First points to Hooton for daily editorials in The Post

Aristotle may have warned us that one swallow does not make spring, but Matthew Hooton’s first-week-in-the-chair decision to reinstate daily editorials in The Post is a welcome portent of things to come.

So, too, is his decision to establish an Editorial Leadership Team to “guide the daily leaders on the issues that matter to New Zealand and New Zealanders”. In other words, Hooton has sent the strongest signal that the daily editorial will not be simply a re-masted version of his now-discontinued opinion column in the New Zealand Herald.

Announcing the move last week, The Post said Hooton will chair the team along with associate editor Luke Malpass and national affairs editor Andrea Vance. The other members of the team suggest the spectrum of editorial subjects will be wide-reaching. Its full membership includes chief arts correspondent André Chumko, political editor Henry Cooke, Auckland business editor Dita De Boni, assistant editor Kelly Dennett, chief sport news director Mark Geenty, chief Wellington news director Marc Greenhill and Auckland editor Amelia Wade. Others will contribute as required on specialised topics.

The first editorial, published yesterday, was a well-researched and well-articulated critique of failed government projects – large-ticket items that had produced little or nothing in spite of having public money thrown at them. The peg on which it was hung was the outrageous immigration facial recognition software scandal now subject to an enquiry by the State Services Commissioner.

The leader was measured but pulled no punches: “…failure has ceased to be an exception. It has become a governing philosophy. That is a far graver scandal than any single abandoned project.”

It was prominently displayed across the top half of a page and was attributed to “The Post Editorial Leaders Team”. The aim is to produce editorials based on team consensus but Hooton has taken the highly unusual step of allowing dissenting members of the team to disassociate themselves publicly from the collective point of view. Continue reading “First points to Hooton for daily editorials in The Post” →

The news shown in bite-sized social media morsels

The significant investments that Stuff and NZME have made in video news are starting to look like wise moves even if the payback has yet to fully materialise.

Their current major initiatives – Stuff’s production of Three’s nightly news and NZME’s two breakfast video shows on Herald Now – are unlikely to be financial saviours for either group. They are, however, the foundations that will allow both groups to take advantage of significant shifts in news consumption.

Their strategic thinking was given a boost last week with publication of the latest Reuters Institute Digital News Report which has found growing audience enthusiasm for online video content at a time when search referrals to digital news sites is plummeting toward ‘Google Zero’.

The Reuters report surveys 48 markets (Australia is the closest we get). For the first time, all of the surveyed countries report a majority of people watching online video news. Seventy seven per cent of people globally consume it each week. In 45 of those markets, more people watch online video news than broadcast television bulletins. And 57 per cent of 12 to 15 year-olds identify a single platform as their most important news source. It is TikTok – the go-to site for short-form vertical videos.

It is noteworthy that this growth in online video consumption is all happening on third party platforms. Worldwide, video consumption on news websites and apps has dropped five per cent in the past year. The report is unequivocal: “…if news videos from mainstream news organisations are being watched, that consumption is likely happening somewhere other than that publisher’s own website or app”. Over the past three years the proportion who consume video on news websites and apps has dropped from 28 per cent to 23 per cent.

In a New Zealand context, that points to a future where few will be watching Garth Bray’s HeraldNow Business or Ryan Bridge Today on the Herald website, or repurposed Three News on Stuff, but will turning to YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok. Continue reading “The news shown in bite-sized social media morsels” →

Matthew Hooton’s controversial appointment: A smart move?

 It takes a lot to bowl over seasoned journalists but the appointment of Matthew Hooton as editor-in-chief of The Post in Wellington skittled more than a few. Even the Stuff website described it as “a bombshell move”.

Hooton’s background is political communication and public relations. He was one of Jim Bolger’s press secretaries and a National Party strategist. He has never been a journalist, although his commentaries have been a regular feature in the New Zealand Herald and other publications.

His website describes him as “the country’s leading centre-right political commentator”. It goes on to say he “is well connected with the most senior figures in all three parties in New Zealand’s centre-right National-Act-NZ First Coalition Government and with the Opposition Labour Party.” Perhaps he is not on the Green Party or Te Pāti Māori invitation lists.

Although he has widespread consulting experience beyond politics, it is his perceived political leanings that will create the greatest controversy over his appointment at The Post.

There will be critics aplenty, who will see The Post being printed on blue paper and espousing the unchallenged views of the Right (with a very large Capital R). They will be goaded into red-faced rage when they see the title of his recently completed PhD thesis: “Groundwork and Principles of Applied Conservatism”.

I suspect that controversy has a large part to play in Sinead Boucher’s decision to appoint him editor-in-chief of Wellington’s daily newspaper, but it will not be through any desire to provide him with a powerful soapbox for political allegiances. Continue reading “Matthew Hooton’s controversial appointment: A smart move?” →

A prediction: New Zealand’s media when I turn 100

Commentators who project themselves into the future are either very gifted or exceedingly stupid. Only time will tell which of those I have been.

I have been encouraged to lay my credibility on the line by a series of reports over the past week that address the future of mass media – the print, broadcasting, and mainstream digital outlets that are the primary producers of journalism.

I have projected myself forward to a time when I am preparing for my 100th birthday. Okay, it’s not that far away. We are talking about a leap in time of not much more than 20 years. Given the pace of technological change, that is as far forward as any sane person should be prepared to predict.

What I see is a landscape in which print is the quaint pursuit of an artisan group of niche periodical publishers, broadcasting is no longer a term in common use because it has been replaced by streaming services, and ‘mainstream’ is something that marketers recall with wistful fondness.

I see China and Bangladesh continuing to flood the world with mass-produced use-and-throw-away garments with which we clothe ourselves, while information seekers turn to the equivalent of nineteenth century bespoke tailors for their news. Journalism will become personal.

Several developments have drawn me to that prediction. Continue reading “A prediction: New Zealand’s media when I turn 100” →