Read on Twitter
1/ Ok. My take on the media presser thing;
Yes, some NZers are overly protective of the PM. They don& #39;t need to be. She demonstrated that when she totally out played Walls yesterday.
Yes - some NZers find the presser part of the briefings anxiety producing in themselves. They
Yes, some NZers are overly protective of the PM. They don& #39;t need to be. She demonstrated that when she totally out played Walls yesterday.
Yes - some NZers find the presser part of the briefings anxiety producing in themselves. They
2/ should probably turn off.
But what is also happening is NZers *are* seeing an aspect of the political/media process they don& #39;t"t usually see
And - yes - they don& #39;t much like it. Not because they don& #39;t understand or because they don& #39;t like "their" PM being questioned.
But what is also happening is NZers *are* seeing an aspect of the political/media process they don& #39;t"t usually see
And - yes - they don& #39;t much like it. Not because they don& #39;t understand or because they don& #39;t like "their" PM being questioned.
3/ They don& #39;t like it because they are seeing the way journalists work to frame the narrative about issues that directly impact them during a crisis, and they don& #39;t like it. When journalists come up with increasingly complex ramifications of levels restrictions, looking for
4/ a story in which they can write "OMG, you won& #39;t be able to walk your dog, take a swim, kiss your boyfriend!", when they could be asking - "What is the best way for people to remember to act within these restrictions?", viewers see what they& #39;re doing. When journalists demand
4/ answers about who is at fault so that they can write "PM blames hard working health workers for botch up!", instead of asking "This is clearly a mistake. How has it impacted on our response? Is it serious?", viewers can servwhatbthey& #39;re doing. When journalists demand the PM
5/ apologise for a mistake made by the MoH comms team so that they can write "PM forced to apologise for testing disaster!", instead of asking "It seems to have taken a while to fix. How will you ensure this won"t happen again?", viewers can see what they& #39;re doing.
They can now
They can now
6/ see how those stories happen. How events get twisted to create "newsworthy" narratives. And they can see political journalists aren& #39;t working to clarify, unravel, make sense of issues for the viewer. They can see how journalists are looming for s story, a hit, a scalp. And
7/ they don& #39;t like it.
8 / last bit: Today Anna Leask posted something demanding the PM take responsibility, using the old circus/monkeys analogy. She wasn& #39;t calling health workers & #39;monkeys& #39;. But it does highlight the issue. "Your circus, PM. Your monkeys" Actually it& #39;s *our* circus. Health
9/ workers are working for *us*. Political reporters, by necessity, remove themselves from the fray. Stand apart. Fair enough. Seems to me that model isn& #39;t especially helpful in this situation.
