David Farrar points out the utter hypocrisy of the media:
This is the e-mail released by the PMâ€™s Office. Obviously it has impacted Judith Collins, but if you read the whole thing youâ€™ll see it backs something I have said consistently.
Cameron deals with a huge range of people, including Labour MPs, Green MPs, and almost every media organisation in NZ. The book only showed you his interactions with people associated with National, but this e-mail includesÂ media contact with no less than four different journalists. One specific quote:
I am maintaining daily communications with Jared Savage at the Herald and he is passing information directly to me that the Herald canâ€™t run and so are feeding me to run on the blog.
Now let me say again that what Cam says in an e-mail is his interpretation of events. I regard Jared Savage as an excellent investigative reporter. But the e-mail does lead to questions being asked. How is media giving Cam stories, different to a press secretary doing so?
Now again what Cam has written is hisÂ interpretation. It may not be the literal truth of what Jared was doing. But hereâ€™s the thing â€“ you need to be consistent. If you accept everything in the e-mails written by Cam as the literal truth, then the NZ Herald was feeding stories to Whale Oil, which they could not run in their newspaper. If you do not accept those e-mails as the literal truth, then why would you accept the ones about interactions with people in National as the literal truth?
Is the Herald going to say thatÂ everything Cameron wrote about his dealings with us is incorrect, yet everything else is correct?
Will other mediaÂ subject Herald reporters and editors to the same level of inquiry that they have subjected others named in the hacked e-mails to?