National recently selected Chris Bishop as their Hutt South candidate. Chris, a Senior Adviser in Steven Joyce’s office, is up against the old Labour warhorse that is Trevor Mallard.
This week he has been out early in the mornings leafleting at various Hutt Valley railway stations, the photo shows him at Woburn early this morning.
If you want to see Mr Mallard pass into the pages of history, just like the warhorse has, then support Chris in Hutt South.
Adam made another milestone in his fitness and lifestyle programme at the weekend; he passed the 900 km mark in terms of distance walked since 1 January 2014.
In the past he had walked regularly, but in the last few years had lost the habit. At the turn of the year he decided to try and get back into the walking rut so to speak. The initial target was to walk 600 kms in the year, this was achieved by 7 May. Since then, in just under 2 months, a further 300 kms have been walked. So Adam’s present target is to have walked 1800 kms by year end.
This exercise has had excellent cardio-vascular impact and overall morale boosting sense of achievement.
There is a good old fashioned phrase ‘barefaced cheek’ , defined as used to describe someone’s behaviour when you want to emphasize that they do not care that they are behaving wrongly; alternatives include shameless and brazen. This came to mind when watching David Cunliffe on both The Nation and Q & A this weekend.
Cunliffe who has been in full bore preachy mode for weeks if not months as he attacks the government on donations and related matters, aided and abetted by Grant Robertson, now when exposed along with his party as neck deep in the poo, is seeking to claim that New Zealanders are not interested in all this stuff and want to hear about the real issues. Given that it has been Cunliffe and his minions who have been raking the muck and claiming the muck is what New Zealanders want to hear about, this is hypocrisy and effrontery of the rankest kind.
Like many who seek to preach from the moral high ground of their virtues he and his have been found to have been vain glorious and are now brought down by their own hubris and over weening sense of self righteousness.
Yet still the media do not really push Cunliffe in interviews on this and still we see the talking head panels seek to defend him.
This morning Adam opined on his Facebook page:-
When TVNZ introduces an item with the words ‘David Cunliffe’s latest debacle’ and Radio NZ has Guyon and Susie running several little negative items re Cunliffe in a row, you know that it is game over for Cunliffe. This is reinforced by Campbell getting out a bunch of wet bus tickets last night and slapping Cunliffe around with them.
Then this afternoon whilst driving back from an appointment he heard part of Jim Mora’s Panel Show. The panellists were David Slack and Dita de Boni. Subject as you would expect was Cunliffe’s latest imbroglio; the comments and attitudes expressed were true to form as regards this show and Radio NZ normally, ie it was all down to the evil National Party, Cunliffe was hard done by etc, etc. If David Slack could have found more ways to give Cunliffe victim saint status ,no doubt he would have. Clearly Radio NZ had a brain fart on Morning Report and have spent the rest of the day making up for it.
Brian Edwards, with whom I rarely see eye to eye, has an interesting article on the NBR website. He is writing about conflicts of interest in the media.
Adam’s eye was caught by these paragraphs, Adam has taken the liberty of bolding some especially pertinent, to his mind, text:-
There is actually nothing new about all of this.
So Edwards is saying that the NZ media have essentially always been compromised in this regard.
Then a key group of sentences:-
The list of television and radio broadcasters working in news and current affairs who are or have been simultaneously engaged in activities which conflict with their obligation to be and be seen to be utterly impartial in all matters relating to their jobs, is extremely long. They may well be in the majority. Conflicts of interest among such practitioners abound.
According to Edwards conflicts of interest in the news media are endemic and the majority of the media are essentially compromised in this regard. He highlights the area of media training.
The real trouble with the media training business is that some of its practitioners are still working journalists, reporters and interviewers. That makes them both gamekeepers and poachers, who can potentially end up reporting on or interviewing their own clients. Now that is as good a definition of ‘conflict of interest’ as you’ll find.
Edwards has ‘blown the gaff’ on the pretensions of the Fourth Estate. We have seen a lot of guff recently on how the duty of the press is to be impartial and objective and hold politicians to account. Yet myriad instances of ‘poor’ reporting or one sided articles come to mind. So the articles on perceived conflicts of interest in print and broadcast media, nearly always focused on National, are from the pens and mouths of ‘journalists’ who are in fact in many cases conflicted themselves. Now a number of words come to mind, but Adam will settle for two – sanctimonious hyprocrites.