Mike Hosking has come out and claimed that it’s no ones business what TVNZ pay him as a salary.
This has come to the surface because of the grotesque difference in pay between male and female presenters at the BBC. On that point, surely the issue is not that women presenters should be paid more to match the obscene extremes of the male presenters, male presenters should be docked their wages to lower them to the female broadcasters.
Not in service
Back to Mike, his claim that it’s no ones business what he is paid is utter bullshit. He is on Seven Sharp, the lead current affairs show in the country on the State Broadcaster!
Being on the State Broadcaster carries obligations to the taxpayers who have built that asset up, which means his salary should be transparent.
He is embarrassed to have his salary come out because he knows the sleepy hobbits he broadcasts to and manipulates every night would see his true wealth as the obscenity that it is. He speaks to their bigotry and calms their ignorance as a trick, and if the trick ever reveals its true price, those being sold it would realise they are being tricked.
His brain certainly isn’t in service.
Martyn, – Hoskings equals = Another classic case of a “Public Servant” acting very badly by not recognising what the term “public Servant” means.
Hoskings like all the rest of Parliament and all government services are all “Public servants” all whom appears to act as they are above the glaze of the public who is their employer. We pay the taxes that fund their income Mike Hoskings and YES WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT TVNZ PAY FOR YOUR (lack of services) to us as the taxpayer who is your employer.
You couldn’t force me to watch Seven “Sharp” on pain of death, but that doesn’t mean I don’t care about Hosking’s salary. Living in a country with a state broadcaster that claims to embrace gender equality, I want to know that Toni Street’s salary is the same a Mike Hosking’s. If not, why not?
If they don’t have salary parity, the most effective solution would be to lower Hosking’s salary to match Street’s. This would give the best value to the NZ taxpayers paying Hosking’s wages.
Hosking’s pay is our business as we the taxpayers pay his wages ?
If he was as quick to reveal his salary as he is to give his opinion on everything, he’d probably hold some sort of credibility, actually no he wouldn’t..
As an aside, just been listening to the most biased speaker of the house in history, David Carter. I seriously don’t know why they sit in parliament when they have a potentially corrupt leader of parliament. We are talking every question that is asked by the opposition being preambled by the Speaker with ” in regards that the minister has ministerial responsibility” In other, words he’s allowing them an out.
Considering we the general public pay Hosking’s wages, we have every right to know what he earns! And I wouldn’t mind betting his Natz masters, also give him a few lucrative backhanders to spread the word!
Hosking’s arrogance knows no bounds!
‘The lead current affairs show’ Good God is that what it has come to – The lead current affairs show really is checkpoint with John Campbell. I would never ever watch Hoskings you couldn’t pay me to.
How much does John get paid or doesn’t that matter?
Deflecting much?
Try answering the first question before moving on to the next.
Try for the third time.
I don’t think his remuneration ( he is not on a salary) is our business.
It should be remembered too that people like this are not State employees (hence why they are not on salaries) but contractors. Big difference.
This blog has not asked what John C is being paid.
That’s good as his remuneration isn’t our business either.
[Patrick, your previous two comments were declined publication because they added nothing constructive to the debate. This comment from you has been accepted for publication because it speaks to the issue. – Scarletmod]
Normally, Patrick, I might agree except for two points;
1. He is a state employee. TVNZ is a State Owned Enterprise.
2. Hosking has passed harsh moral judgement on others. He is therefore made himself subject to the same low-bar he himself has set.
Frank, we would definitely have to beg to differ on the “employee” status.
This class of contractor have no ongoing right to “employment” super or any other normal “employee” protection.
Remember that other hated contractor whose contract was revoked because he made fun of the name of an Indian official?
Convince me that he is the same as any other Public Servant.
John C has also passes harsh moral judgement on others, usually for very good reason, but harsh moral judgements are harsh moral judgements, whether L or R.
Please quote chapter and verse.
Frank, I know you love chapter and verse -(you quoted election night results of 2014 to disprove my assertion that Lianne Dalzeil is unpopular in 2017. Chapter and verrse but it meant nothing as it was years old)
I watched John every night when he was on and he was the best friend Christchurch residents had as he was really the only journo who stayed on the case. His criticism of the powers was often devastating but that’s what journo’s do.
So you can’t quote any evidence.
Campbell’s stories on Christchurch called to account behaviour from insurance companies. There was no “moral judgement” required – he simply publicised their actions (or lack thereof).
As per usual, Patrick, you discredit yourself with your right-wing bullshit.
And you’re still deflecting, Patrick. That implies you are uncomfortable with the issue being discussed. Why is that?
I am uncomfortable with it and so should be.
What these contractors ( and Marcus Lush is one as well) earn is nobody’s business but theirs, just as what you earn is nobodies business but yours.
That is not deflecting, it’s merely restating these individuals right to privacy.
You can bet that all their contracts will have privacy clauses.
The real deflection is the implication that Hosking’s is a Public Servant when he very obviously isn’t.
Never liked this man’s attitude and to think that, as a taxpayer, I contribute to his salary make me wanna fumigate his office with Roundup. I wont call him a weed because I like the smell of the stuff.
I consider whatever he is paid it’s far to much for that arrogant crap he turns out.
People like Hosking are the reason the why the french has the good sense to storm the Bastille.
TVNZ as a PUBLIC company that is funded by the taxpayer and must abide by a charter that should amongst other things be responsible to be impartial when conducting its media responsibilities.
The people running TVNZ are public servants and should act in the public interest, Hoskings bias and his exorbitant salary are not.
I hope that when we have driven this government out the next minister of broadcasting strengthens the fourth estate and returns it to its real purpose of like other public entities of serving and informing the public without bias and an overpaid media celebrity pushing their own personal opinions to the masses thinking that we want to hear it in the first place.
Hosking likes to make people justify what meagre benefits (or “handouts” as he calls) THEY get, but he is too arrogant to tell anyone what salary HE gets from the state broadcaster even if both amounts come from the government.
Hosking would be best suited to a “pin the tail on the donkey” party with him as the ass.
I was a state servant for 42 years and my pay rate and employment contract was ALWAYS in the Public domain.
The people have a right to know how their money is spent.
Fuck his salary, I want to know the size of his ego, or if there is a tool( other than himself) big enough to measure it?
Dunno about his ego Bert, but one thing we know for certain: his head was big enough to fit up John Key’s arse.
You know, comparing Hoseking to other puppets like Sooty and Sweep reminds me how infinitely more informative and entertaining The Sooty Show was in contrast to SevenSharp.
Why do we even have “state broadcasters”?
Our State Broadcasting was firstly instituted to give the members of Parliament a platform to inform their constituents originally under the original Broadcasting Act
Here is the latest version. see (d) Though not an static programing platform we do still believe the intent is to enable all political Parties time for their views but we see lee and less for any other than the ruling party now.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0025/latest/DLM155365.html
(a)
to provide for the maintenance of programme standards in broadcasting in New Zealand; and
(b)
to establish the Broadcasting Standards Authority and to define its functions and powers; and
(c)
to establish the Broadcasting Commission and to define its functions and powers; and
(d)
to enable political parties to broadcast election programmes for Parliamentary elections free of charge; and
(e) [Repealed]
(f)
to repeal the Broadcasting Act 1976; and
(g)
to provide for matters incidental thereto
Title paragraph (e): repealed, on 28 February 2003, by section 30 of the Television New Zealand Act 2003 (2003 No 1).
“Broadcasting act’
We could save a lot of money of they just used Twitter instead
People don’t listen to women.
Women don’t understand The Issues.
Every Good Bloke needs a side-kick and a foil for his wit. A ‘Laurel’ – (girls’ name) to his serious Hardy (joke).
Blokes Know Things and can interpret. Women just chatter and gossip.
Blokes are Serious. So they need to have a pay rate that honours and recognises their intrinsic value to the whole of humanity.
I think that’s the rationale.
I’m still wondering who this Hosking person is. Never heard him in my life. Is he the opinionated contributor to the ‘Herald’? I skimmed him a couple of times. Don’t bother any more. Flatulent stuff – on a good day.
There seems to be some confusion in some of these comments as to who pays Hosking’s salary. TVNZ is a State Owned Enterprise which means it has to run at a profit and only return a dividend to the government. It is not actually funded by the taxpayer and its staff are not paid by the taxpayer, rather they are paid out of the profits made by the corporation that is TVNZ.
Hence the decline and dumbing down of programme quality, the increase in numbers of ads over the years and the endless revamping of ‘current affairs’ and ‘news’ programming to find the most popular formula. Hosking is only retained because he manages to gain a rating of around 600,000 every night. Programmes are formulated to please the advertiser. Anything you hear to the contrary is spin. To fix the dangerous problem of the Hoskings on our screens we need a total revamp of the broadcasting act so that real public broadcasting is reinstated in this country. Until then we run the serious risk to social democracy that the Hoskings of the world pose.
As a footnote, the dividend paid back to the government by TVNZ is around 7% of their overall profits, as I understand it. Something that was not made very public was that the government waved the dividend recently so that TVNZ could spend the money on an expensive makeover on their Auckland building.
Paul you are correct that TVNZ is a SOE. However, TVNZ as the public broadcaster was built with taxpayer funds, you can’t pretend TVNZ just burped up one day and was returning a profit, Hosking rides a TV station built from its roots up by the tax payer and as such TVNZ still owes us public broadcaster values, and making those salaries transparent is one of those public broadcaster values.
Thats a lovely idea Martyn, but I think you will find TVNZ’s neoliberal bosses just laughing at that suggestion. When the SOE was formed it would have disavowed any responsibility towards the taxpayer, just as they disavowed any responsibility to good community programming, though having said that, I believe the Maori content and the limited amount of local programming (though this was circumvented with mostly cheap reality rubbish) is part of an obligation to the state…without looking over the agreement and new terms of the SOE made at the time, I believe you would find this to be the case.
Sorry to be such a cynic, but TVNZ has failed this country miserably in my view.
I’m not disagreeing, I’m putting forward the argument that a new Left Government should adopt walking into public broadcasting area – the public built TVNZ, the people should take it back
Agreed totally. I think it should be a major policy push and declared as part of the election campaign. I’m sure it would pick up a lot of votes as a large part of the population are completely frustrated with the garbage on TV. Its a classic line of complaint amongst New Zealanders and has been for years. The argument of course is that online content is reshaping the way people watch TV, but it is a fact that fixed time broadcasting remains the largest percentage of the market.
Comments are closed.