Post by Kiwi Frontline on Dec 9, 2023 8:46:46 GMT 12
REGIME CHANGE
Does it boil down to media bias? Or Government funding? Or both?
There is no doubt that the media is biased to the left.
They admit it themselves.
The “Worlds of Journalism Study 2.0. Journalists in Aotearoa/New Zealand” published last October by Massey University asked journalists to identify where they stood on the political spectrum: nine out of ten identified themselves as ‘left-wing’, and one in three as hard core.
But while the media has always been biased to the left, historically, their industry code of ethics has ensured fair and balanced reporting.
What the study points out, however, is that these days “journalists are much less interested in blindly adhering to their professional codes”. There’s been a significant shift from a focus on the “neutral observer” role – presenting both sides of a story so an audience can make up their own minds – towards advocacy: “educating the audience” and “countering disinformation”.
The end result is that these days the public no longer believe the media when they say they are unbiased – and nor should they because it’s clearly no longer true.
When it comes to government funding of the media, the age-old idiom “don’t bite the hand that feeds you” springs to mind!
Labour’s funding was extremely generous. The $50 million media rescue package announced in April 2020, was followed by the general Covid wage subsidy scheme in June, which many media outlets took advantage of.
In addition, there was significant government funding through advertising, with over $118 million spend on Covid ads alone from April 2020 through to March 2023.
The controversial $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund was introduced in February 2021, after Labour had won the election and the right to govern alone.
Unbeknown to voters at the time, the Ardern Government was planning to roll out He Puapua, a blueprint for Maori supremacy by 2040, that had been developed in conjunction with iwi leaders.
This plan for tribal control, which was to dominate the agenda of the new government, had been deliberately kept hidden from voters during the election. Labour feared a backlash that would have cost them votes if the public found out they intended to undermine democracy by introducing power-sharing arrangements with iwi for key public services through co-governance and race-based preference.
This unmandated – and therefore illegitimate – constitutional transformation, which had the effect of giving iwi leaders supreme authority over the lives of other New Zealanders, was to be justified through a re-interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi as a 50:50 “partnership” between Maori and the Crown. Promoting this fabrication was included as a key requirement for PIJF funding.
Under section 3 of the PIJF agreement, media companies receiving funding were not only required to: “Actively promote the principles of Partnership, Participation and Active Protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi acknowledging Māori as a Te Tiriti partner”, but they also had to “show a clear and obvious commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including a commitment to te reo Maori.”
The NZ on Air guidance to applicants provides a glimpse into the radicalised nature of this project by claiming, “Maori have never ceded sovereignty to Britain or any other State” and “our society has a foundation of institutional racism.”
A successful PIJF funding application by the NZ Herald referenced their Editorial Code of Conduct and Ethics as evidence of their commitment to the project: “We celebrate the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of New Zealand. We will strive to ensure that the Maori voice, world view, and language, where appropriate, are an essential part of our coverage and that our workforce reflects the face of modern Aotearoa. We embrace tino matatau (excellence), manaakitanga (duty of care) and pono (integrity) in everything we do. We promote understanding of Maori culture and tikanga, and do not reinforce negative stereotypes of any race through our content.”
Whether those provisions were included specifically to secure PIJF funding is impossible to tell, but what is clear is that the Herald’s Editorial Code of Ethics contained no such Treaty references in 2016.
When then Minister of Broadcasting, Chris Faafoi announced the PIJF, he claimed it would ensure “a healthy democracy by holding voices of influence to account.”
What he failed to spell out was that the strings attached to the funding would essentially discourage critical analysis of the Treaty “partnership” concept and by association, He Puapua........
www.nzcpr.com/regime-change/
Does it boil down to media bias? Or Government funding? Or both?
There is no doubt that the media is biased to the left.
They admit it themselves.
The “Worlds of Journalism Study 2.0. Journalists in Aotearoa/New Zealand” published last October by Massey University asked journalists to identify where they stood on the political spectrum: nine out of ten identified themselves as ‘left-wing’, and one in three as hard core.
But while the media has always been biased to the left, historically, their industry code of ethics has ensured fair and balanced reporting.
What the study points out, however, is that these days “journalists are much less interested in blindly adhering to their professional codes”. There’s been a significant shift from a focus on the “neutral observer” role – presenting both sides of a story so an audience can make up their own minds – towards advocacy: “educating the audience” and “countering disinformation”.
The end result is that these days the public no longer believe the media when they say they are unbiased – and nor should they because it’s clearly no longer true.
When it comes to government funding of the media, the age-old idiom “don’t bite the hand that feeds you” springs to mind!
Labour’s funding was extremely generous. The $50 million media rescue package announced in April 2020, was followed by the general Covid wage subsidy scheme in June, which many media outlets took advantage of.
In addition, there was significant government funding through advertising, with over $118 million spend on Covid ads alone from April 2020 through to March 2023.
The controversial $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund was introduced in February 2021, after Labour had won the election and the right to govern alone.
Unbeknown to voters at the time, the Ardern Government was planning to roll out He Puapua, a blueprint for Maori supremacy by 2040, that had been developed in conjunction with iwi leaders.
This plan for tribal control, which was to dominate the agenda of the new government, had been deliberately kept hidden from voters during the election. Labour feared a backlash that would have cost them votes if the public found out they intended to undermine democracy by introducing power-sharing arrangements with iwi for key public services through co-governance and race-based preference.
This unmandated – and therefore illegitimate – constitutional transformation, which had the effect of giving iwi leaders supreme authority over the lives of other New Zealanders, was to be justified through a re-interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi as a 50:50 “partnership” between Maori and the Crown. Promoting this fabrication was included as a key requirement for PIJF funding.
Under section 3 of the PIJF agreement, media companies receiving funding were not only required to: “Actively promote the principles of Partnership, Participation and Active Protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi acknowledging Māori as a Te Tiriti partner”, but they also had to “show a clear and obvious commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including a commitment to te reo Maori.”
The NZ on Air guidance to applicants provides a glimpse into the radicalised nature of this project by claiming, “Maori have never ceded sovereignty to Britain or any other State” and “our society has a foundation of institutional racism.”
A successful PIJF funding application by the NZ Herald referenced their Editorial Code of Conduct and Ethics as evidence of their commitment to the project: “We celebrate the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of New Zealand. We will strive to ensure that the Maori voice, world view, and language, where appropriate, are an essential part of our coverage and that our workforce reflects the face of modern Aotearoa. We embrace tino matatau (excellence), manaakitanga (duty of care) and pono (integrity) in everything we do. We promote understanding of Maori culture and tikanga, and do not reinforce negative stereotypes of any race through our content.”
Whether those provisions were included specifically to secure PIJF funding is impossible to tell, but what is clear is that the Herald’s Editorial Code of Ethics contained no such Treaty references in 2016.
When then Minister of Broadcasting, Chris Faafoi announced the PIJF, he claimed it would ensure “a healthy democracy by holding voices of influence to account.”
What he failed to spell out was that the strings attached to the funding would essentially discourage critical analysis of the Treaty “partnership” concept and by association, He Puapua........
www.nzcpr.com/regime-change/