Mediawatch: Ministers' 'Helpful' Handouts Go Multimedia
"Dear Prime Minister: the rise in crime and antisocial behaviour since COVID 19 struck is stark and confronting. We ask that you please take urgent action to support recovery and retain our reputation as a safe city and country."
That was the message of a full-page ad in the Weekend Herald placed by groups representing Auckland businesses, accusing the government of failing to act on past promises.
It was almost identical to a similar plea to a previous PM four years ago.
The following day the current PM was the target of another open letter advert in the Sunday papers. This one - placed by electricity retailers, users and Consumer NZ - called on him to fix "a broken energy sector".
That campaign also featured on TVNZ's Q+A show the same day, and in a front-page New Zealand Herald story the next day, the Minister of Energy - the aptly named Simon Watts - acknowledged our electricity market was "not functioning as well as it should".
But it's not the first time that he's been singled out by a lobbying campaign in public.
In June, pro-electrification group Rewiring NZ deployed AI animation to turn him into a superhero in ads that urged the public to make it an election issue - and it used a billboard near the Beehive to make sure that he didn't miss it.
TVNZ's Q+A said lobby groups like Federated Farmers and the Sensible Sentencing Trust had used the same spot for the same reason in other campaigns.
But do ministers targeted by these ads even notice them?
"Yes, I do. On the way to the airport, out of Parliament and down onto the quays there - it's pretty hard to not to," National's Chris Bishop told TVNZ's Whena Owen.
But are campaigns singling out individual politicians in public really effective? Most ministers are also lobbied behind the scenes by the same special interest groups. Being hectored publicly as well could make them more inclined to dig in rather than give in.
"Lobby groups have always taken out ads in newspapers. Now they're moving it to digital billboards which can be up longer and can be cheaper," said Dr Claire Robinson, the author of Promises, Promises: 80 years of Wooing New Zealand Voters.
"They can be located at traffic lights where ministerial cars have to stop. It's probably a really good way of getting something under the nose of a cabinet minister who may not open the newspaper anymore in the morning to see it there."
"If you want to lobby a minister now you've got not only print, radio and TV - and you've got your own channels, social media and even LinkedIn posts. There's a complete industry in being able to disseminate your messages, hoping that one of them is going to get through," Dr Robinson told Mediawatch.
Politicians going multimedia
Politicians aren't shy about getting their own messages out to the media either - and have specialised staff to do it.
Journalists' email inboxes are clogged with media statements from ministers and MPs hoping that their comments will make it into the media's coverage.
And now they are going multimedia too.
Last weekend reporters got video of the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio greeting Winston Peters, along with a media statement, after an ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Malaysia, which was attended by Peters.
NZ First posted that footage on Facebook on the day of the meeting - and then there was another version last Tuesday featuring Peters looking statesmanlike, with a TikTok-type soundtrack added.
The same day the streaming show Herald Now ran the Rubio footage during an interview with Peters.
Should media be wary of airing images hand-picked by ministers' staff?
"Yes, because by using it they're essentially using party generated pictures and feeding the beast - and exacerbating the rule-breaking of political parties," Dr Robinson told Mediawatch.
"Anything that is generated through party social media channels really needs to be stopped at the door.
"But at the same time the media loses all perspective when a PM or foreign minister meets a US president or Secretary of State. In 2014, photos of John Key playing golf with Obama were splashed across the newspapers . . . and nobody asked who took the photos back then."
MPs offering mp3s
Recently reporters have also received sound bites from ministers along with standard media statements.
Last week, Associate Minister of Justice Nicole McKee announced anti-money laundering law changes to make managing property easier through family trusts. The release included a minute-long MP3 clip of her reading out some of the key points - and 'video on request'.
In June her office also sent three separate sound bites about the 'Three Strikes' law coming into force.
Why send selected comments rather than allow reporters to record their own in a media conference in the usual way?
"Quite often we'll put out a media release, then we get all the phone calls looking for a grab. Why not give a grab ourselves?" McKee told Mediawatch.
RNZ's reporters in the press gallery in Parliament told Mediawatch they wouldn't use audio supplied under those circumstances.
"I believe it has been picked up by a couple of radio stations but I haven't actually tracked it myself."
ACT leader David Seymour has spoken about bypassing the media because they "abuse their power to edit" and refused to allow ACT's ministers to appear on RNZ's Morning Report. He's even appealed for funds from ACT supporters to fund his own online media channels.
Is McKee supplying audio comments as a substitute for interviews or media conferences at which she could be challenged or questioned by reporters?
"That's not the reason. It's actually realising that our media are quite stretched - for time and for people," McKee told Mediawatch.
On that issue of the family trusts and anti-money laundering laws, McKee was interviewed by RNZ news after sending out the statement and audio.
"I've always made myself available to the media. Should they want a sound grab directly, I'm happy to give it. We just thought that this would help the media, especially if they do have those tight deadlines. And of course some have less staff now."
"It doesn't take me long to add a couple of 10-second sound bites to the media releases we put out. And of course if it is being picked up then it is useful to some. So we'll continue to do it."
McKee says she hasn't tracked which media outlets have used the supplied audio.
Another minister handing out sound bites with media statements lately is Associate Minister of Transport James Meager.
"Now is the perfect time to look ahead toward building a resilient maritime economy for future generations," he said in mid-June, announcing pumped-up investment in navigation services for shipping.
One week later, Meager sent out three more sound bites, about a funding boost for lifesaving.
Meager credits his press secretary, former Newstalk ZB journalist Blake Benny.
"He came to me with the idea that if we include some audio grabs with our press releases, it makes the job of producers and radio reporters so much easier," Meager told Mediawatch.
If so, it might mean not having to answer questions about contestable claims made in statements - or confront contradictions?
"There's always the option for journalists who want to ring up and press on some of the details in those press releases. I'm always happy to take interviews. The only time I decline would be if it's outside my portfolio or if I literally can't do them."
Few ministers ever issue statements on matters outside their portfolio - and Meager declined to say which outlets had broadcast his recorded statements.
More to come?
Before he became an MP, he set up an online archive of political ads - electionads.org.nz - with partner Dr Ashley Murchison, an expert who wrote a PhD about responses to political ads.
Some of Nicole McKee's recent media statements said video was available on request as well. Meager doesn't offer that - yet.
"But if we had the resources and that made people's lives easier then it might be something that we look into. I used to work as a press secretary and I think I wish I'd been smart enough to think of this six years ago," he told Mediawatch.
But he says he and other ministers will be offering the media more multimedia stuff in future.
"I'm doing a couple (of soundbites) this weekend for a couple of announcements we're making in the top of the South so hopefully they'll be picked up. In the weekend when staffing levels are lower, that might be a little bit helpful too."
Exploiting a week spot
"Political parties have always used new technology to try and get their messages across - even going back to Michael Joseph Savage in 1938 when he used film, which was a new technology back then," Dr Claire Robinson told Mediawatch.
"I think that the politicians hope that the time-poor media will just insert (the content) into coverage. But there's something deeper going on here because they're exploiting the whopping decline in journalism employment," said Dr Robinson, who is also the current chief of Toi Mai / the Workforce Development Council, which published a development plan for journalism in 2024.
"That decline is because of government-enabled inaction or policies that have seen that advertising money that used to sustain news media organisations go offshore. In the old days (they) would have more scrutiny and political parties are now exploiting that gap and creating their own media."
Bending the rules for funding the ads
In a recent piece for The Post, Dr Robinson said the public pays for political parties' digital media messaging - but shouldn't be paying for some of it.
"The rules are really clear. You can only electioneer using public funds in the three months prior to an election campaign. The rest of the time parties are enabled to create information, but not to electioneer with social media," Dr Robinson told Mediawatch.
She says the NZ First party publishing footage of Winston Peters in Malaysia as foreign minister on social media is an example of the problem.
"It has their party logo and is using Peters' role in his capacity as Minister of Foreign Affairs for party purposes. It doesn't say 'Vote for NZ First' but the boundaries are blurred. It is really saying our leader is a great leader because he can create amazing relationships with people."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Groundswell and the new scaremongering about climate action
Some people found this month's ravaging floods in Nelson and Tasman quite scary, but never mind. Plans to identify who's helping to cause floods like that and who's helping to prevent them are apparently much worse. Talk about scaremongering. What does the taxonomy plan really mean? AgriZeroNZ has one answer. This joint venture between the Government, agribusinesses and banks has just announced a $6.3 million investment in BiomEdit. BiomEdit is an Indiana-based company that makes probiotic feed additives designed to boost productivity and reduce methane emissions from dairy cows. This is AgriZeroNZ's third such investment. Chief executive Wayne McNee says, 'We're investing in local and global companies to give us the best chance of providing New Zealand farmers with access to a range of affordable, effective mitigation solutions to choose from.' The taxonomy plan will allow this kind of financing to be accurately and independently assessed and labelled. Why would anyone call that 'the scariest thing'? Groundswell has come a long way in a short time. In 2020 this group of Southland farmers started to build a nationwide network with tractor convoy protests, sporting slogans like 'No tax on food production' and 'Don't bite the hand that feeds you'. Part of a Groundswell protest at Parliament. Photo / Mark Mitchell Back then, Groundswell was relatively fringe. Since then, it has channelled climate denialism and anti-government campaigns into high-powered lobbying. I know, they will say they're not denialists. But in my view they consistently do their best to block climate action in the rural sector. They want us out of the Paris Accord and they argue methane has been unfairly targeted. They quack like a duck. To me, they're having the same impact as climate denialists. And their lobbying is effective. In my opinion, Groundswell has bent the Feds increasingly to their views and they have influential supporters in all three parties of Government. Back to sustainable finance taxonomy, which has been proposed by Climate Change Minister Simon Watts. As press gallery journalist Richard Harman has reported, his plan aligns with similar moves in Australia and the European Union. Climate Change Minister Simon Watts. Photo/ RNZ / The Centre for Sustainable Finance calls it 'a standardised framework for classifying economic activities according to their environmental performance'. The centre is a co-ordinating group that includes all the major banks and several of the big law and accountancy firms. When Watts floated the idea last September, he said, 'The strategy will provide the necessary clarity for financing and investments, helping New Zealand align with global sustainability trends. This alignment will not only attract investment but also increase jobs and drive economic growth locally.' If you think that sounds like a framework to allow banks to assess the climate impacts of lending proposals, you'd be right. Groundswell and the Feds are opposed and, in parallel, Act and NZ First both have private member's bills intended to make it illegal for financial institutions to consider 'ideology' or 'reputational risk' in their lending decisions. 'Woke banks!' complains NZ First. NZ First leader Winston Peters visiting the Covid-related protest at Parliament in 2022. Photo / Mark Mitchell This is absurd. Banks aren't driven by green ideology: they know that lending to ventures that could be undermined by climate change is bad business. They also know the world is full of greenwashing. The law firm Russell McVeagh says taxonomy 'could reduce both the risk of organisations describing financial products in a way that is accused of being misleading (greenwashing) and the risk of organisations staying silent on sustainability-related matters to avoid being accused of making misleading statements (greenhushing)'. Is that BiomEdit work credible? Sustainable finance taxonomy, done well, will tell us the answer. If it's yes, it can be promoted; if it's no, funding agencies can move on. Standing in the way of this is, to me, the same as denialism. It's also hypocritical, when it's done by political groups who claim to believe in the value of the market. Sustainable Finance Taxonomy empowers the market to make economically informed decisions. Russell McVeagh says it 'could allow the development of new financial products, such as KiwiSaver products that align ... with taxonomy criteria'. What a good thing that would be. Where does National stand on all this? Does Watts represent the party position or are the politics more subtle than that? National's climate response is very oddly mixed. To take just one example: oil and gas exploration is supposed to be restarting but the legislation to allow this is a long time coming. There's more rhetoric than reason in this policy, because it's well known that new exploration will not solve the twin energy crises of customer pricing and precarious supply. This is because prospecting outcomes are uncertain and the timelines are far too long. Meanwhile, Watts has put incentives in place to expand urban residential and rural solar power, but there's very little action to back them up. One way to read this is to assume Watts has been designated to build National's appeal to the climate-conscious middle ground of the electorate. But the party is terrified of losing provincial and rural votes to Act and NZ First, so Watts gets to say more than he gets to do. And while the oil and gas policy won't change anything we need changing, it does reward some very well-oiled lobbying from the fossil-fuel sector. Also, it allows Shane Jones to keep up the inflammatory posturing. Resources Minister Shane Jones during his appearance at the Economic Development Select Committee hearing this year. Photo / Mark Mitchell Which, in turn, provides cover for Government inaction on what's really needed: meaningful, customer-focused, climate-conscious reform of the energy sector. Where does this leave sustainable finance taxonomy? Will the Government support this initiative to reduce emissions and build climate resilience? Or will it cave in to Groundswell-inspired climate denialism and attack the ideologically-rotten greenies running the banks? It's a common view that the coalition Government has brought a new maturity to MMP, because the major party has worked out how to let the minor parties strut their own stuff, even when it's outrageous, while it gets on with its own programme. But real MMP maturity would involve more than this. If National supports Watts' plan for sorting the real climate action from the fake, and its partners are away chasing their denialist base, it should call on Opposition support. Call out that 'scariest thing yet' nonsense: that's how to stop the tail wagging the dog. And getting a mid-ground consensus to do the right thing is also very likely the way to build more trust and respect for politicians. Simon Wilson is an award-winning senior writer covering politics, the climate crisis, transport, housing, urban design and social issues, with a focus on Auckland. He joined the Herald in 2018.
NZ Herald
13 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Kāinga Ora tenants accused of firing gun, threatening assault keep homes despite eviction bids
The tenant allegedly asked the boy: 'Do you want to die? Are you not scared of dying? I'll come and kill you right now.' However, the tribunal adjudicator decided there was not enough proof the man made the threats, despite it being confirmed he was facing criminal charges after police found a firearm at his property. The unsuccessful evictions appear to be speed bumps in Kāinga Ora's new policy of getting tough on state housing tenants. In January, Housing Minister Chris Bishop declared the 'easy ride' for disruptive Kāinga Ora tenants to be over. In March last year, the Government told the public housing provider to abandon its 'Sustaining Tenancies Framework'. That programme first started in 2017 as a pilot in which Kāinga Ora staff were urged to try their best to avoid evicting tenants and instead work with them to overcome their issues. Part of the policy's belief was that evicted tenants could be left with nowhere else to go, potentially leading them to cause more trouble on the streets or cost taxpayers more through poor health and medical expenses. The new Coalition Government argued, however, that disruptive and threatening tenants were causing neighbours to live in fear. They believed the threat of eviction would also 'spark behaviour change', forcing these tenants to behave better. That tougher stance led to a five-fold increase in evictions. A Kāinga Ora spokeswoman said about 85% of all its eviction applications to the Tenancy Tribunal were successful. 'Of the 88 applications we made in the past 12 months, 77 were successful,' she said. However, the Hamilton and Nelson cases showed tribunals weren't rubber-stamping every application. The spokeswoman said the tribunal needed a 'high standard of evidence'. 'While we always aim to meet that threshold, sometimes the evidence we are able to present isn't quite strong enough,' she said. In the Hamilton case, tribunal adjudicator Jenny Robson questioned how reliable the neighbour's evidence was. Robson noted that Kāinga Ora had presented evidence saying the neighbour - who was the grandmother of the teenage boy the tenant was accused of pointing the rifle at – originally gave a statement to police, saying she went outside to confront the tenant. She told police the tenant then threatened to also kill her and shot off more rounds from his rifle. But when Robson asked the grandmother what happened during the confrontation, she replied that the tenant ignored her. 'Her oral evidence was contrary to the statement she had given to the police,' Robson concluded. The woman's grandson also didn't appear at the tribunal, meaning Robson was left to doubt the evidence presented. The tenant himself refused to comment at the tribunal, saying he had pending criminal proceedings. In the Nelson case, the tenant's clean record over four and a half years helped save her tenancy despite her admitting she threatened her neighbour. The drama began when her boyfriend assaulted the neighbour's son on January 9. The boyfriend was bailed with conditions to stay away following the attack, but allegedly returned to the woman's flat within two weeks. When her neighbour called police to report the bail breach, the tenant overheard 'inflammatory language' about her boyfriend and confronted the woman, the tribunal said. The tenant wasn't evicted because his neighbour was found to have given contradicting statements about what he did to police and to the Tenancy Tribunal. Photo / 123rf 'The tenant does not dispute she threatened to assault the neighbour. The video evidence of such a threat was conclusive,' tribunal adjudicator Michael Brennan found. However, he noted that only one of seven neighbours had complained about the woman and she had not had run-ins before this incident. He ultimately decided there were enough mitigating factors to let her off. 'I have given the tenant the benefit of the doubt this time, but she should be clear on how any future repeat behaviours … may not result in the tenancy continuing,' he said. Ben Leahy is an Auckland-based senior journalist. He has worked as a journalist for more than a decade in India, Australia and New Zealand.
RNZ News
20 hours ago
- RNZ News
Australian escort Madison Ashton wants to give evidence at inquest into death of Pauline Hanna
Sex worker Madison Ashton had a relationship with Pauline Hanna's husband, Philip Polkinghorne. Photo: supplied Australian sex worker Madison Ashton, has asked to give evidence at the inquest into the death of Auckland health manager Pauline Hanna . Hanna, who managed the roll-out of the Covid-19 vaccine as an executive director at Counties Manukau Health, died in her Remuera home on 5 April, 2021. Her husband, former Auckland eye surgeon Philip Polkinghorne, was found not guilty of murdering her after an eight-week trial last year. The Crown argued Polkinghorne killed his wife after a possible violent struggle, while he may have been under the influence of methamphetamine. The defence maintained Hanna died by suicide after many years of struggling with depression, compounded by work-related stress. A photograph of Pauline Hanna is framed on the wall of the Manukau Super Clinic. Photo: Melanie Earley Ashton - Polkinghorne's former lover - was called as a witness for the Crown but did not turn up during the trial. She told other media she decided not to give evidence at the trial due to being unhappy with the police's treatment of her. Ashton had since approached Coroner Tania Tetitaha's office, indicating she had evidence relevant to the circumstances of Hanna's death. This could now be revealed as the Coroner lifted a previous non-publication order. The next pre-Inquest conference is set down for August. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
