leading to: >https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-wellington-florist-calls-green-mp-a-bully-as-fresh-allegations-of-intimidation-emerge/YXWHXJJGTJH4BIAGOX5CPVPJ74/The Herald is a publication you have always despised. I note that you don't criticise Stuff or other publications that are pro left wing parties and were paid by the last government to publish what they were told to, but then balance is something you do not do, eh?
I am not surprised that the story originated at The Herald - written
by a reporter who only started with them in 2022 after completing
Bachelors Degree at AUT. It is accepted as professional practice to
seek confirmation of anything asserted for a story; doubtless he will
egret not having checked this source out, but where was the review
process within the Herald? Why did others who repeated the story -
RNZ, Stuff, NZME, Newshub - not do at least some elementary checking;
it doesn't seem to have been too difficult for Nick Rockel to find out
that the story was not balanced.
So yet again we see mis-information and dis-information - this time
from our own media. There is no doubt that Genter's action in
parliament was wrong, but that does not excuse vilification by our
press. The Herald partially cleaned up its act when it got rid of Mike >Hosking, but he was always billed (at least technically) as "Opinion"
- no such disclaimer with this amateur hit job on a politician.
But it appears The Herald could not stop: - the article above was at
7:11 am, then at 11:58 am we get : >https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-florist-laura-newcombe-says-being-filmed-by-mp-was-humiliating/EZMBCKZZURCPXJIRIHNWMAEFLA/
which after repeating and giving more the views of Newcombe of , did
at least identify that there were other views . . . - but then
finished with a nasty quote from Queen Nasty (National of course)
Nicola Young
. . .
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/i-could-be-a-floristThe Herald is a publication you have always despised. I note that you don't criticise Stuff or other publications that are pro left wing parties and were paid by the last government to publish what they were told to, but then balance
leading to: >>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-wellington-florist-calls-green-mp-a-bully-as-fresh-allegations-of-intimidation-emerge/YXWHXJJGTJH4BIAGOX5CPVPJ74/
I am not surprised that the story originated at The Herald - written
by a reporter who only started with them in 2022 after completing
Bachelors Degree at AUT. It is accepted as professional practice to
seek confirmation of anything asserted for a story; doubtless he will
egret not having checked this source out, but where was the review
process within the Herald? Why did others who repeated the story -
RNZ, Stuff, NZME, Newshub - not do at least some elementary checking;
it doesn't seem to have been too difficult for Nick Rockel to find out
that the story was not balanced.
So yet again we see mis-information and dis-information - this time
from our own media. There is no doubt that Genter's action in
parliament was wrong, but that does not excuse vilification by our
press. The Herald partially cleaned up its act when it got rid of Mike >>Hosking, but he was always billed (at least technically) as "Opinion"
- no such disclaimer with this amateur hit job on a politician.
But it appears The Herald could not stop: - the article above was at
7:11 am, then at 11:58 am we get : >>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-florist-laura-newcombe-says-being-filmed-by-mp-was-humiliating/EZMBCKZZURCPXJIRIHNWMAEFLA/
which after repeating and giving more the views of Newcombe of , did
at least identify that there were other views . . . - but then
finished with a nasty quote from Queen Nasty (National of course)
Nicola Young
. . .
is something you do not do, eh?
But what you do all the time is attempt to assassinate the characters of anybody who is not extreme left wing, that is something you really adore, eh?
On 5 May 2024 22:15:49 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:Once more you indulge in a deliberate twisting of another person's post. You should be, but never will be, ashamed of your crass behaviour.
On 2024-05-05, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:Exactly, Gordon, this was a thinly disguised attack on Genter that did
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/i-could-be-a-florist
leading to: >>>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-wellington-florist-calls-green-mp-a-bully-as-fresh-allegations-of-intimidation-emerge/YXWHXJJGTJH4BIAGOX5CPVPJ74/The Herald is a publication you have always despised. I note that you don't >>> criticise Stuff or other publications that are pro left wing parties and >>>were
I am not surprised that the story originated at The Herald - written
by a reporter who only started with them in 2022 after completing >>>>Bachelors Degree at AUT. It is accepted as professional practice to >>>>seek confirmation of anything asserted for a story; doubtless he will >>>>egret not having checked this source out, but where was the review >>>>process within the Herald? Why did others who repeated the story -
RNZ, Stuff, NZME, Newshub - not do at least some elementary checking; >>>>it doesn't seem to have been too difficult for Nick Rockel to find out >>>>that the story was not balanced.
So yet again we see mis-information and dis-information - this time >>>>from our own media. There is no doubt that Genter's action in >>>>parliament was wrong, but that does not excuse vilification by our >>>>press. The Herald partially cleaned up its act when it got rid of Mike >>>>Hosking, but he was always billed (at least technically) as "Opinion"
- no such disclaimer with this amateur hit job on a politician.
But it appears The Herald could not stop: - the article above was at >>>>7:11 am, then at 11:58 am we get : >>>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-florist-laura-newcombe-says-being-filmed-by-mp-was-humiliating/EZMBCKZZURCPXJIRIHNWMAEFLA/
which after repeating and giving more the views of Newcombe of , did
at least identify that there were other views . . . - but then
finished with a nasty quote from Queen Nasty (National of course) >>>>Nicola Young
. . .
paid by the last government to publish what they were told to, but then >>>balance
is something you do not do, eh?
But what you do all the time is attempt to assassinate the characters of >>> anybody who is not extreme left wing, that is something you really adore, >>>eh?
Read the first paragraph and saw that the person is being attacked and not >>the ball.
not meet journalism standards - it was effectively an attack on issues
that were unrelated to the events in Parliament (for which Genter was
rightly criticised) that amounted to pushing a political agenda. I did
not pick up similar articles in other news outlets but I note that you
do not give references to similar lapses in journalism standards,
although I have no doubt it does occur from time to time.
If one defends a point of view there is a chance that the other side will be >>think about it and agree with your point.
On 2024-05-05, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:Exactly, Gordon, this was a thinly disguised attack on Genter that did
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/i-could-be-a-florist
leading to: >>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-wellington-florist-calls-green-mp-a-bully-as-fresh-allegations-of-intimidation-emerge/YXWHXJJGTJH4BIAGOX5CPVPJ74/The Herald is a publication you have always despised. I note that you don't >> criticise Stuff or other publications that are pro left wing parties and were
I am not surprised that the story originated at The Herald - written
by a reporter who only started with them in 2022 after completing >>>Bachelors Degree at AUT. It is accepted as professional practice to
seek confirmation of anything asserted for a story; doubtless he will >>>egret not having checked this source out, but where was the review >>>process within the Herald? Why did others who repeated the story -
RNZ, Stuff, NZME, Newshub - not do at least some elementary checking;
it doesn't seem to have been too difficult for Nick Rockel to find out >>>that the story was not balanced.
So yet again we see mis-information and dis-information - this time
from our own media. There is no doubt that Genter's action in
parliament was wrong, but that does not excuse vilification by our
press. The Herald partially cleaned up its act when it got rid of Mike >>>Hosking, but he was always billed (at least technically) as "Opinion"
- no such disclaimer with this amateur hit job on a politician.
But it appears The Herald could not stop: - the article above was at
7:11 am, then at 11:58 am we get : >>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/julie-anne-genter-confrontation-florist-laura-newcombe-says-being-filmed-by-mp-was-humiliating/EZMBCKZZURCPXJIRIHNWMAEFLA/
which after repeating and giving more the views of Newcombe of , did
at least identify that there were other views . . . - but then
finished with a nasty quote from Queen Nasty (National of course)
Nicola Young
. . .
paid by the last government to publish what they were told to, but then balance
is something you do not do, eh?
But what you do all the time is attempt to assassinate the characters of
anybody who is not extreme left wing, that is something you really adore, eh?
Read the first paragraph and saw that the person is being attacked and not >the ball.
If one defends a point of view there is a chance that the other side will be >think about it and agree with your point.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 51:42:13 |
| Calls: | 10,397 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 14,067 |
| Messages: | 6,417,343 |
| Posted today: | 1 |