Pages

Tuesday, December 12, 2023

Gerry Eckhoff: Public Interest Journalism Fund

A reasonable question, not yet asked as to the media’s acceptance of  $55 million, is - did the media or its governing body ask for this considerable sum of money or was it offered by the Labour Government?  

Where is the paper trail of emails to determine the media’s role and also that of the Labour government.

The expression - quid pro quo – is defined as “something for something else” which is why the question of who approached who is important in the context of this issue. It appears to be an example of reciprocity wherein both parties agree to an exchange of benefits. The debate is rightly now in the public arena yet (perversely) it is the media who is must now  scrutinize their own actions with absolute impunity, which may not be possible.

Whether or not bribery is too strong a description to describe the offering and acceptance of a sum of public money to an important public entity such as the medias governing body - is a moot point. Bribery is defined as the offering, giving or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty. The media council have a duty of care to the public and to the image this industry reflects. As we all know, perception is reality in this age of instant gratification.

There is still a law which says you cannot “treat”  voters prior to an election. Is it possible however to direct funds to an organization (the wider media) that will indirectly influence what is “on offer” from competing parties through requiring only a positive reflection of a particular but contentious issue such as the Treaty of Waitangi role in our modern society. The media is a crucial part of the three legged stool in upholding our fragile democracy - along with the legislature and the judiciary. So is public confidence in each entity.

Winston Peters is right to challenge the media. David Seymour says  it passes the sniff test. I guess it all depends, David, on whether or not you are  up or down wind of the smell.

Gerry Eckhoff is a former councillor on the Otago Regional Council and MP.

3 comments:

Robert Arthur said...

Where topics with no hint of maori policy association were broached, some excellent articles were produced under the PIJF and are still appearing. But the consditions re matters Treaty and maori were incredible blatant bribery. The Framework even more so but, like so much produced today using w.p, of such rambling length few would have troubled to read it, including journalists.Any media which in any production took a critical line on the Labour pro maori policy would have not been viewed favourably for PIJFunding, so the influence extended beyond directly financed output.

Anonymous said...

The PIJF was paid with public money, so show us the "commercial, in confidence" contracts.
Russia would never reveal what they pay Pravda to publish their propaganda.
Why is our funding of the Labour propaganda secret ?

Anonymous said...

Some journalists have dishonestly tried to blur the lines between the $50 million given for Covid and the $50 million for the PIJF as if they were the same payments. On top of that massive advertising contracts.