is hardly likely to be a Saddam man either.