Press Freedom Debate
May 3rd, 2010 at 1:00 pm by David FarrarTo mark Press Freedom Day, there is a debate tonight (7 pm) at the Backbencher on the moot “That politicians pay the price of a free press”.
The cost is $25, which includes finger food. Proceeds go to the Asia-Pacific Solidarity and Safety Fund which basically provides welfare to the families of journalists killed doing their job.
The debaters are:
Affirmative
- Annette King
- Darren Hughes
- Simon Bridges
Negative
- Tom Scott
- Jane Clifton
- Barry Soper
They are all very amusing speakers, so should be a fun evening.
You can pay at the door, but if you do plan to go, it is useful to e-mail Brent Edwards so they can cater for the right numbers.
Related posts:
- EPMU Press Freedom Debate
- The great debate
- Press Gallery fundraiser for Christchurch Earthquake
- Politics segment now on Thursdays
May 3rd, 2010 at 1:09 pm
Sounds fun.
I trust there will be laughter at Bridges if he tries the quip that it is rare for him to be on the same side as Hughes and King on anything?
Vote:May 3rd, 2010 at 1:27 pm
what time? upstairs?
Vote:May 3rd, 2010 at 1:29 pm
I agree. Hughes is indeed amusing. However I suspect that the reasons why may come as a bit of a surprise to him.
Vote:May 3rd, 2010 at 2:12 pm
“Politicians pay the price of a free press”
Some more than others- witness the extreme scrutiny applied to Sarah Palin, and the spineless sycophantic scurry to cover up for Obama.
Vote:May 3rd, 2010 at 2:20 pm
Fourleftwingers one rightwing and one indeterminate. Maybe they will sing the red flag at the end of it.
Vote:May 3rd, 2010 at 2:25 pm
backster
Apart from Clifton the most right wing person in that lot is probably Annette King.
Vote:May 3rd, 2010 at 2:35 pm
What’s the point re supposed wingedness? “That politicians pay the price of a free press” should surely be neutral of which wing flaps the most.
Vote:May 4th, 2010 at 10:22 am
Totally agree with Redbaiter on this one. The press have got freedom all right — but I would think it was freedom to report the facts and provide a range of opinion. Instead we are subjected to an endless barrage of left-wing opinion masquerading as objective reporting.
I was reading the Sunday edition of the New Zealand Herald over the last few days. Everything is from the left-wing. Articles denigrating Sarah Palin (up to 6!), an article talking about the battle Obama faces with implacable Republican opposition (oh those mean Republicans), extensive coverage on the mining issue basically siding with the environmentalist left, it goes on and on and on. And that’s not to mention Matt McCartan decrying the lack of “class consciousness” among the working class. Or the articles running down the Pope and desperately trying to link him with negligence regarding child abuse allegations.
And the New Zealand Herald is positively balanced in comparison with the Sunday Star Times where most of the columnists are from the far left.
Oh for media balance. What we would do for reporters that report the facts without left-wing spin.
Basically when we read a newspaper or watch the news it will be from the left. More government, the right wing is bad, all religions are basically the same apart from Christianity which is bad, government spending is a cure for most of our social problems etc etc. We need a much wider range of media opinion.
I think the journalists would do well to get on their knees and thank God for the freedom that they enjoy. Then they should try and report much more honestly than they do.
Vote: