Friday, December 03, 2004

Media coverage of the Civil Union

I got an email from my friend David Do who watched the media coverage of the 2nd reading of the Civil Union Bill.

He said I could post it. Its a good wrap up.


I looked at the coverage on both TV1 at 6 and then Nightline on TV3 tonight.

TV3s report warned that the bill may lose support from a few MPs if an amendment to put Civil Unions to referendum was voted down.
The correspondent on National Radio said on Checkpoint that today's vote didn't hold any surprises. He says that while there might some loss in support with regards to the idea of a referendum, but predicted it would not be enough to sink the bill.

Judy on TV1 unfortunately introduced the piece in the headlines as'gay marriage laws', but Fran Mold did a good report. On the referendum issue, she got David Benson-Popes quote that human rights should not be the subject of referenda.

TV1 did the dreaded vox pop of surveying passersby, and both channels got quotes from Georgina Beyer and Brian Tamaki. They quoted enough from Brian to suitably discredit him in the eyes of most people. TV1also quoted from the leader of Destiny NZ(the political 'party') as well.

Thanks David, always interesting to see the comparisons between the media outlets.

I subjected myself to Newstalk for a while. Gulp. Not really much to say...

I also subjected myself to 'Close up at 7' who had quite a good story on Civil Unions with a lesbian couple who have been together for ages and have brought up kids. Then an interview with Lockwood (thanks for the 1st name mum) Smith, Ron (right on the) Mark (with his votes so far) and Stephen (how's this for a silly argument) Franks - all talking about their positions. It was suppose to be a flip flop piece, Susan misrepresented Marks view at first and then corrected herself. Very bad research. I noticed from the self styled 'flip flop' (new political catchword) interview that they failed to get someone who voted against or abstained from the first reading and who now is voting for the bill to speak. I am sure they would have had some nice things to say...

They finished up the show witha report on my pet hate. An opt in poll they had been conducting.

Do you think that the law should recognise a form of same sex relationships?

$1 per vote, kids ask your fundy parents if you can call up to save the sanctity of marriage.

The result? Something like 13000 against and 3500 for.

I hate opt in polls and think they should be banned. Susan finished the show in mock suprise and asked the audience who the MPs must be asking when they say that the bills have widespread public support...


  • Almost as bad as the dreaded 'Scientific Poll' by Wayne Mapp. What a plonker...

    By Blogger Xavier, at 4:48 pm  

  • If it werent for Susan Wood and the part about her saying things the interview would have been relativly informative. The way she framed a conscience vote was oversimplfied to the extreme, it makes me wonder whether they do this deliberatly or is she too air brained to have any idea about parlimentary process? Im not sure which of the two is worse.

    Yet another glorious phone in poll showing a true and impartial snapshot of the nations feeling.

    Wouldnt it be great if we could all see it that way, damn university for making me cynical and jaded.

    By Blogger Brendon, at 10:07 pm  

  • Great work!
    [url=]My homepage[/url] | [url=]Cool site[/url]

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:53 pm  

  • By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:53 pm  

  • Nice site! |

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:54 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home