Will TVNZ be prosecuted for One News tonight?
October 5th, 2010 at 9:02 pm by David FarrarI thought TVNZ’s One News tonight was just as blatant a breach of a name suppression order, as anything Cameron Slater did.
It was calculated and deliberate to identify one of those given name suppression.
Now I have to be honest and part of me was wildly cheering on TVNZ for their defiance of the court order.
But the other part of me wonders if the Police and Crown Law will treat TVNZ to the same standard as it did a blogger?
October 5th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
Agreed
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
When I saw TV1 I roared with laughter because I leapt to a certain conclusion.
But it may not be apparent to all.
Here is the link to the TVNZ article. What do Kiwiblog readers think?
http://tvnz.co.nz/local-elections-2010/court-appearances-over-alleged-voting-scam-3818752/video
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
could this be a ‘clear sign’ that our news reporters have grown some balls?
If you pause at 56 seconds, the smile on the presenters face speaks volumes!
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:17 pm
Clearly blatant and deliberate abuse of the suppression order.
I doubt if it’s balls, it’s more like not wanting to be out manouvered by blogs, trying to remain relevant. The thing is, with such piddly penalties (should they be prosecuted and convicted) there is very little disincentive once the floodgate has been opened.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
So who will be Singing in the rain ?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
In my opinion..
The judge should be hung drawn and quartered for dereiction of duty..
We the people at an election should have the information..
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:28 pm
Sorry about the spelling
)
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
TV3 news showed the election advertising board with the guy with the turban as well.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
Brian – that might be over-stepping the mark on someone elses blog. But it was kinda obvious who it was from the start.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:42 pm
“TV3 news showed the election advertising board with the guy with the turban as well.”
The foundation is shaking. The edifice is crumbling.
It’s a bit like The Hobbit.
i.e. on the very day Simon launches his initiative, along comes a questionable case.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
Now if Paul Henry had revealed the names we would be in a world sized cluster fuck…..;-)
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
That fact that there is any prosecutions regarding this example of electoral fraud is astonishing. That after their names and pictures were already splashed around they were given name suppression is hysterical but not surprising, it’s the way the process works. Ridiculous in it’s execution in today’s environment but clearly well intended in it’s drafting whenever that was.
So given the, unprecedented in recent times, pair have been charged without months and months of deny, delay, denigrate where do we go from here? Is this going to end like a typical ACT storyline where the bad guys get thrown to the courts and we actually move on or is Labour yet to play it’s trump card of ‘Others were doing it too and the law is confusing’.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
@George Patton, nice one. And DPF’s question is very valid – will they be prosecuted i.e. not warned, etc. but cops, charges, courts, guilty, sentence.
I suspect not.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:13 pm
The difference between tvnz & Slater is that Slater engaged in a deliberate campaign to bait the justice system for his own egoic self gratification.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Yes, but I think voters in a postal election that closes on Saturday (well before any orders will be lifted) have every right to know who has been arrested and may well be in prison instead of representing said voters. Democracy must certainly be more important than the rule of law? One must come before the other. $800k nicked at the last election with retrospective validating legislation makes this hard to stomach. Which Mayoral candidate was “third from the left” in that electioneering material?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:21 pm
I’d expect the police to be very careful with this investigation, but if the names were publicised now, it affected the election and then they were found to be not guilty it would be as big a travesty. All candidates have every right to be treated fairly.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:21 pm
No. The rule of law must be followed.
But, voting should be suspended, and the election postponed. The fact that this has a high cost is irrelevant. The cost is far less than the worth of our democracy.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
I forgot to ask the lickspittles at TVNZ are these sods New Zealanders?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
Gibson, so you support a segregated justice system where law breaches are treated differently based on who is doing what. I thought the law applied equally to all?
Obviously not in your warped world. A breach of name suppression is a breach of name suppression, surely it matters not who does it. TVNZ just as willingly breached name suppression tonight.
Somehow I doubt the Solicitor-General or his uppity pals on the bench will stir themselves over this proving once again that they weer just trying to prove a point with my prosecution, and at the same time make themselves look like complete arses for trying vainly to suppress the internet.
If the US Department of Defense can’t keep its secrets off Wikileaks how the hell does Simon Power and the other pretentious tossers in the Law Commission propose to prevent breaches of name suppression?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Labour is hard work.
That can’t possibly be in breach of any suppression order.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:24 pm
“I doubt if it’s balls, it’s more like not wanting to be out manouvered by blogs, trying to remain relevant.” – Pete, bloggers need to stop taking themselves so seriously. They have a tiny audience in comparison to the legitimate media.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:27 pm
I expect Little to say the Labour man was guilty of nothing more than helping his
Vote:mayoral candidateconstituents.October 5th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Radman, I think that ten-trip ticket has been fully clipped for Labour. And there really is no free coffee.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:33 pm
Yes, but they are rattling the big media cages, who are getting skittery about upstarts upstaging them. MSM enjoyed their positions of power over information. Increasingly they are becoming less relevant except as an entertainment medium. They hate not being the news breakers.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:33 pm
Now I could be wrong, but on the evidence presented on TVNZ news tonight, would I be correct in assuming Paul Henry would not think this gentleman with name suppression looks like a New Zealander?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:34 pm
Do TVNZ get name suppression if they get charged?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:38 pm
“Pete, bloggers need to stop taking themselves so seriously. They have a tiny audience in comparison to the legitimate media.”
So do the MSM corporates do risk-management-strategy-containment sessions re: bloggers, or is that just rumour?
If it’s just rumour, why don’t they?
Don’t they know what’s going on?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
@Sonny – citizens throughout history have refused to obey unreasonable laws. Most liberty was won partly partly by doing so.
Agree with you re postponing the election.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
RowiWoR
So how long before we hear the cultural differences angle from Labor like we got about Taito Field?
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Asymmetric mediafare. Dinosaurs versus whales and other things a bit more agile.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Pete – very few NZ bloggers are news breakers – they cut paste and comment. The only real exception to this is Gotcha! because it is run by a full time editor with good sources. Kiwiblog for example is a forum for discussing news published in the legitimate media, a good forum but all the content is paid for by the professional media.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Whaleoil – you appear to have something against Simon Power and your suppression campaign seems to be part of that. It also appears to have been a strategy to promote your blog – nothing wrong with that but please don’t feign outrage.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:46 pm
You do realise youtube is essentially made up of bloggers John? that giant is going to wreck some houses when it starts moving.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:47 pm
Postponing seems necessary to me. I would say a fresh election needs to be considered, we need to scope the scale and prevalence of this kind of abuse. Pretend it never happened and move on is the Labour way, but National are running the ship at the moment so it’s time to get some popcorn and keep my fingers crossed it’s not a fizzer. The public interest is always served by protection of the democratic process from tampering.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:50 pm
burt, any election that has been compromised must be re-run.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
Don’t forget Guyon Espiner told the world about David Garrett’s identity theft case while that was still suppressed – still waiting for the prosecution on that one as well.
The one tonight sems very blatant and just repeated on the late news – so obviously no simple slip up.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
It’s not just bloggers, it’s the immediacy of the internet. Newspapers have been forced to have rolling news rather than once a day, as one does it the others have to follow or be left behind.
The great TV six o’clock focus has severely diminished in importance. If I can be bothered watching it goes something like “did I know that this morning or yesterday?” or “what a load of crap” or “waste of time filler”.
Blogs mostly don’t lead the news, but they are a focal point for those looking for news and sharing it, so the best and quickest sources soon become known.
Newspapers were supreme, then had to learn second fiddle to TV who came to promote personal self importance over news quality, and they are now having to just share the spoils – with newspapers online who have the immediacy they never had, and with the roaming moaning goading masses. Blogs are part of the new framework, along with other social sites.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
I’m not feigning outrage, nr am I outraged. You’ll know when I do.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
WhaleOil
I think it fair you take credit for the review, took one for the team. Good on you for that.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 11:07 pm
There can be no doubt that this election should be delayed and re-cast totally.
The Labour lickspittles are cheating yet again. There are far too many serious breaches in the protocol.
Our very System of Democracy is being undermined by folk who don’t look typically Kiwi.
Corruption, Graft and Foul Play by Thugs is what is typical on the Sub Continent.
If they want to do all of that and get away with it, they need to return from whence they came.
Labour Party NZ needs to be thoroughly investigated. It is systemically corrupt.
This Name Suppression Malarky has been engineered by Judges who are generally appointed on favourable terms, by their Socialist running dog mates.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
Don’t forget Guyon Espiner told the world about David Garrett’s identity theft case while that was still suppressed – still waiting for the prosecution on that one as well.
That’s a non-starter. By the time the news was reported, Garret had already made a statement to the house confirming the details and guess what? Suppression orders do not apply to parliamentary proceedings. If Guyon had added further details to his reporting that wasn’t in the statement then he would have been in breach but the case would have been so trivial that it simply wasn’t worth anybody’s time trying to put the case together.
Vote:October 5th, 2010 at 11:20 pm
“Blogs are part of the new framework, along with other social sites.”
Blogs reflect and sometimes inform opinion Pete but do they shape it and offer equivalent judgement, balance, research: all that stuff that a real MSM.org can, if it chooses to?
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 1:18 am
John GIbson, Reid. Just because much of what is published on blogs, or even on a particular blog like kiwiblog, is review or commentary of news elsewhere, or even pure entertainment dross, doesn’t mean that news isn’t broken on blogs. If the rule was that everything on a site had to be real news, I’d say most of the MSM would be in trouble – endless breathless speculation about what drugs Paris Hilton is doing aren’t exactly hard hitting analysis.
Kiwiblog does occasionally break news, Gotcha more often, and other blogs often too. In collection, I’d hazard a guess that more news is broken on blogs than not. I’d go further to say that blogs like Kiwiblog act as an aggregator, pulling this information from other places, and replacing to some extent a newspaper. Remember that newspapers often don’t do their own research, they buy it in from NZPA and elsewhere, that’s no different than DPF linking to another blog site. Well, actually, different in that they often add nothing, where DPF adds some commentary or perspective, and then we get comments by others added that give context or call out any blatant inaccuracies. Whereas a badly written MSM article just stands as much as a well written one does – each person forms their own opinion with no extra info.
Sorry, I think that MSM will largely die, to be replaced by a few really well respected sources (The Economist, NYT, maybe one newspaper in NZ, etc), plus a bunch of citizen generated media that is filtered and aggregated by a few trusted sources in the vein of kiwiblog. And that will be a good thing – why pay newspaper to repeat the news badly when people will do it well for free?
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 6:01 am
Anyone who believes that this is an isolated event, or that it’s something new is naive beyond comprehension. There are questions that need to be asked and answers that need to be given.
The first question i would like to ask is:
if you need a job as a requirement for migrating to this country, how many people during the Labour party era of the last decade put “liquor store manager” or similar and were granted a migrant visa, to end up in South Auckland?
There needs to be a Royal Commission of enquiry with wide ranging powers. The first person that should be called is Taito Filip Field.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 am
Well – I reckon Paul Henry might have re-calibrated the whole Auckland election and galvanised Labour’s voters – http://monkeyswithtypewriter.blogspot.com/2010/10/henry-gifts-auckland-to-labour-or.html at least that is what I think Mallard is hoping with his dogwhistling tactics . ..
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 7:07 am
That’s not right.
Espiner obviously knew about the charge and the suppression and put Garrett in a position where he had little choice but to out himself, although the damage had already been inflicted by Espiner. If Whale can be convicted for using tricks to out suppressed names than Espiner is as culpable, in my view.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 7:16 am
Socialist Labour fiddling the books and going back to its old tactics. Once a crook, always a crook.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 7:27 am
Pete, I tend to agree with you regarding the breach of Garrett’s name suppresion. Clearly there is one rule for some that doens’t seem to apply to others. The Police and Crown Law have their own rules, it seems, and will decide who to prosecute. Remember that a couple of years ago Michael Laws publicly announced that Nick Smith and Lianne Dalziel were intimately tied up with the Peter Ellis case. Laws identified 3 of the child complainants from that case…police later claimed that as 6 months had passed since Laws had made his comments, they were unable to prosecute him.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 7:37 am
The difference is that TVNZ/TV3 etc don’t make a big issue out of being martyrs pushing boundaries – they don’t paint targets on their t shirts saying “Look at what I’m doing”, they just do it. I suspect they have decided that contesting suppressions through the right channels is long winded and mostly unsuccessful, so they just circumvent the intentions of the law. They are driven by the arrogance that they “deserve” or are owed any news that may improve their ratings and their illusions of grandeur. Similar motives to Whale, just as blatant but more cunning.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 7:55 am
Espiner obviously knew about the charge and the suppression and put Garrett in a position where he had little choice but to out himself, although the damage had already been inflicted by Espiner.
Simply uncovering details of a suppressed charge is not a breach of the suppression orders. The key element is publication.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 7:57 am
Michael Laws publicly announced that Nick Smith and Lianne Dalziel were intimately tied up with the Peter Ellis case
Lianne Dalziel’s connection is not covered by a suppression order. She is married to the ex-husband of one of the four women that were charged in the case.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:00 am
Whale published clues and puzzles that easily led to identification of a suppressed name and crime.
TVNZ broadcast an interview that easily led to the uncovering of a suppression and crime.
What’s the difference?
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:04 am
Pete George,
You tell me. I’m just pointing out to those clowns who think that the police were hypocritical in not prosecuting Guyon Espiner that they are wrong.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:16 am
I see labour have decalred theat they have been cleared of any involvment and the spinless tools at the dompost have simply reported this as fact allowing their paper to be Andrew Littles personal press release.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:23 am
burt – the Law Commission began their review of name suppression in 2008. A very long time before Slater began his ‘campaign’.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:24 am
@ Murray – quite so; Little was distancing Labour from this mess 10 days ago. But nothing can change the fact that Mr X is a Labour Party candidate, endorsed on Labour Party signage.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:29 am
I don’t know if there were grounds to prosecute Espiner, I’m not a lawyer, TVNZ have their own legal advice. I’m just looking at the similarities between the intentions of Whale and the intentions of Espiner/TVNZ and I see little difference. Both sought to circumvent suppression orders and both succeeded. Maybe it’s ethics more than legalistics but it looks the same to me. And guess who dropped in my perception of journalistic respect? Espiner was one of the few that had kept a semblance of serious journalistic intent in TVNZ.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:31 am
Pete, there was no interview in the clip I saw. It was a girlette cubreporter standing in front of a billboard which showed the name and picture of a gentleman in a turban. By a pure coincidence this gentleman comes from a country which is nominally a democracy but where corruption, graft and influence peddling extend right through their political, business and social system. Now obviously the girlette”s report and the picture are not connected in any way at all… that goes without saying of course… but anyway, it wasn’t an interview.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:37 am
Now, if Paul Henry hadn’t been suspended ?????????????
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:46 am
LOL – excellent.
I hope the guy they’re targetting really is the guilty party.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:49 am
Kudos to Whale Oil for bringing the attention of our lawmakers to this issue of name suppression order.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 8:57 am
@RRM, no, thats not really the point at all.
The important thing is that the police have amassed enough evidence of electoral fraud with which to CHARGE and ARREST him. The police aren’t ‘targetting’ anybody… they have been INVESTIGATING a case of electoral fraud, and we the public have every moral and commonsense right to fucking well KNOW who the alleged criminal is.
This person will get his opportunity for a legal representation and a fair trial; this is how the question of guilt or otherwise will be settled, but in any event the public has a right to and open and transparent rather than a closed and secretive justice system.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:02 am
This person will get his opportunity for a legal representation and a fair trial; this is how the question of guilt or otherwise will be settled, but in the meantime let’s post up allegations about him as fact anyway eh?
The standard of proof in this country is Court, not mob opinion.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:05 am
And the defendant has a right to due process, not the knuckle drasgging mod rule that seems to be the new national passtime Dave.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:06 am
Those of us who know who the person in question is, and I would say that is all of us, should question the fact that interim name suppression is in place. Legally we can’t stop it. As soon as the lawyer lodged an appeal over name suppression to the high court the judge in this case had his or her hands tied.
However, given who the accused is, the nature of the crime and the current electoral activities, name suppression in this instance arguably works against public interest. The public has a right to know, now more than ever.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:10 am
PULL THE SUPERCITY ELECTION NOW!
LABOUR AND BROWN HAVE TRIED TO BUY IT.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:20 am
no give it to National then they can be blamed for screwing up Auckland
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 9:58 am
“Kudos to Whale Oil for bringing the attention of our lawmakers to this issue of name suppression order.” – Falufulu Fisi Google the background FF, name suppression was being looked at by the lawmakers when Slater’s primary focus was tracking down the location of servers used by The Standard. He deserves zero credit for any changes to the law.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 10:13 am
It seems to me that the whole Auckland Super City Election is compromised and corrupted and too much expense and re-organisation has occurred to allow a corrupt result to stand. The Police have done a fine job and have given the enquiry the amount of resource usually reserved only for complex homicide cases (40 detectives), yet even so the fraud seems so widespread and with so many tentacles that the full extent will never be known. A new polling place election with scrutineers seems the only answer imperfect as it might be.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
John Gibson
All very personal for you…. were you an ‘interesting name’ on his blog ?
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
backster
Be careful saying it is widespread. The Labour muppets will play their normal defense of “others were doing it too” and we all know what happens when Labour people get caught doing something illegal when they were not the only ones and the law was confusing – we move on and forget that democracy was deliberately compromised in the best interest of Labour.
Vote:October 6th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Of course it’s entirely possible that the new found testicular fortitude displayed by TVNZ is due in no small part to the fact that they realise that if they go along with this order, their entire audience would switch off and go online to Whale’s blog to find out the truth.
So rather than trying to parse his motives, and using our assumptions about them to condemn him (yes, John Gibson, I’m looking at you) we should be thanking Whale for bringing about a small but much-needed change to TVNZ’s standards.
Now… who’s going to get them to do some basic research before they let some numpty tell us how Australia votes (and get it completely wrong) or ask the PM where the Governor General hails from?
Vote: