Thread: When the new is just as bad as the old...

Originally Posted by Carlsen Highway

Its just the Police Association. He is not in a position to change anything.

I think that's a point lost on many. The police association is not the police; it is a union advocating on behalf of members of the police. Unfortunately it has a very loud voice in the media when it lobbies for gun control.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Carlsen Highway

Its just the Police Association. He is not in a position to change anything.

Very true and legally no, but the ability to influence public opinion is a hugely powerful attribute.
Plus the media will allways give him the air time he needs whilst doing their best to muffle any sensible responses from the pro gun lobby.

Originally Posted by zimmer

Very true and legally no, but the ability to influence public opinion is a hugely powerful attribute.
Plus the media will allways give him the air time he needs whilst doing their best to muffle any sensible responses from the pro gun lobby.

Surely gun owners and gun lobby groups have the same rights to try to influence public opinion as does a union?

If the media gives one side more air time, is that the fault of the gun lobby group, the union, or the media?

Originally Posted by systolic

Surely gun owners and gun lobby groups have the same rights to try to influence public opinion as does a union?

If the media gives one side more air time, is that the fault of the gun lobby group, the union, or the media?

Unfortunately we (well virtually all of "we") play into their hands with our complacency. How many members of this forum for example "bothered" to send a submission to the current review committee. We have the ability to go off on a forum though. So when we have available air time eg in this case the review committee, we mostly don't avail ourselves of it.
Oh, and by the way, I didn't submit either.

And yes as the media is actually a business they will present what is most emotive in order for their business to succeed. Therefore they will foster imput from those views that support the changing, or norm public opinion - the customers of the media.

Originally Posted by systolic

Surely gun owners and gun lobby groups have the same rights to try to influence public opinion as does a union?

If the media gives one side more air time, is that the fault of the gun lobby group, the union, or the media?

There is no reputable news media anymore. The mainstream outlets are nothing more than click bait stories and left wing propaganda.

Grouping "the media" as one entity makes as much sense as grouping all shooters to be the same as Andrew Mears.

I'm yet to see any main stream news outlet that doesn't read from the same song book and tell the story fairly and accurately from both sides of a subject. Firearms is a glaring example, but I have noticed absolute garbage touted as fact in other areas as well that I have an interest in. When you see blatant twisting of stories to suit a prevailing narrative or just to simply insight fear for commercial gain, you start to question what else you are being lied to about, or being told what to think about.

Read somwhere on the weekend that the police association has 95% representation of police

Originally Posted by Tussock

Not when they are public companies and the ownership is public information. They are all subsideries of a single entity, as are banks and corporations.

Those are marketing departments for very large financial entities, not news agencies.

They are all bought and paid for and under modern management. Reporters will do as they are told or report to HR.

They are "Human Resources" not independent minded journalists.

My perspective of the media is different from yours, because my wife works for Newshub. I'll tell her she's not independent and that clearly she's a puppet

As I've said, grouping "the media" , or anyone into one simplistic entity is a fantasy.

All Cops are wankers. All male teachers are pedos. All shooters are reckless killers. All media are anti-gun. Blah blah blah.

As per the original thread, the Police Associations represents Police. That their new boss wants to come up with BS lingo like military assault style rifles while choosing to ignore the current registration system that exists for imports is mischievous at best, or just being very stupid at worst.

Originally Posted by Kscott

My perspective of the media is different from yours, because my wife works for Newshub. I'll tell her she's not independent and that clearly she's a puppet

As I've said, grouping "the media" , or anyone into one simplistic entity is a fantasy.

All Cops are wankers. All male teachers are pedos. All shooters are reckless killers. All media are anti-gun. Blah blah blah.

As per the original thread, the Police Associations represents Police. That their new boss wants to come up with BS lingo like military assault style rifles while choosing to ignore the current registration system that exists for imports is mischievous at best, or just being very stupid at worst.

My sister works at news hub. didnt stop me publicly calling the bulldog (HDPA) out on her BS, or that the police association president is either incompetent or a liar. Fact checking of the nz media is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list compared to get out the story fast and and present it in a way to increase viewers. in other words, click bait.

If reading things in the media upsets some of you so much, perhaps you could turn off your television and internet and not read those things?

Originally Posted by Tussock

I'm sure she champions the company line or they would have sacked her, or she would have quit in disgust.

I'm pretty sure you won't want to believe this, but there is no party line to follow, otherwise she would be in on the meetings dictating the content lines. Apart from the basics of accuracy, journalism, etc. The BSA exists to find against broadcasters who don't get it right. But believing that there's some ultimate force dictating content is something I'm pretty sure I can't convince you of otherwise.

Originally Posted by Kscott

Apart from the basics of accuracy, journalism, etc.

Is that the stuff that doesn't get published then?

I never said there was any grand conspiracy, I just think that they all run the same narrative and come across as telling you what they think you should think about something, as oppossed to just presenting the facts.

Originally Posted by systolic

If reading things in the media upsets some of you so much, perhaps you could turn off your television and internet and not read those things?

Pretty much everyone and everything on this forum upsets you, yet here you are.