• Rachel Smalley: Pharmac has misled the Health Minister over Today FM ban
    Mar 29 2023

    Opinion: I was fossicking around in the written Parliamentary questions this week, and I came across a question written by National MP Erica Stanford, to Dr Ayesha Verrall, the Health Minister.

    Here’s the question:

    4635 (2023). Erica Stanford to the Minister of Health (08 Mar 2023): "Did Pharmac contact MediaWorks in December stating that they would not speak to any MediaWorks journalists indefinitely, and if so, why was this decision made by Pharmac, and does this meet the Ministers expectations?"

    Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall (Minister of Health) replied: I am advised that Pharmac paused media interviews with MediaWorks while Pharmac was in debate with MediaWorks over the accuracy of its reporting on a topic.

    No, Minister. That is not what happened. Pharmac has misled you. That is not correct.

    Here is what happened.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    Show More Show Less
    6 mins
  • Full Show: 30/3/2023
    Mar 29 2023

    Weekdays 5:00am-6:30am.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    Show More Show Less
    1 hr and 28 mins
  • Rachel Smalley: Stuart Nash is gone - We've lost one of the good ones
    Mar 28 2023

    Opinion: It's been a remarkable few days in politics. 

    And this morning you're waking up to the news that Stuart Nash, one of Labour's better-performing Ministers has been stripped of all portfolios. 

    Here is what Chris Hipkins had to say about the behaviour of Stuart Nash.

    "I expect ministers to uphold the highest ethical standards and his actions raise a perception of influence that cannot be allowed to stand."

    Central to Cabinet is confidence -- what is discussed in there, essentially stays in there. And Nash emailed details of private Cabinet discussions to external people - some of whom had donated to his campaign. 

    "While Stuart was on a final warning I want to be clear that this incident alone would have resulted in his dismissal in its own right."

    Hipkins, quite rightly, has pulled the pin and in the next month, it's feasible that Nash could leave politics altogether. 

    And that's a great shame. Stuart Nash is in politics for the right reasons. He's easy to talk to. He's easy to engage with. He knows his portfolios. And he's great at rolling up his sleeves and getting on with the job. 

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    Show More Show Less
    5 mins
  • Sir Peter Gluckman eloquently articulates where we are all going so wrong
    Mar 27 2023
    Opinion: The role the media and politicians play in social cohesion has always been important, but perhaps never more so than right now.  Words matter. They really do.  What fuelled my frustration at the weekend amid the trans-rally, and one of the reasons I have elevated this issue in my programme, is because I watched the Greens engage with us through social and mainstream media, and their collective method of communication can only be described as one of social antagonism.  These are politicians - and they were reckless with social cohesion. They labelled people trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs). They labelled people Nazis. They said white men were the source of all violence. They called on people to rise up and later applauded the intimidation tactics used in what should have been a peaceful protest.  There is no other term for it. It was socially reckless.  Neither Chris Hipkins nor Christopher Luxon operates in this way. Both are de-escalators. Both have the life skills and experience to read the room and understand the role they play in taking the public with them, and supporting social cohesion.  If the Greens possess any of those skills, they have not shown them.  How we communicate and educate ourselves, how we access information and form an opinion can rely, in part, on the way politicians speak with us, and how the media shapes and curates what they say and the news agenda.  Yesterday, I heard an interview with Sir Peter Gluckman, a former Chief Science Advisor to the Prime Minister. A highly respected man and someone who, in this interview on Newshub, so beautifully articulated what I haven't been able to over the last few days. It's probably the most important five minutes of audio you can listen to about how we have found ourselves where we are today as a society - polarised, angry, divided and intolerant.  Below is a transcript of Sir Peter Gluckman on TV Three's AM explaining how we got here, and who needs to lead us back towards social tolerance.  "It's deep across all the Western democracies, across all the democracies that we're seeing polarised societies, not coping well with rapid change and change is very, very rapid," said Sir Peter. "We've seen the weaponization of narrative, particularly through social media. And these things polarise people, and make people scared, which in turn reinforces the ability for people to be more polarised. "We're also dealing with the fact that politics, as we've just been talking about in relation to disasters, has become short-term and superficial and focussed on identity rather than on ideology or ideas. And we would rather, I think as a society, have a contestation of ideas than a contestation of personality. But we can't have a contestation of ideas if we no longer allow for people who don't necessarily agree with each other to have constructive dialogue and find a way through what are difficult matters. "And we see epithets like racist and other ‘ists’ being thrown around in ways that are not appropriate. And there are racists, but many people who are accused of being racist just happen to have a different idea to other people and to the people who are throwing the accusations at them. We need to get better. We need to find ways to have constructive, non-emotive or less emotive conversations on matters where society needs to come together and have a consensus. AM co-host Ryan Bridge asked Sir Peter how such a vision could realistically be accomplished. "How do we do that?" Asked Bridge. "When you have things like Twitter which restrict the number of characters you can use and maybe forces people to become more extreme in their views?" Sir Peter responded to say society needs to turn away from extremist ideals on both the left and right. "That's precisely the problem," said Sir Peter. "That's why organisations like yours need to encourage sensible discourse and not give hype and exaggeration to people at the extremes. We need to see our politics return and our discourse return to the centre. Otherwise, we will fragment and we'll look like other countries that we do not want to emulate in that regard, who have large protests on the street or where politics can quite cheekily say black is white and one and one equals three. AM co-host Melissa Chan-Green asked Sir peter his thoughts on how the Posie parker protest was handled on all fronts. "When you talk about commentary on the extremes, and I'm thinking particularly about what we've seen at the weekend with Posy Parker and the strength of feeling on both sides there, how do you think that was handled or how could it have been handled better so where it didn't come to the scenes that we saw at the weekend?," asked Chan-Green. Sir Peter responded to say we need to understand each other's needs on a deeper level. "People are scared by rapid change," said Sir Peter.  "Quite clearly, human rights are critical and we need to explain, and the whole of society needs ...
    Show More Show Less
    7 mins
  • I feel a very lonely voice at the moment in the mainstream media
    Mar 26 2023
    Opinion: It’s a lonely old place in the media right now. I believe in the freedom of speech and the need to have an open debate and consider everybody’s rights, and encourage good, strong, discourse. I have also spent the best part of my life working in communication. Long enough to recognise that the route of all evil is when people feel they are not heard, or they are denied a voice. If no one will listen to you, it fuels frustration and fear. If you’re talked at or drowned out, the effect is much the same. You become disenfranchised and disengaged. I am pro-trans rights but I am also pro-women’s rights. I believe one shouldn’t come at the expense of the other, but I can’t say that easily. If I do, the abuse rolls in and I’m called a bigot and a transphobic and a Nazi. But I do believe Posey Parker should have been given space to speak because I don't think society should ever silence people it disagrees with.  Today and for much of this week, the Posie Parker protest and the fallout from it should be leading every media channel. The nature of that protest. The silencing of women. Intimidation tactics. Abuse. Who victimised who? And both sides of this debate should be given an equal voice and be challenged thoroughly too. Last week, we saw some remarkable bias in mainstream media reporting. And when people like Kim Hill - the doyen of interviewing - spoke robustly to both sides of the debate, pro-Trans supporters immediately reported her to the Broadcasting Standards Authority for giving a voice to Posey Parker.  I don't think we will see balanced reporting again this week. The mainstream media is, by default, quite young – too young to really understand how hard-fought women’s rights have been. They have been born and raised in a world that many of us fought hard to change in the years that have gone by. They've benefited from those changes, but they haven't understood the struggle.  I first worked in a sports newsroom back in the 1990s. I was young and inexperienced. I was told by the ageing sub-editor, and you’ll have to forgive the language, but he told me there were only two reasons I wanted to work as a sports journalist – one, because I either wished I’d been born with a cock or two, because I wanted to be around them all day. I remember quietly disappearing into the loos to cry that day, but I never raised it with my boss. It was par for the course.  I was also one of the more senior sports journalists when the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games rolled around. Four journalists were sent. I was the second or third most senior sports journalist. And the boss called me into the office and said I couldn’t go to Manchester. The four boys they were sending could share two rooms and it would be more expensive to send me. Besides, the editor would later joke, what would I do when they went to the lap-dancing clubs at night? No female sports journalists will endure that today. Women have a voice. And unlike me, back in the 1990s, they know how to use it. It's a different world. Thankfully.  But that's also why events like what unfolded at the weekend really upset me. I feel like society is going backwards. Men yelling at women. Men intimidating women. But worst of all, women yelling abuse at other women – or sanctioning intimidating behaviour against them. It is my hope that across the mainstream media, you will find some very strong and brave analyses today that position this story right down the middle. It is my hope that you get journalists calling this intimidating behaviour out, and reiterating that to enable the rights of the trans community, you also need to enable the voices of women because we are all different and we all have stories, and backstories, and some of us will be impacted by the elevation of the trans community, and we have a right to speak up about our concerns if women are losing our rights to feel safe and occupy women-only spaces.  I don’t know whether you will read, see and hear that today but in a well-functioning democracy, it’s what you should see from our media.  I feel a very lonely voice at the moment in the mainstream media.  New Zealand feels like it’s digressed decades in enabling women, and after what I witnessed at the weekend, and the crushing of women, I feel like I’m back in a sports newsroom in the 1990s.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
    Show More Show Less
    4 mins