Hunter seems unwilling to recognise that the MSM has has any role in its own downfall. My own distrust in it began before Trump or the pandemic… time poor, I would watch the tv news, wanting a quick rundown on important events that might be happening in the world, only to be served up big stories about the weather, squabbling politicians, maybe a few dramatic snippets on world events like explosions (sometimes with footage from an old event and not the one reported on), and stories about lost dogs. The appearance of Trump and the pandemic only resulted in reinforcement of my previous opinion that I was being served a very curated version of the stories and not told other important things . Thankfully there is now the internet and we can read elsewhere for ourselves. But we still have to filter out sensationalism, opinions, spin snd unsubstantiated facts wherever we look.
Another example of what I was referring to: Luxon’s state of the nation speech several months back. We watched the full speech on you tube. Later that evening we watched the tv news and even compared two channels. Both had shock snippets implying he would cut benefits and send teens into poverty (certainly not the whole story) and then focused on his presence at the big gay out. 99.9% of tge speech was missed out and they did not even attempt a credible summary. I don’t think I’ve watched tv news since.
Once upon a time I used to love local media - the print papers, TV news, Radio NZ, the Listener and I was happy to pay for it too. Now I view the NZ media with contempt - it has become so partisan, and dumbed down. I check Stuffed, the Feral’d and social media etc each day because I still want to know what’s happening, or *claimed to be* happening; I also want to know what the usual suspects and partisan interests are saying about what’s happening.
I resent taxpayer funds going to local media. I pay subscriptions for a local and an overseas independent media source and follow various substacks and social media accounts (sometimes pay/donate) in an attempt to understand all sides and get a more in depth view about the matters of the day.
Vance’s c word column was but exhibit millionth of antics that make me sick. The omnicause club of Very Wellington types and media and activists/NGOs disgusts and repels me, the class snobbery, the monomanias, the shallowness, the infantilisation of the public, the gaslighting - maybe worst of all, far from being the sharp ones, the cool kids they hope to be - they are all so painfully bloody boring.
It’s hilarious how offended they are by the rejection and the mistrust they so wholly deserve - and the way they blame Trump and “misinformation” is also very funny. As if us plebs owe them anything. Arrogant mediocrities the lot.
Thanks for the comment and the detail. Much appreciated. I have to say that I write a fortnightly column for the Listener. I was approached because of the material that I was putting up on Substack. The editor wanted that perspective to balance the content. Also they use sub-editors at the Listener. Many MSM outlets do not which accounts for the abysmal grammar and spelling.
The media campaign against Ray Chung is a glaring example of this. His lurid email was certainly newsworthy and in the public interest - but it appears to have only been leaked and media piled-on once Chung was doing well in the polls.
Yep. And that is why I - a former lefty and complacent Wellington bubble dweller - am almost to the point of voting for him, and for the Nats next election - such is my revulsion for the lanyard class and its enablers. My enemy’s enemy is my friend.
with regards to 'communicating with clarity' and to a discerning audience - one can only hope!
When I was working for Stuff, we were advised to write for the average reading age of the public - age 12! That in itself is an indictment on our education system. And along with 'soundbite culture' in broadcast sand digital content, leading to very limited attention spans ... The dumbing down is real.
I do agree that part of a journalist's job is to write plainly, removing jargon and not use obscure words where a commonly used one will suffice - all good and well. But journalists are not given leeway to write with sophistication or treat their audience as intelligent. We are literally told to treat them as children.
If we treat our audience as children, then we disrespect them, and we actively dumb them down so that they cannot absorb a well written piece that lays out complexity and nuance, or god forbid, invest the time to read carefully a piece of long form investigative journalism or a well researched feature. It's a self-fulfilling disaster.
Great stuff David but will anyone in MSM actually listen and take it in? My take is that the defensive walls are so high at every level and the pundits who talk about the drop in trust want it to be solely due to external factors. Too many reputations on the line and too much egg-on-face potential.
People with the intelligence, judgment, and analytical skills to do what Crump suggests are no longer choosing journalism as a career. There are better jobs for those people now, particularly in IT. Marc Daalder can never emulate Richard Long or Tim Pankhurst, no matter how hard he tries.
Mark Daalder needs to understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity and park his opinions at the door before what passes for a brain allows his fingers to caress a keyboard.
make journalism great again. I love the job, but there is a lack of real opportunity to do the kind of work we really want to do. The culture within newsrooms is not healthy - once, political diversity amongst journalists was valued - no longer. And the morale is abysmal. Journalists are, in the main, miserable in their jobs. High output pressure, pressure to get clicks, not given to time to really investigate anything, a limited range of angles and topics and group conformity within editorial meetings.
Like you, I read and applauded Crump's superb guidelines. I endorse your summary of Hunter's deplorable "defence"; and endorse your conclusions. It is "long-standing journalistic practices" that have (over several decades) destroyed public trust in MSM... especially TV media. You have already received many excellent comments, so I'll say no more. Please keep up your good work in so many fields.
The Herald filtered who could advertise in their rag, they allowed propaganda from left wing unions, pro radical maori groups etc, but not groups like Hobson’s Pledge and Stopcogovernance.kiwi., the latter two having only wanting to highlight verified history and research, as opposed to the sensational statements and untruths of the first two.
They used pathetic reasons, or excuses, to justify their bias such as being worried about backlash etc.
Great stuff David but will anyone in MSM actually listen and take it in? My take is that the defensive walls are so high at every level and the pundits who talk about the drop in trust want it to be solely due to external factors. Too many reputations on the line and too much egg-on-face potential.
Great stuff David but will anyone in MSM actually listen and take it in? My take is that the defensive walls are so high at every level and the pundits who talk about the drop in trust want it to be solely due to external factors. Too many reputations on the line and too much egg-on-face potential.
Currently in New York for a few days. Very exciting and heading for Paradise on 5th Ave tomorrow. (There is a piece in preparation about that)
When I look at the New York Times against the Horild I see good factual reporting set against rubbishy, poorly written, grammatically incorrect trivia.
Hunter seems unwilling to recognise that the MSM has has any role in its own downfall. My own distrust in it began before Trump or the pandemic… time poor, I would watch the tv news, wanting a quick rundown on important events that might be happening in the world, only to be served up big stories about the weather, squabbling politicians, maybe a few dramatic snippets on world events like explosions (sometimes with footage from an old event and not the one reported on), and stories about lost dogs. The appearance of Trump and the pandemic only resulted in reinforcement of my previous opinion that I was being served a very curated version of the stories and not told other important things . Thankfully there is now the internet and we can read elsewhere for ourselves. But we still have to filter out sensationalism, opinions, spin snd unsubstantiated facts wherever we look.
I fear I have to keep abreast of the trivial pursuit that passes for news. Otherwise I can’t really comment. It is brain dead stuff at times.
Thank you for doing it so we don’t have to 😂
Another example of what I was referring to: Luxon’s state of the nation speech several months back. We watched the full speech on you tube. Later that evening we watched the tv news and even compared two channels. Both had shock snippets implying he would cut benefits and send teens into poverty (certainly not the whole story) and then focused on his presence at the big gay out. 99.9% of tge speech was missed out and they did not even attempt a credible summary. I don’t think I’ve watched tv news since.
Ikr - so disgusting.
Once upon a time I used to love local media - the print papers, TV news, Radio NZ, the Listener and I was happy to pay for it too. Now I view the NZ media with contempt - it has become so partisan, and dumbed down. I check Stuffed, the Feral’d and social media etc each day because I still want to know what’s happening, or *claimed to be* happening; I also want to know what the usual suspects and partisan interests are saying about what’s happening.
I resent taxpayer funds going to local media. I pay subscriptions for a local and an overseas independent media source and follow various substacks and social media accounts (sometimes pay/donate) in an attempt to understand all sides and get a more in depth view about the matters of the day.
Vance’s c word column was but exhibit millionth of antics that make me sick. The omnicause club of Very Wellington types and media and activists/NGOs disgusts and repels me, the class snobbery, the monomanias, the shallowness, the infantilisation of the public, the gaslighting - maybe worst of all, far from being the sharp ones, the cool kids they hope to be - they are all so painfully bloody boring.
It’s hilarious how offended they are by the rejection and the mistrust they so wholly deserve - and the way they blame Trump and “misinformation” is also very funny. As if us plebs owe them anything. Arrogant mediocrities the lot.
Thanks for the comment and the detail. Much appreciated. I have to say that I write a fortnightly column for the Listener. I was approached because of the material that I was putting up on Substack. The editor wanted that perspective to balance the content. Also they use sub-editors at the Listener. Many MSM outlets do not which accounts for the abysmal grammar and spelling.
The media campaign against Ray Chung is a glaring example of this. His lurid email was certainly newsworthy and in the public interest - but it appears to have only been leaked and media piled-on once Chung was doing well in the polls.
Yep. And that is why I - a former lefty and complacent Wellington bubble dweller - am almost to the point of voting for him, and for the Nats next election - such is my revulsion for the lanyard class and its enablers. My enemy’s enemy is my friend.
with regards to 'communicating with clarity' and to a discerning audience - one can only hope!
When I was working for Stuff, we were advised to write for the average reading age of the public - age 12! That in itself is an indictment on our education system. And along with 'soundbite culture' in broadcast sand digital content, leading to very limited attention spans ... The dumbing down is real.
I do agree that part of a journalist's job is to write plainly, removing jargon and not use obscure words where a commonly used one will suffice - all good and well. But journalists are not given leeway to write with sophistication or treat their audience as intelligent. We are literally told to treat them as children.
If we treat our audience as children, then we disrespect them, and we actively dumb them down so that they cannot absorb a well written piece that lays out complexity and nuance, or god forbid, invest the time to read carefully a piece of long form investigative journalism or a well researched feature. It's a self-fulfilling disaster.
Thanks Bonnie. Back in NEW ZEALAND on 29 July. Happy to talk further on this topic.
I appreciate your honesty.
Great stuff David but will anyone in MSM actually listen and take it in? My take is that the defensive walls are so high at every level and the pundits who talk about the drop in trust want it to be solely due to external factors. Too many reputations on the line and too much egg-on-face potential.
People with the intelligence, judgment, and analytical skills to do what Crump suggests are no longer choosing journalism as a career. There are better jobs for those people now, particularly in IT. Marc Daalder can never emulate Richard Long or Tim Pankhurst, no matter how hard he tries.
Mark Daalder needs to understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity and park his opinions at the door before what passes for a brain allows his fingers to caress a keyboard.
make journalism great again. I love the job, but there is a lack of real opportunity to do the kind of work we really want to do. The culture within newsrooms is not healthy - once, political diversity amongst journalists was valued - no longer. And the morale is abysmal. Journalists are, in the main, miserable in their jobs. High output pressure, pressure to get clicks, not given to time to really investigate anything, a limited range of angles and topics and group conformity within editorial meetings.
It’s also a good idea to challenge objectively bad stories: https://open.substack.com/pub/willfries/p/cbs-news-affiliate-scrutinized-for?r=17md5s&utm_medium=ios
Bravo David
Like you, I read and applauded Crump's superb guidelines. I endorse your summary of Hunter's deplorable "defence"; and endorse your conclusions. It is "long-standing journalistic practices" that have (over several decades) destroyed public trust in MSM... especially TV media. You have already received many excellent comments, so I'll say no more. Please keep up your good work in so many fields.
The Herald filtered who could advertise in their rag, they allowed propaganda from left wing unions, pro radical maori groups etc, but not groups like Hobson’s Pledge and Stopcogovernance.kiwi., the latter two having only wanting to highlight verified history and research, as opposed to the sensational statements and untruths of the first two.
They used pathetic reasons, or excuses, to justify their bias such as being worried about backlash etc.
Result: loss of a lot of subscribers!
MSM journos have no say. The stench emanating from owners, board members and editorial nudging permeate the ideological water closet.
Disagree George. They write the stuff. I doubt owners and boards have the say you imagine. The rot is throughout the ecosystem.
Great stuff David but will anyone in MSM actually listen and take it in? My take is that the defensive walls are so high at every level and the pundits who talk about the drop in trust want it to be solely due to external factors. Too many reputations on the line and too much egg-on-face potential.
Great stuff David but will anyone in MSM actually listen and take it in? My take is that the defensive walls are so high at every level and the pundits who talk about the drop in trust want it to be solely due to external factors. Too many reputations on the line and too much egg-on-face potential.
Thanks Aroha.
I just keep banging the drum.
I have another piece in the works.
Currently in New York for a few days. Very exciting and heading for Paradise on 5th Ave tomorrow. (There is a piece in preparation about that)
When I look at the New York Times against the Horild I see good factual reporting set against rubbishy, poorly written, grammatically incorrect trivia.