OPINION
Caleb Anderson
First published on NZCPR
Mr Peters’ recent frustration with the media is understandable. After a series of inane questions from the usual left-wing attack dogs he simply instructed them to “stop asking stupid questions” and then walked away.
And indeed their questions were stupid.
Amidst what might be seen as momentous discoveries and disclosures … the cascading evidence of fiscal ineptitude by the previous government, corruption, sabotage, bullying, and lies and deceit, the mainstream media have deemed it of greater importance to focus on Teslas, Te Reo lessons and slips of the tongue.
The media knows how to implant ideas and how to fertilize these.
The most enduring memory of Don Brash’s almost successful election campaign nearly twenty years ago is a photograph of him wiping mud from his face at Waitangi. The media played this endlessly.
The most enduring memory of Judith Collins’ tilt at leadership was her ill-advised prayer at a nearby church. The media played this endlessly.
The policy seems to be embed and repeat, embed and repeat, embed and repeat.
And by contrast, the excesses of the left are given a once-over lightly, never to be repeated, if attended to at all.
It takes a bit of brain power to figure out why the media are taking so long to get the message that they are out of step with what most people think and that the greater portion of the population is tuning out and going elsewhere.
Falling ratings, and unprecedented public frustration with their agendas, portend bleak times ahead for them.
Why can they not see that the saw is more than halfway through the branch on which they are sitting?
And yet they keep sawing.
When the source of funding for the Prime Minister’s Te Reo lessons trumps clear evidence of fiscal ineptitude (on a gigantic scale), for newsworthiness, when serious disclosures of corruption and misappropriation receive barely a mention, when vandals at Te Papa are treated as heroes, when the lacklustre turnout at recent protests are presented as evidence of imminent insurrection, when significant government announcements are barely reported or are manipulated to purpose … and when a token conservative view is sought to give the appearance of balance, something is terribly and very obviously wrong.
When historians reflect on past events, the accounts closest to the period in question are generally given very serious scrutiny. The media have a responsibility to report events accurately.
Alternative perspectives need to be (genuinely) sought, expert commentary needs to be (genuinely) invited, deep questions need to be (genuinely) asked, and stones need to be overturned.
Otherwise, we embolden those whose tendency is to throw caution to the wind, irrespective of the risk, and we greatly multiply the likelihood of repeating our past mistakes.
The excesses of the past six years (and maybe longer) need to be examined and documented. Memories are short. There is no better time to do this than now if we are to regain confidence in our political system and our public institutions.
The journalistic activism of recent years must be displaced by a return to honest, fair, and balanced reporting of the facts, irrespective of worldview.
In short, people are seriously tired of the not-so-clever ways in which stories are being slanted, while avoiding the appearance of doing so, and under the thinnest of veneers of even-handedness.
It seems doubtful that TVNZ and RNZ are redeemable in their current form, and there are serious problems with most print media.
While private media will inevitably be dealt with by the market, those funded, in full or in part, by the taxpayer need to be given a message that the status quo will not be tolerated, they need a very clear “shape up or ship out” message.
A journalist’s job is to report from across the spectrum of views and report these without fear or favour.
We are not interested in their opinions.
We do not want to be told what we should think.
We will apply our own filters in assessing the merit or otherwise of an idea or action.
During the election campaign, Mr Peters was forthcoming in his disdain for a media that was determined to ignore him and adamant that the current abuse of privilege by media would not be allowed to continue.
It is a matter of some urgency that this matter is addressed as the media has demonstrated its willingness to undermine a democratically elected government and to foment unrest in pursuit of their agendas.
We too are tired of the stupid questions, we see through the subterfuge, and we expect a much better return on our investment.
If Mr Peters sets his mind to this, I suspect there will be many there to cheer him on.
And in the meantime, a retort right across the coalition that stupid questions will not be answered might suffice.