Brian Edwards Media

TV3 News Returns to the Trough

Last Friday, in its regular segment featuring the on-line editor’s selection of items from the channel’s website,  TV3 returned to the topic of Chris Carter:

“How to have dinner with MP Chris Carter: Find out how you can have dinner with Labour MP Chris Carter. He’s promising lots of wine.”

Viewers who went to the site, could read the following post:

Dinner with Carter, Kaiser – BYO flowers, masseuse

Trade Me bidders can win dinner with troubled Labour MP Chris Carter and his partner Peter Kaiser, but they are adamant that gifts of flowers are at the public’s expense.   

 Mr Carter and Mr Kaiser will entertain the successful bidder at their home in Te Atatu South, providing food and a “generous amount” of wine. 

On the post the pair make fun of Mr Carter’s recent problem with inappropriate spending on his ministerial credit card.

“Chris and Peter accept flowers – at your expense,” they write.

 Massages and flights to and from Auckland are also at the bidder’s expense.

In the ‘Question and Answers’ section of the post one potential bidder asks whether Mr Carter would be paying for the dinner on his Government credit card.

The pair evade the question; writing: “It’s a charity auction. Feel happy to bid if you like.”

All funds from the auction, listed on Trade Me, will go to the GABA Charitable Trust – a fund set up to support the health and welfare of New Zealand’s gay community.

Bidding for the dinner – to be held on a date agreed between the two parties – is currently at $100.

The only problem with this story is  that the following statements are entirely untrue:

- they are adamant that gifts of flowers are at the public’s expense. 

 – On the post the pair make fun of Mr Carter’s recent problem with inappropriate spending on his ministerial credit card.

 – “Chris and Peter accept flowers – at your expense,” they write.

- The pair evade the question, writing, “It’s a charity auction. Feel happy to bid if you like.”

They are entirely  untrue because not only did ‘Mr Carter and Mr Kaiser’ not write the ad which appeared on Trade Me, they had no input of any sort into its writing and neither saw nor vetted it before it appeared. Their sole involvement was to agree to put on the dinner, as they have done for 7 years, as part of the GABA Charitable Trust’s  annual auction to raise money primarily for HIV/Aids. Other MPs also contribute, a fact unsurprisingly not mentioned in the post.   

TV3 could have discovered all of this simply by getting in touch with GABA, as I did,  and asking who was responsible for the Trade Me insertion. They didn’t bother.

To add insult to injury, the channel not only invited comment on its untrue claims but invited viewers and readers to ‘Post Your Opinion’ on  ‘Who should join Chris Carter for dinner?

Chris Carter is auctioning a night with him and his partner for charity. But who do you think would make his ideal dinner guests?’

Forty-six people posted their opinions. As TV3 will have expected when they posed the question, many  of the responses were offensive or overtly homophobic. They published them anyway.  

I have suggested to Chris Carter that he now lodge a complaint with the Broadcasting Standards Authority citing the requirement under the Broadcasting Act and the Codes of Broadcasting Practice for fairness and balance in broadcast reporting. If I had any doubt that TV3 was conducting a campaign of personal vilification against Carter, that doubt has long since vanished.

For the record, Carter and Kaiser cook the dinner and cover all the costs out of their own pockets.

[NOTE: I see that the vile Cameron Slater of Whale Oil infamy, has complained that TV3 pinched the story from him.  I’m reminded of the old saw: ‘Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite ‘em,  And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum.]

 

, ,

83 Comments:

  1. Wasn’t there a US court case a few years ago when Fox News (sic) established the legal precedent that their corporate aims meant their “news” did not have to be true (and could even be knowingly false), so long as it was entertaining?

    TV3 News, like many other news organisations, will have taken this concept on board. And they clearly aren’t trying to inform us. So who are they trying to entertain?

  2. Well Mr. Edwards, I guess Journolist and 400 colluding leftist journalists and academics should put paid to any complaints about the vast right wing media conspiracy for a while. In the US anyway. Any idea if a similar list might exist in New Zealand?

    • Well Mr. Edwards, I guess Journolist and 400 colluding leftist journalists and academics should put paid to any complaints about the vast right wing media conspiracy for a while.

      I have no idea what your talking about. More info please.

  3. Thanks for the compliment Brian.

    Glad you enjoy reading Whaleoil. Seeing as you like quotes, here are a few for you that seem appropriate.

    People everywhere confuse
    What they read in newspapers with news.
    ~A.J. Liebling, The New Yorker, 7 April 1956

    The secret of successful journalism is to make your readers so angry they will write half your paper for you. ~C.E.M. Joad

    I do not mean to be the slightest bit critical of TV newspeople, who do a superb job, considering that they operate under severe time constraints and have the intellectual depth of hamsters. But TV news can only present the “bare bones” of a story; it takes a newspaper, with its capability to present vast amounts of information, to render the story truly boring. ~Dave Barry

    Didn’t you used to be a TV news-person? Which leaves me with just one question for you Brian.

    If you saw a man drowning and you could either save him or photograph the event… what kind of film would you use?

    • Thanks for the compliment Brian.

      You’re welcome. Appreciate the quotes. My only comment is that I was never a TV news-person.

  4. Whaleoil, no-one uses film anymore ;-)

  5. Brian, I am surprised you dirtied your hands with this piece of sewage. Not only do you give it wider currency than it deserves but the chances of any type of rational discussion is zero from people like Slater and Redbaiter (the latter appearing to be on some sort of mind altering substance judging by the incoherence of his comment).

    As regards the TV3 item, it only serves to confirm that anything that this organisation reports as news is not to be trusted.

    • Brian, I am surprised you dirtied your hands with this piece of sewage.

      If a large and powerful news organisation is conducting a campaign of villification against an individual, that information deserves to be brought into the light. I rather suspect that whoever wrote this piece on Carter assumed it would remain under the radar. Your position is an argument for indifference in the face of unethical behaviour.

  6. I guess consistancy must be high on the list of TV3s objectives.I consider this “news” to lack any entertainment value so the Fox News case should not apply.On a more positive note ,no sign of Duncan Garner,Yet

  7. I’m stunned!

    Brian, how could you get it so very, very wrong — with the cruel put-down headline: “TV3 News Returns to the Trough”? And everything seemed to be going so swimmingly well, with you and 3, up until now.

    If anything, it’s the polar opposite: TV3 have reached dizzying heights, scaling the Mountain of Munificence. All, for Carter. Owing to their
    generosity, he’s getting a free plug for his fundraising dinner. Carter should be very grateful. TV3 have done more than extend an olive branch as a peace offering, they’ve sent around the potted sapling tree and two white doves. It’s a wonderfully effusive gesture of goodwill, that deserves high praise.

    BE: “For the record, Carter and Kaiser cook the dinner and cover all the costs out of their own pockets”.

    Since the taxpayer isn’t picking up the tab — and going by the cynical manner, Carter has gouged us in the past — let’s just hope that the winning bidder’s culinary expectations don’t run too high. When, Carter and the Kaiser, have to pay for the meal, themselves, their hospitality reservoir is not exactly renown for overflowing the dike. Besides, I hear, Chris is just itching to flaunt his dexterity on the microwave keypad. And his deftness, wielding a can opener, isn’t too shabby, either.

    To the winner, remember, bring some flowers: a couple of hydrangeas. It’ll be commensurate with the occasion.

    • Brian, how could you get it so very, very wrong — with the cruel put-down headline: “TV3 News Returns to the Trough”? And everything seemed to be going so swimmingly well, with you and 3, up until now.

      It’s not worth debating this with you, Merv. You have a closed mind. It would take me half an hour to correct all the misconceptions and distortions in your comment and frankly I can’t be bothered.

  8. I guess TV3 are trying to appeal to the “vile and homophobic” members of their audience. It would be better if they stayed away from those particular cesspits.

  9. “I have no idea what your (sic) talking about.”

    Wow, now that is amazing. Not trying to be nasty Mr. Edwards, but that someone who claims some degree of professional expertise in the media business to be ignorant of one of the biggest scandals ever in the US media, and to be apparently unaware of something that has attracted such widespread reporting in the blogosphere, is a revelation that leaves me somewhat gobsmacked.

    Of course it hasn’t made it into the mainstream media here in NZ (or in the US either) because it is so damaging to the the false layer of objectivity left-media like to cocoon themselves in, but even so it is still an immense story. Really, I am shocked that after a week of unrelenting reporting on the subject elsewhere you remain unaware of the event. (1,170,000 hits on Google) Are your information sources really that limited??

    I can summarise it (in the limited space I have here) as a collection of influential media commentators and academics (400 or more at Time Magazine, CNN, the Washington Post, The Guardian, press people in the Obama campaign) who worked assiduously behind the scenes to shape favourable public perceptions of Barack Obama and negative perceptions of his opponents.

    Two examples were the downplaying of Obama’s connections with the hate preacher Reverend Wright and the widespread ridicule of Sarah Palin. (at first stunned by Palin’s abilities, they later colluded in a plan to make her out as inexperienced and unprepared for the Vice Presidency).

    I wrote a blog article here-

    http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/?p=669

    but there is a more informative article here

    http://www.dailyinterlake.com/opinion/columns/frank/article_22201864-977d-11df-9ea1-001cc4c03286.html

    I’m sure you’ll find it all very interesting Mr. Edwards, given you’re in the trade and all. I really would like to know if anything similar is occurring in NZ media circles.

  10. I note a couple of things:

    1. Chris Carter is no longer a minister so doesn’t have a ministerial credit card anymore. This makes the piece even more stupid.

    2. The BSA doesn’t have jurisdiction of broadcasters’ Internet sites; this is somewhat of a hole in the regulation of our media. Newspapers’ sites are covered by the Press Council. Broadcasts are covered by the BSA, but broadcasters’ site are in a bit of a no-man’s land.

    • 2. The BSA doesn’t have jurisdiction of broadcasters’ Internet sites; this is somewhat of a hole in the regulation of our media. Newspapers’ sites are covered by the Press Council. Broadcasts are covered by the BSA, but broadcasters’ site are in a bit of a no-man’s land.

      That’s an interesting point, Graeme. Though a precedent might be set here. If Carter’s argument were that TV3 (a broadcaster) had mounted a campaign of villification against him, which included several earlier broadcasts and a recent broadcast inviting viewers to look at the channel’s website, where another example could be found, the BSA might take the view that the breach was by the broadcaster in more than one medium. It’s a thought anyway.

  11. I am hardly suprised, once again the evil capitalist multinational which tv3 is part of created, distorts and lies to degrade, make a fool of and embarass the member for Te Atatu, who has done much good for the electorate and continues to do so.
    Here he is out of the goodness of his heart (something the right wing capitalist fatcats would not understand, their heart being of stone) doing a good deed for charity, helping the less fortunate, being a fine upstanding contributing citizen …and the biased rabid right wing media seeks to mock him for it.

    Very very poor show tv3, surely their is someone that can force them their news of the air till they sort their act out and report the news in a more enviromental and people friendly manner, doing good to society instead of seeking vastly inflated profits to go into the pockets of their capitalist oppressor shareholders who will no doubt use those funds to rape and pillage poor third world economies of their rightful land and commodities all in the name of profit, disgusting.

  12. “However, I’ll read what you’ve sent me and trade if for your reading this:”

    Thanks for the link Mr. Edwards. I read it in horror. Then I looked up the writer, Mr. Kaiser. He was a founder and former president of the New York chapter of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association. He is a former reporter for the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, and a former press critic for Newsweek. He has also written for The Washington Post,the Los Angeles Times, The New York Observer, New York magazine, Vanity Fair, and many other such liberal publications. He first started writing for The New York Times when he was an undergraduate at Columbia University. He has taught journalism at Columbia and Princeton.

    After reading all of that, my horror increased.

    Mr Kaiser writing is underpinned by a mindset that is typical of today’s dying media. It’s a mindset that is immediately identifiable to anybody who does not share it, but in most cases is extremely offensive to those readers. Mr Kaiser writes to the Progressive/ Liberal market that only 25% of US citizens self identify with. While all of those outlets Mr. Kaiser worked for are in decline, FOX News and Andrew Breitbart and Jason Matera and the new media coming through are on fire. Mr. Kaiser is a dinosaur. Like the participants in Journolist, he has professed to objectivity but never been objective. In fact and again like the Journolist, he has been entirely partisan and deceitful.

    FOX News succeeds because it allows dissent. In most cases, if it covers an issue it will provide a for and against viewpoint. The media world Mr. Kaiser comes from has never done this. Even the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s new 24 hour channel suffers the same bias. In its first few days, many critics pummelled the network for only inviting commenters who agreed with the presenter’s viewpoint and excluding commenters who did not.

    The clue to the demise of mainstream news and the rise of the new media lies in Roger Aile’s answer when he was was recently asked by The New York Times what made his conservative news channel such a ratings winner, he replied: “I built this channel from my life experience… my first qualification is I didn’t go to Columbia Journalism School.”

    The mainstream media has over the last four decades or more been perverted by Progressive political advocates (like Mr. Kaiser) into a tool to shape our culture in their own image. Its failing because the majority of its audience totally reject that culture.

    BTW, you didn’t answer my question. Do you think an email list similar to Journolist may exist in NZ’s largely Progressive media?

    • Thanks for the link Mr. Edwards. I read it in horror.

      Well, what we have here is a simple clash of ideologies. Mr Kaiser is condemned by his (quite impressive, one must say) background in liberal journalism. People of your political persuasion are condemned by the liberal media. Often not a great deal of considered thougth on either side. But we really ought not to be blind to the possibility that some of the things we say are arrant rubbish. An example from your comment: ‘FOX News succeeds because it allows dissent. In most cases, if it covers an issue it will provide a for and against viewpoint.’ You’d have to be deaf, dumb, blind and mentally defective to believe that. I’ve watched hundreds of hours of Fox News and never saw any liberal get a fair hearing or any issue discussed with the fairness and balance that the network boasts.

  13. I hate the term “liberal media”. By it’s very nature the media is liberal: it relies on liberal values like freedom of speech and freedom of information for its very existence. Without liberal values the media will simply become a mouthpiece for the status quo.

    • I hate the term “liberal media”. By it’s very nature the media is liberal: it relies on liberal values like freedom of speech and freedom of information for its very existence.

      Would that that were true. For the most part the media rely on advertising revenue and, in some instances, government support for their existence. There are liberal media and conservative media. Fox News survives brilliantly with libertarian rather than liberal values. It uses the word ‘liberal’ as a term of derision. It is a far right conservative channel, less a mouthpiece for the status quo, than a mouthpiece for 19th century values.

  14. “I hate the term “liberal media”.”

    The term signifies liberal in the modern sense, not the traditional sense. In the modern sense it represents the opposite of those values you say it relies upon. Modern liberals are authoritarians in disguise who exact severe social punishment upon those who do not conform.

    • Modern liberals are authoritarians in disguise who exact severe social punishment upon those who do not conform.

      Really? What country are you talking about? And what examples of these ‘social punishments’ do you have. Looks to me as if, like the American Right, you choose to confuse liberals with socialists or even communists. Electorally convenient, but totally dishonest.

  15. Well, Redbaiter (as with Ben), I thought your posts were a delirious rant. Barely coherent. Then, I worked out the WORDWHEEL in today’s Herald (B17). It’s true — there is a Liberal conspiracy afoot, with its tentacles reaching out far and wide. Scary!!

  16. “Well, Redbaiter (as with Ben), I thought your posts were a delirious rant. Barely coherent.”

    Funny. Mr. Edwards seemed to understand them OK. But of course my comments are quite coherent. Any objective observer would see your silly and infantile smears as false. You RGB are one of the liberals identified in my explanation to Greg (above), who deny anyone who opposes your viewpoint any kind of legitimacy, and attempt to discredit those who oppose you not by means of reason or argument, but rather by feeble attempts at ridicule accompanied by patently false expressions of amusement.

    This is a reasoned discussion. You’re just injecting spite and idiocy generated from your affront. You’re old RGB. Real old, and you’ve got nothing to say in the newer context.

  17. “You’re old RGB. Real old, and you’ve got nothing to say in the newer context.”

    Accepted. But, tell me: exactly, how many times, each night, do you crawl out of your bunk bed, to check what’s underneath it?

  18. “Let everyone tell his own lies, that’s the freedom of the press”. – Norman Mailer

  19. Can we just ban redbaiter already?

    • Can we just ban redbaiter already?

      Whoa there, Tom. That would give him just cause for complaint. No, as long as he doesn’t defame anyone or resort to obscene abuse, his comments will be welcome.

  20. PS Brian – I too am amazed that you don’t know about the “Journolist” scandal – it’s THE major media-bias story of the day.

    You’re just going to have to accept that some blogsites do have the goods, and go there. “American Thinker” is one such site, and they have/had the “Journolist” well-covered, right down to the 107-and-counting names involved (including names like Krugman and Klein) – unlike the NZ mainstream media (or the USA mainstream media, for that matter).

  21. Obviously redbaiter (in his enthusiasm for channelling his pinup girl sarah palin) can see Russia from his home in Tauranga.

    What?? But please please do not ban redbaiter. He is funny.

  22. @ redbaiter

    What other conspiracy theories do you subscribe to Red?

    You suggest RGB is narrow-minded – isn’t that a little ridiculous? You are blatantly biased yourself.

  23. Disappointed not to get a response of any kind to my main query Mr. Edwards.

    I was hoping you would tell me something that might put my suspicions to rest.

  24. “Really? What country are you talking about? And what examples of these ‘social punishments’ do you have.”

    How about, given their convenience, the posts from Ben, RGB, Colin, Amelia and Tom Semmens. I would bet they picture themselves as liberals but here they are (as you to your own credit have noted) displaying exactly the intolerant characteristics and ridiculing responses I have described.

    Another example. I watched Q & A today (the ABC show) and there was one person (Tom Switzer, editor of the Australian Spectator) on the panel who did not buy into the current global warming/ climate change scenario and spoke out strongly against it. The opprobrium he endured, by means of ridicule from the studio audience, twitter posts, text messages and emails (yes, all of that comes through live on Q & A) was just so distasteful to observe it almost made me nauseous. The same kind of weak attempts at ridicule as we have examples of above, some though much nastier.

    This is the political climate generated and controlled by the Progressives,and it’s just a modern day more sophisticated manifestation of the thinking that prevailed in Joe Stalin’s time and saw dissenters sent off to gulags. It has the same purpose, a totalitarian political climate.

    If the people guilty of these affronts to freedom of expression read up on what happened in Russia during Stalin’s time, (I suggest The Gulag Archipelago) they would see their behaviour emulated almost exactly by the Soviet ruling class. It is something that has crept into our society over the last forty years and I find it utterly abhorrent.

    • If the people guilty of these affronts to freedom of expression read up on what happened in Russia during Stalin’s time, (I suggest The Gulag Archipelago) they would see their behaviour emulated almost exactly by the Soviet ruling class. It is something that has crept into our society over the last forty years and I find it utterly abhorrent.

      Aha, so it’s in New Zealand that these Stalinist outrages against personal freedom are occurring. Bloggers, tweeters and the rest expressing their disagreement with someone else’s view. I woud have called that ‘democracy’.

  25. Redbaiter is a figure of fun whose obsessions are deservedly mocked. For him this is apparently equivalent to being exiled to the gulags and worked to death.

    “Fox News” is an oxymoron and “Fair and Balanced” is a lie. They are balanced alright; balanced precariously on the end of the spectrum.

  26. 26

    Is the equally vile Redbaiter still alive? I thought he must have choked on his bile and lies years ago!

    I’m no supporter of Chris Carter, but TV3 has a duty to report on him accurately. As it has a duty to report on everybody. If it is going to editorialise, go ahead, but make that obvious. The piece is posted under “Politics > Story” – they are telling stories, but not news.

    Pillocks.

  27. Interesting that leftards immediately prove the authenticity of Redbaiters statements without batting an eye.

  28. “this is apparently equivalent to being exiled to the gulags and worked to death.”

    You sad frightened Progressives always have such poor comprehension skills. No doubt because you are all products of the education system you have converted to an ideological immersion process and where English and History come a long way behind important subjects like diversity and biodiversity. I said the mindset was the same, clearly a distinction too fine for you to appreciate Trevor.

    FOX News has far too many liberals to be a right wing broadcaster. Far more liberals than any of its competitors have Conservatives. The assertions in your post Trevor range from infantile to bigoted. Please try and add to the debate if you do post again.

  29. “Modern liberals are authoritarians in disguise who exact severe social punishment upon those who do not conform.”

    – So why do you call them ‘liberals’ then? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to label them as the ‘authoritarian media’ or something similar, rather than using a word that apparently means the opposite of what it used to mean?

  30. RB, at least you keep your abuse under control here and soften your rhetoric.

    “The assertions in your post Trevor range from infantile to bigoted.”

    But your projections are much the same. You are what you accuse. “Please try and add to the debate if you do post again.”

  31. Redbaiter, you said “they would see their behaviour emulated almost exactly by the Soviet ruling class.” Anyone can scroll back and see it.

    I suggest you stop lying about yourself. Then you might be in a better position to stop lying about reality.

  32. “they would see their behaviour emulated almost exactly by the Soviet ruling class.”

    That is correct Trevor. Their (today’s liberals) behaviour in using ridicule and personal attacks and false allegations (usually of lying) emulated by the Soviet ruling class. Not the other way around as you have read it.

    And I really don’t want to use Mr. Edward’s blog to confront your pathetic allegations of lying so I’ll skip over that for now.

    More wasted time, more of Mr. Edward’s blog space taken up unnecessarily, and more evidence of your crippled comprehension skills. (You’re just a sad half educated hater Trev, and that white knuckled hate mixed with your poor comprehension is a toxic self destructive mix). For your own good, try and tone it down a bit.

  33. Greg, you make a good point, but I believe most people understand that is what “liberal” means when used in that particular context. The left took the word and applied it to themselves and from that the new meaning gradually developed, based on a gradually improved understanding of what the “liberal” leftist really is.

  34. 34

    Drossie Bleu-Bleu

    Redbaiter, a question for you — do you live on your own?

  35. Brian, do you think Redbaiter is old enough to have taken offence at the Citizens For Rowling campaign which seems to be a precursor of his Journolist?
    I really admire your forbearance, and wonder at how time has mellowed that acerbic interviewer from days when only the TVs were black & white, as compared to today’s rather damaged specimens from the blogsphere.

  36. “Interesting that leftards immediately prove the authenticity of Redbaiters statements without batting an eye.”

    Quite correct. How can they write such things here in such blissful unawareness of the fact that they are doing exactly as I described??? And they do not seem to care one iota either for their abuse of Mr. Edward’s blog, being quite happy to submit messages which have no relevance to any part of the discussion but are just personal attacks on myself (or weird personal questions). Strange inconsiderate people and bizarre behaviour.

  37. This was one of the few blogs I have bothered to read or contribute to because I could be sure that the debate would be rational and even though I might disagree with the opinions I enjoyed the reasoned argument. Even Merv, at his most provocative, is enjoyable to read.

    One person (the name tells you what sort of person we are dealing with) has managed to change all that with his incoherent ranting. However we live in a democratic society and even lunatics must be allowed their say. I once used the analogy with another blogger, that reading his views was like listening to someone with a cleft palte giving a political diatribe; totally incomprehensible but mildly entertaining.

    By all means allow this person to contribute but may I suggest that if he and his fatuous arguments were totally ignored he might eventually get tired and go and be stupid somewhere else.

  38. 38

    Unfortunately he won’t get tired. He’s been doing this for years and years. Here’s a typical quote from 2005: “You’re a liar. Get off this group with your obsessive hate
    driven stalking and your obvious fabrications you sad retarded
    loser.” I’m not going to include the next sentence he wrote at the time…

    And then he goes for what he likes to think is the moral high ground by accusing others of abusing “Mr Edward’s blog”. But with his permanent hypocrisy at no time in this whole thread has he said anything specifically about the original blog entry – it’s all been a platform for a rant about the media, then a rant about people ranting about him. He won’t go away. All one can do is step over him and pretend he doesn’t exist.

  39. Ben has nailed it to a T. Redbaiter has totally hijacked this thread. First off, he sidetracked the posters from the safety of the sign-posted path; now, they’re hopelessly lost in the bizarre maze that is his scrambled mind. Desperately, trying to find their way out.

    Worldwide leftist “conspiracies”, “Fox News”, “CNN”, “Time Warner”, “U.K. Guardian” (and other newspapers), “Soviets” and the “gulags”, “Obama”, “Sara Palin, “Joe Stalin” — I think, he’s even mentioned Mao’s hairstylist.

    It’s as if, he’s barged into a a formal dinner party, sat himself down at the splendidly-layed-out dining table, and in the midst of polite company, chomps his food and talks — feverishly — whilst waving his dinner knife around in wild gesticulations, spraying spittle and foodbits on to the startled dinner guests. Worse, still, he’s belching and farting ‘n’ carrying-on, like, no one notices.

    Brian, it’s not the “bickering” you should be worried about. Redbaiter’s just ruined it, here. He oughtn’t’ve done what he done; but he done it, anyway. And ruined it. The topic was about Carter and TV3. But it’s been vomitised, thanks to Red Under the Bed.

    How come, you don’t ask him, if he’s “taken his meds”? Or, has he already overdosed?

  40. A friendly piece of advice, Brian.

    While your sense of fair play and adherence to the principle of free speech is guiding your approach to the likes of Redbaiter and his ilk, I would ask you to consider your other readers.

    These far-right habitues of the blogosphere are forever on the lookout for indulgent bloggers willing to let them ply their reactionary trade.

    If you let them set up shop on brianedwardsmedia they will very quickly come to dominate all your commentary threads (as they have dominated this one) and their obnoxious contributions will, like the Didimo weed in our once clear rivers, make it impossible for any other form of life to florish.

    Before long all your regular readers, unwilling to wade through Redbaiter’s and his kind’s snotweed, will simply stop visiting your blog.

    Then it’ll just be you and them.

    And that would be a very sad fate for a very fine site.

    • A friendly piece of advice, Brian.

      Thank you Chris. I’ve given the gentleman his head on this occasion. Been out at the movies (Me and Orson Welles – great!) while most of this has been going on. It’s now 4.31. Any furture comments on this must relate to Chris Carter and TV3. The rest won’t be published.

  41. All I ever wanted was to ask Mr. Edwards if he knew of a Journolist in New Zealand. If anyone has taken the thread off track it is the commenters who cannot write about anything but they’re obsessive hatred of Redbaiter.

    It still baffles me completely that in your apparently compulsive attacks you remain so unaware of the fact that you are behaving exactly as I predict. Surely even the most lame leftist would comprehend that by loading this thread with so many comments protesting my mere presence here you are (as one commenter has already pointed out) completely validating my allegations of a Stalinist mindset.

    Read a good article on that this very morning actually-

    Why The Left Hate Conservatives, by Dennis Prager.

    http://article.nationalreview.com/438670/why-the-left-hates-conservatives/dennis-prager

  42. Sorry, “their” obsessive hatred.

  43. So Brian & Chris Trotter
    Is there a Journolist in NZ.
    is there even an informal gathering (electronically) or meeting of minds to discuss issues of the day amongst our media?

    I love Dennis Prager’s quote “The Bigger the Government, the smaller the citizen”
    Dennis Prager 2010

  44. “Bloggers, tweeters and the rest expressing their disagreement with someone else’s view. I woud have called that ‘democracy’.”

    ..and if I could just break through all of the static and continue my conversation with the host- Mr. Edwards I have to pull you up on the expression you have used “expressing their disagreement with someone else’s view”. Well of course if that was the true situation it would be fine, but as you can see from the above, it is not disagreement. It is ridicule and smears and calls for me to be silenced, without any attempt at offering any difference of opinion. Point me to one commenter besides yourself who has actually addressed the issue.

    That is it you see. These people all describe themselves as “liberals”, but not one could write here and explain how the words they have written above and the thoughts they have expressed, can conform to any kind of real traditional liberal mindset.

    Christ Trotter for example. However could the words he has written above be considered as indicative of a liberal mindset? I suggest that any true traditional liberal would react in horror at the suggestion that Mr. Trotter was here exemplifying traditional liberalism.

    As I seem to be on trial here, I plead NOT GUILTY, and offer as evidence in my defence, the writings of Mr. Trotter and others above. I stand by my original claim when discussing what “liberal” really means today-

    “In the modern sense the term “liberal” represents the opposite of those values it represents in its traditional sense. Modern liberals are authoritarians in disguise who exact severe social punishment upon those who do not conform.”

  45. I was determined to resist the provocation of Redbaiter but I must make the following observation.

    If the arguments are well presented I do not hate either the ‘left’ or ‘right'; I enjoy reading others’ views whether I agree with them or not. For example Matthew Hooton in the NBR; I disagree with many of his views but thoroughly enjoy reading them. I disagree with much of what Chris Trotter and John Minto write, but look forward to their columns.

    Redbaiter, I would not expect you to see this yourself, but your comments are largely gibberish and you have, as Merv puts it, hijacked this discussion with your gibberish.

    I do not have an obsessive hatred of Redbaiter. you are too insignificant to be worth expending the energy upon. You are irritating in the same way that the noise of a garden weed cuter is irritating.

  46. The only thing even remotely like this “journolist” being spoken of that I am aware of here in NZ consists of people asking for tips on how to get paid for freelance submissions. It’s hardly a communist plot to overthrow democracy.

  47. Thanks Don, but I was hoping for a response from the organ grinder. I would think that if he did not know of such a list he would simply say so.

  48. I’ve reluctantly switched from TV3 News in recent months, and wondered why. Your recent pieces have made it clear, Brian.
    Not that I watch TV1, either…viewers have a bigger choice these days and we’re taking it. No wonder they treat us older viewers with contempt, we think brains are for using, not sopping up commercials.

    PS Don’t feed the troll, either.

  49. @ Redbaiter

    Mate, by last count, you’ve made 15 return trips to the buffet table. If it wasn’t bad enough your scooping ALL the oysters-in-the-half-shell on to your plate, did you really have to go over to the carvery and take the whole leg of ham back to your table as well? Is there no limit to your gluttony?

    Show a bit of decorum, you’re embarrassing. The “organ grinder’ is having a lie-down — after his cocoa — he’s got a splitting headache.

  50. Redbaiter may have a point. His comments about any all too righteous liberal could impress-a zealot of any colour can attract criticism. But where he ruptures and disintegrates into a thousand pieces is his defence of Fox.
    Any basic understanding of Fox’s treatment notes their short attention span grabs, their yelling, repetitive stings, their bimbo looking female presenters shouting shallow and sly slants. It’s dumbing down at it’s finest. Manipulations and distortions growing simplistic hysteria. Indeed Redbaiter would have to be blind and deaf not to notice such. Redbaiter is a prick.

  51. Ah. I’ve now been to Prager, muzzlefree.com (where I had to keep scrolling to avoid the pane telling me I had to register and affirm that I’m over 18), and then to Wikipedia, and I now see what Redbaiter is on about.

    This might have been the wrong place to raise the topic, and certainly the wrong thread, but … Mr Baiter has a point.

    It seems that people on this JournoList (I thought he had misspelled it, sorry) have colluded to write to an agenda – they themselves set? -, and without making that clear to their readers.

    Surely that is untoward. Who gave them that right? Did their editors and publishers not know? If they did, why didn’t they tell their readers?
    Surely they had a right to know.

    It was striking how Obama seemed to come through the pack in mid-2008. Most media support, as I recall, had been for Hillary Clinton. It reminded me very much of Jimmy Carter and his presidential run in 1976.

    Of Sarah Palin: She might not be bright, but I don’t think she’s stupid, or as stupid as some in the media like to paint her. I don’t know much about Alaska, or its politics, but I imagine she would not have been elected governor if she was a bimbo.

    She is one of those people, I think, whom you ‘misunderestimate’ at your peril.

    The Associated Press set a team of fact-checkers on her biography to try to catch her out. Unless I have not looked hard enough (and I haven’t gone to the nth), they have not done very well.

    The New York Times late last year ran a review by a Harvard or Yale professor of her book. What struck me was that it was one of the fairest pieces about her in a leading ‘liberal’ newspaper that I’d read.

    Apart from my reservations about this being the right place and the right thread, I think Mr Baiter deserved better treatment from some commenters for what he did bring up.

    Just my wooden kopeck’s worth.

  52. I thought Redbaiter was coherent and polite. He is not always so, it is true. But on this thread he has been.

  53. Paul Corrigan: thank you for a well-expressed, reasonable response, of a kind that should have come from the blog principal himself.
    ————–
    Re the “Journolist”:

    * it exists in America (whether a similar situation exists in NZ is a separate, irrelevant question), and was designed to SUPPRESS bad news about Obama during the campaign.
    * Mr Edwards, who professes to be a media watchdog, knew NOTHING about it
    * and the POINT is that not only is the American Journolist a MAJOR MEDIA SCANDAL (effectively, a complete dereliction of Fourth Estate duty), the news about it was also ignored by a collaborating mainstream media
    * any media-oriented discussion site, such as this one, should know about such things if it wishes to retain credibility
    * and now that it’s broken, all you have to do is – wait for it – Google it

  54. “I think Mr Baiter deserved better treatment from some commenters”

    Yeah, so do I. How about this outrageous comment though from one who flits about the blogosphere proclaiming himself to be the epitome of a tolerant liberal-

    “While your sense of fair play and adherence to the principle of free speech is guiding your approach to the likes of Redbaiter and his ilk, I would ask you to consider your other readers.”

    Haha- Yeah, consider your other readers who have no such adherence or principles. Sure seems to be the case. Does Mr. Edwards write for an audience of fascists? Apparently that’s what Mr. Trotter believes.

  55. Mr Trotter also believed, in a widely derided newpaper column that he wrote, that unethical methods would be justified to ensure that Labour won the last election – which it didn’t. The people, whom Mr Trotter so often wistfully purports to represent, spoke. At last.

  56. Gosh I enjoyed that! Even Chris Carter would have enjoyed it. I score it paranoia on the left 3, paranoia on the right 2 (simply because RB was vastly outnumbered). I am sure TV3 would like to make it a news item and I hope this wil get published for mentioning CC and TV3.

  57. I think it’s all moot now anyway, Brian, given that the dinner auction has been withdrawn. Perhaps TV3 would like to do a story on how they stopped it, because I’m pretty sure the abuse Carter and Kaiser were getting over this had something to do with it.

    • A friendly piece of advice, Brian.

      Yes, so that’s rather less money going to a good cause. Thanks TV3 and, of course, the homophobe community who support you and Trade Me.

  58. Is it true the charity auction in question has now been cancelled?

    • Is it true the charity auction in question has now been cancelled?

      It looks like the Chris/Peter dinner which they’ve auctioned for the past 7 years is off. I certainly can’t find it on Trade Me. A very sad victory for the mindless.

  59. “the homophobe community who support you and Trade Me”

    Heck, now there’s a word- “homophobe”. Derived from “homophobia” Which has as its root the Greek word “phobos” meaning flight and in English represented as “phobia” and usually forming a suffix to such words as claustrophobia, arachnophobia, etc- generally indicating an irrational fear that has as its root cause a mental or medical condition that can be diagnosed and treated by specialists.

    As a responsible and leading member of the NZ media Mr. Edwards, perhaps you can advise how many people have been diagnosed as “homophobic” by official medical practitioners and how many sufferers have been treated for this condition and how many have been cured.

    I mean, wouldn’t be right for the media to be using a made up propaganda term and trying to pass it off as some kind of mental condition would it? They’re surely all above attempting that kind of feeble deceit.

    • Heck, now there’s a word- “homophobe”.

      Now Redbaiter, I’ve had just about enough of you. Common usage is the normal standard in deciding the current meaning of words. Language is a living thing and Greek and Latin prefixes and suffixes often tell us little more about a word than where it came from. Homophilia and homophobia derive from roots meaning ‘love of the same’ and ‘fear of the same’, but for some considerable time, the word homophobia has been most commonly used to mean ‘a dislike of or prejudice against homosexuals’. The New Shorter Oxford (1993) gives both the older and the more recent and commoner meanings. “afraid of or hostile to homosexuals”. I am a linguist, married to a linguist, Redbaiter. I have a doctorate in languages, which you have not had the courtesy to give me in any of your pretentious, smart-arsed comments. Come to think of it, I haven’t just about had enough of you. I’ve had enough of you full-stop. Goodbye!

  60. Come to think of it, I haven’t just about had enough of you. I’ve had enough of you full-stop. Goodbye!

    Does Judy think you are beautiful when you are angry:)?

  61. Hey Brian – I too think that Redbaiter is indeed the ‘weakest link’, BUT to get back on thread it now looks as if Chris Carter has ‘cooked his goose’ – don’t know if that was going to be on ‘that dinner menu’. I think this just goes to show what incredible pressure our MP’s are constantly exposed to. I’m of the opinion that the more thick skinned they become the less effective they also become – or is that me indulging in a bit of wishful thinking. Oh well, on reflection, I’ve probably made a wrong assumption there – some of the more thick skinned MPs have remained MPs for a while now.

  62. I’ve noticed that most people who use the term Homophobia, do so, as an emotional painting word to shut down and denigrate someone who’s views they don’t like or agree with.

    Hence when I see someone using it I calss them as a wanker and dismiss the rest of what they are saying.

    I’ve never met anyone who actually hates homosexuals.
    But have met many people of both genders who don’t agree with their lifestyle choice.
    Interestingly, they are outnumbered by those who are fed up with the homophobia propaganda.

    But most of them won’t say anything publicly, probably for fear of being labeled a homophobe.

  63. I notice in this blog entry that you “suggested to Chris Carter”.
    I hope that you didn’t suggest today’s little escapade to him.

    • I notice in this blog entry that you “suggested to Chris Carter”. I hope that you didn’t suggest today’s little escapade to him.

      No. I would have thought my answers to the 10 questions would have made that fairly clear. Doh!

  64. That would have been a little difficult BE.
    At the time I put this in you hadn’t posted your 10 questions.
    I admit though I didn’t mean it seriously. I just couldn’t resist putting the comment in.