Firstly, I fear I may be wasting your time if you didn't see it. If you didn't, you didn't miss much.
If you did see it you will have been, I assume, bored witless.
If you were a Chris Hipkins fan going in I don't think he did anything to put you off.
Chris Luxon did well because it was his to lose. In fact, given the build up about him being new and so on, he did very well.
He looked in command of what he was saying but then, hype aside, you don't get to be the leader of a large political party by not being able to front and explain yourself. So in that sense I wasn't surprised.
They agreed on a lot of stuff, which plays into the idea that National are Labour-light and may give room to the minor players who want a bit more upheaval.
There were a series of hopelessly condescending quick-fire questions about their favourite beach and the last book they read and whether they had ever had a speeding ticket. Those questions are for breakfast TV, not a prime time debate.
The questions from the viewers were a waste of time and smacked of tired lazy production. There is not a question out there a moderator can't ask, we don't need to see Ken of Kaitaia.
Both men were respectful, and that might be to Hipkins' disadvantage. He never looks like he is desperate and he should, because he is.
He is losing this campaign, and badly, and he needed to show us he cared. He never looks over-exercised about anything. Nothing is brilliant, nothing is a shambles. It's just good ol' Chippy, talking about vaping or gangs or tax or his favourite beach.
If you have followed this campaign you would have learned nothing. If you had followed none of it you might have picked up a few generalities but, to be fair, if you hadn't followed the campaign you are not the sort of person to watch a debate because you clearly aren't that interested.
Ultimately, that's why the debate failed its audience. People who watch debates know what's going on. We needed life, we needed spark, we needed passion. Yet, we got a couple of blokes holding their own and a moderator sadly working too hard on telling us it was fun.
My theory is this campaign is over and has been for sometime, that the result is a forgone conclusion, and the debate sort of reflected that. We went through the motions, no one fell on their face and we all know what's going to happen in a couple of weeks.
Was there a winner? Yes.
It was those who didn't watch because you had a more productive time.
And Chris Luxon, who showed he is more than up to the task.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
Chris Luxon did well because it was his to lose. In fact, given the build up about him being new and so on, he did very well.
He looked in command of what he was saying but then, hype aside, you don't get to be the leader of a large political party by not being able to front and explain yourself. So in that sense I wasn't surprised.
They agreed on a lot of stuff, which plays into the idea that National are Labour-light and may give room to the minor players who want a bit more upheaval.
There were a series of hopelessly condescending quick-fire questions about their favourite beach and the last book they read and whether they had ever had a speeding ticket. Those questions are for breakfast TV, not a prime time debate.
The questions from the viewers were a waste of time and smacked of tired lazy production. There is not a question out there a moderator can't ask, we don't need to see Ken of Kaitaia.
Both men were respectful, and that might be to Hipkins' disadvantage. He never looks like he is desperate and he should, because he is.
He is losing this campaign, and badly, and he needed to show us he cared. He never looks over-exercised about anything. Nothing is brilliant, nothing is a shambles. It's just good ol' Chippy, talking about vaping or gangs or tax or his favourite beach.
If you have followed this campaign you would have learned nothing. If you had followed none of it you might have picked up a few generalities but, to be fair, if you hadn't followed the campaign you are not the sort of person to watch a debate because you clearly aren't that interested.
Ultimately, that's why the debate failed its audience. People who watch debates know what's going on. We needed life, we needed spark, we needed passion. Yet, we got a couple of blokes holding their own and a moderator sadly working too hard on telling us it was fun.
My theory is this campaign is over and has been for sometime, that the result is a forgone conclusion, and the debate sort of reflected that. We went through the motions, no one fell on their face and we all know what's going to happen in a couple of weeks.
Was there a winner? Yes.
It was those who didn't watch because you had a more productive time.
And Chris Luxon, who showed he is more than up to the task.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
3 comments:
Mike, you ask 'was there a winner' ? Yes.
Well had you watched tvnzs ( labours propaganda arm) post election experts of tau henare, mikie Sherman and David Cundiff they all seemed to agree it was a draw.
Now given they are all left leaning and more so with the maori henare, where was the balanced view and debate? Oh no...labour don't want that at all.
If they want to be credible, which clearly they arnt interesed in, they should have had at least one nat voice in there rather than their pathetic and feeble effort to boost chippy and say he held his own.
Just terrible bias by tvnz and sheer desperation by the left to hold onto power and send this poor country to oblivion in 2024.
What goes round comes around. I hope National is paying attention. This appalling apology for a TV news and current affairs service needs a bomb under it. Figuratively of course.
I can’t say who finally won the debate. More about that further on. The loser was Jessica Mutch-McKay followed by the viewers. I switched off 40 minutes in. JMM interrupted both Hipkins and Luxon - again and again and again, ad nauseam. Went over to Sky News Oz for a while. Came back to debate about 20 minutes later. Stayed about 5 minutes. Same behaviour from JMM. Back to Sky News Oz. Returned to debate 8.30pm for 2 or 3 minutes. Found the panel was Jack Tame and two ex-politicians. Lost all interest. Total Garbage. As Boring As.
In the original 40 minutes punishment I found Hipkins and Luxon expressed themselves clearly enough despite the toxic and shambolic approach of JMM. Over all they were way too polite and accommodating of JMM. Would they have been so with a guy conducting the debate? Luxon put across a line which some may not have noticed. He labelled Labour’s support as the Greens and the Maori party, AND THE GANGS. Yes, that is what Luxon said.
What have I learned, from actual debate time I heard, and generally from the campaign? From Labour – don’t frighten the horses, don’t upset the Maori elites, don’t upset the Chinese, don’t go hard on the gangs. That Luxon and National will be more of the same old historical National – fiddle around the edges, change as little as possible, carry on with the smoke and mirrors system.
Here’s a question. Would Artificial Intelligence have produced anything better?
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.