Ian Wishart

Is Ian Wishart a politician or a journalist?

Bloggers wanting to be journalists. ?Journalists running blogs. ?The friction as to what constitutes “real news” has been debated for many years.

But what happens when a known journalist, an acknowledged one, is drifting into politics, but does not reveal this? ? Then what the journalist writes about politics or the party is unlikely to be impartial. ?To not allow readers to know you have an interest is very much like a politician, but less like a journalist.

Ian Wishart of ?Investigate Magazine fame was approached by the Conservative Party to run for the 2014 campaign, but he declined. ?We know he is a Christian conservative, so in general he would be aligned with the party’s ideas.

As covered this morning, we’ve seen him lend a hand by publicising “The Great Kiwi Poll” which was just the Conservative party itself really. ?Ian supporting a cause that he believes ?in doesn’t make his work any less valid.

Unless, of course, instead of being a reporter, you turn into someone to whom hard facts are suddenly just approximations to be bent at will.

There is no doubt in my mind that Wishart knew the Conservative party was behind the mysterious poll. ?And so, promoting it on a site that has been a site where he’s been selling?investigative journalism and news is a little cheeky.

But I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. ?The poll was meant to be some kind of mystery poll with an aim to stop respondents skewing their responses. Read more »

Conservative party nearly breaks 5% in poll

Whaleoil follows political parties, other media and people of interest as part of staying on top of what is happening. ?One of those is Ian Wishart’s website for Investigate Magazine. ?He normally only publishes two or three articles a month. ?Often these are to push his own work. ?Fair enough.

Read more »

Why won’t anyone step up to lead the Conservative party?

The Conservative party have approached a number of people to lead it since Colin Craig’s leadership fell under a rain cloud.

Here’s a list, which may not even be complete.

bob-mccoskrie-family-first

Bob McCoskrie

The moral crusader considered the position for a while, but in the end declined. ?Just like in court, where he said he had not been part of the production of Colin Craig’s “Dirty Politics” booklet, and then had to be recalled to be given a second chance to explain why he had email correspondence with Colin Craig that proved … his memory was faulty. Quite?how a moral crusader justifies?giving evidence in support of Colin Craig after the sordid revelations in court and in the Human Rights Tribunal is beyond me.?A conservative party with McCoskrie at the helm would be constantly tested against Family First policy and inevitably would be found to be supporting more than one position depending on which organisation he was fronting. Read more »

Wishart to release explosive book on Ben & Olivia case, identifies the “mystery ketch”

Journalist Ian Wishart believes there will be “red faces” and “demands for explanations” when a new book on the Scott Watson case hits bookstores in a fortnight or so.

Entitled “Elementary: The Explosive File on Scott Watson and the Disappearance of Ben & Olivia – What Haven’t They Told You?”, the book promises to identify the “mystery ketch” that has dominated books, documentaries and public debate around the case.

Wishart only went public with news of the impending book to Investigate Magazine website subscribers late Thursday?and, within minutes, major media outlets were making inquiries.

“I appreciate there’s massive public interest in this case, but I’ve made it clear that I’m not revealing anything that’s inside this book until it launches in bookstores on an undisclosed date late January. The book will be printed at an undisclosed location, and I will take questions the moment it releases. The book is the most exhaustive review of the case ever published. It will leave some people with red faces, and after the public get a chance to read the never before published evidence, I expect there will be big demands for explanations.” ? Read more »

Face of the day

David Rankin

David Rankin

David Rankin is an interesting person to do a google search on.

He has talked about the possibility of Maori not being indigenous in 2012

The status of Maori as the country’s indigenous population could be in danger if research, which suggests previous civilisations lived in New Zealand before Maori arrived, is proved true.

Ngapuhi leader David Rankin said books by authors such as investigative journalist Ian Wishart and historian Noel Hilliam presented “clear evidence” that some of New Zealand’s earliest residents might have arrived before the Polynesians.

He pointed to numerous Maori oral histories which referred to people being here when the first Maori arrived, including fair-skinned people.

“If we believe our histories, then we as Maori are not the indigenous people of New Zealand.”

The archaeological evidence in some research was a potential challenge to the status of Maori as indigenous, which was why he believed no other Maori was prepared to speak publicly on the issue, Mr Rankin said.

Details of much of the country’s past was being concealed by academic historians, he said.

“I would say it’s a conspiracy. They are worried that their own research will be exposed so they have worked hard to ridicule and suppress any Maori history which disagrees with their views.

“However, the tide is turning and more people are now seeing that there is a whole history of our country that has been concealed and which will have major implications for Treaty settlements for example.”

-NZHerald

Read more »

Why do people take a defamation action?

There is a case being heard in Wellington at the moment over an alleged defamation.

NBR reports [paywalled]:

Just when Truth newspaper bites the dust along comes a case that would have seen the old lady ?shunt up her circulation in the days when television was all Phillip Sherry and Ena Sharples.

The Wellington defamation action against author and publisher Ian Wishart, taken by former New Zealand ?diplomat Lindsay Smallbone, has it all. Not just sex, either, but voyeurism, threesomes and porn addiction, together with an unhealthy dose of infidelity, drug use, fraud and, well, you can really?fill in just about anything and anyone you like.

The case involves a book, The Hunt, by George London and Mr Smallbone?s former wife and model Paulette London, whose tale involves her?ultimately successful attempts to locate her abducted children. Mr Wishart represents himself in the proceeding, with Justice Joe Williams acknowledging he appears ?well able to defend?himself? under vigorous cross-examination from Mr Smallbone?s lawyer, Peter McKnight. ? Read more »

David Cullen Bain should get nothing, the Herald survey is wrong

David Fisher has taken a break from repeating Kim Dotcon’s words verbatim or from regurgitating Ian Wishart’s latest conspiracy theory to write (did he really write it) about a survey/poll that shows that most Kiwis, apparently, support giving David Cullen Bain some taxpayer cash.

Well not me, not ever.

All that poll/survey shows is how susceptible people are to long term persistent pr campaigns like that run by Joe Karam.

You know the survey/poll is totally suspect by the constant qualifications in Fishers article.

A?Herald-DigiPoll summer survey found 74 per cent of those polled believe Mr Bain should be compensated if the judge who reviewed the case recommended that. (The survey was started on December 7, before Justice Ian Binnie’s recommendation of compensation became public.)

and;

The poll of 500 people was done amid fallout from the review by Justice Binnie.

But what is it? A poll or a survey? The two are quite different. Clearly Fisher doesn’t know the difference. He is more intent on printing Charles Chauvel’s nasty little smears:

Labour justice spokesman Charles Chauvel said the “ad hoc” process had become “rotten”. He said Justice Binnie’s report was “perfectly adequate” and did not deserve “bile” from an “Auckland tax lawyer” like Ms Collins.

Right so someone who?she worked as a?lawyer, specialising in employment, property, commercial, tax law and active in legal associations, and was President of the?Auckland District Law Society?and Vice-President of the?New Zealand Law Society is an “Auckland tax lawyer”.

Using that logic I guess one could say Chauvel is a former editor of a little read legal bulletin and former lickspittle and lunch boy to proper lawyers engaged on important matters of law.

David Rankin reckons that Maori are not the indigenous people of NZ

Maybe David Rankin is on to something here, if he is, can Maori please refund all money they have claimed under the treaty, as its obviously the proceeds of crime, given that it was received for the land they claimed they owned, but probably stolen from previous occupants…..

The status of Maori as the country’s indigenous population could be in danger if research, which suggests previous civilisations lived in New Zealand before Maori arrived, is proved true.

Ngapuhi leader David Rankin said books by authors such as investigative journalist Ian Wishart and historian Noel Hilliam presented “clear evidence” that some of New Zealand’s earliest residents might have arrived before the Polynesians.

He pointed to numerous Maori oral histories which referred to people being here when the first Maori arrived, including fair-skinned people.

“If we believe our histories, then we as Maori are not the indigenous people of New Zealand.”

The archaeological evidence in some research was a potential challenge to the status of Maori as indigenous, which was why he believed no other Maori was prepared to speak publicly on the issue, Mr Rankin said.

Details of much of the country’s past was being concealed by academic historians, he said.

“I would say it’s a conspiracy. They are worried that their own research will be exposed so they have worked hard to ridicule and suppress any Maori history which disagrees with their views.

“However, the tide is turning and more people are now seeing that there is a whole history of our country that has been concealed and which will have major implications for Treaty settlements for example.”

Whaleoil Awards – Worst Political Journalist

WO-Worst-Journo

Commenters are pretty emphatic…and I have taken the liberty of adding?Bernard?Orsman.

The nominees are:

Barry SoperTeletubby explains:

Barry Soper for continually being more important than the story. Cock

Brian Rudman – Brian Rudman constantly bangs on about liberal elite past-times that he’d like to fund with other people’s money. A big fan of buses and trains…again funded by other people. His biggest bug bear though is that Auckland doesn’t have a suitable theatre that meets his fussy audiophile standards and he expects the ratepayers to have one damn it all! Troy explains:

Brian Rudman. Recipient of the Charles Southwell Award (for equitable and informed journalism) … yeah right, most of his articles are simple trash, so much so that I hardly make the effort to read them any more.

John CampbellCows4me writes:

Yeah he’s a lefty suckhole, most of the media in NZ are bent to the left. If we had a true right wing channel that held some of these dribbling lefty’s up to the light people like Campbell would struggle for air. It’s so easy to be a greasy, politically correct lefty when there’s no opposing voice.

Simon Collins – Collins pimps the poor, he came to my attention with his shocking half story about Tania Wysocki. I note to date he hasn’t had the stones to re-visit that story…he wouldn’t want to have to write about success by a battler. Hagues said:

Simon Collins for his series of wow and misery blamed either on the govt or “someone else.”

Bernard Orsman – Orsman is Len Brown’s direct line into the Herald. He has written so glowingly in favour of Len Brown I thought perhaps he had moved from the Herald Albert Street offices into the Town Hall to shorten the?communication?lines.

David Fisher ?- Fisher has compromised himself so badly this year. He has written little else other than PR articles on behalf of Kim Dotcom or Ian Wishart. He has become fixated, so much so he is now allegedly writing a book about Dotcom with the assistance of Paul Little…I hope they don’t get too friendly…we know what happens when wine, late nights and friends mix with Paul Little.

Whaleoil Awards - Worst Political Journalist

  • John Campbell (49%, 211 Votes)
  • Barry Soper (25%, 105 Votes)
  • Brian Rudman (11%, 45 Votes)
  • David Fisher (7%, 29 Votes)
  • Simon Collins (6%, 25 Votes)
  • Bernard Orsman (3%, 12 Votes)

Total Voters: 427

Loading ... Loading ...

Word of the day – totsched

via Stephen Franks

How dissent is literally silenced and ignored instead of debated. We witnessed this just last week with the treatment of Lord Monckton. We have seen it in action with anything that Ian Wishart ever says and now we are seeing it with John Ansell.

The other trick is to quietly exclude certain people from the national discourse. It is best summed up by a German word: totschweigtaktik. To be totsched is to be subjected to death by silence: books, ideas, people that challenge the status quo are simply ignored.

In Quadrant last year, Shelley Gare wrote that those who are totsched find “their efforts left to expire soundlessly like a butterfly in a jar”. When Orwell wrote his 1938 classic Homage to Catalonia, which addressed Stalinist Russia’s involvement in the Spanish Civil War, the left-wing literati simply ignored it. By the time Orwell died in 1950, barely 1500 copies had been sold. As Gare traces, the same death by silence was used to ignore Australian writers such as Chris Kenny, who challenged the secret women’s business behind the Hindmarsh Island affair. It was used when author Kate Jennings aimed her fire at the sisterhood, postmodernism and women’s studies.

It’s used by those who tell us that climate change will destroy us all if we do not act immediately. The sceptics are being?totsched. Opposing views? What opposing views? Governments have their own tactics. Those with poor ideas and even worse policies resort to something best described as the bipartisanship racket. Former prime minister Kevin Rudd called for bipartisanship on indigenous policies. In fact, Rudd sought supine obedience to the rollback of the NT intervention. If you disagreed, you were charged with politicising an issue. Just imagine if similar calls from those defending the status quo had managed to shut out the ideas from people such as Noel Pearson. The very last thing we want is bipartisanship when it is used so blatantly to stifle dissent and vest moral authority in one voice.

 

×