We attempted to book the Sunday Star Times, The Post, the Christchurch Press, and The Southland Times. It would have been a tidy sum of money for the financially beleaguered media outlet…
Our ad was very simple. Just words on a page communicating what is at the heart of the debate – equal rights. Vote for the Bill for equal rights. Say no to the Bill, say no to equal rights.
Stuff has the right to refuse to run advertisements they don’t like. And we have the right to make a judgement about why Stuff is doing so.
It is no coincidence that almost all advertisements turned down by legacy media such as Stuff and the Herald are advocacy advertisements from centre right groups.
The media say they are so poor that they need the Government to pass a special law to bail them out, yet they turn down legal advertisements.
It is puzzling to me why this National-led Government is trying to pass a special law to force successful Internet companies to fund legacy media companies. Not only is it against core National principles of belief in markets, it is also practically one of the stupidest things they could do. Why would you reward legacy media companies for turning down advertisements from centre right groups? Doing so will merely create an even more hostile environment for the parties of Government.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
It is no coincidence that almost all advertisements turned down by legacy media such as Stuff and the Herald are advocacy advertisements from centre right groups.
The media say they are so poor that they need the Government to pass a special law to bail them out, yet they turn down legal advertisements.
It is puzzling to me why this National-led Government is trying to pass a special law to force successful Internet companies to fund legacy media companies. Not only is it against core National principles of belief in markets, it is also practically one of the stupidest things they could do. Why would you reward legacy media companies for turning down advertisements from centre right groups? Doing so will merely create an even more hostile environment for the parties of Government.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
8 comments:
David, I can't figure this one out either. Why support far left media....
David, thank you for the article. I can see broad similarities with what the British government are doing and not doing regarding illegal immigration and wonder at a common cause.
National wants the Internet companies to subsidise leftwing media because Luxon is more centre left than he is centre right. Just another very good reason for the National Party ro replace him with a genuine centre right PM, such as Bishop, Stanford and possibly Brown, or preferably David Seymour whose ACT Party will gather more votes than National in the next election.
Doubtless RNZ will thoroughly and objectivey canvass the situation; probably using Mahu??? Forbes to apply and extend the fed questions..
Thought I would wait and see what comments appeared and I am rather surprised that none have mentioned that the ad wording: "equal rights. Vote for the Bill for equal rights. Say no to the Bill, say no to equal rights." has to be, by definition, the most balanced possible statement - ever! It does not pose an opinion either way but simply spells out the alternatives. Perhaps it is too obvious and so not worthy of comment? In putting it this way, Hobson's Pledge have been so clear that the point of it might only be lost on our PM who would find nothing to like about it. While we cannot de-fund Stuff as our govt could conceivably do to TVNZ or RNZ, we could just boycott Stuff? It has worked for Woolies in Australia over their woke stance on Australia Day merchandise.
Please remember Luxon's body language when he made that weird comment ( "Nothing to like") - very uncomfortable as though he was blurting out a pre-arranged script. No really thinking leader would agree to make such an absurd statement. To be against equal rights in a democratic country is akin to political suicide.
Agree, it shouted political suicide when he said it but he is still rolling. Begs the question, who has the hand up his back, is there a puppet master manipulating his strings? If what we are seeing is really him and him alone - maybe Sean Plunkett could do some more digging when he comes back after his hols since he posed that lovely question about what did Luxon like about the TP Bill?
Interesting how recently someone complained in the "Letters" to "The Post" about all the advertising which effectively wraps that rag these days, with the correspondent suggesting perhaps another name change to "The Harvey Norman" might be in the offing? Letter's since have been both in support of said correspondent and one from a sycophant that supports Stuff in their bid to remain afloat. No-one of course acknowledging how Stuff are choosing what they'll print in their role as a public censor. Reminds me a little of Hutt City Council's position on the removal of the Apirana Ngata publication, which is now set to be heard in Court and also, particularly in Stuff's case, of the saying "Go Woke, Go Broke."
Post a Comment