Talking around the issues without the complete picture

Otago Daily Times

21-05-2025

If Andrea Vance in The Sunday Star Times had wanted to bring the media into increased disrepute she could not have done a better job than her contribution in that paper on May 11.
Readers and listeners have been turning off politics (as presented by the media) in droves, although not quite so much the politics reported by the ODT , as it happens.
Ms Vance calling a minister of the Crown the c-word was not merely a slip of the tongue in the heat of the moment.
This was a column which was written, likely on Friday, and made it from Ms Vance past editorial scrutiny to the paper, both the written and the digital version, on Sunday.
But perhaps as important as what is being written is what the media is not writing.
The protection given to the media by democratic countries is given because the media is an integral part of a functioning democracy. We need a free independent news media to provide in-depth, factual information to inform political decision-making.
We also need them as watchdogs against abuses of power and to offer a forum for the exchange of opinions and perspectives.
Increasingly, we are receiving scant information about the issues being raised. The news media seems focused on interviewing each other and others in opposition to the government.
The opinions being offered take the place of any useful in-depth information or analysis.
For example, around the Treaty Principles Bill we heard there were hundreds of thousands of submissions, 90% of which were against.
Anecdotally, it seems many were of the opinion that David Seymour was trying to deny the Treaty. The news media made no attempts to disabuse people of that view.
There was no media discussion around whether it is a general view that Parliament is not sovereign in New Zealand. Or what it would mean for it not to be sovereign.
The Pay Equity Amendment Act reporting made much of people with placards and aired appropriate concerns around the use of urgency.
The news media gave us no information about whether this government has been using urgency more or less than previous governments.
More importantly, it took a lot of researching to find out what the amendment would do, and why the government wanted to pass it.
The media covered unseemly parliamentary debate on the subject, still without giving any idea of the legislation.
Finally on Saturday, May 17 the ODT printed an opinion piece on the business page which gave a rundown of the Act.
From most of the media there has still been no explanation of the hysterical response from such as Ms Vance.
We heard it would save the government money. We heard it would set back the cause of equal pay for many years.
What we should have had is information about what comparisons were being made between male- and female-dominated industries.
We didn't hear that various industry bodies, including some unions, agreed that it was not working well and should be at least tweaked.
We may have come to the conclusion on our own that this amendment was not to our liking. But we needed the background.
Closer to home there is an issue with the Dunedin City Council around replacement of our landfill.
There were over 700 submissions to the DCC long-term plan, many of them supportive.
Yet the only issue which has received much of an airing is the Smooth Hill landfill submissions, which were less than 6% of the total. And the reporting on Smooth Hill has been notable by its absence of useful, informed background information, despite much information being provided by the DCC.
There has been reporting provided about the views of those seeking office at the next election, and some who clearly have commercial interests, but little actual information on what choices councillors have made based on what information.
What were the other 660 submissions about? What were the people of Dunedin wanting the councillors to consider in spending our rates for the next nine years?
Instead we have a seemingly endless I think-you think conversation happening without any clear understanding of what is behind the choices being made.
When the news media is doing little more than allowing views to be expressed without any clear understanding of what, if anything, is behind the views, the accusation of bias increases.
Even information around polls seems to be biased, usually towards the left.
Even RNZ's flagship Mediawatch programme is accused of bias.
Chris McVeigh KC, writing for RNZ, recently talked of someone being asked if they listened to M ediawatch .
The answer was: "If I want to have some self-righteous bastard preaching to me on Sunday mornings, I'll go to church thanks".
[e-mail]
• Hilary Calvert is a former Otago regional councillor, MP and Dunedin city councillor.