top of page

From his personal Podium of Truth at OneNews, Jack Tame writes, "I share the view of many others that any net reduction in the total number of journalists is damaging for democracy. Regardless of the medium, it means fewer people questioning power". Who does Tame think he is? An Opinion Leader? A Thought Leader? Didn't he read the AUT Media Trust report published last week? It said, "Those who say they don’t trust and/or avoid the news are most concerned about .. what they perceive as political bias and opinion masquerading as news". What is TVNZ's reaction to Newshub's demise? To run as its lead story Tame's "Analysis" of the situation, which is not analysis at all, but instead his view, his own opinion, which is probably biased anyhow since he may have an interest in defending his industry mates. Hang on - isn't that exactly why people are switching off the news, according to the Media Trust survey? It has long been known that a greater number of journos doesn't mean more questioning of those in power & doesn't strengthen democracy if those journos are under the thumb of the folks in power. That has been happening around the globe since the start of time and it is happening in many countries right now. So Tame's argument is wrong.

Quality journalism that reports a diversity of views but, most importantly, in the age of Web, allows readers & viewers to connect, respond and trade with one another is booming. On the other hand, having biased views of Main Stream Media journos shoved down our throats is a turnoff. Next time an NZ news outlet thinks its fun to give a platform for folks leading up to an Election to call ACT's Leader "financially illiterate" (untrue) and National's budget "bullshit" (a false allegation) then maybe its journos should ask themselves if people will just switch off. On how the media can make as much money as ever in the age of the internet, take a look at my old acquaintance, Bharat Anand's, Podcast. I'm sure you will enjoy it, not that any journos in our media industry have probably bothered to watch. They're too busy analyzing themselves and their own factual opinions.


Christchurch Cathedral was damaged by earthquake in 2011. The total rebuild cost is now estimated at $NZ 248 million - in other words around 1/4 billion Kiwi $ with a date of completion sometime in the next decade, if you're lucky. Meanwhile Fletcher Building has incurred a total cost for the Auckland Convention Centre of $NZ 900 million. As for one of the biggest ancient structures in the world, Notre Dame Cathedral, it had a catastrophic fire in 2019 that brought down large parts it. The restoration is nearing completion. It is reopening later this year, at a cost of around $US 760 million - in union dominated, socialist France. There are US-NZ exchange rate changes to be made, but what do these numbers tell us? They suggest it doesn't matter how much money NZ throws at infrastructure - maybe at pretty much everything - the Kiwi "system" is broken. Competition is bust. Productivity stalled. The country is pricing everyone out because both the private & public sector are not working efficiently. My view is that a set of massive reforms that would make the Coalition Agreement look like a tea party are now required or NZ will become a failed state. Their nature would be to transform our economy along the lines of the Singaporean model. NZ First's "2023 Election Planks" state that the party "has studied the Irish Celtic Tiger success along with the successes of Singapore & Iceland and believe these are much more sound models than economic experimentalism". What is it waiting for? Do it.


Home: Blog2


Thanks for submitting!


Robert MacCulloch

bottom of page