Great. Ron Mark gets filmed repeatedly making obscene gestures in Parliament (video here) - and the speaker, Margaret Wilson, goes after TV3 for showing it. And politicians wonder why the public think they are a pack of self-serving arseholes...
Ron Mark is a moron, but I think for the media to focus on the behaviour of MPs like that is a distraction from the real issues, ie what gets voted on in parliament.
CMT: Politics isn't just about "issues" - or rather, what is or isn't a "real issue" is something for the voters, not MPs, to decide.
In this case, Mark's actions were certainly newsworthy, not what the public expects from Parliament, and it may affect how some people vote. Like David Benson-Pope's little snooze, or Gerry Brownlee putting Don in his place, its quite informative about what is going on in politics at the moment.
Yes, it makes Parliament look bad. But if Parliament is concerned about protecting its image, it should change its fucking behaviour rather than try and censor the media or punish them for revealing thatMPs, on occassions, behave like obnoxious children.
Totally agree I/S, although I wouldn't want to see a petty media culture always focusing on "small stuff", it isn't for them to decide what is newsworthy, and indeed it is up to them to change their behaviour.
To think they wanted to do away with the media-owned cameras and only have their own. Thankfully that isn't going to happen.
Anyway, I think rules with respect to filming should be loosened - their cheap potshots at one another are hardly worth it as it is, and if MPs happen to be acting immaturely (more so than usual) media should have every right to capture and broadcast that.
Indeed - and while reading Michael Cullen at his pompous "the rules are the rules and they must be obeyed" best in this morning's Herald, I just tried and remember how many times we've seen footage of members in their seats (including Doctor Cullen) interjecting and pulling faces with precisely no objection from the Leader of the House.
It's one thing to be pedantic - but can we at least have the Leader of the House being consistent about it?
Tussock: the point of filming Parliament is so we can keep an eye on our politicians - and not just when they're "debating". Unfortunately, MPs and the Speaker seem to be hostile to the very idea of being subjected to public scrutiny. Again, if they're afraid of being judged by their bad behaviour, they have a simple solution available: behave better.
Keep an eye on them? Bah humbug. The press is there to entertain us for a second or two with the everyday antics of terribly bored people. I've seen nothing from it but pissing contests.
Politics will never be about the issues until the press tell us about the issues. This doesn't help that.
Oh well, one less fluffy duck story on the "news" this week I suppose.
Back in the real world, if my workplace was so dynfunctional that obscene gestures and shrieking like a toddler with Tourettes were "the everyday antics of terribly bored people" I'd be seriously thinking about moving on. And just to write a reality check, for a moment, do you think these same people would tolerate for a second the same behaviour from a civil servant or staffer? Yeah right...
Ron Mark is a moron, but I think for the media to focus on the behaviour of MPs like that is a distraction from the real issues, ie what gets voted on in parliament.
ReplyDeleteCMT: Politics isn't just about "issues" - or rather, what is or isn't a "real issue" is something for the voters, not MPs, to decide.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, Mark's actions were certainly newsworthy, not what the public expects from Parliament, and it may affect how some people vote. Like David Benson-Pope's little snooze, or Gerry Brownlee putting Don in his place, its quite informative about what is going on in politics at the moment.
Yes, it makes Parliament look bad. But if Parliament is concerned about protecting its image, it should change its fucking behaviour rather than try and censor the media or punish them for revealing thatMPs, on occassions, behave like obnoxious children.
Totally agree I/S, although I wouldn't want to see a petty media culture always focusing on "small stuff", it isn't for them to decide what is newsworthy, and indeed it is up to them to change their behaviour.
ReplyDeleteTo think they wanted to do away with the media-owned cameras and only have their own. Thankfully that isn't going to happen.
Anyway, I think rules with respect to filming should be loosened - their cheap potshots at one another are hardly worth it as it is, and if MPs happen to be acting immaturely (more so than usual) media should have every right to capture and broadcast that.
The point of filming parliment is to allow us to see the debates. The debates are never shown, so kick the cameras out. Simple.
ReplyDeletePublicising idiocy only produces more idiots. Ron Mark just got an extra thousand votes next election by name recognition alone.
I/S:
ReplyDeleteIndeed - and while reading Michael Cullen at his pompous "the rules are the rules and they must be obeyed" best in this morning's Herald, I just tried and remember how many times we've seen footage of members in their seats (including Doctor Cullen) interjecting and pulling faces with precisely no objection from the Leader of the House.
It's one thing to be pedantic - but can we at least have the Leader of the House being consistent about it?
Tussock: the point of filming Parliament is so we can keep an eye on our politicians - and not just when they're "debating". Unfortunately, MPs and the Speaker seem to be hostile to the very idea of being subjected to public scrutiny. Again, if they're afraid of being judged by their bad behaviour, they have a simple solution available: behave better.
ReplyDeleteKeep an eye on them? Bah humbug. The press is there to entertain us for a second or two with the everyday antics of terribly bored people. I've seen nothing from it but pissing contests.
ReplyDeletePolitics will never be about the issues until the press tell us about the
issues. This doesn't help that.
Oh well, one less fluffy duck story on the "news" this week I suppose.
Tussock:
ReplyDeleteBack in the real world, if my workplace was so dynfunctional that obscene gestures and shrieking like a toddler with Tourettes were "the everyday antics of terribly bored people" I'd be seriously thinking about moving on. And just to write a reality check, for a moment, do you think these same people would tolerate for a second the same behaviour from a civil servant or staffer? Yeah right...