I think this is the heart of the misunderstanding between political journos and public criticism of their questions.

The journos correctly say they're not asking silly or repetitive questions because they're dumb or mean, but to get the answers on record, or probe the answers... https://twitter.com/henrycooke/status/1299960436058587138

...to critics, their response is 'don't want to see sausages made? don't tour the factory' (which is a little ironically thin-skinned for a group whose job is to question others and make them explain themselves).

But here's the thing, what press conferences are has changed...

...they used to be non-public events for journos to gather info & quotes that they would then assemble into news

Now, the press conference is the news

The media themselves decided this by running them live and in full, and rightly so to inform the public in the COVID crisis...

..Jacinda's recognised that COVID press conferences are now themselves news events with large audiences

That's why she starts with speeches that bore journos but are in fact directed at & appreciated by the public audience

journos are still working like old press conferences...

..& getting angry at public criticism

An old political warhorse used to say- 'if the public believes it, it's true'. Doesn't mean whatever the public believes is correct, but if the public is your judge/customer (as it is with politicians or journos) their view is what counts...

..this is a long way of saying if press conferences are going continue to be live news events - & they are - the public will judge all participants through that lens. They will take the questions at face value & as genuine attacks

...& grumpily telling them off won't change that

PS. we should all try to walk a mile in each other's shoes

The public don't understand the process, they see unseen voices yelling aggressive questions at someone they trust

Journos see themselves performing a vital role informing the public- being cast as villains is upsetting