Most biased article for a while
December 18th, 2010 at 8:54 am by David FarrarIf you want a shocking example of a hideously biased article, try this one by Chris Barton in the NZ herald on VSM.
It does nothing but attack supporters of VSM, without even giving them a word in response, and uses propoganda exmaples from as many student associations as possible.
It paints the increase in the student services levy at Auckland university to $542 as due to VSM, and doesn’t even mention that on other campuses it has risen to $600 (plus a compulsory student association fee).
It lumps together National, ACT and the Business Roundtable together and ascribes motives to them – without again talking to a single person from them.
It fauls to mention the WSU vote to return to compulsion was scheduled by former UK Labour MP Bryan Gould to occur with no notice during study week, and hence a tiny number of students over-turned the results of three previous votes with much higher turnouts.
It quotes a legal opinion from former Labour PM Geoffrey Palmer that compulsory membership doesn’t breahc the international human right not to associate. It doesn’t mention the legal opinion submitted from a leading QC disagreeing with Palmer’s opinion.
The article would be fine as an op ed from NZUSA or the such – I have no problem with the media running anti-VSM views. But when it appears as a new story by an in house journalist, I’m amazed such a biased story appears.
Odddly the journalist is one I really rate – I just think this particular story is shiockingly bad.
Related posts:
- Critic’s drug date rape article
- Desperate spin from NZUSA
- Voluntary Law Society Membership
- Why universities are against VSM
December 18th, 2010 at 9:05 am
Its a shocker alright. coincidentally Jo Nova encounters similar problems in Australia.
“A journalist who confuses journalism with propaganda”
Vote:http://joannenova.com.au/
December 18th, 2010 at 9:16 am
What surprises me is the intellectual gymnastics/dishonesty often seen in this space, from people who would, I assume, consider themselves thinkers.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 9:19 am
http://www.presscouncil.org.nz/complain.php
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 9:38 am
and doesn’t even mention that on other campuses it has risen to $600 (plus a compulsory student association fee).
That’s because if it did so, it would be inaccurate.
Your blog post is inaccurate as the one university that charges around $600 in student services levies does so as like Auckland, they don’t charge a membership fee for student association membership. You imply that this university does so.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 9:56 am
I just laugh at the accusation of bias by a blogger who wears his bias on his fingertips!.
[DPF: DOn't be a moron. People do not expect bloggers to be neutral - we are into opinion. Peopel don't even expect a columniist to be neutral - that is clealry opinion. But this purported to be a news story]
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 9:59 am
At least his fingertips aren’t ‘fond of a good grope now and then’ like yours eh Handson.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:00 am
Herman, down boy! Get that green out of your eyes!
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:05 am
The difference Luc is that David has a blog that he openly admits looks at NZ politics from a centre right perspective. The media of course are supposed to be neutral and unbiased but in NZ mostly tilt to the left with Barton’s piece being egregiously to the extreme end of that tendency. There is no equivalence.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:07 am
Hey KIA, I saw a poll that shows 60% of US Fox News watchers either think Obama wasn’t born in the US or that he is really a Muslim.
[DPF: 10 demerits for off topic]
I know you are an avid watcher of Fox, so what’s your view?
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:09 am
Hey Luc explain how forcing people is freedom.
Fucktard.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:11 am
The very first word is spin. “Universal or voluntary membership? ”
In theory, you could have both – a good voluntary association should attract all students to it’s membership.
I also love the “Its mandate slashed, ” – so if you force membership by force of law, that gives a mandate? You’re joking right?
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:13 am
Luc, while that may seem deluded I’m betting you think that the media coverage of that election was fair.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:23 am
Ah, I’ve just read the Barton article. Now I can see why Farrar and his acolytes here hate it. The conclusions follow the reasons, as they should. Not a non-sequitur in sight. That’s a bit hard for people who argue from pure prejudice masquerading as ideology!
Hey Murray, I was a compulsory member of the AUSA and though it great value for money. Even better than almost free accommodation on the ski slopes during the snow season were the off-season working bees. Herman would spew.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:25 am
Oh my God! My first demerits! (That I know of). I must be staring to get the hang of this!
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:28 am
“Hey Murray, I was a compulsory member of the AUSA and though it great value for money. Even better than almost free accommodation on the ski slopes during the snow season were the off-season working bees. Herman would spew.”
Read: I love the fact non-skiers were forced to subsidise my activities.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:29 am
Farrar maybe you just do not like hearing the truth when it contradicts your biases
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:29 am
he conclusions follow the reasons, as they should.
He picks selected facts and ignores others. No one is saying that his conclusions don’t follow, just that his presentation of reality is in la-la land.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:30 am
Luc, if you loved AUSA, then you should absolutely be a member. Other people don’t love it. Should you be allowed to force them to be a member? If your argument is that AUSA is great, then surely going to VSM wouldn’t make any difference – everyone will still want to join. Do you not see the fallacy in your position?
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:30 am
Luc
I believe Obama was born in Hawaii – the birth notices in two Honolulu newspapers were ample evidence of that. I have a theory as to why he wont release the long form vault BC (the source of all the Birther’s paranoia) and it is because his mother’s 2nd husband Soetero adopted Obama when he about 3 and when you are legally adopted, the State of Hawaii destroys the original birth certificate and replaces it with one with the adopted name. We all know he changed his given name from Barry to Barak in high school. Obama calculated (rightly as it turned out as the media were not at all curious to dig deeper) that the release of the short form certificate (reflecting his first name change and his reversion to his father’s Kenyan surname) was sufficient for all but the nutty right. He also calculated that releasing the original vault BC with the name Barry Soetero WOULD be politically damaging in what was for a while a close election (McCain Palin led in almost all polls post the GOP convention and didnt surrender their lead until after the late Sep market meltdown). He’s happy to pay the close to $1m in legal fees to ward off all the extreme right wing challenges because he knows its a non issue for most mainstream Republicans (like me) and Independents.
I believe Obama is a Christian – nominal in the sense that he is unusual (compared to his Oval Office predecesors) in that he does not worship with a certain Christian faith or congregation at this point in his life. Having being forced to renounce his one time black liberation pastor Rev Jeremiah Wright, he’s been a bit lost for a church but he is not a Muslim. That said he has strong sympathies for Islam and Muslim sensibilities and that leads him to make speeches that his more extreme opponents think show his closet Islamic beliefs.
I dont know what you’d define as avid. I watch maybe 3 hours of Fox a month – snippets of O’Reilley and some of Hannity – none of Beck and a news clips on key political topics from their hard news team from their website.
Sorry to disappoint you.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:31 am
Farrar maybe you just do not like hearing the truth when it contradicts your biases
I can’t speak for Farrar, but my bias it towards truth. What’s yours?
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:31 am
Seems to be two different versions:
Vote:http://www.nzherald.co.nz/chris-barton/news/article.cfm?a_id=36&objectid=10695053
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10694942
December 18th, 2010 at 10:32 am
Sorry David but Luc was trolling and I wanted to put him out of his misery.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:34 am
I sure Did, KiwiGreg!
Hey DPF, doesn’t Murrray get demerits for egregious and totally unnecessary use of insulting and foul language?
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:36 am
I’m here, KIA, but I’m not allowed to debate you.
You have friends in high places
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:38 am
By the way, Scrubone, David is all for compulsory whatever when it suits him. The “c” word has crossed his lips more than once on “The Panel”!
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:38 am
Luc
I answered your question you unless David has deleted it.
“totally unnecessary use of insulting langage”
“questioning his obviously tenuous grasp on reality”
Pot I’d like to introduce you to kettle – his name is black!
Run away and rabbit on about Palestine in the General Debate why don’t you.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:47 am
The way my luck’s running today, KIA, that would more demerits for off-topic!
Yes, it’s happened before, although not to me.
Well, it’s been a great response to a post or two after a week off while I’ve been rostered on for a long one or two or four, so thanks guys for making me feel so welcome.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 10:48 am
I hated my student association when I was at Massey.
They wasted money all the time and the vote to select them was always less than 10% of the student population.
I think most students saw people standing for the SA as wankers so far up themselves you knew they would have a good carrer as a future Greenie or Labour pol.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 11:06 am
This article really is shocking. No attempt to look at both sides.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 11:08 am
@Graeme Edgeler
Is bias a grounds for complaint?
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 11:08 am
Luc said : “thanks guys for making me feel so welcome”
Vote:Stop trying to play the victim card, you sound like Chris Carter. You came here trolling and have gotten a completely appropriate response. If you don’t like it try the same approach at the standard or red alert. Instead of demerits I’m sure you would have been banned.
December 18th, 2010 at 11:45 am
Poor article. Quotes derived from press releases for God’s sake. I know student union presidents would love to talk about VSM if someone bothered to call them. Secondly, the AUSA does not “run” Shadows.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 11:49 am
It’s a moot point anyway, the law is a done deal. What will be will be, and when Labour get back in they’ll roll it back on some pathetic excuse like they did last time (“It’s confusing” was their last choice).
Though having said that, I’d rather have an informed public if given the choice, rather than a public “informed” by this sort of nonsense.
And to give them a little credit, at least they didn’t repeat the nonsense about “98% of submissions”.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 1:32 pm
Having read that article I’m struggling to understand what makes this guy worthy of the title “journalist”. Opinion-monger would be a better term.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Puke Hansen in “can’t tell the difference between a journalist and a commentator.”
Next we’ll find out he can’t tell the difference between the Taliban and the French Resistance. Oh wait.
Vote:December 18th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
I wonder if the question may require viewing from a slightly different angle, and the asking of the question ‘What does tthe student actually GET for their compulsory SU fee’s?
I’m currently a student at ‘Waikato and yes, I DO pay the compulsory Union Fee (currently $65.00), and yes, as an individual who dislikes ‘Union’ for anything, it really irked to have to pay!! However, there was, I discovered, certain ‘advantages’, which have never actually been spelt out publicly. Thes include such things exclusive use of a specific designated area for ‘mature students’ (whatever ‘mature’ may mean – and yes, I’m older than 25 -’nuff said), coffee, tea, milk etc on demand, provision of microwaves and computer terminals etc, etc, etc. There is also a ‘student’ magazine of somewhat doubtful quality.
Now whether all of the above is in fact WORTH the $65 can be debated at length (albeit pointlessly, as we all have our own particular viewpoints both for and against), but at around $4 a week over a 17 week semester, I can’t help but feel that it’s actually rather good value for money – all services provided for less than the cost of a Cappuccino!
I’m STILL unimpressed with the fact that the ‘fee is compulsory, yet would I have got the same facilities if I voluntarily signed up? The answer, unfortunately, is ‘No’, since I would have said ‘I’m a poor student and couldn’t afford it’ – then wandered-off to purchase a ($4-$5.00) coffee – without even seeing the contradiction inherent with such an action (or the money I was losing as a result).
Value for money? Despite my (continuing) anti-compulsory-fee viewpoint, it actually DOES make a lot of sense; something I would never have previously admitted-to.
As it is from a ‘practicing’ student, I thought you might find this of interest – perhaps, as usual, practicality and pragmatism has once-more trumped theory?
It’s an interesting conundrum . . .
Vote:December 19th, 2010 at 1:44 am
First point, if membership was voluntary Unions would have to do a better job at selling their existence to potential members.
Now, you think the membership is worthwhile because you get more value out of it than you think it cost you. That doesnt prove CSM is better than VSM. The only case you make for compulsion is that you didnt know what a “good deal” it was, and that left to your own devices you would have behaved irrationally. So compulsion is necessary to save people from themselves? Is compulsion necessary to stop people making the “wrong” choice for themselves?
You like that those benefits exceeded the cost to you. There are two main ways those excesses are created. One, economies of scale, and two, under-use by other people. There are only so many gains you can make from economies of scale. Under-use costs those members. When payment is voluntary, that loss from under-use is unfortunate but its the under-users fault. They paid, they didnt use it. Oh well. Under a compulsory system, on the other hand, the loss takes on a different complexion. Somebody took their money, and the member failed to get it back.
Vote:December 19th, 2010 at 6:22 am
“If you want a shocking example of a hideously biased article, try this”
I usually just log in here if that is my fancy. Seriously David you take a side why can’t anyone else?
Vote:December 19th, 2010 at 12:35 pm
RTFM sonic, blogs are supposed to be filled with opinion, new articles should be filled with news.
Now fuck off back to your bridge troll boy.
Vote:December 19th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
“Hey Murray, I was a compulsory member of the AUSA and though it great value for money. Even better than almost free accommodation on the ski slopes during the snow season were the off-season working bees. Herman would spew.”
Luc, I’m not sure what era you attended the UoA, but I attended with CSM, voted in the referendum on VSM, and attended during VSM- both as an undergraduate and post-graduate. I was also an ex officio member of the AUSA executive during this period (because I was on another student body executive, and of the vice-chancellor-led student council/post-graduate council which).
AUSA was profoundly mismanaged prior to the introduction of VSM, aswell as some of their assets- including bFM (to a certain degree). Exec. members of the CSM era brought VSM on themselves, in no small part due to some of their obscene abuse of members’ money, in particular- and their self-serving discounts of which your skiing example is but one of many.
Around this time AUSA was becoming less relevant anyway- people previously relied on AUSA and it’s associated bodies at the faculties of engineering, law and medicine, to provide them access to free/cheap/underage alcohol- the reduction in the drinking age devastated attendance at AUSA activities and participation in decision-making processes by a much greater amount than the introduction of VSM.
And yet students at the UoA are not worse off- the food is much better, and none of the cafe’s have been shut down for public reasons since the year VSM was introduced (I remember the medschool cafe and the big main-campus cafe being shut-down for poor hygeine at various times). bFM is perhaps going through a financially difficult time at the moment, and although many lament the reduction in actual student participation which VSM effectively resulted in, the station thrived in the later half of the naughties, and is still better off to this day.
And, not surprisingly, the executive’s management of AUSA has continued to be poor- friends vote in friends, executive meetings and emails are dominated by infighting, factions and often just outright bitchiness. Almost a decade later, and AUSA has not yet facilitated redirecting much of the money the university puts aside specifically for students and student-spaces, and has allowed the university’s executive to engulf that previous role- The UoA has thrived as a result of VSM, and student spaces have improved drastically, albeit at the cost of less student involvement.
Vote:December 21st, 2010 at 1:58 pm
Chris Barton should contact his editors urgently. Someone from NZUSA has written a stridently anti-voluntary article and submitted it in his name.
Vote: