Dom Post says keep media free of govt control

October 18th, 2011 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Should the mainstream media and its self-regulatory body become part of a government? Hell, no. Even the most democratic of administrations should be kept well away from independent media outlets.

Sadly for the Dom Post, the same day Labour released its policy which indicates their interest in doing exactly that, and merging the Press Council and the BSA, so that all media come under Government control.

Labour have spent three years blaming the media for their unpopularity. They just love the idea of being able to appoint people who can fine editors for not being “fair” to them.

Tags: Dominion Post, editorials, Labour

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 18th, 2011 at 11:00 am and is filed under NZ Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

12 Responses to “Dom Post says keep media free of govt control”

Graeme Edgeler (2,938) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 11:14 am
Umm … it’s National which is investigating combining the Broadcasting Standards Authority, Press Council and Advertising Standards Authority.

[DPF: No they are not. They said that they thought there might be scope as part of the cost saving review for the agencies to consider sharing backend functions, but they did not raise the spectre of actually merging the actual authorities into one combined regulator]
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Fletch (4,316) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 11:15 am
Hell, most of the media is Left Wing, liberal, and progressive anyway – especially in the US.
Just watch how they will fight for Obama – a failed president – in the coming year.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Nick R (363) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 11:34 am
What Graeme said. National floated this months ago. Do try to keep up.

[DPF: No they didn't. Try to be accurate]
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Lance (1,946) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 11:42 am
@Fletch
Of all those on offer from after WW2, which president wasn’t a failed president?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Graeme Edgeler (2,938) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
They said that they thought there might be scope as part of the cost saving review for the agencies to consider sharing backend functions, but they did raise the spectre of actually merging the actual authorities into one combined regulator…

Well, that doesn’t contradict what I said, but I note even a merging of back office could involve somewhat of a government takeover. The ASA and Press Council are private organisations … including them in a review of the state sector says something about government intentions. Particularly when you don’t even tell them in advance!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
thedavincimode (4,707) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
This is the beginning of what Klerkula floated. These cunts cannot be trusted one tiny little bit.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
nasska (6,413) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 1:51 pm
Again from DPF’s ‘Labour’s ICT policy’ post yesterday….

…”Labour is proposing to levy a special Internet tax on Internet users to fund copyright holders, plus it is effectively proposing that the Government gain the power to regulate the non-broadcast media, allowing it to fine and censor newspapers and maybe even bloggers.”……..

After suffering the distaste of being on the receiving end of media criticism for the past three years it would seem that Labour are determined to get a stranglehold on the NZ media. They have TV & radio in their pockets & the newspaper’s reporters efforts are reminiscent of ‘Santa’s Little Helpers.’

It only leaves the blogosphere & Labour’s proposals will leave that an edentate pussycat too. Be very afraid!
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Nick R (363) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
DPF – How exactly is “merging the actual authorities into one combined regulator” (National policy, your words) different to “merging the Press Council and BSA” (Labour policy, your words)?

You clearly believe there is a fundamental point of difference between these policies and that one constitutes an attack on the freedom of the media while the other does not. I would like to know what that difference is.

[DPF: There was a "not" missing in my response to Graeme, try it now]
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Nick R (363) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Ok, that makes a bit more sense. But I still think the only difference is that National is proposing a gradual erosion of self-regulation for advertising and the print media (does anyone seriously believe you can nationalise back office functions of private organisations like the Press Council and still pretend they are independent?) whereas Labour is proposing to end it outright.

Both policies are bad, and nobody should be using the BSA as a model of good media regulation. IMHO of course

[DPF: national raised the back office stuff as an option and has already dropped it.

My preferred model is to abolish the BSA and have the Press Council apply to broadcasters]
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
kowtow (4,448) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Free speech is vital in a democracy.
The Human Rights Act must be amended to drop the insult provisions.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
leftyliberal (428) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Is it plausible for them to merge whilst still being independent of government?
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Mick Mac (1,085) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
thedavincimode (2,251) Says:
October 18th, 2011 at 1:31 pm

you get it in one.

Freedom and liberty are so precious we need protecting from Government and Politicians.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Kiwiblog