Ruffled Feathers???
Dan Eaton in The Press claims John Key and Bill English have “ruffled feathers by using an interview in Right-wing Investigate magazine to attack Prime Minister Helen Clark and the Government.”
I am amazed at stories like this. Where the hell do the media get the idea that an Opposition Leader should not attack the Government, and that somehow doing so is “ruffling feathers” which is language suggesting it is outside the norm.
Where the hell were the stories about Helen Clark ruffling feathers in 1998 and 1999 with her attacks on Jenny Shipley?
And does the story say whose feathers have been ruffled? The only comment recorded is from the PM’s press secretary.
Stories like this really piss me off. When Michael Cullen uses his wit to savage National MPs, the gallery almost wets its pants with joy (I enjoy Cullen’s wit also). When Peters does an over the top attack on say Brash they cover it adoringly. But then when National’s Leader and Deputy say some negative things about Helen Clark in an magazine read by a few thousand people only, somehow this is tut tut and ruffling feathers.
January 18th, 2007 at 10:37 am
Further evidence of the left wing / liberal bias present in the media.
January 18th, 2007 at 10:39 am
You’re dead right David. A magazine that prides itself in delving into the personal lives of MPs, making outrageous claims with little evidence, and generally engaging in attacking people rather than ideas is the ideal forum for National to articulate how it has changed since Don Brash was rolled…
January 18th, 2007 at 10:50 am
Red Devil
I wonder if you are talking about the Herald because thats exactly who you have described but insert Labour and Helen into it instead of National and Don Brash
January 18th, 2007 at 10:57 am
Jeez – and you wonder why the average person finds most of the blogosphere’s debates a complete waste of time.
January 18th, 2007 at 11:04 am
I did find it a bit odd that they gave an exclusive interview to Investigate magazine after recent events surrounding that publication.
Red meat for the base?
January 18th, 2007 at 11:43 am
“… the gallery almost wets its pants with joy (I enjoy Cullen’s wit also). “
Pant-wettingly so?
January 18th, 2007 at 11:46 am
The Eaton article is simply skilled, pro-active media management by the Prime Minister’s media machine. As for media bias, it is simply that there is a lot belief alignment between many journalists and editors and what Clark’s Labour stands for. And Clark knows how to feed this.
National and ACT need to frame up new belief options for those members of the media that are open to an alternative analysis of issues and solutions
January 18th, 2007 at 11:57 am
MPs sometimes give interviews to student newspapers also. Does that mean they endorse everything a student newspaper does? Of course not – that’s insane thinking.
I look forward to a Labour MP who talks to Critic being accussed of supporting drug rape for example!
January 18th, 2007 at 11:58 am
Isn’t it that it was done through Investigate that makes this feather rufflable?
January 18th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
What really amuses me is the Socialist leaning so called media who try and pretend they are neutral when you can see the Red ink oozing out of the print or oozing out the pores of their skin on TV or down the airwaves on radio. Who the hell do they think they are kidding.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
“Who the hell do they think they are kidding.
“
51% of the population, unfortunately.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Key and English obviously neeed the votes of conspiracy theorists, creationists and people who wear tinfoil hats.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Interesting tone in the investigate article. At the same time Key is telling the mainstream media about all the big changes he has in store, he is telling Wishart that nothing has been altered and Brash’s policies remain in place.
If Labour has any political skills left at all they can drive a metaphorical coach and horses through that gap before the next election. Key’s equivocation over the springbok tour may be the shape of things to come.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
“National and ACT need to frame up new belief options for those members of the media that are open to an alternative analysis of issues and solutions”
What arrogance. To hell with the “media”. Who the damn hell are they?? A bunch of lick spittle no talent dumb as shit Klark sycophants, distorting real events by means of their rank leftist opinions and prejudices.
National and ACT need to develop policies and arguments that confront socialism. Rodney’s doing it. National have turned yellow.
National and ACT also need to make more of an effort to confront the leftmedia and their second rate reporting. They could possibly get a few pointers on how to do this from John Howard.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
I think RB should set up his own party to be honest. I think he sincerely believes that every single person, except his good self, is an evil communist.
January 18th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
..and like every other emotionally driven narcissistic leftist, you believe that because you “think” something, no matter how weak hackneyed and uninteresting, its always worth writing it here… You painful boring empty little fuckwit..
January 18th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
David, all your mock anger and bluster aside you have to admit that it is a bit strange for Key and English to do there first major interview for Investigate magazine, why not North & South, the Listener or even Metro?
January 18th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
The last time I checked, the magazines ask the MPs for interviews, not the other way around.
Investigate got an interview I presume because they asked for once. If Metro asks, I have no doubt they get one also.
And no mock anger here. I am seriously pissed off at the article. It has no journalistic merit and uses cheap tricks such as referring to ruffled feathers when they don’t quote anyone but the PM’s press secretary.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Just to set the record straight…Investigate asked for the interviews and they were agreed to.
Secondly, Investigate’s sales as measured by A C Nielsen’s barcode scanning software in all supermarkets nationwide have us roughly neck and neck with Time magazine, around half the sales of North and South, and outselling Metro in all markets outside Auckland.
Additionally the most recent Roy Morgan readership survey shows Investigate has FOUR times the readership of Unlimited, which features the illustrious Russell Brown as a columnist, and the new Nielsen national readership figures out next month will show Investigate has hit another record high for the third year running.
For any given issue, based on the Nielsen figures, somewhere between 55,000 to 90,000 people are reading it.
Hope this dispels any misconceptions.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
So Ian could you share for the benefit of those here who claim loudly (often at a pitch only dogs can hear) that virtually everything you print is defamation exactly how many times members of the government have taken legal action against your for defamation.
To the best of my knowledge DBP aka Panty Slut Boy has not only not denied the story about him but has made of point of ensuring that no one even says that he has denied it.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
The magazine has never been threatened with a defamation action by anyone, least of all a politician.
We have in the past been injuncted to prevent publication of a true story, which forced us to put an issue on sale with 10 pages ripped out of it, after we gave police the courtesy of offering comment on some new leads on a murder we’d discovered.
During the High Court injunction hearing, which the Crown won, they then sidled up to us and begged our assistance with the case..which by then had cost us somewhere in the region of $20,000.
But no defamation, ever.
January 18th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
“So Ian could you share for the benefit of those here who claim loudly (often at a pitch only dogs can hear) that virtually everything you print is defamation”
Personally (and no offence meant to Mr W) I would argue most of it is codswallop.
Did you read last months bit about “Modern Day Miracles that baffled medical science”?
January 18th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
According to this investigate sells 7000 copies an issue.
http://www.abc.org.nz/audit/index.html?magAcceptedNav=1&type=%25&publisher=%25&frequency=%25&sort=t.name&search=GO
The Listener sells 68,000, Womans Day 145,000 and and Time 28,000. So I don’t see Ian how you can claim to be “neck and neck’ with them.
January 18th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Hedgehog, me old mate, read what I said: in supermarkets nationwide, which are the main outlet for all NZ magazines…we are roughly neck and neck with Time and around half North and South…
That’s because both those magazines, and the Listener incidentally as well, are built on huge subscription bases whereas Investigate is primarily retail sales driven – we haven’t put much energy into ploughing through mailing lists to attract subscribers with one of those “You have been selected…” letters.
ABC circulation figures are interesting…you’ll find many titles articially boost their circulation by giving away thousands and thousands of free copies every issue – M2 magazine is one of these – but as one of the ad agencies remarked before Christmas most of the freebies tend to go in the bin unread and have little impact on actual readership.
Readership is higher than circulation for obvious reasons…
January 18th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Still leaves open the question why give your first big NZ interview to a publication that has, as we all agree, has a lowish circulation.
I still think that it is the political composition of the readership of your esteemed organ that was the most important factor. Letting the base know that whatever was said on TV1 the policies would remain the same.
January 18th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Watch this year as Panty Slut Boy will be very quiet and well mannered towards the opposition.
Who’s next ?
January 18th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
“Personally (and no offence meant to Mr W) I would argue most of it is codswallop.”
Learn to express yourself you uneducated little Klark suckhole. You are claiming, not arguing. You have merely expressed an opinion, and you have not offered any substantiation for it.
The reason you’re putting so much energy into trying to discredit Mr. Wishart’s magazine is because its one of the few publications in NZ that isn’t under the thumb of the Klark regime. Can’t have any real free speech can we Sonic. Only that approved by Klark and her socialist acolytes. Anyone disagreeing with current socialist doctrine is either crazy or a social misfit right? Goddamn creepy little totalitarian dirtbag..
January 18th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
RB
Don’t ever change mate, we love you just the way you are.
xxx
S
January 18th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
Seeing as DPF failed to provide a link to the story, here it is:
http://stuff.co.nz/3930642a6160.html
This interview was odd considering the bile that Wishart is willing to throw around and considering how National was supposedly distancing itself from that sort of shit.
Seems the new leadership is just as hollow as the old. A question for Wishart, is this payback for services rendered last year? One has to wonder given the impeccable timing of some of your “exposes”.
Equally pathetic are his attempts to impress us with selected readership stats to show how popular his writing is. Well, I bet Penthouse sells about as much and is on a similar level to Investigate. Doesn’t mean it is particularly relevant to our political discourse.
and how about this for a quote:
“English yesterday defended the decision to talk to the magazine, which last year targeted Labour MPs with allegations of corruption, child abuse and sexual misconduct, saying they would talk to anyone who wanted to get their views across.”
Similar vein to Brash’s “accept support from anyone…”. Well, well, well. Seems the lesson from the last few months is to carry on regardless.
January 18th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
“we love you just the way you are”
More delusion, so submerged in collectivist doctrine Sonic you’re apparently incapable of thinking in individual terms.. (its “I”, not “we”)…and you have the nerve to call everyone who disagrees with socialism crazy!!!
Utter? Funny name that. “Utter Bigot” in full is it?
January 18th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
I meant we. I’m one of the founder members of the Redbaiter fab club. We meet every week in Auckland and pass around our favourite Baiter postings!
We especially like your spelling of Klark, classy stuff. We would invite you, however we have decided that we are not worthy to meet our idol.
So we will continue to worship you from afar.
x
S
January 18th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Sonic….Go easy on RB{russell brown} mate like all the other leftwing journos Dan Eaton may be vieing for the vacancy in Klark’s Press Office.
January 18th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
When two trolls go to war (with apologies to Frankie Goes to Hollywood)
January 18th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
If I plucked a feather from the Klark thing….. would a snakes egg drop out it’s tail end ?
January 18th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
One day reality to going to catch up with Chronic the Hedgedog.
It’s going to look like he’s been hit by train.
January 18th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Red Baiter if you want to get in the gutter and use filth and profanity ,vernacular and disgusting abuse,go for it child ,I am south auckland born and raised,I can wipe your chin for ya ,and your clock.I ask you not to ,politely ,just as I was asked by DPF some time ago,and despite serious provocation from you wing nuts ,I have been real good,{by my standards anyway.Now pull yer fucken head in before I tear you a new arsehole ,rip yer head off and stick it up it.
January 18th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
They had better do better than ruffle a few feathers. I would like them to place a nuclear bomb into the Labour Party and utterly destroy it politically for at least 30 years.
January 18th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
David,
I’m surprised you don’t think critism of Helen Clark and Labour ruffles feathers, it does ruffle feathers, theirs. They can’t stand it, even from the opposition.
January 18th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
Remember when Don Brash kept calling Labour corrupt, Helen Clark responded by calling him “corrosive and cancerous”.
January 18th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Have the precious corrupt pricks actually paid any money back yet? Does Treasury have the interest clock ticking on them. Of course that includes Winston.
January 18th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Once a newspaperman, always a whore.
January 18th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
David
I wonder if you noticed on TV 1 news tonight the story about Sir Ed going back to the ice for what will most likely be the last time.
Sadly he is being accompanied by Helen Klarke and a few of the sisters.
The ironic thing for me was that she as a self is traveling down there on an AMERICAN MILITARY jet.
Can you imagine how the left wing press would report that here if it was Brash or Key traveling down in an American jet if they were the PM, the headlines would scream “Key/Brash cuddle up to American military, NZ’s anti Nuke status at risk from the Nats”
Personally I think Wishart is a religious nutter but he is vital in as much as he bring balance to our media, I am heartily sick of the sycophantic left wing wankers who call themselves journalists, the are nothing more than cheerleaders for the Labour party.
January 18th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
Yeah, all of National’s problems are to do with the bias of the media. The fact that they don’t have much to say, or keep changing their minds has nothing to do with it. National’s campaign in 2005 was all focused around how they said stuff rather than what they said and the voters saw through it completely. The ‘ruffle feathers’ story is a non-event. The bigger story is that Key and English seem to be giving different messages to different audiences. You may not like what Clark and Cullen have to say, but at least they don’t change their story depending on who they talk to.
January 18th, 2007 at 11:38 pm
RD – different focus when talking to different audiences is part of politics. You tailor your speeches to what they are likely to be interested in. Helen has been doing it for years, although she has been known to say directly contradictory things to different audiences.
As for the how v’s what story about the last election, I would say the media focused on the how over the what. A classic example being the Orewa speech, which when read was pretty common sense, but in the media was apparantly “playing the race card” or “dog whistle politics.” There was a lot of substance in that and other speeches that they were quite happy to ignore. I am sure the Labour party often feel the same – substance is not staple fare in our newspapers.
The subtle (or unsubtle) use of language to denigrate one side of politics has a substantial effect on those people who get most of their news from the media – i.e. the majority of the population. The same as the classic “terrorist” v’s “freedom fighter” distinction colours people’s view of what is going on in a particular conflict.
January 19th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
“Now pull yer fucken head in before I tear you a new arsehole ,rip yer head off and stick it up it.”
Yawn.. another socialist dickwad anxious to confirm my thesis that the saddest thing about leftists is always their irredeemable stupidity..
January 19th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
For those of you have not seen Redbaiter in action before, please be informed that his behaviour in this thread is absolutely typical.
1. He spouts extremist notions in a provocative, arrogant manner. If that was all he did, that would be just fine with me, as he tranparently acts as the least trustworthy spokesperson for the views he espouses.
2. In fact he is such a nutter that many of us throught for a long time that Redbaiter was a troll, or at the least a rather good parody. Unfortunately it seems this is not so.
3. More unfortunately his noxious, offensive language invariably winds someone up, who replies in kind.
4. At this point RB invariably whines about it. How extraordinary that the man objects to being treated exactly the same way he treats others.
5. As a result every thread he participate in, very rapidly heads for the sewer. This has happened over and over.
There is only one way to deal with this: IGNORE HIM. Do not feed the troll.
January 19th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
“There is only one way to deal with this: IGNORE HIM. Do not feed the troll.”
errr.. ever heard this maxim..??
“Practice what you preach”
Seven paragraphs and around 150 words recommending another poster be ignored? Hahahahah.. What is it with dumbfuck irrational leftists that they just can’t seem to help making absolute bloody fools of themselves???
January 19th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
For those of you have not seen Redbaiter in action before, please be informed that his behaviour in this thread is absolutely typical.
1. He spouts extremist notions in a provocative, arrogant manner. If that was all he did, that would be just fine with me, as he tranparently acts as the least trustworthy spokesperson for the views he espouses.
2. In fact he is such a nutter that many of us throught for a long time that Redbaiter was a troll, or at the least a rather good parody. Unfortunately it seems this is not so.
3. More unfortunately his noxious, offensive language invariably winds someone up, who replies in kind.
4. At this point RB invariably whines about it. How extraordinary that the man objects to being treated exactly the same way he treats others.
5. As a result every thread he participate in, very rapidly heads for the sewer. This has happened over and over.
There is only one way to deal with this: IGNORE HIM. Do not feed the troll.
April 7th, 2007 at 1:08 am
This has already been sent to the feedback blog but as you are “more in charge” I send it to you as well.
http://spartan.cis.temple.edu/synergy/_knobas/0000031e.htm