FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS NOT A RIGHT MERELY TO MAKE NOISE

This post follows an exchange of comment on facebook between a science based techie, a journalist and me. The techie starts, “Problem with journalism investigating science is that they erroneously believe in balance. That gives nutjobs like Monckton a voice”. After some discussion about presenting a balanced view, the journalist commented, “When thousands of people are interested in what the alleged quack has to say, that constitutes public interest. Right or wrong. Money? Wish it didn't matter but it does. But in this instance, public interest and money aren't necessarily intrinsic. Part of journalism/media's role is to inform people. If they are asking questions then they deserve some answers. It's not so very complicated or dark - just a mirror of society”.

I wondered to myself if any law or ethics are currently taught to our young ladies and gentlemen of the fourth estate. If journalists want to present a “balanced” view then they need to let the public compare apples with apples. Scientists by definition carry out their work according to established methodologies. Any results are then subject to the rigor of peer review. Balance in science journalism would be putting one scientist up against another. Put the loop quantum gravity proponent up against the string theorist. If journalists merely want to generate revenue by presenting outrageous opinion, then interview the creationist alongside the lady who thinks it’s turtles all the way down. Don’t mix them up. The first two are scientists, the second two are not.

The problem with poor standards of journalism in relation to science is the harm misinformation perpetrates. Quackery and pseudo science affect the public’s understanding of, inter alia, vaccination, cancer treatments and earth and climate science. Thoughtless dissemination of minority non-science based views can and does cost lives. By all means let lunatics have their say on their own page or on a soap box in Hyde Park. But, the constraints of quality journalism outweigh the public’s desire for ready access to odd-ball opinion through mainstream media, and, the right of mainstream media to generate revenue without constraint. Freedom of speech is not and never has been undelimited in any society, and, it is certainly not the right merely to make noise. Like all rights it comes with responsibilities. In this case, responsible journalism.

WISH WE HAD SAID THAT

We cant claim to watch breakfast TV. Occasionally we will take a peek at the news at the top of the hour on TV1 but Oliver Driver was always too smarmy for us. 

Paul Henry's irreverence fits us well. 

So we did not even blink when TV3 Sunrise programme got the chop today. TV3 is in the business to make a profit - not to aid our early morning digestion. 

And then we flick over to the Eye to the Long Run Blog  by economist and irreverent cynic Brent Wheeler. 

He says what we wanted to only better. 

Now “Sunrise” – apparently a commercial disaster – falls. But we have a Canterbury University media academic commentator saying…. well with the “owner” being Iron bridge (a private equity group) as owners, we cannot expect a decent owners interest in news…. these guys are only after profits.

So what do you want in a business????? Profit is utterly neutral. It has no interest in left, right or centre…. it ought to be the ultimate owner.

Bad case of be careful what you wish for.

The rest of his pithy blog is here 

RNZ CORPORATE MEMBER OF THE ABU

Funny how bullshit can catch up with you .

We have expressed disgust at the fact that RNZ workers have been sponsored to attend a Radio talkfest in Iran hosted by the Iranian propaganda machine the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) and event they are promoting and and jointly funding with the Asian Pacific Broadcasting Union ( ABU )



Now when we ran the story RNZ's mouthpiece John Barr was quick to distance the broadcaster from the event.

Two Radio New Zealand staff members have been invited to take part in an international radio festival and conference in Iran, but the invitation came not from the IRIB organisers but the Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union, the umbrella agency for public broadcasting in our region. Our staff are not representing Radio New Zealand, but are attending on behalf of ABU, and if that organisation had not issued the invitation, they would not be attending.

John Barr
Communications Manager
Radio New Zealand

Now a simple search of the ABU site shows that RNZ is an Associate member.



But its getting even more interesting... the IRIB is a not only a member - its on the ruling council of the ABU.

So this raises a couple of interesting issues. Firstly it is disingenuous of Barr to try and distance RNZ from the event. Secondly if RNZ has not officially sanctioned the trip then have the RNZ staffers asked official permission as they are required to do under the terms of the Editorial Policy 2005 that states that all staff must get permission of the CE for any junkets or non RNZ engagements?

After all we all watched with interest when the state broadcaster came down on Sean Plunket for writing a column in Metro , which apparently is outside the the terms of the 2005 policy.

So

• we have RNZ employees being sponsored to speak at an international conference that is being sponsored and hosted by the corrupt Iranian State Broadcaster.

• We have RNZ's mouthpeice saying its staff are not representing RNZ at the talk fest.

• We have RNZ being a member of the organisation co-hosting and funding the event

• We dont know if the staffers have official permission of the CE to take part in a non - RNZ event which will be in a highly charged political environment.

And just in case you are wondering why we think its an affront to every New Zealander that the RNZ staffers appear at a conference that is essentially hosted ( and we bet largely funded ) by the Iranian propaganda machine the IRIB ...

Then here is the reason why.



And this man who heads the organisation IRIB that is effectively sponsoring the RNZ junket lied about it as he called the video a fabrication.

Everyone who cares about democracy, in the name of Neda Agha Soltan, should write to RNZ at rnz@radionz.co.nz and express their deep concern that this has been allowed to happen.

MAU TIPPING THE VELVET

We have been watching the unfolding story of Alison Mau's personal life with half a jaded eye. All ho hum really. So she apparently likes girls.

However, things took an interesting and what we think is a sinister twist today and no - its not the pics of Alison on the front page of Womens Day. that have us worried.

It her use of Breakfast TV and Close Up to fuel her own PR machine.

Celebrities are happy to court the media when they want " their side of the story" published. as Mau did here.

But its not okay when the media write stories they dont want people to see ?

First we get a uppity and outraged Mau giving the mag a broadside about "stalking her." on Breakfast TV .

Then she uses the state broadcaster to take a shot at the boys and girls who make a living out of the gossip of the rich and famous on Close Up.

This is the " top story" on close up tonight - its all about Ali.

Seven minutes of utterly indulgent pap looking at the Seriously Important issue of media divas whining about the apparent injustices metted out to them. Lets just forget about all the stories they have covered about other peoples lives.



There should be a case for Mau to be charged for the teletime she has used to fuel her own PR machine. Bad form and a seriously misuse, no actually abuse of public resources.

wonder what her kids thought of the Santa Kini...








My - my hasn't she come a long way.

Can we have some real news please?

NBR UPDATE

One of our mates at NBR has updated us on the staffing issues. Apparently the next edition will see some interesitng new faces and some old ones disappear.

Two print columnists and two occasional columnists have gone.

We look foreward to see who are new this Friday.

NBR - FURTHER SHIFT TO ONLINE?

Well, after a lovely weekend in the sunny city of sails catching up on some mates and the associated gossip, we understand that about 7 of the columnists and other contributors for the NBR print edition were given their marching orders post Xmas.

Now apart from occasionally getting the print version to read Matthew Hootons fine columns, we are happy to pay for the racier and pithier online version.


We also think it must be very easy to monitor the popularity of the online NBR journalists and contributors.

There really is no need for lengthy performance contracts and KPI's these days. Simply track the clicks to a journalist's stories and the amount of comment it provokes and you have a clear idea who the public wants to read.

So does this mean that Mr Colman sees the end of the line for the print versions of one of the most iconic business press brands and the dawn of the new age for the new media?

We think so... And we will happily pay for the online subscription as it keeps getting better and better.

Note - We have no financial connection to the NBR other than as a subscriber.

THERES A HOLE IN MY BUCKET ....Dear Henry

Every now and then you come across something that someone has written that requires a very wide audience. This essay by Brent Wheeler should be required reading for everyone who has a stake in our economy.

Dairy Farmers are about to be asked to make some decisions about the future of Fonterra.

The farmers have always been scared about outside investment worrying that it would mean they would lose control.

Brent has done a very neat dissection of the issue. It's a brave article. Journalists should add Wheeler to their list of "go to" people for comment as the round of farmers meetings are rolled out across the country.

Take this pithy take on the robustness of the model. He contends that it only exists by state coercion through legislation.

No one else needs or gets that hand up. If this model is so robust why is force needed? This is anti smacking stuff for farmers. A large number of nursery rhymes about collective behaviour, weak selling and such like have circulated for years while the evidence says, unsurprisingly, that these people are price takers not price setters and no amount of collusion can stop competition for long - ask OPEC.

He has concerns about the fact that Fonterra in its current form is exposed on many fronts and is by and large run via a political process.

And he scoffs at the fact that farmers are being forced to accept high risk and paying top dollar for an equity stake.

Third, "their" company is asking them to invest at a cost of equity about which little is known other than the fact that it's limited liquidity, its rules around ownership and the dependence of the model on state imposed monopoly all combine to drive risk higher than standard levels. Paying over the top for equity in a company you have a compulsory sales arrangement with in which the company sets the price is, at the very least, bizarre.

He thinks that the whole set up is Schizoid

Thus capital comes and goes with redemption and growth fighting one another in a process which never sees a stable capital structure. The value of permanent capital was recognised by the Dutch and the English in the middle of the 17th century.

Just what price is "enough" for the rights to be a part of all this? We don't know but may be about to find out. What is for sure is that it's pointless looking for objective answers from farmer politicians who have everything to lose and nothing to gain.

And why should we be asking questions?

Well that's simple says Wheeler.

It would be useful if a few more critics turned some serious spotlight on the political roadshows to come - after all, that monopoly is granted by taxpayers - not farmers, not by suppliers to Fonterra, not by Fonterra management and certainly not by farmer politicians. Taxpayers too are owed some accountability.

Brent has mapped out some of the key areas for debate. We will return to Eye2theLongRun

as the issue progresses.

COME BACK NICK

Phil Kitchin remains the undisputed king of investigative journalism in this country but it appears there is a former NZ journalist who has made an international name for himself for unrelenting truth seeking.

The Herald reports this morning that one of their former reporters, Nick Perry, has won the coveted George Polk award for sports reporting - uncovering a dark and sinister side to American Pro football.

The George Polk Awards have in the past been scooped up by such literary luminaries as Norman Mailer and Christine Amanpour.

He and his co writer Ken Armstrong were also finalists for the Medill Medil of Courage Journalism Award

And they also won the Micheal Kelly Award for Journalism.

Story can be found at the end of this story here

IN DEFENCE OF DOING WHATWE LIKE

Well it seems that Cactus Kate needs to research the net before she uses cute terms. Burnt Sperm apparently refers to something rather ugly.

While she has shocked her mother we apparently have pissed off some of the visitors to Roarprawn with our gossip posts. Tough. Its our blog - its called suspense and we enjoy watching people work it out or the journos who write for a living go off and do a decent story.

So Gomango - you are right its Hone and its a story the journos should chase - if he can bring together some pan party Maori initiatives then he should be applauded and he deserves more coverage for it than in our lowly little blog. we work in another industries these days so dont have the resources to devote full time to nailing the Scampi scandal. Maybe Rodney will pick it up where he left it off last year. We know that there is still plenty of material around that will keep the stench rising from the scampi scandal and we have devoted a few hours to nutting out a novel that has been triggered by the story.
So wemake no apologies for writing gossip posts from time to time. They are written to make you think and keep you in suspense and if your emotions are being ignited by them then they are successful. Remember its our blog and it you dont like it dont read it. But its amazing how many people email with the answers.
And we are not insiders. Not even close. Just mates of a lot of people who are.

So sorry boyo but the gossipy bits will surface on Roarprawn from time to time as is our want.

WELLINGTONS MOST IMPORTANT POLITICAL PARTY

Is on tonite - the Press Gallery party is the stuff of legend. An event to be seen at but not after 10 when you are pissed with your undies round your ankles in close proximity to the speakers chair. Well so one of the stories go. . Scuttlebutt is the currency of the evening. Anyway BB has been invited as have some of the other prawns. We may blog.

JOURNALIST ON THE MOVE

Oskar Alley the Dominions Chief reporter has a new job - as Assistant Editor at the Dom Post.
We remember when he and Jonathan Milne, dep editor at the Herald on Sunday - were pups, yappy go getting pups nonetheless and its good to see they are continuing on as newshounds.
Whats even better is that they are both good people.

NATIONAL HIRES TOP GUNS

Its good to see the Nats hire some good people to bed down new Ministers as reported in Stuff. We are also particularly pleased to see Paula Oliver join the PM's team. She is one of the most solid journos we have ever worked with and has integrity in spades.

THE PERFECT STORM OR THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY

One of the things we have learnt over the last few months is the power of the " new media" the blogs, websites, U Tube Myspace etc.

We were always avid almost obsessive readers of news and listeners to the broadcast media. Now we only get the weekend editions and only listen to RNZ morning report- its definitely lefty but it does set agendas. These days we read the online editions of most major papers, cherry picking stories that interest us. We now read overseas papers on line like The Australian. Today it has a very interesting piece that follows on from the previous post. It covers a report that looks at what is being billed as the "perfect storm" for traditional media. We reckon it is smack on.

This from the Australian

JOURNALISTS have been warned they cannot be spectators if they are to survive the new world of media fragmentation and digitalisation -- an environment dubbed a "perfect storm".

"A report, Life in the Clickstream: The Future of Journalism, released today by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, warns that the Western media industry faces "two years of carnage", squeezed by the global economic meltdown and the unravelling of traditional economic models.

The report reveals that more than 12,000 journalists worldwide have lost their jobs so far this year.

Thats a lot of journos and we have seen some serious downsizing here in NZ as well.

Media Alliance federal secretary Christopher Warren says journalism has traditionally thrived on the emergence of disruptive technologies even as economic models have changed.

"Like all crises, the challenges journalism faces are rewriting everything we thought we knew about the news media and causing us to question the basis on which the industry has survived and flourished," Warren says.

The shifts experienced in the media are "exciting and disquieting", and journalists are using technology to find new and progressive ways to keep the public informed, he says. It's "disquieting because the mainstream industry is in such turmoil".

And the way that journalists are doing their jobs has changed significantly. We here this from our mainstream journo friends all the time. They have to write stories fit for publishing throughout the day whereas once they were chasing one deadline.

The report reveals the introduction of new technology and shrinking workforces has resulted in more than 70 per cent of journalists reporting increased workloads, with 43 per cent saying they have "increased a lot".

More than 55 per cent received no compensation for increased work and 57 per cent say they received no training for their changing roles and were expected to pick it up as they go along.

We think that the following in right on the money

The report also looks at what might evolve if mainstream news organisations collapse, citing research from the City University of New York that postulates an organic news organisation could evolve.

Based on bloggers, video shooters and photographers, it would be augmented by community managers, program developers artists and run by just a handful of editors, all on an annual budget of $2.1 million.

The report concludes that all stakeholders need to be active in shaping the future, providing adequate training and ending work intensification.

SuperBlog anyone?

SHONKY SURVEY GOOD EXAMPLE OF PR DARK ARTS

The NZ Herald has followed Stuff and been sucked in by Fonterras competitors. The San Lu milk scandal is as bad as it gets but this story which appeared in Stuff yesterday , raised the ire of Roarprawn. Two clicks to the Sinlogie website showed that they do a hell of a lot of work for a very big dairy exporter in USA. ( Probably Dairy America)

This is why PR gets a bad name - this is a classic example of the dark arts, and at a time when New Zealand and Fonterra need informed media coverage we get this pap. Here's what the Herald had this morning.

More than half of Chinese consumers have less trust in New Zealand dairy produce because of the poisonous-milk powder crisis engulfing Fonterra, says a survey by Sinogie Consulting.

This is the worrying bit.

Fonterra's 43 per cent-owned Chinese dairy company San Lu is one of 22 firms caught up in the scandal over the industrial chemical melamine being added to watered-down milk to boost apparent protein levels. The contamination has made tens of thousands of infants ill and killed at least four.

Sinogie, a Hong Kong company, commissioned a survey of 300 shoppers in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou between September 22 and 25 and found 51.2 per cent had less trust in New Zealand dairy produce.

Wow that's a big survey.!

Sinogie chief executive Bruce McLaughlin was surprised the figure was not higher.

"What it suggests to me is that people are still seeing this as a San Lu problem."

Suggests???! A hint perhaps - and a nice time for a another brand to infuse the market.

There was not much damage to Fonterra at present but that could change in the long term.

"I would say that Fonterra has to keep its head very low in China at the moment. I think if they start shouting too loudly about the Chinese authorities being to blame, then the Chinese authorities will react and it won't be pretty."

More than half the respondents (56.2 per cent) said they had been buying more foreign-branded dairy produce since the scandal broke, while 79.8 per cent were worried that all brands of infant formula, domestic and foreign, could be contaminated.

New Zealand came second behind the European Union when people were asked to rank food from markets for trustworthiness.

"I think New Zealand itself enjoys such a strong brand that while Fonterra is obviously probably your biggest food company, I think people will still have a lot of faith in other New Zealand brands."

Mr McLaughlin said he had seen many companies run into difficulty in China.

"I think that people are blinded by this idea of mysterious China still. Because of that they don't think that they should go in with the same level of caution [as if] investing in Australia or America or somewhere like that."

A Fonterra spokesman said the company approached its investment in San Lu very cautiously.

"Fonterra has been doing business in China for over 20 years so the company was well aware of not just the business but also the wider political and cultural complexities of operating as a foreign company in China."

Fonterra undertook very deliberate and careful due diligence before making the decision to invest, he said.

Its strategy was to progressively upgrade operations and it had also begun a plan to introduce better-quality milk to the supply chain by investing in its first farm in China.

"However, in moving to steadily improve San Lu's quality-control systems, it was impractical to be in a position to protect 100 per cent against all risks to San Lu's supply chain such as a deliberate criminal contamination

Journalists need to be very careful of running stories like this - this has been picked up everywhere as people want to know more about this issue. But instead they are being given at worse a false picture nicely planted by a competitor of New Zealand dairy interests .

The inside story on media manipulation by Colin Espiner

This from Colin Espiner at the Press

Espiner is one of the best analysts in the Gallery...

Here's is an insight about how a bunch of journos got manipulated..

Shame on them and there's a bottle of wine from the prawn to Espiner for this stirling piece of work .....

The media had its own version of America’s Meltdown Monday yesterday. Stories came thick and fast.
First we learned the privileges committee report was coming out late at night - not today, as we had previously thought. Then news emerged late in the day that the US had agreed to join the P4 group of countries, which includes New Zealand, in talks on a free trade deal. Finally, TV One broadcast - when it could finally get it to air - news that John Key had been less than honest about his share dealings in 2003.
What an amazing coincidence that three big stories would all break on the same day. Wasn’t it?
Um well no, not really. Because it turns out that Labour fed the story about Key’s share trades to TVNZ late on Sunday night for use on Monday, knowing that the privileges committee report was about to blast Winston Peters to smithereens. And Trade Minister Phil Goff leaked details of the FTA announcement to selected media - TVNZ, TV3 and Radio New Zealand - five days ago, on the condition they kept it quiet until yesterday.

Now that is pure manipulation - I hope they all hang there heads in shame.....!

Gloat, you read this at Roar prawn first....

Sad but true,

and isnt it ironic that this is all about RNZ worrying about competition when it doesnt compete commercially with any media ??????

Plunket will find a good home - I've heard his phones been going since the story broke on Roarprawn.





Plunket looks for new job after RNZ row
4:00AM Tuesday Sep 23, 2008By John Drinnan
Sean Plunket. Photo / NZ Listener
Radio New Zealand's Morning Report host Sean Plunket says he is "moving on and looking for a new job" after 11 years with state radio.
Radio New Zealand insiders said that difficult relations with RNZ boss Peter Cavanagh had come to a head when the CEO banned him from hosting tonight's pre-election debate about the internet on TVNZ 7 Freeview.
Political commentators typically swap around media for special shows in the run-up to elections.
But an insider said that the row went beyond that and on to plans for Plunket.
"They want him to be the new Geoff," said the source.
Plunket's co-host Geoff Robinson is expected to move on soon.
Plunket - who is arguably New Zealand's toughest broadcasting interviewer and famous for taking politicians to task - said that after 11 years he was looking for a role that had a new spark. He had not resigned yet.
"I'm putting my portfolio together and I'll be taking my time," he said.
TVNZ 7, a digital information channel available on Freeview, confirmed that Plunket pulled out of hosting tonight's internet debate suddenly at the weekend.

"But that is a matter between him and Radio New Zealand," said TVNZ 7 management. Blogger and journalist Damian Christie was assigned to the programme at short notice. Plunket would not discuss the demand that he pull out of tonight's internet debate.
A Radio New Zealand source said Mr Cavanagh was insistent Plunket could not have a role outside RNZ.
Plunket said there was nothing in his employment contract that limited his hosting special events for other media.
The TVNZ 7 audience is tiny and a high-profile presenter like Plunket would attract viewers. But Mr Cavanagh is said to be wary about boosting TVNZ 7 and has stopped other freelancers from working for the new Freeview channel.
It is understood he fears that as TVNZ 7's audience grows it will undermine RNZ's role promoting National Radio.