Must read

What's hot

Affordable housing fails in the cheap back blocks of Nelson
MARION VAN DIJK/FAIRFAX NZ via Stuff
15

The Huddle at 1740

by Whaleoil on November 26, 2012

I am on the Huddle tonight with Larry Williams and Josie Pagani.

Our topics are:

  • The allegations facing Brendan Horan -  a mere family fight or a devious man willing to steal from his dying mother. Either way it doesn’t look good for him. (Not that he’ll be missed in Parliament because no one can recall that he’s actually done anything there!)
  • Jetstar’s latest cock up. This time cancelling flights on Christmas eve. This airline appears to go out of its way to court bad publicity! Seriously you think they would have learnt by now?
  • Apparently Phil Goff didn’t get a fair deal in the last election. The release is below.

New research to be released this evening concludes that four of the country’s top newspapers were biased in their coverage of the last election.

The research by Massey University Associate Professor Claire Robinson finds that the Herald, Herald on Sunday, Dominion Post and Sunday Star-Times all exhibited substantial bias in their selection and use of images during the election campaign, most of it in favour of Prime Minister John Key.

“Labour and Phil Goff have real grounds to feel they were unfairly treated in print during the last election campaign,” Dr Robinson says.

Tagged: • • • • • • • •

Related posts

  • Positan

    When, or should I say “if”, Labour ever shows the remotest trace of demonstrable competence to the electorate, and fields as candidates, individuals possessed of backgrounds relevant and worthy to be elected to parliament such as proven business/administrative track-records – then, and only then will I worry about whether that party has been “unfairly treated” by the media.

    Who pays for Claire Robinson to waste her time and, doubtless, government funding on such fatuous nonsense? She should be ordered to make restitution in full to the university.

    I used to believe there was value in having university qualification – but most intelligently pursued applications seem to have been prostituted beyond belief. That such nonsense “research” could attract current media attention is bad enough, but Robinson should be subjected to having all future “research” programs monitored and evaluated before any funding was applied.

  • Phar Lap

    Ms Clark got so much coverage in 2008 with her airbrushed head,and perfect teeth.In fact she owned the media.TELEVISION NZ ,TV THREE ALL THE NEWSPAPERS,ETC,ETC.John Key only got recognised because he ran rings around the old boot in a TV debate three times.Anyway in 2011 Goff was so dim witted he would not even agree to let his face be on Lie-bours billboards.Overall whats the point,with the latest on the media coverage on the 2011 election.who cares now.The mentioned media have certainly made up for any sign of them favouring the Nats at the last election.Every day they make up crazy lying stories regarding John Key,some of them bordering on Libel.

  • JC

    Such research is useless without comparisons to several earlier elections to establish a baseline. My guess is the PM always gets better publicity regardless of party because his or her day job naturally puts him in the limelight.

    JC

  • Middleagedwhiteguy

    Oh come on…not even Labour used Phil Goff’s image in their election advertising.

  • Neil

    I’m sorry that is just so wrong – everyone knows the media is run by socialists and lefties.

    • Lion_ess

      Neil, do you mean the media is run by socialists and lefties, or owned by socialists and lefties? I’m curious if you mean the latter.

  • CommonSense404

    Seriously?! Bias in favour of JK? I suspect if Ms Robinson’s ‘research’ extended to the tone and content of editorials, opinion pieces and general selective reporting, an opposite bias would probably be evident. But she reports only on the number of times their photos appeared – a pretty dubious proxy.

    • Pokerface

      CS404 – Agreed, I distinctly recall months of bristling at each news item, read or watched, in the lead-up to the election. I suppose the view depends on which side of the fence one sits. But funding this rubbish is nuts.

  • Gazzaw

    Considering the shit that was stirred up by labour, winston, wussel & the media over teacupgate I’m not surprised that JK scored heavily on the number of times his image appeared. Labour aided & abetted that preponderance.

  • Gazzaw

    As for Jetstar – never again. Last week a family members flight from Singapore to Auckland was cancelled three days prior to departure and replaced with flights via Melbourne resulting in a lengthy delay in the ETA in Auckland. A family function was totally stuffed up. We should have known better but never, never again will our family fly Jetstar.

  • stanman

    this has to be a complete waste of time study.

    The Labour party pulled all hoardings with Pics of Goff, they ran an invisible campaign purely because they knew the leader was a has been and had a total popularity that could be etched on a pin.

    I cant believe this woman got air over this-is she an insider? im guessing very left leaning given she hails from Smarmy from Palmys education centre

  • Sir Cullen’s Sidekick

    What a waste research…everybody including Labourers themselves were scared of using Uncle Goff’s image….He needed a photoshop to look like Brad Pitt to stand a chance against Emperor.

  • toby_toby

    “Dr Robinson assessed every image of John Key and Phil Goff published
    during the election campaign in the four big papers. Mr Key featured 138
    times while Mr Goff featured 80 times. Mr Key also dominated the column
    centimetres, at an almost two to one ratio.”

    John Key of course was the PM. Naturally there were going to be stories related to things that he and the govt were doing at the time that were unrelated to the elections. Did she actually separate those out? Because the press release doesn’t say.

    • Callum

      Pretty simple, no one knew who Goff was.

  • GregM

    Don’t forget taxpayers, you all paid for this groundbreaking research paper.
    I hope you are all as delighted as I am with the conclusions reached.

    Why are we paying for this shit???

%d bloggers like this: