The ongoing debacle and accusations flying over at RNZ have managed to blot out TVNZ claiming National was attempting to implement Nazi white supremacist genocide, but there is a far bigger issue here than obvious Russian disinformation at RNZ, what about pro China and pro American disinformation?
How many times has the NZ Herald been caught peddling Chinese propaganda?
How many times do American interests get sold to us as our own by the mainstream media?
What exactly did RNZ news stories say that were actually lies?
Here is the original text…
“The conflict in Ukraine began in 2014 after a pro-Russian president was toppled in Ukraine’s Maidan revolution and Russia annexed Crimea, with Russian-backed separatist forces fighting Ukraine’s armed forces.”
…here is what RNZ wrote…
“The conflict in Ukraine began in 2014 after a pro-Russian elected government was toppled during Ukraine’s violent Maidan colour revolution. Russia annexed Crimea after a referendum, as the new pro-Western government suppressed ethnic Russians in eastern and southern Ukraine, sending in its armed forces to the Donbass.”
…look, I’m no Putin cheerleader, I called him invading the Ukraine and I blame him for this terrible violence, but this conflict didn’t happen in a vacuum eh?
NATO’s constant encroachment and the colour revolutions are all examples of the West interfering and there isn’t anything in the re-edit that is a lie!
I’m all for dismantling disinformation and bias, but the sole focus on RNZ and Russia is disingenuous in the extreme when you consider the pro China and pro American propaganda we get sold here constantly by our corporate media Overlords!
Propaganda is in the ear of the beholder.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
The slanted editing wasn’t just about international issues and only over the last few years.
Many listeners would have thought the nickname ‘Red Radio’ was well-earned.
Oh yes “red radio” – and it has had the dramatic impact of what exactly?
NZ supporting decolonisation and freedom in Palestine?
Supporting the end of illegal US sanctions around the world?
Ending the object lesson of Assange?
Coverage of Russia’s security needs and perspective in what has loomed as an inevitable conflict since at least 2007?
RNZ is establishment black and white and grey. It just nothing to advance 1% interests.
I think she means “Red, White and Blue Radio”, which means the pro-war editorial line is always identical to Voice of America and R.F.E.R.L.
Red radio?
You do know that Russia is not communist?
Taking Russia’s concerns seriously is not being pro red
” Many listeners would have thought the nickname ‘Red Radio’ was well-earned. ”
Get real and wake up !
It was never ” Red ” just a convenient slur because they were independent prior to 2008 and the appointment of a National party friendly board to ensure that financial rapist and his gangsters had un interrupted propaganda on the airwaves that rather than present news and facts …independently appointed their own manager and board to remove the last independent voice from NZ media as the rest had all capitulated with the promise of funds and the shysters ” enemy ” list of all the journalists that had personal indiscretions that Key could hold over them personally and threatened their career’s.
If only the New Zealand people knew how their media and government subverted one of the facets of democracy.
A free unbiased fourth estate.
Earlier referenda (1990s)pointed to Crimea wanting greater autonomy = more independence from Ukraine and Russia.
The “referendum” in crimea in 2014 on whether to join Russia was AFTER it was invaded by Russia and not done with any international oversight other than the barrel of a Russian AK.
Thus making the statement in the propaganda piece an obvious lie.
Actually, there were no AK47s in sight and there didn’t need to be.
In 2014 all Crimeans aged 60 and over were born in Russia (before Crimea was given to Ukraine). So they are Russian and at home. Most of the remaining adults were dual nationality – Ukrainian (born in Ukraine) but also Russia (one or both parent(s) born in Russia). So the US selected interim govt removes Russian as an official language and bans Russian aligned political parties. Making Russians second class citizens. So how do you think they’d vote?
Which leads to what I’ve been saying for ages. There are no winners in war, less so here. What is the end game. If Ukraine wins, the Russians are second class citizens – and they can’t “leave and go home” as many of them are home. If Russia wins, then the Ukrainians in Crimea (and the four newly annexed regions) have lost their nationality. If the US hadn’t decided to take over the uprising and declare war on Russians (and Russia – it proposed kicking them out of the only port they had in the Black sea to protect themselves and install NATO, which is Cuba missile crisis on speed) then this could all have been avoided.
Still, this is only the entree I fear, the mains will be a war with China (started by way of getting Taiwan to declare independence). Dessert I hear you say? That will be cold lentil soup eaten in a cold damp cave in the green glow from our radioactive skins.
The point stands.
Martyn asked what was incorrect in the doctored article, the referendum was done after Russian invasion not before, and after Russia had “relocated” non Russians from Crimea at the point of an AK.
I have never seen anything that suggests any people were “relocated” – can you supply a link. And they barely used an AK in taking control (was there a shot fired in anger at all?) so that seems unlikely to me, but happy to be corrected if you have links to the evidence supporting your assertion.
The doctored article is correct – Crimea did not become part of Russia until after the referendum. Occupation does not equal annexation so there is nothing incorrect in stating the last two of Invade/Occupy then Referendum then Annexation.
A referendum held under the barrels of Russian guns has no validity.
Igor Strelkov, also known as ‘Girkin’, was the Russian Federal Security Service officer who played a key role in the annexation of Crimea.
Below is the twitter link to the videoed interview he gave about the Russian annexation of Crimea, below the links is the transcript of what Strelkov had to say about the referendum:
https://twitter.com/splendid_pete/status/1660893890956648451
“….I was in Crimea from the 21st of February [6 days before Russia invaded] And you know, what you are telling me is absolute bullshit. Further more, I didn’t see any support from/any organ of government power in Simferopol where I was located I didn’t see this support, it wasn’t there.
The Crimean deputies were rounded up by our militias in order to corral them into the hall and make them vote for the decision.
Yes! I was proud to command these militias.
I saw all from the inside with my own eyes. Igor Strelkov interview.
Following the annexation of Crimea Strelkov went on to train and supply pro-Kremlin neo-nazi militia’s in Eastern Ukraine. .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusich_Group
https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-neo-nazis-fighting-ukraine/31871760.html
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1543904151821746177
The purpose of the illicit edit of the RNZ overseas news feed is to give the misleading impression that the referendum was not conducted under duress from Russian security forces, when according to the testimony of Russian Federal Security Service officer Igor Strelkov it most surely was.
NATO’s constant encroachment.
Nice.
lol
Yeah, Putin invaded Ukraine.
Let’s hope he does a Bush, declare victory and leave Ukraine.
I’m still waiting for the secret US bioweapon research labs to be found and publicized.
Yes the Americans travelled to Kiev (yeah, right) to protest when the Ukraine President decided to side with Putinism rather than doing the “will” of the “people” in signing the agreement with Europe as decided in the Ukrainian parliament. He new better.
Once it became clear to him that his military will not protect his presidency by taking violent action against the public, he left Kiev.
The Verkhovna Rada voted in 2014 to remove Yanokovyck from the presidency on grounds that he had withdrawn from fulfilling his constitutional duties and then called an early presidential election.
So no, the government was not toppled.
They didn’t achieve the percentage required , so sorry Thiart, no cigar
Not sure what your angle is here.
The parliament had a debate, voted on the issue and the president left the country. Vacated the presidency! Like resigning.
It is only in America that you can be in prison and be the president at the same time.
I do not vape or smoke.
Hey, Johan, I enjoy the smell of a good cigar or a decent pipe and masculine ( or grandmotherly) habits you may not have do not necessarily hold very negative connotations at all…
Under the existing (at that time) constitutional law, the 450 seat Rada required 75% agreement .That’s about 338.The vote didn’t achieve that.Of course that was conveniently overlooked by those who sought to profit….and did , with the IMF prising open Ukraine to foreign ownership.
And Yanukovich was in fear of his life .He wasn’t exactly preferring to spend time with his family, or take up hobbies.He had a target on his back with bullets thudding into his car as he left initially for eastern Ukraine
The president packed his bags and left.
Pretty good reason to pick a new one, right?
When you have armed groups threatening to kill an elected president who then flees to save his life, what you have is a coup…
Nope.
The vote was 328 – 0, so one can assure 122 delegates did not vote.
108 protesters killed and 13 police killed. The people in Kiev was angry.
But you already know this.
And the number required was 338.The vote fell short
Yes people were killed at the Maidan with reports of random firing into the crowd from above,killing policemen and protestors alike.
So much for a peaceful demonstration , as the BBC pointed out at the time
Check out the footage
100% Yah!
0% Nay!
It was Yanukovich himself who offered a snap election, but the fascists were not buying it: they probably thought he would just be re-elected.
Russia’s being threatened by America and the build-up of NATO forces seems censored information, but censorship and controlling what people are allowed to know has been happening fairly easily. Back when Wellington’s Dom dumped Robert Fisk they also decimated their amount of foreign news coverage; I think they reduced it to one page and printed a lame excuse as to why.
When police said it wasn’t their job to protect women being beaten up in Auckland, it is astonishing that mainstream media didn’t call them to account for this. Overseas media are noting that at recent K-J K’s events in Vienna and Geneva, the police did protect women, women majorly outnumbered in Geneva by men wearing wigs and equipped with loud sound systems just as at Albert Park.
Again on the home patch, local media blanked the role of Parliament’s speaker Mallard in provoking the Parliamentary protestors and escalating the situation. Labour, National and the Greens, all joined forces in deciding that they didn’t want to hear what the demonstrators had to say, or let them say it.
Fisk, Pilger, Hager, various off-shore national newspapers provide news and sources; if news agencies like Reuters are having their content altered at RNZ it’d be a struggle to accept that it’s the work of a Lone Ranger.
I totally agree, it is not particularly foreign news that is being censored (BTW, news out today shows RNZ have also been censoring Reuters articles in a pro palestinian way despite RNZ saying it hadnt happenned outside of the Russian Ukraine sphere) it is the news within NZ that is censored by not being reported on or being misreported on in spades eg: The aftermath of KJK and the week after where journalists lauded trans activists and denied the violence wholesale. It was only after Sean Plunkett’s ‘Let Women speak’ series that some journalists at Newshub allowed a few non all peace and love stories to trickle in and where they did they still painted KJK in a negative light. (In the journalistic tradition of “Well she was wearing a short skirt so deserved it anyway’)
Where was the MSM coverage of the over 100K submissions on Free Speech? 3 Waters? And how they made assumptions about 80% of them coming from one source and put them straight in the bin unread?
Where was the media reporting on the shitshow that was the consultation process on the Same Sex ID bill? and the bullying and derision that was perpetrated by the highly partisan panel paid to listen to submissions?
One could go on and on.
NZ media is sick and the Reuters thing is just the tip of the iceberg, I think Reuters would stop sending copy here if there was an international review of journalistic standards in NZ. In many ways, the foreign propaganda is small beer compared to what has been perpetrated in NZ. At least it’s an election year and we are getting a few glimmers of balanced reporting.
Good comment Fantail.
Yep. I’d wondered if Reuters would deny us access to their reports if they find out that they’re bringing tinkered with, or worse still, altered. It’s worse than plagiarism, and dishonest.
The gender ID bill was voted on by politicians clueless about what they were voting for, but word-of- mouth reports about Kerekere’s partisan participation chairing the select committee ( if I’ve got the right committee here) are shocking, including the intimidation by a fairly big female, of an earnest young male presenter. That should never be done by the chair. But worse, it has the potential to inhibit future presenters, so it’s yet another assault upon freedom of speech.
Overseas media commented on the sins of omission by New Zealand msm regarding the occurrence at Albert Park 21/3/ 23, and it makes New Zealand media look as dodgy as hell. They also reported our PM regretting that he was unable to join the transactivists beating up on K-J K, the moron.
Govt can control the media, but not social media, hence Ardern’s advocating global censorship at the UNO, but this issue is also being addressed by off-shore media outlets. To my horror, I found myself ruing the departure of previous male chauvinist Dom & RNZ editors, and have low expectations re election coverage by the msm.
Read articles relating to firearms, you’ll see plenty of lies, misinformation & bias there.
Very true No Comment.
Cahill caught lying by an OIA… crickets.
Be careful John, censoring and censuring is coming like a wolf on the fold
sorry , wrong thread!
But you are 100% correct.
Protect free speech.
tell that to RNZ
It is now out in the open. Consumer beware!
Let’s hold those with power to account by lifting the cloak.
No censorship here.
Have a listen to this and cringe
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018894000/rnz-ceo-paul-thompson-on-investigation-into-the-altering-of-reuters-articles
Cringe in fear. It is quite possible that criminal charges will be laid against the individual who fraudulently altered these news feeds.
It the investigation determines that provable lies were illicitly inserted into the RNZ news feed, it would be remiss of the investigating panel not to recommend to RNZ that RNZ take this matter to the police. And I think they should do so. In my opinion it would be a dereliction of duty to the NZ public for RNZ not to act on any recommendation to lay charges against this alleged fraudster. These matters need to be judged in a court of law according the laws relating to fraudulently altering copyrighted documents and passing off these altered news reports as coming from the media institutions whose byline and masthead they went out on. If these altered news reports are the work of a named journalist or investigator whose byline was left attached to the illicitly altered copy, then there may be grounds for the individual journalist whose copy was altered to take a case against the alleged fraudster and RNZ for reputational damage.
And I think that this will happen if RNZ don’t lay charges themselves.
So cringe (or not) in fear, because it is quite possible that the individual responsible sees themselves as some sort of wronged vigilante for truth as they see it, and would welcome being charged and their actions and reasons for these actions being made public. And it would be in the public interest if they were.
Left wing peace and climate activists have been dragged through the courts for much lesser offences by powerful business interests.
https://thestandard.org.nz/greenpeace-climate-activist-rosemary-penwarden-found-guilty-but-remains-undeterred/
It will be interesting to see if right wing activists like this supporter of Russia’s war against Ukraine are treated as harshly.
More background here:
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/media-shooting-itself-in-the-foot
No surprise to see a mention of revolting China and Russia cheerleader. Mike Smith.
The RNZ person on leave is also named:
“ RNZ’s failure to act on a warning light more than a year ago has cost it hugely.
The public broadcaster, currently New Zealand’s most trusted news source, is getting a hammering that it could easily have avoided.
In May 2022 a highly experienced RNZ journalist alerted the broadcaster’s management to a story it was running on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The person felt the story, which quoted former Labour Party general-secretary, Mike Smith, and a former minister in the Helen Clark’s coalition government, Matt Robson, was unbalanced.
The two political veterans were commenting on the Arden government’s decision to send army instructors and intelligence experts to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s “special military operation.”
Smith was quoted as saying New Zealand could now find itself “on the wrong side of history” by helping prolong a conflict in the interests of waning US hegemony while risking its own interests in the Asia-Pacific region, and increasing the risks of a nuclear war.
The story, without quotation marks, also attributed the following to Smith – New Zealand is inadvertently helping to arm neo-Nazi militias and far-right groups in Ukraine with modern weapons, which could be used elsewhere.
Robson, according to the story, claimed the US and NATO were now in a proxy war with Russia and the Government’s decision to involve New Zealand would have huge implications.
“My expectation is that the analysts that we’ve supplied are using intel from the spy planes that are flying around Ukraine and from satellites to provide targeting information to the Ukraine forces. We’ve made those decisions without any procedure as to how they would be authorised.
“We should not just be able to enter into war at the whim of the government of the day.
“The present situation is disastrous because it’s removed any chance of a negotiated peaceful settlement and any chance of a continued independent policy.”
The story was published on Radio New Zealand’s website. The website is run by RNZ’s digital division not RNZ’s news department – which is responsible for broadcast news. The digital division was set up about four years ago and is under the wing of RNZ’s Head of Content, Megan Whelan.
When alerted by the journalist from the news department, RNZ added balancing remarks from Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta, security analyst Paul Buchanan and Victoria University’s David Capie.
The story, with a footnote explaining the additions, remains on the website.
The author of the story was Michael Hall who is now on leave while RNZ investigates a host of other stories he has written. Newsroom understands Hall works mainly from home.
The original version of the story should have seen Hall red flagged and his work given additional oversight. But that clearly didn’t happen.
Hall’s work also came to the attention of the local Ukrainian community which complained to RNZ eight months ago. It said Mike Smith’s claim about Neo Nazi militias and far right groups in Ukraine was typical of Russian propaganda.”
and also BBC propaganda?
How about the Washington Post?
NYTimes
All of these published warnings about the rise of the far right and the Azov international outreach recruiting campaign within Ukraine from 2014 onwards.
I don’t consider those news sources to be mouth pieces of the Kremlin .
All this changed after the invasion and now our own propagandists are off the hook.
I see nothing incorrect in what Smith or Robson said.
The Ukraine situation is going to be shaking up alot of interests.
Whatever you believe to be the conflict’s cause, and whatever you believe constitutes “a pro-Russian slant,” the singular most important fact that emerges from this story is that, according to RNZ CEO Paul Buchanan, Western news agency stories are sacrosanct, infallible, dogma.
And if you don’t think that’s dangerous, that a faceless foreigner employed by a foreign news agency can supply us with a particular version of events and not have it checked when it arrives on a New Zealand Media sub-editor’s desk, then you’re not thinking.
When deadly conflicts erupt, that ultimately require us to choose sides, nothing is more important than that we know the truth of the matter – nothing!. And if that “truth” is to be entrusted, to a foreign news agency, without question or query, then, in my view, this is the most important debate we could be having.
It is a readily verifiable fact that even Reuters, the Euro-American wire service that tries the most to maintain a false facade of neutrality, has taken money from the UK government to propagandize journalists in ‘enemy’ countries against their own nations.
https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/20/reuters-bbc-uk-foreign-office-russian-media/
Of course, it’s Russian ‘malinformation’ to bring up these nasty little real facts.
After a two decade flirtation with foreign policy independence and non alignment post 1985, this nation has long since reverted to towing the line for our US puppet masters.
We’re completely roped in now with TPPA and similar commercial shackles over and above the intelligence and military ties.
Swallowing US geopolitical propaganda is all just part of the parcel. Welcome back Cold War, courtesy Uncle Sam.
“in my view, this is the most important debate we could be having” Malcolm Evans
It sure is.
Did Michael Hall send out false news reports, as RNZ alleges?
Or,
Did Michael Hall correct false news reports, as he and his supporters allege?
Will Michael get his chance to defend his actions before the New Zealand people, or will it be a closed investigation?
In my opinion the investigation into Michael Hall’s activities needs to be open and transparent, provision for reporters and observers and possibly even a video record of the proceedings need to be made available for public scrutiny.
Michael Hall may welcome defending the allegations being made against him, that is, if the investigation is both transparent and open, and he has proper representation present. Both sides need to demand the right to lay before the investigation panel, the evidence for their version of truth and have this evidence forensically examined. The debate on the record into who is the purveyor of fake news in New Zealand, RNZ, or Michael Hall, or both? Both can’t be right. But both can be wrong.
All sides in this debate will need to bring their best game.
(Maybe both sides are liars and won’t want to see this matter end up in the public arena, where they will have to account for their lies.)
No matter how much he may think he is, Michael Hall is not New Zealand’s Nelson Mandela, if the allegations being made against him of spreading lies and disinformation he won’t be spending 27 years on Robben Island. If the worst comes to the worst for Michael Hall, and he eventually finds himself facing charges for sending out falsified news reports, Michael Hall can seek diversion, as Rosemary Penwarden is doing after being convicted of sending out a false email. In my opinion Michael Hall’s crime if proven is much worse, but as a first offence he will probably be successful in getting diversion.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/15/nz-climate-activist-faces-up-to-10-years-in-prison-over-fake-letter-saying-fossil-fuel-event-cancelled
NZ climate activist faces up to 10 years in prison over fake letter saying fossil fuel event cancelled
Rosemary Penwarden said her letter telling oil executives a petroleum conference was off was satirical protest but was found guilty of forgery offences
The issue, as you well know, is surreptitiously editing the Reuters and BBC items and passing off the edited versions as the originals.
A cardinal sin for a journalist. Tantamount to deliberately changing a quote and passing it off as the original quote.
Radio NZ could have provided the background itself, provided it was clear that it was their view. Chris Trotter deals with this in he is own blog. Well worth a read.
Correct
Utter nonsense! If you knew anything about news media you’d know that editing news stories is what sub-editors are employed to do and have always done.
The piece needed to be rewritten and attributed to ‘Agencies’ or ‘R.N.Z. Staff Writers’, not simply ‘Reuters’. But he would’ve been sacked anyway, for violating the editorial line.
You are incorrect. You don’t alter the original story from a third party such as Reuters or the BBC and still pretend it is the original story from them. If you edit the story it then becomes your story, at least in part. That then has to be acknowledged.
If the situation was as you suggest then the this issue would not have become an issue. RNZ would simply say they were following normal journalistic practise, no different to any other news outlet. But of course it isn’t normal journalistic practise.
100%.
Absolutely correct Wayne,the editing here went way beyond the brief of a sub editor.
Corporate media have used up all its bullets. There’s no coming back from it.
censoring pro russiuan articles IS not editorial balance….sorry RNZ it just isn’t, it’s pushing the narrative one way
But TBH Gaga, despute RNZs protestations of balance, arent they always this way about most things they report on. For example, Kim Hill is anything but balanced and although I willingly read RNZ, I notice the same bias in many of their stories as is seen on Stuff even if it isnt writ large.
absolutely fantail this current kerfuffle is a symptom of an ongoing process covering many issues
Funny how this rnz pro US fed propaganda bs is playing out. Even TDB reident secret ex CIA spook Buchanan is getting a mention and Morgan too for feeding NZ’ders US, pro-Nazi Azov Ukrainian propaganda via the bbc & Reuters.
I think this story has got legs. Death to the infidels!!
The dude who corrected the misinformation fed by Reuters should be given an award for (investigative) Journalism because his colleagues are doing anything!
Bomber your comment on the 2 statements on Crimea actually highlights what is wrong with seemingly innocuous journalistic tampering. There are about 4 statements in the second piece that are either wrong or hotly disputed. But the best example I can give is around the referendum.
The statement implies they had a referendum and everyone was happy. But this is quite deceptive. Russia invades Ukraine and took over Crimea fact (the world looked the other way fact). Having taken power they later carried out a referendum without international scrutiny (having been strongly told to ensure scrutiny) and then came back saying something like 70% of people were happy.
So an authoritarian power takes over part of another state and launches its own referendum under military control and then says see everyone is happy.
This is why accurate journalism is so important. Are 70% of people in Crimea happy? Maybe but we can never know because of the way in which this all played out. It could be utter BS or it could be true. But the impact of the second statement you made implies everyone was happy and it justified Russian actions.
So accurate non partisan journalism is of paramount importance and as you have pointed out it doesn’t matter whether it is pro western or pro eastern propaganda or even left/right internal propaganda (in which we are drowning) – the accurate facts matter!!! Hugely.
Are you willing to believe the data collected by western polling agencies?Gallup for instance
They found ( no doubt to their disappointment) that yes indeed the majority of Crimeans were only too glad to rejoin Russia. The results of the referendum are well in line with that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum
But that isnt the point I am making. The truth is Russia took Crimea from the Ukraine (a sovereign nation) then had an election which specifically evaded international scrutiny and even had armed military? militias? at the polling booths.
The truth matters. Maybe everyone in Crimea welcomed it but the inference in the story are quite different from the sequence of events and that is what matters. That reporting is factual and not weighted one way or another.
Fantail “ … the interference in the story… is what matters.” 100%.
Believe as you wish Francesca, we are currently free to do so in this country, unlike Russia.
Even your own link says the 2014 referendum in Crimea is “disputed”.
Actually it was completely crooked and Ukrainians were forced to take Russian citizenship, be conscripted or flee.
https://jamestown.org/program/demographic-transformation-of-crimea-forced-migration-as-part-of-russias-hybrid-strategy/
“ Since 2014, Russia has been employing traditional Soviet resettlement practices and forcibly changing the demographic composition of the population in Crimea (see EDM, May 30, 2019 and August 6, 2019). The imposition of Russian Federation citizenship on residents of Crimea (nearly all residents of the peninsula had Russian citizenship less than a year after the annexation), forced deportations, the unlawful conscription of local men into the Russian military, persecutions and imprisonments of pro-Ukrainian activists who stand against the occupation, repressions against the Ukrainian Church, as well as closures of Ukrainian schools triggered a mass departure of Ukrainians (including Crimean Tatars) from Crimea. According to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, almost 48,000 people left the peninsula for Ukraine during the last seven years (Krymr.com, January 6, 2021). The number of those who moved to other countries may be higher.”
The edits that are being complained about are hilarious.
It’s literally all stuff that zionists are mad about. God forbid there be any media, anywhere, even because of one guy who had a few too many drinks of a night and edited the Reuters copy, that tells the truth instead of the zionist fake ‘truth’.
Case in point:
‘changing the phrase: “Hamas, which runs the blockaded Gaza Strip” to “Hamas, the elected government of the blockaded Gaza Strip”.’
OK, it’s not perfect. It would be more appropriate to say “Hamas, the democratically elected government of Palestine”. But that gets a bit wordy. But of course the zionists who only think “democracy” is “democracy” if controlled media convinces people to vote their way are mad about it.
RNZ should not publish propaganda, period. We rely on RNZ and mainstream media to publish verified news and opinion pieces. Opinion pieces are by nature biased.
Like getting your news here on the TDB you know that the “news” is reliably biased to the left. No age or IQ warnings required.
If your like your news right leaning, go the Kiwiblog.
” he ongoing debacle and accusations flying over at RNZ have managed to blot out TVNZ claiming National was attempting to implement Nazi white supremacist genocide, but there is a far bigger issue here than obvious Russian disinformation at RNZ, what about pro China and pro American disinformation?
How many times has the NZ Herald been caught peddling Chinese propaganda?
How many times do American interests get sold to us as our own by the mainstream media?
What exactly did RNZ news stories say that were actually lies?
The poison that Joyce with the authority of the shyster an his cabinet infected our last bastion of non partisan independent reporting the Hobbits turned to with a non neo liberalism platform has died….and allowed to without any of the Hobbits having an inkling of the anti democratic forces at work.
Well put.
It’s USA’s war. They spent over two decades engineering it.
Putin was stupid to walk into their trap.
This war will bleed Russia dry, as intended.
Who signed the Molotov-Von Ribbentrop treaty?
No this is Putin’s war.
Not to let extraneous nonsense get in the way of the topic being considered, by any objective reading of the Reuters’ paragraph sub-edited by Radio New Zealand’s journalist, it’s clear it was merely amplified with more facts, which, though that may have changed the nuance of the Reuters’ account, nevertheless gave the story more “accuracy, fairness and balance,” which, as the NZ Herald says, is the first principle of the NZ Media Council’s requirement of news reporting. So we can expect him to be up for a gong at the next Media awards.
So. There is only one journalist in this entire thread. That’s Malcom! So I’ll take his lead on this!
Amateur influencers need not comment any further unless you can provide your credentials and evidence of some recognised work you have done for a proper news agency.
Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Is that censorship? Or a directive?
A three person panel of media “experts” has been set up to investigate what happened.
The panel is headed by a lawyer and media law expert Willy Akel.
https://www.sangrochambers.co.nz/members/william-akel
[Willy Akel is] A recognised expert in corporate and personal reputation management and defamation, William is one of New Zealand’s foremost media lawyers.
With a lawyer heading this investigation no doubt they will be looking into whether charges can laid against the person responsible for these illicit edits.
Following the conviction this week of climate activist Rosemary Anne Penwarden who is facing a possible ten year sentence for putting out a false email, it would represent a double standard not to lay charges against this individual for falsifying news feeds.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/petroleum-conference-fake-email-trial-dunedin-activist-grandmother-guilty-of-forgery/4HBJLVMKNJHDVCQQG3AWAX5YRQ/
I hope charges are laid, this misguided fool deserves his day in court, he needs to account for his actions before the New Zealand public.
In the age of Chat GPT4 and Python every effort needs to be made that public statements actually come from the actual people or organisations that made them.
This person wants to seen as some sort of martyr for truth, and possibly would want to be charged, and would probably welcome getting the opportunity to make a public statement from the dock in support of their cause, believing that they are some sort of wronged Kiwi Nelson Mandela. No doubt far right conspiracists and pro-Kremlin warmongers would also look forward to rallying outside court in his support.
The Minister of Broadcasting Willy Jackson may also have some questions to answer about this fuck up. The Ukrainian community had complained to Willie Jackson about this rogue subeditor some time ago and he brushed them off saying it’s an “operational matter.” (Whatever that means) I suppose the panel will be asking the Minister if he took it any further, or thinks he should have.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/491940/rnz-appoints-panel-to-investigate-inappropriate-editing-of-online-stories
“We’re also going to look at the specific handling of the complaint to the broadcasting minister from the Ukrainian community in October 2022 and then it’s going to broaden out to review the overall editorial controls, systems and processes for the editing of online content at RNZ.”
Let justice be served.
Slava Ukraine
News on Stuff about a Chinese warship coming within 430m of one of our own ships yet absolutely zero on the 6 o’clock news.