Thursday, May 12, 2016

How do I trust thee NZ Herald? Let me count the ways

Yesterday, David left a comment that made me go and look at the latest NZ Herald editorial relating to domestic violence. It was titled:

Never any excuse for a man to hit a woman

The number of responses that took issue with the sentiment expressed was surprising.

Now, at the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I know for a fact that NZ Herald's current modus operandi is achieving website hits.  For example, they set up minimal word (for the attention deficit readers) contrasting views to provoke debates readers will repeatedly return to.

Regarding their anti-domestic violence campaign, I'd accepted their anti-male bias as sincere if misguided.

But I may be a muggins. Perhaps this entire campaign has been set up to antagonize and enrage, thus setting up a flurry of website hits.

Or maybe I am over-thinking it.

It's bad enough not trusting their so-called facts.

It's worse not trusting their motivation.


Mark Hubbard said...

Their current saturation Bachelor content shows they're only about clicks.

Only NZ sources I read now are NBR and RNZ.

Brendan McNeill said...

Sadly, when it comes to our media, there are times when jaded cynicism can be the only response.

S. Beast said...

They are marginally better than Stuff at present who have taken to placing selected US stories in above the fold slots (normally reserved for items of greater importance). God knows why.

Of course neither Stuff nor the Herald is beneficial to critical thinking or worthy of much time.

david said...

Following from Mark's comment, I originally wondered whether NZME had a financial interest in the Bachelor, I couldn't understand why a newspaper would give it more than one line in the entertainment pages otherwise. But if the "most viewed" list is genuine (cynic again), Mark has the answer, it is all about clicks. And taking up a point you made Lindsay, I see every day also has an 'anti' article to get the debate going.

JC said...

The whole thing is just virtue signalling.. an excuse to label the whole of society as abusers or enabling abuse. Critical to the whole thing is that its a male problem and its driven by poverty and inequality.

But just watch out if you try to do something about it like putting out the facts.. they'll be studiously ignored as outside the narrative. If you start identifying and targeting the abusers you'll kick up a stench of hate, cries of racism, male privilege etc.. the last thing those making money and gaining virtue from the abuse and related industries want are actual solutions because solutions narrow the focus to a relatively small hard core of offenders, and who wants the dangerous job of dealing with just those people?

Just for laughs there's this..

In the 2006 Census 13,000 identified as social workers but in 2011 just 2842 were registered. CYF had 100% registered (1046 people) involved in a "variety" of roles.

And this..

(Our priority goals

One: Membership – To maintain and grow a strong, engaged and committed Tangata Whenua and Tau Iwi membership

Achieve net growth in Tau Iwi and Tangata Whenua membership
Increase Tau Iwi and Tangata Whenua participation in the Association)

To which I say "Um".. I'm not sure if increasing membership is a sign of success in welfare work or being dealt out by natives and members of a "foreign race".