You don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone

News media are good at telling us about other people but not so good at explaining the importance of their own existence. That has to change.

The standing of journalism has been undermined by characterising government funding of it as bribery. That has to change.

The New Zealand public either do not know or wilfully choose to ignore the fundamental reason why journalists are a vital part of a democratic society. That, too, has to change.

Unless the general public starts to value the role of professional journalism and demand its survival (and improvement) they are in danger of waking up one morning to find it gone or, if not gone, then reduced to the point where it can no longer hold power to account.

Today Koi Tū: The centre for Informed Futures has published a position paper on the media titled If not journalists, then who? It is a rhetorical question because there is no viable substitute for the role of the journalist in a free society.

I am an honorary research fellow at Koi Tū and I am the principal author of the paper. Today’s commentary, however, is written in my private capacity and should not be seen as necessarily reflecting the views of Koi Tū.

I don’t intend to use this commentary – delayed a day to coincide with publication of the paper – to set out its contents. You can read the paper here: informedfutures.org/if-not-journalists-then-who Rather, I want to discuss how I hope it will be used in essential development of public dialogue, the formation of government policy, and actions by the media themselves. Continue reading “You don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone”

Winston’s Royal Commission: Threat or opportunity?

We do not need Winston Peters’ Royal Commission into Media Bias and Manipulation, but it is high time we took a coordinated approach to the shape of our media landscape.

The New Zealand First manifesto coyly refers to a Royal Commission of Enquiry into Media Independence, but that is no more than a watered down title for the initiative the party announced with a petition back in June. And its Kaipara ki Mahurangi candidate, Jenny Marcroft, made the focus clear during the Better Public Media election debate last week when she referred to it as “a Royal Commission on Media Bias”.

This looks like vindictiveness. Such an enquiry would be no more than a witch-hunt, an opportunity for New Zealand First to address perceived slights and settle scores against journalists and their employers.

To be fair, though, at least NZ First (along with the Greens) has a detailed section on media policy in its manifesto. Some of its proposals, such as joint funding of media internships, have real merit. Sadly, its lead policy on media bias has none.

Let’s assume for a moment that NZ First does become the kingmaker in a new government. Giving in to Winston Peters’ wishes on the royal commission would be an easy concession, particularly if it traded away some of NZ First’s more wayward proposals.

Such an enquiry would be a disaster. Its true purpose, implicit in the petition title and Marcroft’s description, would be to level charge after charge against mainstream media organisations. In the process, the already depleted levels of trust in them would be further eroded, and their democratic purpose and role in social cohesion called into question. As the saying goes: No good will come of this.

Had it proposed a wider enquiry into the future of media, it may have been onto a winner. And, if Mr Peters does get his formal enquiry, it will be vital to move heaven and earth to broaden its remit to dilute (and hopefully eliminate) its misguided origins. Continue reading “Winston’s Royal Commission: Threat or opportunity?”

This is no celeb-soaked skim read

I had misgivings about writing on the arrival of New Zealand’s latest magazine, Woman. Should a male pass judgement on a publication clearly designed to serve the interests of the nation’s females?

By the time I got to page 80, I was thinking to myself: “I’ve got it wrong. Woman is about women, but it is not only for women.”

Continue reading “This is no celeb-soaked skim read”