Revealed: NZ's spy agency investigated RNZ journalist's work
Revealed: NZ's spy agency investigated RNZ journalist's work
This is plainly intimidation for politically incorrect articles by the press. It's an attack of free press in this country.
Wait, is this the guy that got caught making minor wording edits to articles about Russia's war on Ukraine to make them more Russia friendly?
And the article is presenting it like it's a report that clears the guy of wrongdoing, when from my reading it seems the result of the investigation was that he was absolutely doing it but he wasn't being paid by Russia so it wasn't state sponsored foreign interference, the thing they were investigating. Right?
So basically the guy was editing stories to make them more Russia-positive but thinks he's been cleared of wrongdoing due to not being paid for his acts?
Wait, is this the guy that got caught making minor wording edits to articles about Russia’s war on Ukraine to make them more Russia friendly?
All the articles in New Zealand media are already too pro-Ukraine. Last month The Press had two pro-Ukraine articles, one by the Ukrainian ambassador, and another by Kate Turska (Mahi For Ukraine). According to RNZ, talking about colour-revolutions is pro-Russian. I call it pro-reality. The CIA and USAID are always up to no good in former soviet states.
All the articles in New Zealand media are already too pro-Ukraine. Last month The Press had two pro-Ukraine articles, one by the Ukrainian ambassador, and another by Kate Turska (Mahi For Ukraine).
Those sound like opinion pieces. They are allowed to be biased. You don't see opinion pieces supporting Russia for invading a neighbour because bothsidesism is not a good journalistic approach. Sometimes actions are not explained by anything other than megalomania.
According to RNZ, talking about colour-revolutions is pro-Russian.
Russia uses this term as a way of saying and protestors demanding democracy are part of a US operation to destabilise a country. I am not sure what RNZ actions you are referring to but I suspect they are right. I would like to know more, if you have a link?
The CIA and USAID are always up to no good in former soviet states.
At this point I feel like this is an undisputed fact of the world. Russia likes to play things as if being against the Russian invasion of Ukraine means you're pro-US, but it's possible to denounce all horrible actions by the superpowers.
You are missing the point. The press is allowed to be biased. They are allowed to say false things. They are allowed to report stories that go against what the current politically correct ideology is.
The government should never intimidate the press when they report politically incorrect ideas and thoughts.
Isn't the chain of events:
I don't see how anyone went outside their remit. RNZ wasn't forced to do anything. The editor had already resigned, there's no intimidation. GCSB seems to be doing what they are there for I'm regards to foreign interference.
I do not believe as you're implying that freedom of the press involves not investigating foreign states manipulating that press to change the public opinion. Rather I think the press in question would welcome the outcome of this investigation (whatever the outcome). There is no implication here that anyone is forcing RNZ to do anything, only RNZ controlling one of their editors. Surely freedom of the press involves freedom of RNZ to control their editor?
@BalpeenHammer @Dave , not intimidate but without checks and balances it sounds like a recipe for disaster.
We generally do want a press we can trust and not one that spreads falsehoods/lies.
Probably can be investigated if it is the state sponsored news channel.
Definitely should be investigated if the edits are deliberately trying to be as under handed as these were.
Is the herald even remotely reliable for this sort of information?
They're such a hyperbole-fest I gave up on them years ago (rather hypocritical of me, admittedly!)
The only acceptable position regarding Ukraine, is to pull the wool over New Zealanders' eyes. Russian aggression, blah blah, precision missile strikes on playgrounds and children's hospitals, brutal, unprovoked war. Blah blah. Now Rubio says that the US will pull out of Ukraine within a matter of days.
Setting aside all the other stuff.
Are claiming that Russia was not the aggressor in this current war? If so, what's your argument, that it was a response to provocation? If so, what was such a provocation that justified invading another sovereign nation (again)?
It's clear Putin has immense sway over the US government. I will predict our government will soon fall in line with Trump in this regard because Luxon and Seymour are both MAGA turds.
Is there a non-paywalled version?
Thanks
Paywalled?