Geoff Lealand

Defended by a Herald journalist as well

The Kiwi Journalists Association has a Facebook Group (funny for someone not a journalist I am a member of it…and it is only open for journalists to belong) has a lengthy discussion about me and my appeal.

There is some useful and fair (Rob Hosking) others snobby, wanky, pretentious, and lefty ( Geoff Lealand, Gavin Ellis etc ).

But this comment from Peter Calder brings things to a perfect summary of where things are at and where they should be.

Peter Calder: Gavin Ellis For the record, I regard Slater’s work as odious and repellent. But the relevant section prescribes that a news medium must “[disseminate] to the public or a section of the public … news and observations on news”. It does not say that the observations must be from various sources, just that they be plural.

I can’t see why Slater would be disqualified.

And I am most surprised to see that you and Geoff Lealand, both with academic credentials, would seek to reclassify Slater (you implicitly; Geoff Lealand explicitly) according to the ***quality*** of his contribution to debate. Quality is not mentioned in the definition: if it were, there are many columnists I can think of who should be seeking legal advice before relying on unidentified informants and hoping to rely on the confidentiality of sources.  Read more »