Internet MANA the election and the media



I’ve been very critical of media reporting of Internet MANA during the election campaign and not surprised at the predictable response from representatives of the corporate media establishment.

I wasn’t going to carry this further but was asked at the last minute to go on a TV3 panel on Saturday to discuss media reporting of the election so thought I should flesh out here my concerns in a bit more detail.

I think reporting of Internet MANA during the election campaign was poor and often outrageous. TV3 and the New Zealand Herald in particular were appalling.

I’m not saying the reporting cost Hone Harawira’s his seat in parliament. I’ll repeat here that Hone’s seat was lost because the entire political establishment joined in an unholy coalition to get their supporters to vote for Labour candidate Kelvin Davis. David Cunliffe led the charge with the Prime Minister, key figures in the Maori Party and Winston Peters all joining the witch hunt. It says everything about Davis and Hone Harawira that such a determined effort was made to replace parliament’s most effective and outspoken MP with a career politician who will never rock the economic boat or challenge the rule of the rich which drives economic policy today.

So what’s the problem with TV3 and the Herald reporting?

From the outset TV3 political editor Patrick Gower was openly hostile to the strategic alliance between MANA and the Internet Party with its millionaire backer Kim Dotcom. I’ve no objection to Gower having that opinion and expressing that on his TV3 blog. However when that personal opinion drives the narrative which is presented to the public night after night as news for the entire campaign period then that’s an abuse of the critical role of the media in a democracy to report politics without fear or favour.

Gower’s stance carried over to TV3 reporters (I can’t bring myself to describe them as journalists) Tova O’Brien and Brook Sabin such that pretty much the entire TV3 reportage was a hotchpotch of snide, negative reporting of Internet MANA.

TDB Recommends

The classic example was when Internet Party press secretary Pam Corkery lost her cool outside Internet MANA’s campaign launch and roundly abused the media for their obsessive focus on Kim Dotcom rather then reporting on the Internet MANA campaign launch.

I accept Corkery’s outburst was always going to feature on the news as a compelling piece of television but there was no perspective whatever to the report and not a word about the centrepiece policy announcement from the launch. For the record it was a bold jobs initiative the likes of which New Zealand hasn’t seen in a generation.

Needless to say that piece was repeatedly shown throughout the rest of the campaign (10 or 20 times?) to illustrate the “problem” of Internet MANA and its millionaire backer Kim Dotcom. In doing so TV3 confirmed the birdbath nature of its commitment to journalism.

To be fair other small parties also suffered some awful reporting. ACT and the Conservatives were ridiculed sometimes – not for their policies but the alleged quirkiness of their candidates.

Mainstream media know they won’t get much comeback when they ridicule smaller parties but that’s no excuse for cheap, shallow reporting where the objective is to “catch people out” rather than examine and critique party policies on behalf of the public.

The New Zealand Herald reporting on Internet MANA collapsed into farce after the “moment of truth” town hall meeting on the Monday before the election.

Instead of running stories taking the Prime Minister to task for his continuously misleading responses on the question of mass surveillance of New Zealanders the Herald chose to do its best to bury Internet MANA with its funder Kim Dotcom in a tsunami of heavily-negative, front-page reporting because of the alleged failure of Dotcom to produce evidence that the Prime Minister lied.

The evidence had in fact been reported earlier that same day by the Herald itself in an email showing the Prime Minister was well aware of Dotcom well before the Hollywood-orchestrated raid on Dotcom’s mansion.

As I said earlier the media and political establishment were happy for MANA to occupy a small “principled” space on the political landscape (the Herald even editorialised that they would be happy for me to be an MP!) but became outraged (read Patrick Gower) that we were taking money from a millionaire.

Objecting to big money donations for political parties has never been such as issue until a left-wing party got big-money backing with no strings attached. No mention of the critical diet of business donations which keep Labour and National afloat – just outrage that a group prepared to challenge corporate rule might be well-funded for an election campaign to do so.


  1. Without Kim Dotcom Mana would still be in parliament, whether or not Hone would have company, don’t know, but I suspect he might have.
    That was the wrong move, the voting public had no time for Dotcom (rightly or wrongly) before he threw his hat in the ring with the Internet Party.
    Internet-Mana was on a hiding to nothing as soon as he stepped in and as soon as he started running interference (perceived or real).
    You HAVE to know what the general public is thinking and at the moment they are generally in a “Key’s shit doesn’t stink” mode, so you HAVE to work with that.
    Any extreme party is only ever going to get a small proportion of the vote, like Mana like ACT, so you have to make it count.

    • An extreme party?

      ACT only receives 1% of the vote because it represents the 1%.

      Mana is the only party representing the working class. False consciousness would have you believe that National represents the working class – it doesn’t, just as Labour and Greens do not. Think about who neoliberalism favours, and ask yourselves if your standards and costs of living, pay and working conditions have gotten better. It ideally should, since we’re living in a “rockstar economy”.

      But who are the ones making the profit? It is us who are. Who are receiving the profit? It is us who aren’t. We are the ones working harder and making the economy grow – not the managers, not the machines. It is labour that adds value. So shouldn’t you deserve a share of the profit? Doesn’t this sound fair, rather than such mass inequalities? Are policies such as free tertiary education extreme? After all, students receive degrees to use in order to gain more profits for businesses and employers.

      It’s a time to rethink priorities in this country of ours.

      • I wonder if you understand what I mean by extreme. It means in political terms parties or factions whose politics place them at one end or the other of a political spectrum be it economic left and right or authoritarian v libertarian up and down.
        In economic terms Mana represents the furthest left we have in the way of a political party with fairly collectivist monetary policies. Notice I said “fairly” as no NZ party with any traction at all, advocates total collectivism.
        On the other hand we have ACT which is probably actually further right than Mana is left, where it is all individualism (what they fail to acknowledge, though, is that corporations are a form of collectivism, but I won’t tell if you don’t tell).
        So these two parties are the most opposite that we have in this country in economic terms. There is no shame in being extreme, but it needs to be understood that extremes do not work well or for long without force. A mixture of all the bits seems to work best, it’s just we keep changing our minds about what bits are in and what bits are out, and we always probably will as long as we have democracy, probably because we get bored with the status quo.

        • I understand what you’re saying. As John Key would say, you want something that appeals to “middle New Zealand.”

          But I don’t think middle New Zealand is getting a good deal at all, under the current political spectrum. Things aren’t getting better and we need to extend the narrow paramaters by which we speak and think politically.

          We need to change the rhetoric; feeding the kids should not be seen as an extremist policy belonging to an extremist group. One viewpoint enters the prism and expands out, populates our entire way of thinking. For example, free market policies. It’s been heralded as the way things are, that there are no alternatives. We see a section of the news dedicated to financial reports and see those graphs which make as though it appears that neoliberal economics is scientific, that it is objectively true…. That we must align our ideals with those who have economic power over us. This is the destructive effect of one-dimensional thought; we think politically in terms of the established discourse within the parliamentary regime. We think in terms of the ideas and the language of capitalism, and this is what I see as big problem for the left. Think about why even ‘the Left’ is seen as a dirty word.

          New Zealand’s political history has been fickle. Before, you’d get changes in government “to give the other blokes a chance.” But I don’t think this will happen. National could very well get 4th and 5th terms if things keep going the way they are. The media and corporate interests can and will make this happen… don’t fall into the trap by thinking change happens by itself or that it will eventually happen. No, something has to instigate change. This may mean “going to the extreme”… but it won’t be the extreme if we change the way we think about things.

          Anyway thank you for engaging with good, thought-out debate. This is what we need after an election, we are in desperate need for conversations like this!

          • Again you misunderstand, I’ve got no love for this current govt they have made it okay for middle NZ to deny kids are not getting a fair go. And I still do think you misunderstand extreme. It’s on the outer edges that Mana and ACT find themselves, and there is nothing you can do to change that unless they change. You can’t make people accept totally collective policies and you can’t make people accept totally free market. In fact we have better success with the former than the latter this election.
            Of course feeding kids would be in my mixed economy on top of the list of thing that are a must have.
            There is also a lot to be said for making your own way in the world, but that comes after the basics are taken care of.
            It does not hurt to have a bit of understanding how things work even if you don’t like how it is at any one time, still pays to understand, especially if you want the people who will drive that change to do it, and that is the middle, always was always will be

            • I do respect your argument. What I don’t respect is that it is the way things are, and perhaps I am deluded for not wanting to accept this may always be the case. But I want to try open up our thinking… Since the Lange government (who brought in neoliberalism), we haven’t had that thinking. We were the first country to bring in the welfare state – and that cannot be understated. Savage dared to dream; and I think it’s time for the left to dream, because we have the collective creative, intellectual and altruistic pool of ideas and knowledge and people power. If we don’t think differently, we are limiting ourselves. Life under neoliberalism is tough as it is… so it’s up to the collective to find a way out of it. You seem to be a voice of reason, and we need voices like that. But we also need voices like what I’m offering. The only thing is: I don’t have the answers. I think the collective does though.

              My approach may be totally wrong. It’s true, I’m proposing a radical direction. But we cannot simply reject ideas without thinking about them and discussing it over. We need to imagine the possibilities, because the alternative is unbearable. Mass inequalities, economic destruction and an underclass barely able to keep afoot. The extent of this reality requires a big imagination. What you’re proposing is to think within the current mindset; but I’m urging people to think differently.

              • Everybody who cares should get hold of the recently published, concise/easy to read ‘BEYOND the FREE MARKET’ Rebuilding a Just Society in New Zealand ..upon which John Minto was a contributor among others, e.g Jane Kelsey, Nicky Hager, Ruth Irwin, Helen Kelly, David Cooke etc by Dunmore Publishing .. It explains so well how New Zealand become so indoctrinated into the Neoliberal narrative since 1984 “It (I quote) presents appropriate stratagies to ENABLE us to re-establish a society based on more equal access to resources …this book should be shared around far and wide a revolution is needed..starting up from every town every city…..

    • Mana Movement is still going as an important part of the ‘resistance’ to Key group think that has swept the nation. Three yearly restocking of the bourgeois parliament is not the totality of politics for activists and many communities of interest.

      Powerful processes are in play to run down participation in elections and civil society generally. The ‘experts’ do the thinking for a lot of busy and alienated people. How else do we explain a huge non vote from people that desperately need the things in Mana policy? A huge non vote for a $2 minimum wage increase?

      The Minto for Mayor campaign offered free public transport. I know what low paid workers pay for travel so it should have been a no brainer. But no.
      Appalling participation rates in that postal ballot. Online voting frankly concerns me too–1. security and 2. how informed will voters actually be?

      Manufacturing consent as it has been called. We live in a class society and a privately owned psychological warfare machine called the media is vital to keeping us in our place and compliant.

      • Tiger mountain, well said.

        “Manufacturing consent as it has been called. We live in a class society and a privately owned psychological warfare machine called the media is vital to keeping us in our place and compliant.”

        Exactly, so all opposition parties have to form a grand alliance and challenge Key’s Government to split NZTV/RNZ into two separate media moguls one for NatZ and one for all combined opposition parties to give fairness to the taxpayers of the country.
        This will provide a level playing field for all views to be expressed equally without prejudice over serious matters of concern to the state.

        If Key refuses to relinquish half the public asset known as TVNZ/RNZ to a combined consortium of opposition parties take the matter to court.

        The we will see how NatZ have control over our hearts and minds as they struggle to explain why they have all their smear spinners Farrar, Hooten, Hoskings, and all still involved in all public media.

    • Sure, but Minto has a point. When Labour can’t identify who their real enemies are and go in with the opposition to defeat another left wing candidate, and an ally, what use are they? My fervent hope is Labour’s vote collapses and goes with the Green. Either that or Labour party supporters go take their party back from the rabble that’s running it.

      • The real enemies of a neoliberal Labour caucus are those who aren’t neoliberals. It’s a losing game. If I supported neoliberal policies, I would not vote Labour because neoliberalism as an ideology is much more aligned with National. National have a firm hold of this ground, and they are not prepared and going to lose it. Dirty Politics, mass surveillance and the TPPA did not lose this ground, as we hoped it would. And people will be swayed by the “left wing sweeteners” National put in election year budgets. Its very deceptive, but deception is a game National are the masters at. Such a game is not a game that should be in the interests or seen as ethical for the Labour Party to be complicit in.

        I still remain convinced that Labour needs to go for the missing million; and it CAN do this. The voter turnout (let’s also keep in mind that there are a substantial number of people that are eligible to vote but not enrolled) was not much higher than the last one despite the efforts of the ‘Get out and vote’ campaigns. So Labour was unsuccessful in engaging with these people… and there are many reasons for this. The leader is not the issue here; concrete tangible policies make the difference to these non-voters, because the people who don’t vote don’t buy into cult-of-personality politics. Otherwise they would be voting (or alternatively, if policies were laid on the table that made them WANT to vote).

        • The missing million is the key, but they also need to informed not just found.
          It is no surprise that the world has swung toward conservatism if you think about it, as the missing million will be mainly comprised of younger people, so that means the voting is coming mainly from older people and guess what, conservatism is the preserve of the older, the wealthier and mainly male (you can probably throw white in there for good measure)
          I see neo-liberalism as the mechanism that the few wrenched the wealth away from the many and conservatism as the fences and gates that are put up to make sure they keep it.
          You will never win hearts and minds unless you can see what is going on and what is needed to counter it if it needs countering and it most likely is motivating the non-voter part of the population who’ve been conspicuous by their absence for some time. But again, they need to be informed as this is still a democracy and need to find their own political home space

          • It’s interesting you bring up the concept of an “informed voter.” I think the problem with being informed in this country is that our media is dominated by a small group of large companies. Australia suffers from this more through Rupert Murdoch’s mass ownership of media. If a voter were to become informed, and decided to read up about politics through the traditional media that we the masses all love and respect and buy into… they are likely to see this:

            … We dont’ want that… and a lot of Australians are indeed regretting voting for Mr Abbott. Also, remember the media’s treatment of Helen Clark’s third term. It was torrid: nanny state, Helengrad. If Dirty Politics happened on the Left, I would hate to imagine the media’s responses.

            Let’s assume that the missing million are not what we call ‘informed’. Perhaps this is a good thing, this actually can give us somehope. If the missing million listen to the mainstream media sources here, they’d have you believe that New Zealand is on the cusp of something great. That’s a positive message people buy into, albeit and illusory one. But this is our chance to engage with those people who are not informed by these mainstream media sources, and have the conversations with these people talking about things that matter to them. Their ways of life, their livelihoods… the Left needs to think of ways in which to appeal to them. It requires creative thinking.

            Let’s call it: the quest to get to the mission million before the media gets to them.

            • My sort of informed would mean that all the media hype would just end up as white noise.
              My advice is to go and do the test there.
              It is a different site and set up to the one that ran before this election and I think far easier to understand. It also, I think, gives people the ability to understand how things political can be structured and how libertarian can apply to both left and right and and everything in between and how totalitarianism can do the same, and you can sort of see where various political parties and movements fit on the graph.
              We are always going to have the media in this day and age, it is for people to nut things out for themselves.
              I don’t know how many times I could have wrung John Key’s neck every time I heard him use the expression hard left all of the time, and here he is now, babying someone from the hard right. He has been just as manipulative as any press, an easy thing to do when you have all that fawning around you

            • That’s why we need our taxpayer media split in half.

              Half for Left and half for the right for share of our Public TVNZ/Radio NZ.

              Its called a level media playing field.

    • I and a lot of people didn’t have a problem with dot com ,he would be good for NZ ,hes been demonised by the media ,and we all know who the media favours.

    • Agree.

      It is one thing to back a political party financially but he needed to do that from back stage. Too often he was centre-stage when he didn’t need to be there, including the day Pam Corkery had her outburst. He didn’t even need to be on stage for “TMOT.”

      Quite frankly KDC put himself in that position and NZers got switched off because of it. There were too many “FJK” moments, and had he not shown up at Western Springs College the IMP message might have been heard.

  2. Mana had an obligation to increase its parliamentary representation it couldn’t remain stagnant at 1% with a single MP considering how vast the Mana movement is across the country. It wasn’t the money that was appealing it was the media coverage that closer to the elections turned into a smear campaign by Brooke Sabin and Paddy Gower. –Brookes daddy a sitting National MP and Steven Joyce the former CEO of media Internet Mana didn’t have a chance against a National bias media.

    • I don’t know so much, Hone Harawira was gaining kudos from the most unlikely sources and more and more people were, even grudgingly, accepting that he was true to his cause and, I suspect, were a little bit in awe of his oratory abilities in parliament.
      I think he would have made it back with a mate or two, without Dotom

  3. Spot on with media driving the narrative. Thank goodness for the internet. Our only hope is teaching our future citizens-children, to be critical when they search for truth.

  4. At the launch, KDC upstaged the party and its policies by stating that the last PM who pissed him off got hacked. Why was he on stage talking that stuff when this was about the party and the policy, not KDC’s agenda?

    Pam Corkery upstaged them all. She has achieved immortality with her outburst. How could any but the most faithful not be utterly distracted?

    Blaming the media is easy, but look at the juicy morsels they are being fed.

    • “Blaming the media is easy, but look at the juicy morsels they are being fed.”
      Christ you make it sound just like a game!!

      This is serious shit., going on here.

      God these NatZ are ready to wreck our future entirely so wake up we need to unite and fight them not play games.

      Do you really know what time it is? CTA 1970

      Chicago was no worse than what we have here now with crime bribery and corruption grand larceny on a very grand scale is going on here,while the cops play tiddly winks,

      Sure does smell and look like Chicago.

    • Some of us focus on issues and matters of substance. We are poorly served if politicians and media do not do the same.
      It would also be nice if Labour could stop slagging off Mana, it’s bad enough that Labour winning Te Tai Tokerau and Waiariki was a net -3 seats for the left.

    • the immortal words of pam corkery. They should be remembered.

      Indeed the first time that MSM ever broadcast someone expressing what most of the public think of them.

      “jumped up little shits”, I think she said.

      It might have been in the singular in which case it was aimed at that jumped up little shit, Patrick Gower.

    • Remember the punch up in parliament between Tau Henare and your mate Mallard , Ellis?….your very selective arent you ?…. seems like you have learned NOTHING since the last time I put you straight. If that wasn’t a pathetic circus act then what is?

      And get the fuck off Kim Dotcoms case , – at least he had the courage to bring out all the shit that this govt lies about to the population – unlike so many of your sniveling neo liberal mates in Labour.

    • We may not like Kelly’s comments – but truth be told, she’s made a couple of valid points.

      KDC did get carried away with some of his comments; Pam was foolish in losing the plot (as much as I feel like calling certain media twats even worse names); and the “Moment of Truth” wasn’t as well handled as it might have been.

      I say that as someone who gave my Party Vote to Internet-Mana (; as someone who holds Hone Harawira is high regard; and someone who understands where Kim Dotcom was coming from in what he was trying to achieve.

      But then again, hindsight is the best sight of all…

      Interesting though that Mana-Internet’s detractors focus on the sole wealthy benefactor – Kim Dotcom.

      But not a word; not an eyebrow; not a twitch of facial muscle, is made about National’s plethora of wealthy benefactors.

      As I’ve said in the past, the Establishment allowed Hone Harawira to speak for the poor and dispossessed – as long as he understood the rules of the “game”. The moment he got backing, and influence, he broke those unwritten rules and became a direct threat to the Establishment (and I include Labour in that assessment – sorry Kelly).

      The result was utterly predictable.

      And that is why Mana-Internet was squashed.

      We can rail and bellow against the Establishment all we like. No doubt they are amused by the spectacle we provide them.

      But the moment we become a real threat to their power; the moment our influence becomes tangible; the moment the under-classes and other non-voters might possibly take notice of us – then that amusement ends. Smiles wither into tight-lipped frowns.

      Then the Establishment fights back.

      And Kelvin Davis – with the blessings of Labour, John Key, Winston Peters, and elements in the Maori Party – took away Hone’s electorate and so the Establishment’s power was once again preserved.

      Kelvin Davis has served those interests well, and he will be duly rewarded after 2017, when the leadership of the Labour Party is once again up for auction…

      • The moment Gower made his infamous Tweet of being disgusted byLaila Harre, it set the the for media bias against Mana, the Internet Party, and Kim Dotcom. It was like having Jason Ede in charge of the Parliamentary Press Gallery.

        Fairness and non-partisan my ass.

  5. I always knew that the reporting of media for Internet-Mana was going to be biased, but even I was surprised at the vitriol handed out.

    I don’t agree with Raegun. Playing the game is what is becoming the norm for politicians, instead of being of service. And even if you decide to play the game, the gamemasters will change the rules.

    I voted for Internet/Mana and when the opportunity next arises I will do the same. Until then I’ll be looking for ways to support those NZers who are vulnerable and falling through the cracks.

    (The media hates Dotcom with a passion that belies their indifference. It is the reaction of teenage bullies whose “friend” has changed his conduct. The silent screech of “How dare you?!?” permeates most news articles if you care to listen for it).

  6. Your first impulse to not take “the media robbed us!” line any further was the best one. Going on the TV show about media reporting was a classic media-sucking-anyone-they-can-into-validating-their-own-game, play. Stupid is Sticky, and few people can avoid getting it on them.

    All the time and energy going into being annoyed about the media being the media would be better spent on whatever Mana’s next move is going to be. Things will be alot easier for Mana after three years of unrestrained National, with or without media support, with or without Dotcom’s money. So keep keeping on.

    I don’t know how things look to you, since you’re inside the political machine. I don’t know how things look to Patrick Gower because he’s a journalist. I’m a nobody and see things only from the perspective of my life experience. The claim that Mana were bound to Dotcoms money with no strings attached is inconcieveable to me. I have never seen an example in all my life to match it to. Even if it was true, I would expect at any moment for the reality to negate the new truth. Big Money always seeks a profit, that’s how it got to be Big Money. That’s the uphill battle anyone has selling that line to people who’ve seen where money comes from, what it does and where it goes.

    You say the media were unfair, biased and hypocritical. It looks to me like they were saying the same thing about Mana – although I do recognise the power imbalance of the equation too. You make claims that I have to take on faith. I’d guess that the reason (if we ignore malice) the media started howling in outrage about how “a group prepared to challenge corporate rule might be well-funded for an election campaign to do so..” is a combination of the hypocrisy (to their understanding) of the left taking capitalist money to fight capitalism; the hysteria of the moment at that time (even National didn’t think they could win); and maybe even a bit of the same (but sneering) disbelief that Mana thought they could pick up a money-turd from the clean end; and that people were asked to believe that everything we know about life inside of a capitalist famework was about to be turned on it’s head by a Mana miracle.

    This is how it looked to me from the outside. The media’s bias doesn’t lead me by the nose like commentators like to assume it does. I have plenty of bias of my own to filter through. So what I’d like to hear, is how you can convince me to believe that Big “no strings attached” Money doesn’t behave like Big Money and can be free of strings; and how using delusional middle-class values about “no strings money” to kick start a left-wing party isn’t going to end in a re-incarnation of the current Labour party inside of ten years.

    Or you can put the effort into telling me about a “bold jobs initiative” for the next three years – something I’m much much more interested in – until I forget about the money issue, and the financial practicalities of running a small political party, and the laughable idea that anything truely left can come to NZ now without some rather nasty “revolution” and when reminded about it all in 2017 by the media, at worst, i’ll think it’s an acceptable trade-off.

  7. So what is it that makes Hone New Zealands most effective MP John.
    Was taking a holiday during the election campaign also part of this effective strategy.

    • the trouble with being a troll on this site is that most of the people here are far too well-informed to fall for a silly dig like that.

      It’s interesting though in how it shows the gap between the media generated image of Hone Harawira and the reality, people are so mislead that even the trolls aren’t able to be effective.

      • Hone dropped off the radar at the critical moment of campaigning. If this was because of an accident, he needed to make a public statement to that effect, at that time.

        • So the MSM could do an in-depth report, just like they did when bullets were fired into his electoral office? Yeah, right.

  8. A lot of lessons learned in the past few months, not just about the GCSB and the shocking corruption in the highest circles of government, but the absolute uselessness of the mainstream media in reporting important issues. I must admit I already had some inkling of this as living in Christchurch I noted how much they didn’t seem to know about life in Earthquake city. I for one wont be taking their word on anything in the future.

  9. Thank you Mr Minto. I have also been surprised (call me naïve) to the point of being disgusted with the media’s coverage of the election. Raising this is not to blame the media for the result, but to illuminate how it is one important factor that can sway the outcome.

    The disparately negative coverage in the NZ Herald and on TVNZ & TV3 of the Left in general, not solely Internet-Mana, was ‘balanced’ by wholly positive puff-pieces about National. Fran O’Sullivan in particular appears to have an axe to grind with Kim Dotcom that is totally biasing anything she writes which isn’t already a blatant sycophantic sucking-up to John Key.

    I sent in some comments to this effect about her opinion piece on Saturday ( Sadly although I refrained from bad language, use of ALL CAPS, and have had my comments published previously, inexplicably this comment wasn’t.

    I no longer bother with visiting their website except to see what the right-wing spin is they are putting on current events. They’ve made it clear they’ve sold out.

    Did this lose the election for Internet-Mana? Not on it’s own, but it sure was a central plank in the undermining of their message.

    • Totally agree. Boycott the Herald! They are now openly right wing.

      I don’t blame KDC for the result cos when the other parties and media turned against Internet Mana it was going to be tough.

      I voted for Internet Mana not because of Hone but because I believed them and Laila working together to make sure the TTPA does not go through or is negotiated properly, so NZ can not be sued by multinationals, plus wanted dirty tricks cleaned up.

      KDC was good for publicity and anyone who makes an IT business that is rumored to take up 5% of Internet traffic must have something to offer. Dream Team, Hone helping the poor, Laila like a center left Helen Clark, (finally intelligence in parliament) and KDC who has Internet skills and knowledge (another skill vacant in parliament – no offense but when JK says you can’t wire tap the Southern Cross Cable hmmm maybe he shouldn’t be the minister in charge of the GCSB). OK yep, KDC has no media training but he did take down ear wax eating JB so that alone should get a tick. He’s friends with Snowdon another tick from me. He can give the Labour party advice on how not to lose all your unsecured files and emails at the very least. Another tick. CS hates him. extra tick.

      Seriously someone said Russel Norman for Labour Leader – What a great idea. Sorry the Greens did not shine this election for me. Russel defect to Labour. He and DC could be BFF and go into a coalition with the Greens. Internet Mana on confidence and supply.

  10. Oh cmon, Cunliffe is one of the biggest users of the media to try and manipulate public perceptions.

    Even that beach photo looks staged on his behalf to engage public sympathy.

  11. From what I saw of Hone in Parliament impressed me. He demonstrated he was far more of a statesman than FJK. He always presented a good argument every time he spoke, but most of all he spoke from the heart. On the other hand FJK speaks from his own over-inflated ego and his wallet!

    FJK’s Parliamentary behaviour is appalling, comparable to that of a nasty spoiled brat, directing insulting comments to opposition members, screeching across the House, playing to his own sordid bunch of imbecile MPs who applaud him for goodness sake! WTF! It’s supposed to be the highest court in the land! Instead what we get is a preposterous sideshow to be believed!

    God save us (and I’m not religious), another three years of this BS 🙁

    Hone’s loss to Parliament this next term, is the country’s loss.

  12. It would have been nice if someone in IMP had asked Kimdotcom to send a tiny fraction of his millions on a poll regarding public perception of him. Then they could have decided whether it was worth the punt. Relying on the “reckons” of activists in such matters is no way to go about deciding such matters.

    Playing the PR game smart means getting more justice for the people. We on the left do ourselves and the most vulnerable people of NZ no favours when we eschew PR methods based on what ever self-righteous grounds.

  13. @H… You need to know, the ‘ media ‘ styled the disappearance of Hone as a “holiday ” and yet the truth is, a member of the family was extremely unwell and likely to die, and Hone was there. Not Galavanting all over the shop as the media suggested… Well done for believing everything they wrote…

    • Sorry, Pam lost it at the very time she should have demonstrated her media management skills. She was paid to do a job, and she failed the most critical test, and things were never the same for IMP after it.

  14. Well I am really glad I am living in Tonga and do not have to be subjected to the hard right philosophy and to see John Key Take the peoples power away by signing the TPPA in it’s present wording.

  15. Mainstream media are pretty much akin to the school brat who yells ” FIREEEE ”!!!!!!……and sit back to see the panic and mayhem and people being injured as the panic ensues……no different to spooking a herd of cattle with loud gunshot and seeing them charge over a cliff.

    They know they have this ability …so did the Fascists and Communists of the 20th century. Your kidding yourself if you pretend otherwise.
    But instead of it being reporting the facts…they report you their opinion dressed up as news. Bogus.

    And a casualty of that was InternetMana and Mr Dotcom ,…there was weighty policy that IMP NEEDED NZ to hear…things that huge numbers of the people needed to know about….the MSM denied them that chance.

    With Dotcom…the same….huge issues at stake…yet what did the media do?…acted like dirty little arselickers and slimed up to their neo liberal overlords…lied, distorted events , fabricated stories , presented pathetic side story’s with no relevance , pointed out minors when the party they supported (National ) were guilty of gross crimes and gaffes…the list is endless.

    And its called modern day propaganda.

    Nothing less.

    The REAL REASON we had the neo liberal stooge Davis backed by the PM advising his National party voters to vote for Davis…who was a candidate of the PM’s largest opposition party no less!!!… …..and the REAL REASON Winston Peters and the Maori party conspired to join in with them to close down InternetMana and Mr Kim Dotcoms message was this :




    • Agreed, and the flag referendum (what a joke) JK has probably designed the flag already an eagle surrounded by 30 odd stars, and the Tpp is “flagged” at the same time the flag will be changed ,there done and dusted , we are bought and sold down the river by JK, and the people who voted for him will wished to hell they hadnt .

      • The flag “debate” is brilliant Key strategy. The population will go into meltdown about the flag while the TPPA will be relegated to a minor story – nothing to see here, move along.

  16. Like John points out, these commentators here claiming the media have a right wing bias, are completely missing the point. Act and the Conservatives, both of whom National would depend on, were completely and utterly ridiculed by the media. They are like Wolves, circling and looking for weakness. Unfortunately Internet/Mana through their own behavior displayed the former and they pounced.

    It’s the media, that’s what they do.

  17. Minto i’m surprised you didn’t bring up Brian Fallows opinion on the internet-mana parties education policy. The one in which he called free tertiary education ‘extravagant’. Given the fact that Fallow hasn’t been able to call the the actual neoliberal policies as extravagant, this screams to me that he has the most utmost obedience to the business elite.

  18. The point is the media have manipulated the public over this election as they do on lots of other issues. Dotcom was demonised because he was a millionaire backer of a left wing political party. A narrative was set up that somehow his (foreign) money was trying to buy an election result. This came through loud and clear. If this was true then the media needed to also look at the millionaires funding National and Labour. They didn’t. There was virtually no mention of who the backers of the main political parties were. Even Collin Craig got an easy ride on this count. Craig personally poured millions into the Conservative campaign but the media had no problem with that. Only his quirky personality was ever criticized. We heard prior to the campaign that Donghua Liu was a National party backer in relation to the Williamson sacking but that was it.

  19. The narrative of a media biased against it is made equally by the left and the right, and in a sense I’m of the view this does depend on ones own political standpoint. I wasn’t convinced by John’s arguments on The Nation, any more than I am by this article. And I really don’t think John does himself any favours by referring to an email that now seems to be fairly widely considered a fraud as ‘evidence’. If the left is to recover, the media have to be engaged, not treated as enemies.

    • As I understand it the email has been placed before the parliamentary complaints board. Perhaps we should wait for their ruling before speculating that it’s a fraud.

      • Many saw that action as a way of sidelining a level of scrutiny the email was not going to be able to withstand. All the evidence points to it being a fake.

        • Please do share this evidence you have that the email is a fake, if you have something more than Warner Brothers claim that it was never sent.

Comments are closed.