The story that led its bulletins this morning – in other words, the news item that RNZ’s editors considered the most significant of the day – revealed that new National Party MP Cameron Brewer had made an election night speech in which he celebrated the return of the “stale, pale male”. Someone had recorded the speech and leaked it.
RNZ reports that Brewer, who was elected in the Upper Harbour (Auckland) electorate, could be heard declaring himself “a glass ceiling breaker” to laughs from the crowd.
“I’ll be the first male MP for Upper Harbour," he said to cheers. “Stale, pale males are back!”
The tone of the story, by deputy political editor Craig McCulloch, was implicitly judgmental. It presented Brewer’s comments against a backdrop of “scrutiny” – mostly by the media – of a lack of diversity in the National caucus, where 70 percent of MPs are men and 80 percent are Pakeha.
“I’ll be the first male MP for Upper Harbour," he said to cheers. “Stale, pale males are back!”
The tone of the story, by deputy political editor Craig McCulloch, was implicitly judgmental. It presented Brewer’s comments against a backdrop of “scrutiny” – mostly by the media – of a lack of diversity in the National caucus, where 70 percent of MPs are men and 80 percent are Pakeha.
The 8am version of RNZ’s story even implied that Brewer was crowing at having displaced the Sri Lankan-born former MP, Labour’s Vanushi Walters. It introduced a racial element into the story that wasn’t substantiated.
That was reinforced by a headline on RNZ’s website: “New National MP Cameron Brewer celebrated victory for ‘stale, pale males’ after defeat of Sri-Lankan-born rival”. But there was nothing in the story to suggest that Walters’ ethnicity was anything other than coincidental.
At worst, this was a harmless but politically ill-judged remark at a private function by an inexperienced new MP hardly anyone has heard of. He was speaking amid the euphoria of an election victory, probably after having a few celebratory drinks.
Brewer explained it to RNZ as a poor attempt at humour. He would hardly be the first novice politician to be embarrassed in the cold light of day by an injudicious comment made in a moment of heightened emotion.
Let’s take him at his word and accept that his statement was intended humorously. But even if it wasn’t, it was surely neither surprising nor outrageous that a conservative male MP should welcome a change in a political environment where the now-ousted dominant caste and its media cheerleaders often gave the impression they regarded maleness as toxic.
Yes, this was a legitimate news story – but the lead story on the state broadcaster’s morning bulletins? Really? The purpose, clearly, was to portray National as a party of unreconstructed white male triumphalists. (My personal view, for what it’s worth, is that National does have a surfeit of brash, privileged young men in its caucus – but that’s for the party to sort out if it thinks they are an electoral liability. Ultimately, the voters will determine whether these are the sort of people they want to be represented by.)
The question posed at the start of this post shouldn’t be misinterpreted as suggesting RNZ should kowtow to the new government. That would be a betrayal of journalistic principles. No one wants a return to the era of Robert Muldoon, when the media were browbeaten and intimidated.
Rather, the point of the question was that the election result signalled an emphatic change in the mood of the country. For six years, wokeness ruled largely unchallenged. The media generally reflected the ethos of the governing elite. A story such as the hit job on Brewer would barely have raised an eyebrow.
But the election result was a rather big clue that the public had had enough and wanted something different. It’s no longer business as usual. RNZ needs to realise that and catch up.
All mainstream media ideally should strive to reflect the society they serve, but state-owned media especially. Stories that pander to the prejudices of the bullying metropolitan Left strike a jarring note now that the country has moved on.
Karl du Fresne, a freelance journalist, is the former editor of The Dominion newspaper. He blogs at karldufresne.blogspot.co.nz. - where this article was sourced.
That was reinforced by a headline on RNZ’s website: “New National MP Cameron Brewer celebrated victory for ‘stale, pale males’ after defeat of Sri-Lankan-born rival”. But there was nothing in the story to suggest that Walters’ ethnicity was anything other than coincidental.
At worst, this was a harmless but politically ill-judged remark at a private function by an inexperienced new MP hardly anyone has heard of. He was speaking amid the euphoria of an election victory, probably after having a few celebratory drinks.
Brewer explained it to RNZ as a poor attempt at humour. He would hardly be the first novice politician to be embarrassed in the cold light of day by an injudicious comment made in a moment of heightened emotion.
Let’s take him at his word and accept that his statement was intended humorously. But even if it wasn’t, it was surely neither surprising nor outrageous that a conservative male MP should welcome a change in a political environment where the now-ousted dominant caste and its media cheerleaders often gave the impression they regarded maleness as toxic.
Yes, this was a legitimate news story – but the lead story on the state broadcaster’s morning bulletins? Really? The purpose, clearly, was to portray National as a party of unreconstructed white male triumphalists. (My personal view, for what it’s worth, is that National does have a surfeit of brash, privileged young men in its caucus – but that’s for the party to sort out if it thinks they are an electoral liability. Ultimately, the voters will determine whether these are the sort of people they want to be represented by.)
The question posed at the start of this post shouldn’t be misinterpreted as suggesting RNZ should kowtow to the new government. That would be a betrayal of journalistic principles. No one wants a return to the era of Robert Muldoon, when the media were browbeaten and intimidated.
Rather, the point of the question was that the election result signalled an emphatic change in the mood of the country. For six years, wokeness ruled largely unchallenged. The media generally reflected the ethos of the governing elite. A story such as the hit job on Brewer would barely have raised an eyebrow.
But the election result was a rather big clue that the public had had enough and wanted something different. It’s no longer business as usual. RNZ needs to realise that and catch up.
All mainstream media ideally should strive to reflect the society they serve, but state-owned media especially. Stories that pander to the prejudices of the bullying metropolitan Left strike a jarring note now that the country has moved on.
Karl du Fresne, a freelance journalist, is the former editor of The Dominion newspaper. He blogs at karldufresne.blogspot.co.nz. - where this article was sourced.
5 comments:
To me the key words in this article are "private function". So whose worse - the scumbag who recorded the conversation or the scumbag(s) who decided to publish it?
I can see absolutely nothing wrong with his remark. It was said in fun and is a term used by our wokes and MSM as a derogatory put-down to people who are men and white. The stale bit is the really nasty part and flies in the face of reality when you look at history.
When the media pick up on this kind of nonsense the best thing Karl is to ignore them, which is what most of the general public do these days.
Like hysterical Greenies crying wolf over "apocalyptic" climate change, people are starting to tire of these woke outbursts.
Every fad has a shelf life. I think climate change has crested and is on a slow decline. Woke social justice shouldn't be too far behind.
We just have to make sure that what replaces it is something genuinely inclusive and positive.
It is very sad the manner in which wry humour, very much part of the culture of many colonists, is now so suppressed. It should be protected as a taonga. Brits and their descendants are becoming as devoid of wry humour as Americans, Germans, and near all others.
Imagine what gets said at Te Pati and maori Labour faction meetindgs. But anyone sufficiently imprudent to leak would likely be beaten to a pulp.
The instigators may have been pale and established in their aims, but very many of the innovations of modern society originated from them, not from pigmented stone agers.
Karl, I wouldn't know, as I stopped listening to RNZ some years back when they became so woke that they failed me and the vast majority of the NZ population .
Please advise when it's safe to listen to RNZ again.
Can I add my "unqualified two pennyworth of comment".
Now this might "sound savage and cause undue harm to readers", BUT - if I was Cameron Brewer "I would go head hunt, for the person who recorded a private conversation, with out prior warning and/or approval of/from person speaking".
You see Folks, all NZ kindred, we have a Privacy Act, that within said document is a Clause - "that prohibits the use of a recording device (without prior approval) - for the purpose of using gained data, for ulterior purposes/motives". Yes I have checked.
This excludes News Media when interviewing - as long as Interviewee is aware of the devices, purpose and which must be "in clear view of all concerned"-
Now, once said "head hunt" has been concluded, as the data is now in the Public Domain, Mr Brewer has "the Legal Right to sue for defamation".
He stupidly apologized, which David Farrer also said was a mistake (he is not the only Off The Street Media Person to say so), Cameron should have (once aware of what had occurred)- remained silent, until a conversation with His Lawyer.
Sadly, within the realms of our current Social Sillyness, the damage has been done, and Cameron will be forever reminded of it!
P>S - if you watched Chris Luxon - TVN/News 6.00 pm this evening (22.11.23) you would have noticed a young lady behind his right shoulder, carrying a cell phone, she followed him out the gate, the cell phone was held close to Mr Luxon, and when Media Interviews over, she followed him back inside - an acceptable action as He had a record of his statements, so any later "misconstruing of his statements can be refuted" - now normal practice with MP's.
RNZ - try that one with Winston Peters and see what happens.
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.