Is Axing John Campbell Part of A Bigger political agenda

IS CAMPBELL'S AXING PART OF A BIGGER POLITICAL AGENDA?

On Thursday news broke that TV3 veteran journalist John Campbell may be facing the axe.  Questions have been raised since then, is the plan to get rid of journalists who don't support the New Zealand Government?

It's hard to know 100% as the Government would deny the allegations but let's look at the facts shall we?

Mediaworks has been in financial trouble for a few years and faced the receivers in 2013.  There were changes on the board following. Touchdown TV founder Julie Christie who sold the company to Eyeworks was appointed alongside Rod McGeoch (chair) an Australian businessman, Martin Dalgleish another Australian business executive and managing director and Paul Lockey, yet another executive without media experience, that has substantial business experience.  Julie Christie is the only one with any media experience but she is a reality TV guru and if you look at TV3's programming they are moving further and further in that direction.  News is very much taking a backseat.

Since the news broke on Thursday there has been substantial opposition to the possible axing with three petitions calling for John Campbell to be kept on.  Campbell himself has enlisted the help of journalist and lawyer Linda Clark.  It is not yet known what capacity this is in.

There is an image circulating on Facebook which suggests the possible axing is part of a plan to silence media that opposes the National Government.  

If it is true that National is trying to silence opposing media that is disturbing but so far people on Facebook spoken to think it is false but accurate so the Government has acted to silence opponents but haven't said so in black and white.

Once the opposing media is silenced then who will speak out? Doesn't it make NZ no better than China for their extreme censorship and what else is National trying to hide from the public that could damage them? Having read The Hollow Men and Dirty Politics, both written by left leaning journalist Nicky Hager this does seem like something National would do.  Both books look at National's campaign and media strategies which tend to be led by Streven Joyce who founded Mediaworks.  Whatever the case is, it is very concerning for the public.

NZ Herald says journalism doesn't matter

Today the NZ Herald has said that people don't want news.  That they want entertainment.  I'd like to know who their sources are other than reality TV show commentators. What does Blogger Cameron Slater think?  What does Duncan Garner think?

Stuff.co.nz thinks of viewers as pundits.  They clearly missed the journalism lecture on being citizens and journalism serving a purpose.

Politically were diametrically opposed but NZ needs John Campbell.  Without him all NZ has is one angle, one spin, and no discourse.  

It will be a very sad day if it's canned and I for one will watch because despite being in Australia, TV3 has not geoblocked news content which indicates it is important.

Please sign the petition on www.actionstation.org.nz and please watch.

On the flipside of the NZ Media - Review of the Paul Henry Show

The Paul Henry Show debuted on Monday morning this week with Jim Kayes, Hilary Barry and Perlina Lau.

The start of Monday's show Paul was a bit serious and staid but as the show progressed he really did liven up with great banter between him and Hilary.  As the NZ Herald has suggested, Perlina was a bit awkward, and I share those thoughts.  She really wasn't needed, nor was Jim.  Hilary and Paul are enough and it's great to see a smart woman alongside an opinionated man.  It makes for a nice change.  I can't really see Perlina and Jim adding much to the show.

The stories were good and contrasting, there was the fluff and then the more serious stories like the Auckland mayoralty and Labour MP Phil Goff possibly standing.  Great charisma and discussion between Paul and Phil.  Paul had that great connection with all of his guests actually.  He was very engaging.

You can tell the show was catering to their radio audience in addition to TV, with no reference to the pictures on the screen.  It would have been good if he'd made reference to how people could view the pictures online or if this could be added later on.

I've been a fan of Paul Henry for a few years now, since I was 18 actually and I've always thought he was engaging and the Paul Henry Show really brings that out in him.  He's very engaging and little known fact, Henry is FUNNY, yes, you heard me say funny, well actually you READ me say funny.  He brings a real liveliness to morning (though I watch at night due to country time differences and after I've finished work and the gym) TV that has been lacking for several years since well....since Paul Henry was last on the airwaves.

The show loses a few points because he interrupts his guests and because Perlina and Jim aren't needed, but otherwise I have to give the show a four out of five star rating.

When does cost cutting become a cost itself

A couple of years ago Close Up on New Zealand's TV1 was axed in favour of Seven Sharp which is a show based on Australia's The Project which features on Channel Ten every week night.  It has been widely criticised with people saying they'd switch from TV1 to Campbell Live on TV3.  Campbell Live has been on TV3 and hosted by veteran journalist John Campbell since April 2005.  

Recently TV3 axed Nightline in favour of The Paul Henry Show which was short lived for a few months.  Henry now hosts the Paul Henry Show which is simulcast on RadioLive, also owned by Mediaworks.  Well today it was announced that the Campbell Live show would likely be axed in favour of Jono and Ben. For those who don't know they are comedians and do not have journalism qualifications.  

It actually seems as if that's a requirement to work in the NZ media and that if you do they don't want you.  Singer Anika Moa has been hired by the New Zealand Herald to interview musicians.

The Australian media is not much better.  Since Fairfax's purchase of Macquarie Radio Network the 2UE newsroom has closed.  It closed at 6pm tonight.  For those wanting alternative views this is such a bad thing. You can't get wide ranging arguments and views with only one newsroom.  It means all the sources have the same angle, and that amounts to propaganda.

People should be very very worried that profits are coming before information integrity.  Without news we cannot act as informed citizens of Australia, New Zealand, or the world and that is really scary.   

The more you cut something it will fail until the business eventually closes.  Without journalists there are no news organisations.

Gym etiquette - things not to do at the gym

I am a gym junkie.  I go to the gym most days.  The only times I miss the gym are when its closed.  I go even when I have a literal pain in the neck and I push myself even when things are difficult.  Given how much I attend the gym I want to talk today about the types of people who attend who may annoy you and grate on your nerves.

5 - Those who pretend to work out.  As I am cycling (and yes, I appreciate the irony of blogging as I cycle) I am sitting looking at the reflection of two people on the treadmills in the class.  Both of them are walking.  The one on the left, a 30 something male is speed walking and talking on his mobile, or shouting really.  The one on the right, a woman who frequently attends ALWAYS talks on her mobile.  She'd barely be walking at 5kms.  If you're going to the gym push yourself otherwise there is just no point.

4 - The grunters.  These are the blokes who grunt every time they lift a heavy weight.  Here is the thing people.  If you regulate your breathing, and this can be improved through running, then you won't grunt. Nobody needs to hear you work out.

3 - Machine hogs.  These are the people who don't just use a machine for a few minutes.  No.  Instead they'll hog the machines for at least an hour while there are no others and while the gym is full.  We get that you need to workout but we all pay for the gym equipment.

2 - Socialisers.  It's awesome you have friends and that your friends are fit but when you go to the gym please don't socialise.  There is a bar across the road and loads of cafes so take your socialising elsewhere.  We shouldn't have to turn out music up full blast to drown you out.

1 - Hal. Naked Chicks who think a bra passes as a top.  Congratulations on having a six pack but nobody wants to see it.  This is up there with the people who wear either all black or tights.  Lycra does not suit anyone and there are heaps of alternatives at Lorna Jane or other fitness stores.

So if you don't want to annoy people at the gym please don't do any of these things and we'll all have a very happy workout.

What the NZ Media and Government aren't telling you about the job market and economy for the average Jo

Remember the time when the New Zealand Government was trying to get people to stop moving to Australia?  And remember the time when there were around 30,000 people moving to Australia for a better life every year?  Remember when the NZ dollar was only buying 78 Australian cents?  And do you remember when there was the mining boom?

Times have changed and now it appears the tables have turned, or that's what the media and NZ Government will have you believe.  The NZ Government frequently says it's the rock star economy and the Australian media is lapping up these stories.

There is however the truth which is being ignored, and the NZ economy isn't actually doing that well. Sure the NZ dollar may be strong, but lets look at things shall we?  At the end of the day the NZ dollar started going up and then people started speculating and we all know that in economics basic supply and demand rules, so the greater the demand the greater the price?  Based on this economic theory it means that only the currency speculators are winning but the average Jo isn't.

There is no doubt that Australia once had a mining boom and that boom isn't as great as it was but it doesn't mean the NZ economy is stronger.  Sure the price of Iron Ore may have gone down because of lower demand, but overall the Australian economy is still stronger than the NZ economy.  To give you some recent news, it was reported in The Australian newspaper and the NZ Herald that Australians are moving to NZ.  What jobs did these people have though?  Well my friends you guessed correct.  They work in viticulture and agriculture, and where do they live?  Again you guessed right.  They don't work in the city.  They work in the rural areas.

Who went over to Australia for the mining boom?  It was blue collar workers, the types who didn't have qualifications and wouldn't get a job in the New Zealand economy.  Now that mining work has dried up they have nowhere to go, other than back to New Zealand.  It's a different story for those who work in the city and have university, or actually any qualifications though.  They can still find jobs in Australia.  The jobs are still plentiful.

I decided to investigate further. 

In New Zealand, with a population of 4.5 million people there are 17,000 jobs advertised.  In Melbourne that is 28,000 and in Sydney that is 40,000.  Now tell me who has the strongest economy?  Sure, economies of scale come into this but the reality is that the Australian economy is still booming for city workers.  City workers and those with qualifications will always be better off in Australia.  It's the unskilled workers that may have problems, and the NZ Government is ignoring these.

Sure there is the Christchurch rebuild where people can go, but it's a broken glass economy.  What that means is that once Christchurch is rebuilt the jobs will go, what do these unskilled people do then?  They go onto welfare is what.

The NZ dollar is doing very well but ultimately that will hurt farmers and those relying on exporting their goods and services.  It isn't reflective of what's actually happening out there in the market and the fact of the matter is the NZ job market is nowhere near as prosperous as the Australian job market.  Australia still has more jobs per capita. 

Pay day lenders exist because of flawed credit reporting and flawed lending criteria.

The Australian media loves a good story where the public can criticise companies.  It's the usual story, someone does something that gets them into trouble because they don't read the fine print.  Then before you know it they're blaming the company for their issues when it may not actually be the company's fault.

ABC's Four Corners ran a story tonight on pay day lenders.  Pay day lenders are exactly as the name suggests.  Companies lend to people who then pay back the loan on pay day.  The money is automatically taken out of your account by direct debit.  They have been criticised for charging excessive interest rates.  The interest rates are disclosed up front and people either agree to the terms and conditions or they don't.  If they do the money is transferred to your bank account within a couple of hours.

Pay day lenders are used by people of all types.  They are generally a lender of last resort.  The people shown on the Four Corners report were unemployed, mentally ill, druggies or simply didn't have enough money to live.  They are not the only people who use pay day lenders.  There are people out there who simply have poor credit scores from several years ago and instead of the finance companies or banks looking at current spending habits they look at how you used to spend money and what your income used to be.  This isn't how things should be done.  The banks used to lend to people freely before 2008 and then lending criteria got tougher so now the banks look at numbers from up to five years ago.  They don't look at your current situation.

Pay day lenders are not the predators that people think they are.  The fees and costs are disclosed up front before you digitally sign the agreement and nobody forces you to sign that agreement.  I agree with one part of the ABC's report.  If you're using pay day lenders for things like food and power then you have a problem, but in some circumstances that isn't the case at all.  There are people who use them for things like bond, car repairs etc.  That isn't a bad thing and as long as one pays back the loan there are no problems.

Pay day lenders exist primarily because of our flawed credit reporting system.  At this stage the system is set up to only report negative activity, so if you don't pay a bill that's reported, but if you are diligent that isn't reported.  If we had positive reporting people would have more of a chance to get their credit scores up and would be able to borrow from banks or other finance companies over a longer period of time. 

Why do we live in a society that only focuses on people's negative behaviour and actions rather than looking at the positive?  It seems counter productive.

The pay day lending industry wouldn't exist if banks the like looked at positive credit reporting and people's current financial position.  Instead however they look at a number which could be up to five years old, and that's just madness.  It also wouldn't exist if credit history only remained for three years.  A credit score doesn't take into account the economy or your previous employment situation compared to where you are now.  How someone paid their bills five years ago, even three years ago is not necessarily how you pay your bills today.  It's time to stop looking at outdated and irrelevant information.