I get very dissapointed. I thought the media was improving it's coverage of the whole smacking debate issue. But with the news over the last couple of days I guess I was wrong...
A) Listening to radio news yesterday on NewstalkZB there was a short piece on the Christchurch march. The only audio clip the radio played was of a guy who supported the bill. We heard nothing of the speeches of those opposed to the bill - the purpose of the march.
B) The Herald also had a news article, this one on the Wellington march. Rather than a picture showing the number of people attending, there was a picture showing Larry Baldock and again showing someone who supported the bill.
One thing I did like about the Herald photo was the irony that the supposed 'Pro-Violence' Larry Baldock appears calm and collected while the Anti-smacking 'Anti Violence' protester appears very aggressive. If this was the intention behind choosing this photo I will recant.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
you can't expect too much from the NZ media unfortunately, they are very very liberal.
I did quite enjoy tv3's coverage of the march in Wellington and Christchurch. In Wellington they showed the same old lady about 3 times attacking the marches ... It was very amusing ..
1. Because she was so old
2. She appeared to be the only one against
3. No one was paying any attention to her provocative attacks.
Christchurch was good because they had a couple of good audio bites from Simon Barnett and Garry McCormack. Both very smart guys, very well spoken and speaking out against the bill.
They also showed an 'Auckland Event' .. which was pro the bill (and closed doors) ... they had celebrities there .. Jude (Can't remember her last name) and Judy Bailey and some other guy I've never heard of.
-bruce
voters.co.nz
you guys are biased though! you are on one side of the issue.. the media has to look at both.
Now the Clark led government expects us to have faith in, and believe in their review process, what an absurd joke. You couldnt tell the truth if you tried.
Yesterday you were lying about not planning to push it though as a Govt Bill, then Bradford opens her mouth and reveals that Cullen had already done a deal with her earlier that same morning. And isnt the man behind the review... the tennis ball guy? None of us have abused children by forcing tennis balls in kids mouths, just one of her Labour Party ministers.
And now Helen Clark has also revealed that she is anti-Christian, seeing that she has openly attacked the highly respected Dr James Dobson and branded all Christians as wanting to bash and hit kids. The truth is we dont want her to change the existing legistation which protects parents who correct their children. So where does Helen Clark now stand with George W Bush? is she also accusing him of being a child abuser for having a Christian faith?
Haha! Michael. That's funny. The media might 'look' at both sides, but don't tell me they look at it from a purely neutral point of view. They have their own ideas...and these will colour their reporting.
Post a Comment