thedailyblog--2020-05-29--No business with Israel while military Occupation rules

From 13-25 May ( inclusive ) , there were 34 Israeli Gaza ceasefire violations , none of which provoked even a single Palestinian response .
The Israeli Navy carried out 14 attacks on Palestinian fishing boats that included the wounding of one fisherman , as well as a hijacking and the taking of prisoners .
Besides many attacks on local agriculture , the Israeli Army made three incursions into Gaza .
Israel claims that its violence towards Gaza is in order to protect its borders – but it is the Zionist regime ‘ s forces that pass at will , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advantage of the people ’ s total lack of defence .
In the West Bank , there were 22 raids , with home invasions , on Palestinian villages and towns .
On 13 May , Israeli forces , firing live ammunition , rubber-coated steel bullets , stun grenades and tear gas canisters , continued sporadic raiding ( begun the day before , with the wounding of three people ) in the village of Ya ` bad .
Houses were searched and yet another person , Mahdi Billal Hamarshat , was wounded .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nujoud Muhammad Salih Khamayseh , was admitted to hospital in Jenin after suffering a nervous breakdown , as a result of seeing Israeli soldiers severely beating and hospitalising her 13-year-old son , Mu ’ tasim Ribhi Muhammad Abu Bakr .
During the night of 15 May , Israeli forces raided the Aqbat al-Jabir UN refugee camp and searched a home , wounding one person , Eyad Khalid Qatash , before going on to beat up and hospitalise three more residents , Fathi Muhammad Raslan Muaqil , Muhammad Nader Qattam and Muhammad Hamidat .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ forces , in al-Eizariya , opened fire with rubber-coated steel bullets , stun grenades and tear gas canisters , striking in the face and hospitalising a four-year-old child , Mohammad Ahmad Abu Da ’ mous .
On 16 May , a mob from the Yitzhar Israeli Occupation settlement raided Einabus village agricultural land , beating up and hospitalising a farmer , Eyad Fawzi Hussein .
On 17 May , an Israeli Occupation settler , in the Old City of Jerusalem , knifed and hospitalised a 17-year-old Palestinian youth , Mohammad Al-Natsh .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Majdi Hashim Mohammed Hamad of his bulldozer as he worked his land in the village of Immatin , and seized a wooden hut from a Beit Einoun villager , Hisham Eida .
On 19 May , for the second day in a row , Occupation forces bulldozed Palestinian farmland , in order to make way for a seven-kilometre settler-only road .
Israelis from the Rahalim Occupation settlement made their presence felt by setting fire to crops and olive trees on al-Sawiya village farmland .
Other settlers raided agricultural land in Ras Al-Deir Ariya @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from approximately 40 olive trees .
Over the period , there were many more acts of Israeli Occupation violence and population control , including the seizure of water pipelines in the al-Buqa ’ a area of the Jordan Valley .
On 20 May , one person was wounded as Israeli troops , firing live ammunition , raided Tubas .
At 2am , Israelis from the Rahalim Occupation settlement , stoned the home of Mohammad Jasser Snoubar in Yitma village , attacking the family and severely injuring two people .
On 21 May , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other Israelis set fire to Palestinian olive and almond trees .
On 22 May , Israeli settlers beat up and hospitalised two farm workers , others set fire to Palestinian crops , and the Israeli Army set fire to approximately 120 more Palestinian olive trees .
On 23 May , Israelis , armed with metal bars , beat and hospitalised two villagers .
The next day saw more beatings and agricultural sabotage ( including arson ) by Israel settlers .
On 24 May , Israeli forces raided Za ’ tara village , just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dwelling , the home of a villager , Hazem Hashem Abu Mohammad .
They also destroyed a livestock shelter .
Israeli settlers in Jerusalem beat up and hospitalised two residents , Ashraf Al-Shweiki and Dalia Al-Nimri , while in Shuafat village , settler militants assaulted several farmers and severed the limbs off several olive trees .
In the evening , a gang , from the Havat Ma ’ on Israeli Occupation settlement , set fire to wheat and barley crops on land between the villages of Tuba and al-Tuwani .
On 25 May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violations , Israeli settlers uprooted 200 Palestinian olive trees and drove a vehicle into a herd of goats .
Since 13 May , Israeli troops have abducted 14 Palestinian minors , the youngest aged 14 .
A multinational professional service firm , the TMF Group , tells us that New Zealand is the easiest country in the world in which to start a new business .
The World Bank ’ s 2016 Doing Business report found that starting a new business here involves one procedure and takes half a day .
TMF assures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zealand in part because there is “ no payroll tax , no social security tax ( voluntary KiwiSaver was introduced in 2007 ) and no capital gains tax .
A wide range of free trade agreements and pro-competitive regulation make New Zealand an ideal base for expansion in the Asia Pacific region , with free trade agreements ( FTAs ) in place in many of the major economies.
” Unsurprisingly , TMF Management and Accounting Services ( Israel ) Ltd have offices in Tel Aviv .
Israel ’ s Occupation exploitation of Palestinian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also has a relevance closer to home .
On 21 May , The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa ( PSNA ) posted an article on The Daily Blog revealing that New Zealand had quietly signed a Technical , Innovation , Research and Development Agreement with Israel , without publicising it .
PSNA ’ s National Chair , John Minto , noted the fact that , “ Normally a major bilateral deal would involve photo opportunities at Parliament and press releases .
On this occasion , with the Israelis , nothing.
” While MFAT and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment did publish a notice about it on 5 March .
The main publicity , however , came from the One Community | Web Portal for the NZ Jewish Community and the Israeli Embassy .
The Israeli Embassy celebrated the signing , noting that Dr Gerberg had told the Australia Israel Review : “ the relationship [ with New Zealand ] is good but there ’ s room for improvement ” .
He also said : “ Most people understand that Israel is in a very problematic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s important to understand that context .
People also realise that Israel is a sophisticated and advanced country , and there tends to be great admiration for Israel ’ s military and technical achievements.
” One Community also published an account of the signing by NZ Minister , Megan Woods , reporting The New Zealand Ministry of Business , Innovation & Employment ( MBIE ) international science partnerships manager , Simon Rae , as saying Israel has key capabilities in agritech , water management and other areas of interest to New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Israel will provide real opportunities for New Zealand firms .
That closer partnership has already benefitted the Israeli company Netafim which is closely aligned with the Zionist enterprise .
Simon Rae ’ s recommendation , that New Zealand partner with Israel in water management , lacks any humanitarian recognition of the Zionist state ’ s criminal exploitation of water seized from Occupied Palestine .
Cruelly excluding nearby Palestinian communities suffering water shortages , one current example is the Bardala water bypass project .
Partnered by Israeli and international private corporations , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal Occupation settlements with water plundered from Occupied territory .
Beware the company we keep According to the Israeli Institute of New Zealand , the Netafim company is the largest supplier of irrigation equipment in New Zealand .
It was founded with the financial backing of the Jewish National Fund ( JNF ) and the Settlement Division of the Jewish Agency , as well as the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture .
An independent research centre , Who Profits from the Occupation , is dedicated to exposing the commercial involvement of world-wide corporations in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syrian land .
Who Profits ( an offshoot of the Coalition of Women for Peace ) informs us that , heavily subsidised by the Israeli Government , Netafim ’ s products and know-how have been used to boost the profitability of Israeli agricultural settlements in the West Bank and the Syrian Golan Heights .
While Israel ’ s severe restrictions on the free movement of people and goods prevents Palestinians from cultivating their land , which is a major source of their income , many have been forced to offer their skills for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Israel confines the Syrian population in the Occupied Golan Heights to 5 % of the land and a disproportionate allocation of water resources for agricultural production force farmers to pay up to four times more for water than their Israeli counterparts .
Netafim profits further from the commercialisation of military knowledge , derived from the experience gained in the fusion of military and civil enterprises .
The company ’ s command and control software , developed specifically for the Israeli Iron Dome air defence system exemplifies the profit potential of making available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as in this case , for the blockade of Gaza .
Netafim ’ s complicity in the Israeli settlement enterprise and Occupation economy means it is party to a wantonly-induced scarcity of water and land for Palestinian agriculture .
The Israeli military ensures virtually limitless access to water for settlement agriculture and domestic use and , while Netafim provides Israeli farmers with smart irrigation systems , nearby Palestinian communities , prevented from developing their own water resources and infrastructure , are forced to purchase water from the Israeli state-owned Mekorot – at rates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a group of corporate entities that describes itself thus : “ INZ is a national membership organisation that looks after the interests of irrigating farmers , growers and the industry professionals that service them.
” Netafim is a member of INZ .
In a Press Release on 25 May , INZ congratulated National MP , David Bennett , for being handed the agricultural portfolio from the previous holder and new National Party leader , Todd Muller .
Elizabeth Soal , IrrigationNZ ’ s Chief Executive , commented , “ We have worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the agricultural portfolio , and we congratulate him on his new role as leader of the National Party , alongside his deputy Nikki Kaye.
” The Israeli Ambassador ’ s presumption of “ great admiration for Israel ’ s military and technical achievements ” reflects something deeply-seated in Zionist thinking .
For Israel , the combination of technology and militarism afford superiority and the opportunity for material gain over others .
Yet still , both within and outside New Zealand Government circles , those who would tie our country closer to Israel would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the spirit of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 , they must be challenged and called to account .

From 13-25 May (inclusive), there were 34 Israeli Gaza ceasefire violations, none of which provoked even a single Palestinian response. The Israeli Navy carried out 14 attacks on Palestinian fishing boats that included the wounding of one fisherman, as well as a hijacking and the taking of prisoners. Besides many attacks on local agriculture, the Israeli Army made three incursions into Gaza. Israel claims that its violence towards Gaza is in order to protect its borders – but it is the Zionist regime‘s forces that pass at will, in and out of Gaza, taking advantage of the people’s total lack of defence.
In the West Bank, there were 22 raids, with home invasions, on Palestinian villages and towns. On 13 May, Israeli forces, firing live ammunition, rubber-coated steel bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters, continued sporadic raiding (begun the day before, with the wounding of three people) in the village of Ya`bad. Houses were searched and yet another person, Mahdi Billal Hamarshat, was wounded. In the early morning, a mother, Nujoud Muhammad Salih Khamayseh, was admitted to hospital in Jenin after suffering a nervous breakdown, as a result of seeing Israeli soldiers severely beating and hospitalising her 13-year-old son, Mu’tasim Ribhi Muhammad Abu Bakr.
During the night of 15 May, Israeli forces raided the Aqbat al-Jabir UN refugee camp and searched a home, wounding one person, Eyad Khalid Qatash, before going on to beat up and hospitalise three more residents, Fathi Muhammad Raslan Muaqil, Muhammad Nader Qattam and Muhammad Hamidat. Later the same day, Israeli Occupation forces, in al-Eizariya, opened fire with rubber-coated steel bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters, striking in the face and hospitalising a four-year-old child, Mohammad Ahmad Abu Da’mous. On 16 May, a mob from the Yitzhar Israeli Occupation settlement raided Einabus village agricultural land, beating up and hospitalising a farmer, Eyad Fawzi Hussein.
On 17 May, an Israeli Occupation settler, in the Old City of Jerusalem, knifed and hospitalised a 17-year-old Palestinian youth, Mohammad Al-Natsh. On 18 May, armed Israeli soldiers robbed Majdi Hashim Mohammed Hamad of his bulldozer as he worked his land in the village of Immatin, and seized a wooden hut from a Beit Einoun villager, Hisham Eida. On 19 May, for the second day in a row, Occupation forces bulldozed Palestinian farmland, in order to make way for a seven-kilometre settler-only road. Israelis from the Rahalim Occupation settlement made their presence felt by setting fire to crops and olive trees on al-Sawiya village farmland. Other settlers raided agricultural land in Ras Al-Deir Ariya, Yitma, and severed the branches from approximately 40 olive trees. Over the period, there were many more acts of Israeli Occupation violence and population control, including the seizure of water pipelines in the al-Buqa’a area of the Jordan Valley.
On 20 May, one person was wounded as Israeli troops, firing live ammunition, raided Tubas. At 2am, Israelis from the Rahalim Occupation settlement, stoned the home of Mohammad Jasser Snoubar in Yitma village, attacking the family and severely injuring two people. On 21 May, stone-throwing settlers injured four more people and other Israelis set fire to Palestinian olive and almond trees. On 22 May, Israeli settlers beat up and hospitalised two farm workers, others set fire to Palestinian crops, and the Israeli Army set fire to approximately 120 more Palestinian olive trees. On 23 May, Israelis, armed with metal bars, beat and hospitalised two villagers. The next day saw more beatings and agricultural sabotage (including arson) by Israel settlers. On 24 May, Israeli forces raided Za’tara village, just before 2am, and destroyed a tent dwelling, the home of a villager, Hazem Hashem Abu Mohammad. They also destroyed a livestock shelter. Israeli settlers in Jerusalem beat up and hospitalised two residents, Ashraf Al-Shweiki and Dalia Al-Nimri, while in Shuafat village, settler militants assaulted several farmers and severed the limbs off several olive trees. In the evening, a gang, from the Havat Ma’on Israeli Occupation settlement, set fire to wheat and barley crops on land between the villages of Tuba and al-Tuwani. On 25 May, there were two Israeli Gaza ceasefire violations, Israeli settlers uprooted 200 Palestinian olive trees and drove a vehicle into a herd of goats. Since 13 May, Israeli troops have abducted 14 Palestinian minors, the youngest aged 14.
Profit before people
A multinational professional service firm, the TMF Group, tells us that New Zealand is the easiest country in the world in which to start a new business. The World Bank’s 2016 Doing Business report found that starting a new business here involves one procedure and takes half a day. TMF assures us that businesses are attracted to New Zealand in part because there is “no payroll tax, no social security tax (voluntary KiwiSaver was introduced in 2007) and no capital gains tax. A wide range of free trade agreements and pro-competitive regulation make New Zealand an ideal base for expansion in the Asia Pacific region, with free trade agreements (FTAs) in place in many of the major economies.” Unsurprisingly, TMF Management and Accounting Services (Israel) Ltd have offices in Tel Aviv.
The corporate/Zionist alliance
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Israel’s Occupation exploitation of Palestinian water resources is a war crime that also has a relevance closer to home. On 21 May, The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) posted an article on The Daily Blog revealing that New Zealand had quietly signed a Technical, Innovation, Research and Development Agreement with Israel, without publicising it. PSNA’s National Chair, John Minto, noted the fact that, “Normally a major bilateral deal would involve photo opportunities at Parliament and press releases. On this occasion, with the Israelis, nothing.” While MFAT and the mainstream news media remained quiet, the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment did publish a notice about it on 5 March.
The main publicity, however, came from the One Community | Web Portal for the NZ Jewish Community and the Israeli Embassy. The Israeli Embassy celebrated the signing, noting that Dr Gerberg had told the Australia Israel Review: “the relationship [with New Zealand] is good but there’s room for improvement”. He also said: “Most people understand that Israel is in a very problematic area and that when dealing with Israel it’s important to understand that context. People also realise that Israel is a sophisticated and advanced country, and there tends to be great admiration for Israel’s military and technical achievements.”
One Community also published an account of the signing by NZ Minister, Megan Woods, reporting The New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) international science partnerships manager, Simon Rae, as saying Israel has key capabilities in agritech, water management and other areas of interest to New Zealand, adding that a closer partnership with Israel will provide real opportunities for New Zealand firms. That closer partnership has already benefitted the Israeli company Netafim which is closely aligned with the Zionist enterprise.
Simon Rae’s recommendation, that New Zealand partner with Israel in water management, lacks any humanitarian recognition of the Zionist state’s criminal exploitation of water seized from Occupied Palestine. Cruelly excluding nearby Palestinian communities suffering water shortages, one current example is the Bardala water bypass project. Partnered by Israeli and international private corporations, the project aims to supply Israel’s illegal Occupation settlements with water plundered from Occupied territory.
Beware the company we keep
According to the Israeli Institute of New Zealand, the Netafim company is the largest supplier of irrigation equipment in New Zealand. It was founded with the financial backing of the Jewish National Fund (JNF) and the Settlement Division of the Jewish Agency, as well as the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture. An independent research centre, Who Profits from the Occupation, is dedicated to exposing the commercial involvement of world-wide corporations in the Israeli military occupation of Palestinian and Syrian land. Who Profits (an offshoot of the Coalition of Women for Peace) informs us that, heavily subsidised by the Israeli Government, Netafim’s products and know-how have been used to boost the profitability of Israeli agricultural settlements in the West Bank and the Syrian Golan Heights.
While Israel’s severe restrictions on the free movement of people and goods prevents Palestinians from cultivating their land, which is a major source of their income, many have been forced to offer their skills for employment and exploitation in Israeli Occupation settlements. Israel confines the Syrian population in the Occupied Golan Heights to 5% of the land and a disproportionate allocation of water resources for agricultural production forces farmers to pay up to four times more for water than their Israeli counterparts.
Netafim profits further from the commercialisation of military knowledge, derived from the experience gained in the fusion of military and civil enterprises. The company’s command and control software, developed specifically for the Israeli Iron Dome air defence system exemplifies the profit potential of making available to the agritech market technology developed, as in this case, for the blockade of Gaza. Netafim’s complicity in the Israeli settlement enterprise and Occupation economy means it is party to a wantonly-induced scarcity of water and land for Palestinian agriculture. The Israeli military ensures virtually limitless access to water for settlement agriculture and domestic use and, while Netafim provides Israeli farmers with smart irrigation systems, nearby Palestinian communities, prevented from developing their own water resources and infrastructure, are forced to purchase water from the Israeli state-owned Mekorot – at rates determined by the Israeli Occupation.
IrrigationNZ, Netafim and the National Party
IrrigationNZ is a group of corporate entities that describes itself thus: “INZ is a national membership organisation that looks after the interests of irrigating farmers, growers and the industry professionals that service them.” Netafim is a member of INZ. In a Press Release on 25 May, INZ congratulated National MP, David Bennett, for being handed the agricultural portfolio from the previous holder and new National Party leader, Todd Muller. Elizabeth Soal, IrrigationNZ’s Chief Executive, commented, “We have worked closely with Todd since he took over the agricultural portfolio, and we congratulate him on his new role as leader of the National Party, alongside his deputy Nikki Kaye.”
Resist pro-Israel corporate and Zionist influence
The Israeli Ambassador’s presumption of “great admiration for Israel’s military and technical achievements” reflects something deeply-seated in Zionist thinking. For Israel, the combination of technology and militarism afford superiority and the opportunity for material gain over others. Yet still, both within and outside New Zealand Government circles, those who would tie our country closer to Israel would do so quietly and with circumspection. In the spirit of UN Security Council Resolution 2334, they must be challenged and called to account.


thedailyblog--2020-05-30--The Covid income support payment is all lost for any sort of employment – that is nuts

The government plan for financial support for newly unemployed is a very useful emergency measure .
Anyone made unemployed after Mach 1 is eligible for a tax free payment of $ 490 a week ( if they were working 30 plus hours ) or $ 250 a week ( if they were working 15-29 hours a week . )
Many critics pointed to the obvious fact that this created two classes of unemployed – those who became unemployed before March 1 who get half the money available to those who became unemployed after March 1 .
But another massive problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be available to someone only if they are not employed at all – even as a casual .
This means anyone who becomes unemployed in the next 12 weeks will refuse any part time work offered to them because they will lose the new payment .
This is obviously supid so we hope will be changed in the future to allow some income on top of what they get as a tax-free payment .
The 12 week payments are very useful .
They allow the workers being made unemployed after the wage subsidy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payment they were getting before .
And tens of thousands of workers are going to need this payment as the wage subsidy expires for over a million workers on June 8 .
Beneficiaries from before March 1 should also have access to this payment .
Both categories of beneficiary should also be able to earn an income that matches a living wage before having any income abated .
Currently that is about $ 400 a week more than the current full-time income support payment .
Currently a pre-March 1 beneficiary can only earn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cents of every extra dollar earned .
Under the current rules a post March 1 beneficiary would lose 100 percent of their income support if they got any form o9f employment .

The government plan for financial support for newly unemployed is a very useful emergency measure.
Anyone made unemployed after Mach 1 is eligible for a tax free payment of $490 a week (if they were working 30 plus hours) or $250 a week (if they were working 15-29 hours a week.)
Many critics pointed to the obvious fact that this created two classes of unemployed – those who became unemployed before March 1 who get half the money available to those who became unemployed after March 1.
But another massive problem is that the new benefit appears to be available to someone only if they are not employed at all – even as a casual.
This means anyone who becomes unemployed in the next 12 weeks will refuse any part time work offered to them because they will lose the new payment. This is obviously supid so we hope will be changed in the future to allow some income on top of what they get as a tax-free payment.
The 12 week payments are very useful. They allow the workers being made unemployed after the wage subsidy to get at least the same minimum payment they were getting before.
And tens of thousands of workers are going to need this payment as the wage subsidy expires for over a million workers on June 8.
Beneficiaries from before March 1 should also have access to this payment.
Both categories of beneficiary should also be able to earn an income that matches a living wage before having any income abated. Currently that is about $400 a week more than the current full-time income support payment.
Currently a pre-March 1 beneficiary can only earn $90 a week before losing 70 cents of every extra dollar earned.
Under the current rules a post March 1 beneficiary would lose 100 percent of their income support if they got any form o9f employment.
That is nuts.


thedailyblog--2020-06-01--Israel must be excluded from any Covid 19 travel bubble till Palestinians are able to join the bubbl

Israel must be excluded from any Covid 19 travel bubble till Palestinians are able to join the bubble as equals

PSNA has written to the Prime Minister urging the government to reject Israeli participation in a proposed international Covid 19 “ travel bubble ” until Palestinians are able to join the bubble as equals .
Israel is pushing to join Australia in a travel bubble which would include New Zealand as a group of countries with relatively low levels of Covid 19 infections .
Israel runs a brutal military occupation of Palestinian Territories in the Occupied West Bank and a military blockade of Gaza which prevents free movement of Palestinians within historic Palestine .
“ Why should New Zealand facilitate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ movement to Palestinians ?
” Already New Zealand provides visa-free travel to for Israelis but denies it to Palestinians .
This policy must also be abandoned until Palestinians enjoy visa-free travel to New Zealand .
Israel must understand that they will face consequences for their racist cruelty towards Palestinians .
Accepting Israel into a “ travel bubble ” would reward their denial of civil , political and human rights to Palestinians .
Even in the last few days Israel ’ s racist brutality against Palestinians has been on display .
• The killing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hallaq – with 10 bullets into his body • Illegal Israeli settlers stealing more Palestinian land with the protection of the Israeli Defence Force .
Meanwhile the new Israeli government is planning another blatant breach of international law with plans to annex ( steal ) vast areas of Palestinian land in the West Bank from 1 July .
These racist policies are driven by an Israeli Prime Minister whose blatant race-hatred towards Palestinians is legendary .
In the name of human decency New Zealand must say no to any Israeli travel bubble without @ @ @ @ @ @

PSNA has written to the Prime Minister urging the government to reject Israeli participation in a proposed international Covid 19 “travel bubble” until Palestinians are able to join the bubble as equals.
Israel is pushing to join Australia in a travel bubble which would include New Zealand as a group of countries with relatively low levels of Covid 19 infections.
Israel runs a brutal military occupation of Palestinian Territories in the Occupied West Bank and a military blockade of Gaza which prevents free movement of Palestinians within historic Palestine.
“Why should New Zealand facilitate travel by Israelis when it denies free movement to Palestinians?”
Already New Zealand provides visa-free travel to for Israelis but denies it to Palestinians. This policy must also be abandoned until Palestinians enjoy visa-free travel to New Zealand.
Israel must understand that they will face consequences for their racist cruelty towards Palestinians. Accepting Israel into a “travel bubble” would reward their denial of civil, political and human rights to Palestinians.
Even in the last few days Israel’s racist brutality against Palestinians has been on display.
The Israeli Defence Force shooting holes in Palestinian water tanks.
The killing of an unarmed autistic Palestinian – Eyad Hallaq – with 10 bullets into his body
Illegal Israeli settlers stealing more Palestinian land with the protection of the Israeli Defence Force.
Meanwhile the new Israeli government is planning another blatant breach of international law with plans to annex (steal) vast areas of Palestinian land in the West Bank from 1 July.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
These racist policies are driven by an Israeli Prime Minister whose blatant race-hatred towards Palestinians is legendary.
In the name of human decency New Zealand must say no to any Israeli travel bubble without Palestinians enjoying the same rights.


thedailyblog--2020-06-02--US Police racism and brutality – Are New Zealand police also being trained by the Israeli police and

US Police racism and brutality – Are New Zealand police also being trained by the Israeli police and military?

Last week the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa submitted an Official Information Act request to the New Zealand Police to find out if any of our police have received training , either in Israel or New Zealand , from members of the Israeli military or police .
Our OIA request comes after revelations thousands of US police from numerous cities have been trained in Israel in policing and crowd control methods used against Palestinians .
Israeli police are well known for the sheer brutality and racism which drives their policing and military responses to unarmed Palestinian protests .
Jewish Voices for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report Deadly Exchange and describe “ the dangerous consequences of American Law enforcement in Israel ” and Amnesty International have highlighted the same problem .
US cities getting this Israeli training in brutality as the first line of defence include : Baltimore , Florida , New Jersey , Pennsylvania , California , Arizona , Connecticut , New York , Massachusetts , North Carolina , Georgia , Washington state , DC Capitol police while thousands of others have received training from Israeli officials in the U.S. Is New Zealand also receiving Israeli training in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Zealand police have a well-known history of racial bias in policing and we have seen determined moves over recent years towards general arming of police in New Zealand .
New Zealand Police have tried to “ soften up ” the public to accept generally armed police through policies to introduce tasers , carry weapons in squad cars , police being generally armed in Christchurch and elsewhere while the police searched for a wanted person and more recently have sprung a trial of “ Armed Response Teams ” on us .
We don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brutality to be the hallmark of policing in New Zealand based on the violence , racism and brutality which permeates the Israeli state .

Last week the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa submitted an Official Information Act request to the New Zealand Police to find out if any of our police have received training, either in Israel or New Zealand, from members of the Israeli military or police.
Our OIA request comes after revelations thousands of US police from numerous cities have been trained in Israel in policing and crowd control methods used against Palestinians. Israeli police are well known for the sheer brutality and racism which drives their policing and military responses to unarmed Palestinian protests.
Jewish Voices for Peace have documented this exchange in their report Deadly Exchange and describe “the dangerous consequences of American Law enforcement in Israel” and Amnesty International have highlighted the same problem.
US cities getting this Israeli training in brutality as the first line of defence include: Baltimore, Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, California, Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Georgia, Washington state, DC Capitol police while thousands of others have received training from Israeli officials in the U.S.
Is New Zealand also receiving Israeli training in the most brutal law enforcement methods?
New Zealand police have a well-known history of racial bias in policing and we have seen determined moves over recent years towards general arming of police in New Zealand.
New Zealand Police have tried to “soften up” the public to accept generally armed police through policies to introduce tasers, carry weapons in squad cars, police being generally armed in Christchurch and elsewhere while the police searched for a wanted person and more recently have sprung a trial of “Armed Response Teams” on us.
We don’t want racism, violence or brutality to be the hallmark of policing in New Zealand based on the violence, racism and brutality which permeates the Israeli state.


thedailyblog--2020-06-02--Dr Liz Gordon – Writer’s block

Dr Liz Gordon – Writer’s block

Interviewer : So you ’ ve been a bit quiet on the old bloggy front recently , Liz ?
Liz : ( Sighs ) Yes , I am finding it a bit hard to put pen to paper .
Interviewer : Why is that then ?
You are not normally backward in coming forward .
Liz : ( Sighs ) Yeah I know .
It is just all so terrible .
I feel paralysed by the awfulness of it all .
Liz : ( Sighs ) Well , you know .
The Trumpy , Bolsonaro , Boris show over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a racist police force and protests with no end , millions losing their jobs worldwide , the absence of good planning for the future ( except here ) .
Dominic Cummings and breaking the lockdown .
Interviewer : I can see that might be depressing .
But isn ’ t this all grist to your mill , as it were ?
Liz : But that ’ s just it , don ’ t you think ?
Over the past week or so I have read some amazing analysis online .
People are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are out there protesting .
But what ’ s changing ?
Interviewer : What do you mean ?
Liz : ( climbs onto soapbox ) : Well , for example , I could write a learned article on the ‘ natural experiment ’ being presided over by that pig Bolsonaro in Brazil .
Yesterday , that country had 33,000 new cases of coronavirus and the numbers are ramping up week by week .
By declaring that it is just ‘ a little flu ’ , and showing no interest in it , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even though so much could be done to mitigate the effects .
More than that , the politics .
Pro and anti forces are on the streets ( which doesn ’ t help the Covid ) : But Bolsonaro met a tightly packed throng of supporters outside the government palace in the capital Brasilia .
The crowd chanted , “ Myth !
myth !
myth !
” – echoing the president ’ s dismissal of the virus pandemic .
Interviewer : Well , that ’ s pretty shocking stuff .
Why don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Liz : Because , I think , there is no light at the end of the tunnel for that country .
You know I like a joke , a laugh , a little bit of humour .
But I find no fun in fascist revolutions , in ignoring the deaths of thousands of people , in refusing to take leadership at a time of crisis .
There is nothing bloody funny about it at all !
Interviewer : At least you have stopped those mournful sighs now .
Liz : And then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the whole history of racism and police brutality in the USA coming to a head , merging the Trump crisis with the Covid crisis and the race crisis .
And there is no leadership there either .
To all intents they do not have a President .
Batman is not in charge , the Joker is .
Trump wants to open up the country no matter what the effect .
And all of this frustration has sort of erupted onto the streets .
Interviewer : Yes , well , I can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swing of things .
As you say , though , no jokes .
Liz : Jokes ?
You want a joke ?
Dominic – bloody – Cummings .
This man , who dresses , talks and acts like a barrow boy from the East End of London , although he went to Eton .
At the first sign that he and his wife had Coronavirus , he ran around infecting people in London like mad , then packed up his car and family and went running to his parents ’ place in Durham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are both in their 70s .
No thought for anyone except himself .
A total disregard… yeah , but you know all this .
An entitled little git who , once caught , refused to resign .
And there he is .
Oh , yes and of course he was the architect of the failed strategy that has seen so many British people die needlessly , because it took them two months to act .
Interviewer : And you have said several times that there might be hope for Boris now , having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other end .
A sort of redemption ?
Liz : ( quite fired up now really ) Yes .
It is a dreadful disease that literally takes away your breath .
I thought anyone who lived through that might come out with a bit of empathy .
Because he always had this view of himself as sort of above disease .
I thought a touch of the virus might give him a new perspective .
Obviously my redemption theory was entirely wrong , and I apologise to both my avid readers for propounding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I wouldn ’ t know .
I don ’ t really read your stuff .
Liz : I want to thank you , though .
I feel much more cheerful now .
I might write a blog .
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister , with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society .
She usually blogs on justice , social welfare and education topics .

Interviewer: So you’ve been a bit quiet on the old bloggy front recently, Liz?
Liz: (Sighs) Yes, I am finding it a bit hard to put pen to paper.
Interviewer: Why is that then? You are not normally backward in coming forward.
Liz: (Sighs) Yeah I know. It is just all so terrible. I feel paralysed by the awfulness of it all.
Interviewer: (Coaxingly) What is terrible?
Liz: (Sighs) Well, you know. The Trumpy, Bolsonaro, Boris show over the Covid, the killing of George Floyd by a racist police force and protests with no end, millions losing their jobs worldwide, the absence of good planning for the future (except here). Dominic Cummings and breaking the lockdown.
Interviewer: I can see that might be depressing. But isn’t this all grist to your mill, as it were?
Liz: But that’s just it, don’t you think? Over the past week or so I have read some amazing analysis online. People are writing all the right things. Others are out there protesting. But what’s changing?
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Interviewer: What do you mean?
Liz: (climbs onto soapbox): Well, for example, I could write a learned article on the ‘natural experiment’ being presided over by that pig Bolsonaro in Brazil. Yesterday, that country had 33,000 new cases of coronavirus and the numbers are ramping up week by week. By declaring that it is just ‘a little flu’, and showing no interest in it, he is allowing the Covid to spread unchecked, even though so much could be done to mitigate the effects. More than that, the politics. Pro and anti forces are on the streets (which doesn’t help the Covid):
But Bolsonaro met a tightly packed throng of supporters outside the government palace in the capital Brasilia. The crowd chanted, “Myth! myth! myth!” – echoing the president’s dismissal of the virus pandemic.
Interviewer: Well, that’s pretty shocking stuff. Why don’t you write more about it?
Liz: Because, I think, there is no light at the end of the tunnel for that country. You know I like a joke, a laugh, a little bit of humour. But I find no fun in fascist revolutions, in ignoring the deaths of thousands of people, in refusing to take leadership at a time of crisis. There is nothing bloody funny about it at all!
Interviewer: At least you have stopped those mournful sighs now.
Liz: And then there is the tragedy of George Floyd, and the whole history of racism and police brutality in the USA coming to a head, merging the Trump crisis with the Covid crisis and the race crisis. And there is no leadership there either. To all intents they do not have a President. Batman is not in charge, the Joker is. Trump wants to open up the country no matter what the effect. And all of this frustration has sort of erupted onto the streets.
Interviewer: Yes, well, I can see you are getting back into the swing of things. As you say, though, no jokes.
Liz: Jokes? You want a joke? Dominic – bloody – Cummings. This man, who dresses, talks and acts like a barrow boy from the East End of London, although he went to Eton. At the first sign that he and his wife had Coronavirus, he ran around infecting people in London like mad, then packed up his car and family and went running to his parents’ place in Durham to get childcare, even though they are both in their 70s. No thought for anyone except himself. A total disregard… yeah, but you know all this. An entitled little git who, once caught, refused to resign. And there he is. Oh, yes and of course he was the architect of the failed strategy that has seen so many British people die needlessly, because it took them two months to act.
Interviewer: And you have said several times that there might be hope for Boris now, having come through the virus and out the other end. A sort of redemption?
Liz: (quite fired up now really) Yes. It is a dreadful disease that literally takes away your breath. I thought anyone who lived through that might come out with a bit of empathy. Because he always had this view of himself as sort of above disease. I thought a touch of the virus might give him a new perspective. Obviously my redemption theory was entirely wrong, and I apologise to both my avid readers for propounding such a ridiculous notion.
Interviewer: I wouldn’t know. I don’t really read your stuff.
Liz: I want to thank you, though. I feel much more cheerful now. I might write a blog.
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister, with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society. She usually blogs on justice, social welfare and education topics.


thedailyblog--2020-06-03--The Fragile Promise Of American Democracy

THE FRAGILITY of democracy ’ s promise is becoming clearer with every day that passes .
Don ’ t be fooled by all those inspiring images from the streets of America .
No matter how moving , these democratic vignettes do not represent the emerging political reality .
For every thousand protesters risking Covid-19 and police violence in America ’ s public spaces there are hundreds-of-thousands wishing President Donald Trump would stop talking about dominating the protesters and just get on with the job .
Those who prove their devotion to democracy by taking action to defend it will always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it more than lip-service .
The best historical estimates put popular support for the American Revolution ( 1776-1783 ) at around 30 percent .
About the same percentage were loyal subjects of King George III .
The rest of the population simply kept their heads down until it became clear who had won – at which point they solemnly reassured their neighbours that the victors ’ success had always been their most earnest hope .
We should also be profoundly grateful that the science of opinion polling remained undeveloped at the time of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Had pollsters been given access to the American public in the years immediately prior to the war ’ s outbreak , they would , almost certainly , have confirmed that those favouring the abolition of slavery constituted a minority of the US population – albeit an extremely well-organised and noisy one .
Certainly the number of Americans willing to affirm the equality of whites and blacks in the 1850s would have been vanishingly small .
Knowing how substantial was the population ’ s general indifference to the “ slavery question ” may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stick with the Union – causing US and world history to take a very different turn .
It is equally disconcerting to discover how many of the most “ progressive ” Americans had fallen out of love with democracy by the early years of the twentieth century .
The problem , as they saw it , was that giving people the right to vote in no way guaranteed that they would use it wisely .
Middle-class reformers were appalled at the power exercised by the great working-class , immigrant-based , political “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part by the Democratic Party , these machines were indisputably corrupt ( although no more so than the “ Gilded Age ’ s ” rapacious corporations and their market-distorting “ trusts ” ) but the solutions put forward by the Progressive Movement – primary elections , the recall referendum , popularly-generated policy “ propositions ” – proved to be a mixed blessing .
( It was , after all , the primary system that delivered the Republican Party ’ s nomination to Donald Trump ! )
Progressive opinion was even more distressed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans could be turned against their fellow citizens .
The supposedly “ progressive ” President Woodrow Wilson ( a Democrat ) railed against “ hyphenated Americans ” ( by which he meant German- and Irish-Americans , whose communities remained stubbornly unconvinced by Wilson ’ s arguments for entering the First World War on the side of Britain and France ) .
Wilson ’ s suppression of all dissent was aided and abetted enthusiastically by the millions of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans who proved only too happy to intimidate their neighbours into “ patriotic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racist and segregationist , was also a ruthless foe of anti-war socialists and anarchists .
These frightening demonstrations of democracy ’ s awesome potential to tyrannise unloved minorities inspired progressive writers and journalists – most notably the redoubtable Walter Lippmann – to take careful thought about how the consent of the governed could be “ manufactured ” by those with less dangerous political instincts than the ordinary voter .
Rather than follow the lead of the electorate , argued Lippmann , the Executive Branch of Government should be guided by public opinion – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disseminated ideas of highly-educated and public-spirited intellectuals like himself .
Unsurprisingly , Lippmann ’ s hero was Franklin Roosevelt : the aristocratic president whose “ Brains Trust ” and brilliant collection of young “ New Dealers ” encapsulated perfectly the managed democracy Lippmann never ceased promoting in his newspaper columns .
Roosevelt ’ s principled pragmatism notwithstanding , ordinary Americans – properly aroused – could still inflict a powerful amount of harm .
Joe McCarthy ’ s “ Red Scare ” of the early 1950s used democratic majorities to suppress the democratic rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next 70 years , popular prejudices and political passions would prove remarkably resistant to elite instruction .
The great American public were pretty damn sure that the opinions fed to them from on-high by the news media as their own – were somebody else ’ s .
Watching the idealistic journalists and presenters of CNN declaim in favour of peaceful protest and rail against President Trump ’ s atavistic instinct to terminate violent disorder with extreme prejudice , I was minded of the last moment in American history when the USA was convulsed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests .
Journalists covering the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago had been outraged at the brutality meted out to anti-war demonstrators by Mayor Daley ’ s thuggish cops – and said so with considerable eloquence across the mainstream media .
Their dismay is easily imagined when , over the course of the subsequent days and weeks , ordinary Americans in their tens-of-thousands denounced not only the demonstrators , but also the “ liberal media ” , and cheered on Mayor Daley and the City of Chicago Police Department .
The lesson was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later , in 1972 , his appeal to “ the great silent majority of Americans ” would be rewarded with one of the most decisive presidential re-election victories in US history .
Significantly , his extremely narrow 1968 win was made possible only by the fact that the all-conquering Democratic Party electoral coalition of 1964 had fallen apart .
George Wallace , the fiery segregationist Governor of Alabama , was able to draw millions of southern voters away from the Democratic Party ’ s liberal contender , Hubert Humphrey .
By 1972 the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – had transformed itself into the party of white supremacy , Christian fundamentalism and right-wing populism .
You got ta love the Americans marching for George Floyd and the fragile promises of the US Constitution .
But , you also got ta keep your eye on the pale rider in the White House , and understand that behind him Hell follows .

THE FRAGILITY of democracy’s promise is becoming clearer with every day that passes. Don’t be fooled by all those inspiring images from the streets of America. No matter how moving, these democratic vignettes do not represent the emerging political reality. For every thousand protesters risking Covid-19 and police violence in America’s public spaces there are hundreds-of-thousands wishing President Donald Trump would stop talking about dominating the protesters and just get on with the job. Those who prove their devotion to democracy by taking action to defend it will always be outnumbered by those unwilling to pay it more than lip-service.
The best historical estimates put popular support for the American Revolution (1776-1783) at around 30 percent. About the same percentage were loyal subjects of King George III. The rest of the population simply kept their heads down until it became clear who had won – at which point they solemnly reassured their neighbours that the victors’ success had always been their most earnest hope.
We should also be profoundly grateful that the science of opinion polling remained undeveloped at the time of the American Civil War (1861-1865). Had pollsters been given access to the American public in the years immediately prior to the war’s outbreak, they would, almost certainly, have confirmed that those favouring the abolition of slavery constituted a minority of the US population – albeit an extremely well-organised and noisy one. Certainly the number of Americans willing to affirm the equality of whites and blacks in the 1850s would have been vanishingly small. Knowing how substantial was the population’s general indifference to the “slavery question” may well have encouraged the slave-owning southern states to stick with the Union – causing US and world history to take a very different turn.
It is equally disconcerting to discover how many of the most “progressive” Americans had fallen out of love with democracy by the early years of the twentieth century. The problem, as they saw it, was that giving people the right to vote in no way guaranteed that they would use it wisely. Middle-class reformers were appalled at the power exercised by the great working-class, immigrant-based, political “machines”. Controlled for the most part by the Democratic Party, these machines were indisputably corrupt (although no more so than the “Gilded Age’s” rapacious corporations and their market-distorting “trusts”) but the solutions put forward by the Progressive Movement – primary elections, the recall referendum, popularly-generated policy “propositions” – proved to be a mixed blessing. (It was, after all, the primary system that delivered the Republican Party’s nomination to Donald Trump!)
Progressive opinion was even more distressed by the ease with which “ordinary” Americans could be turned against their fellow citizens. The supposedly “progressive” President Woodrow Wilson (a Democrat) railed against “hyphenated Americans” (by which he meant German- and Irish-Americans, whose communities remained stubbornly unconvinced by Wilson’s arguments for entering the First World War on the side of Britain and France). Wilson’s suppression of all dissent was aided and abetted enthusiastically by the millions of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans who proved only too happy to intimidate their neighbours into “patriotic” silence. Wilson, an insouciant racist and segregationist, was also a ruthless foe of anti-war socialists and anarchists.
These frightening demonstrations of democracy’s awesome potential to tyrannise unloved minorities inspired progressive writers and journalists – most notably the redoubtable Walter Lippmann – to take careful thought about how the consent of the governed could be “manufactured” by those with less dangerous political instincts than the ordinary voter. Rather than follow the lead of the electorate, argued Lippmann, the Executive Branch of Government should be guided by public opinion – by which he meant by the publicly disseminated ideas of highly-educated and public-spirited intellectuals like himself. Unsurprisingly, Lippmann’s hero was Franklin Roosevelt: the aristocratic president whose “Brains Trust” and brilliant collection of young “New Dealers” encapsulated perfectly the managed democracy Lippmann never ceased promoting in his newspaper columns.
Roosevelt’s principled pragmatism notwithstanding, ordinary Americans – properly aroused – could still inflict a powerful amount of harm. Joe McCarthy’s “Red Scare” of the early 1950s used democratic majorities to suppress the democratic rights of the American Left. For the next 70 years, popular prejudices and political passions would prove remarkably resistant to elite instruction. The great American public were pretty damn sure that the opinions fed to them from on-high by the news media as their own – were somebody else’s.
Watching the idealistic journalists and presenters of CNN declaim in favour of peaceful protest and rail against President Trump’s atavistic instinct to terminate violent disorder with extreme prejudice, I was minded of the last moment in American history when the USA was convulsed from coast to coast by riots and protests. Journalists covering the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago had been outraged at the brutality meted out to anti-war demonstrators by Mayor Daley’s thuggish cops – and said so with considerable eloquence across the mainstream media. Their dismay is easily imagined when, over the course of the subsequent days and weeks, ordinary Americans in their tens-of-thousands denounced not only the demonstrators, but also the “liberal media”, and cheered on Mayor Daley and the City of Chicago Police Department.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
The lesson was not lost on Richard Nixon. Four years later, in 1972, his appeal to “the great silent majority of Americans” would be rewarded with one of the most decisive presidential re-election victories in US history. Significantly, his extremely narrow 1968 win was made possible only by the fact that the all-conquering Democratic Party electoral coalition of 1964 had fallen apart. George Wallace, the fiery segregationist Governor of Alabama, was able to draw millions of southern voters away from the Democratic Party’s liberal contender, Hubert Humphrey. By 1972 the Republicans – Abraham Lincoln’s party – had transformed itself into the party of white supremacy, Christian fundamentalism and right-wing populism.
You gotta love the Americans marching for George Floyd and the fragile promises of the US Constitution. But, you also gotta keep your eye on the pale rider in the White House, and understand that behind him Hell follows.


thedailyblog--2020-06-03--Against The Great Kiwi Firewall – Why I’m Concerned About Internal Affairs Proposal To Filter “Objec

Against The Great Kiwi Firewall – Why I’m Concerned About Internal Affairs Proposal To Filter “Objectionable” Internet

A few days ago , Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin introduced a Bill into Parliament that would give our Government the power to block off portions of the internet .
The official reasoning is to make it harder for Kiwis to come into contact with – or , for that matter , to share – “ objectionable content ” like the Christchurch Mosque massacre videos .
And while I absolutely do not have a problem with that stated object … I ’ m a little concerned about the mechanism being used to go about it .
Particularly the lack of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let me tell you two ( brief ) stories .
For you see , I ’ ve been down this road before … A little under two years ago , I wrote an article .
It was on India ’ s geopolitical position/predicament in relation to Iran , Russia , and the United States .
I thought it was pretty good , so I sent the link to a friend who was travelling abroad in the United Kingdom .
He couldn ’ t read it .
Why ?
Because in the UK , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he attempted to access my work … he got a message saying it ’ d been blocked by order of Her Majesty ’ s Government etcetera etcetera .
Now , it is well-known that I have a strong love for India … but I don ’ t think it ’ s in quite the way that would usually trigger a porn-filter .
Rather , what the trouble was , appeared to be a combination of what I ’ d written , and the site that it appeared upon .
Which is a fine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its critical stances on a fair swathe of American & NATO policy while occasionally saying not-unkind things about Bernie Sanders … would probably be accused of attempting to hack US democracy for Putin or something .
You get the idea .
So , to back the proverbial truck up – we had inadvertently stumbled across a situation wherein a pornography filter put in place to protect ordinary Britons from deplorable , objectionable content – had evidently ‘ decided ’ that journalism from a set of perspectives the Government of the day didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ content – that you shouldn ’ t be allowed to read in Britain .
Gosh , almost sounds like a compliment when you put it that way , doesn ’ t it .
Recalls the ancient journalistic maxim that “ Whatever a patron desires to get published is advertising ; whatever he wants to keep out of the paper is news.
” Except this is dangerous .
Either because some computer algorithm somewhere has the power to autonomously decide to blot a news site from the UK ’ s internet … or because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so , because they weren ’ t keen for people in the UK to come into contact with our views and perspective .
I ’ m almost not sure which is worse .
That a computer program is this breathtakingly bad at deciding what objectionable pornography is that it blocks a news site ( in which case , what does it say about the sort of people who chose blithely to trust in such a mechanism ) ; or that somebody might have gone out of their way to censor media by having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now I mention this , because Internal Affairs Minister Martin is on-record as being quite keen on the UK ’ s model of porn-prevention .
Which , as we can see , is also a pretty handy tool for a Government to prevent access to rather more than just porn – and nobody notices .
Martin has been pushing this “ particular drive of [ hers ] ” for some years now ; and while on paper there is a theoretical distinction between the regulation of internet pornography , and the blockading of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – in practice , the mechanisms , as well as the motivation are functionally much the same thing .
And , as we have just demonstrated via reference to my article on India ’ s geopolitical predicament – this overlap is vulnerable to all sorts of pernicious ( mis ) use .
Indeed , some might suggest that such a potentiality is less a ‘ bug ’ than it is a ‘ feature ’ .
Who can say .
In the absence of serious oversight ( which this Bill currently lacks ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – and to abuse .
And those are far from the only reasons I feel a bit concerned about where we ’ re going with this legislative proposal .
A few years ago now , I penned a perhaps somewhat controversial article .
About New Zealand politics this time , it attempted to chart the course of an MP ’ s career .
That MP was current Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin .
One of the more curious outcomes of this , was Martin alleging that I was in breach of the Harmful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ written .
And I say ‘ curious ’ for two reasons .
First , because I didn ’ t think that articles critical of political figures were what the Act was supposed to cover ( although at the time , Martin was quite definite that it was her experience working on the drafting of the Act that afforded her the insight to assert otherwise ) – not least because , unlike with defamation , under the HDCA “ Truth ” is not actually a defence .
And second , because I really wasn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Seymour to leap to my defence .
Even if he phrased it as “ sticking up for people you wouldn ’ t really want to have over for dinner.
” I ’ ve always had some time for David Seymour after that .
Because as it turned out , sometimes a principled libertarian really is a useful sort to have around and actively engaged in our nation ’ s politics .
A sentence the younger , and decidedly more black-and-white [ in multiple shades of the term ] Curwen Ares Rolinson would no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now , I ’ m not bringing all that up for the purposes of point-scoring or seeking to re-open an old feud .
The past is the past .
Yet it can provide a usefully instructive guide to the future .
To her credit , Martin did not go through with laying an HCDA complaint against me ( although she obliquely and unfavourably compared me to Cameron Slater , so you win some – you lose some ) .
But other MPs may not necessarily have shown as much restraint .
It does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ memory to recall various instances demonstrating that this isn ’ t an entirely hypothetical situation .
At several points , the previous National-led Government subjected journalists , and a certain errant TV cameraman , to various forms of legal pressure in pretty direct response to exposes inconvenient for them .
That , I feel , is a pretty interesting test for prospective legislation , as it happens – would we be comfortable with it in place if National were to be the one using it ?
And , given it was only a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the National Party was surreptitiously meeting with the head of China ’ s secret police … some might suggest that when it comes to this kind of legislation – the National Party may be a bit too comfortable with its prospect , already .
Nobody should be looking to build a Great Fire Wall of Aotearoa to replicate in miniature the Chinese one .
And , to be fair and sure – I ’ m not sure that this is what Minister Martin thinks she ’ s doing , either .
I would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the example of my work being rendered inaccessible in the UK for allegedly running afoul ( somehow ) of their pornography-filter shows … it doesn ’ t necessarily matter what the politician enacting a law actually means nor intends for it to cover .
Whether intentionally ( by somebody ) or inadvertently , these things grow .
And they don ’ t always grow particularly rationally , either .
Best to be very sure that this is both the path , trajectory , and mechanism we want to go down before we start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inherent in doing this badly – are quite some “ objectionable ” content and conduct , indeed .

A few days ago, Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin introduced a Bill into Parliament that would give our Government the power to block off portions of the internet. The official reasoning is to make it harder for Kiwis to come into contact with – or, for that matter, to share – “objectionable content” like the Christchurch Mosque massacre videos.
And while I absolutely do not have a problem with that stated object … I’m a little concerned about the mechanism being used to go about it. Particularly the lack of independent oversight.
Why? Well, let me tell you two (brief) stories. For you see, I’ve been down this road before …
A little under two years ago, I wrote an article. It was on India’s geopolitical position/predicament in relation to Iran, Russia, and the United States. I thought it was pretty good, so I sent the link to a friend who was travelling abroad in the United Kingdom.
He couldn’t read it. Why? Because in the UK, they have a porn-filter. And when he attempted to access my work … he got a message saying it’d been blocked by order of Her Majesty’s Government etcetera etcetera.
Now, it is well-known that I have a strong love for India … but I don’t think it’s in quite the way that would usually trigger a porn-filter.
Rather, what the trouble was, appeared to be a combination of what I’d written, and the site that it appeared upon. Which is a fine international media outlet, but due to its critical stances on a fair swathe of American & NATO policy while occasionally saying not-unkind things about Bernie Sanders … would probably be accused of attempting to hack US democracy for Putin or something. You get the idea.
So, to back the proverbial truck up – we had inadvertently stumbled across a situation wherein a pornography filter put in place to protect ordinary Britons from deplorable, objectionable content – had evidently ‘decided’ that journalism from a set of perspectives the Government of the day didn’t like … was deplorable, objectionable content – that you shouldn’t be allowed to read in Britain.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Gosh, almost sounds like a compliment when you put it that way, doesn’t it. Recalls the ancient journalistic maxim that “Whatever a patron desires to get published is advertising; whatever he wants to keep out of the paper is news.”
Except this is dangerous. Either because some computer algorithm somewhere has the power to autonomously decide to blot a news site from the UK’s internet … or because somebody deliberately told said algorithm to do so, because they weren’t keen for people in the UK to come into contact with our views and perspective.
I’m almost not sure which is worse. That a computer program is this breathtakingly bad at deciding what objectionable pornography is that it blocks a news site (in which case, what does it say about the sort of people who chose blithely to trust in such a mechanism); or that somebody might have gone out of their way to censor media by having it declared (illegal) pornography.
Now I mention this, because Internal Affairs Minister Martin is on-record as being quite keen on the UK’s model of porn-prevention. Which, as we can see, is also a pretty handy tool for a Government to prevent access to rather more than just porn – and nobody notices.
Martin has been pushing this “particular drive of [hers]” for some years now; and while on paper there is a theoretical distinction between the regulation of internet pornography, and the blockading of other “harmful and illegal content” – in practice, the mechanisms, as well as the motivation are functionally much the same thing. And, as we have just demonstrated via reference to my article on India’s geopolitical predicament – this overlap is vulnerable to all sorts of pernicious (mis)use. Indeed, some might suggest that such a potentiality is less a ‘bug’ than it is a ‘feature’.
Who can say. In the absence of serious oversight (which this Bill currently lacks), it’s open to both interpretation – and to abuse.
And those are far from the only reasons I feel a bit concerned about where we’re going with this legislative proposal.
A few years ago now, I penned a perhaps somewhat controversial article. About New Zealand politics this time, it attempted to chart the course of an MP’s career. That MP was current Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin. One of the more curious outcomes of this, was Martin alleging that I was in breach of the Harmful Digital Communications Act for what I had written. And I say ‘curious’ for two reasons.
First, because I didn’t think that articles critical of political figures were what the Act was supposed to cover (although at the time, Martin was quite definite that it was her experience working on the drafting of the Act that afforded her the insight to assert otherwise) – not least because, unlike with defamation, under the HDCA “Truth” is not actually a defence.
And second, because I really wasn’t expecting ACT’s David Seymour to leap to my defence. Even if he phrased it as “sticking up for people you wouldn’t really want to have over for dinner.”
I’ve always had some time for David Seymour after that. Because as it turned out, sometimes a principled libertarian really is a useful sort to have around and actively engaged in our nation’s politics. A sentence the younger, and decidedly more black-and-white [in multiple shades of the term] Curwen Ares Rolinson would no doubt have been aghast at typing.
Now, I’m not bringing all that up for the purposes of point-scoring or seeking to re-open an old feud. The past is the past. Yet it can provide a usefully instructive guide to the future. To her credit, Martin did not go through with laying an HCDA complaint against me (although she obliquely and unfavourably compared me to Cameron Slater, so you win some – you lose some).
But other MPs may not necessarily have shown as much restraint. It does not take too much of a political memory to recall various instances demonstrating that this isn’t an entirely hypothetical situation. At several points, the previous National-led Government subjected journalists, and a certain errant TV cameraman, to various forms of legal pressure in pretty direct response to exposes inconvenient for them.
That, I feel, is a pretty interesting test for prospective legislation, as it happens – would we be comfortable with it in place if National were to be the one using it?
And, given it was only a few months ago that the then-Leader of the National Party was surreptitiously meeting with the head of China’s secret police … some might suggest that when it comes to this kind of legislation – the National Party may be a bit too comfortable with its prospect, already.
Nobody should be looking to build a Great Fire Wall of Aotearoa to replicate in miniature the Chinese one.
And, to be fair and sure – I’m not sure that this is what Minister Martin thinks she’s doing, either. I would certainly hope not.
But, as the example of my work being rendered inaccessible in the UK for allegedly running afoul (somehow) of their pornography-filter shows … it doesn’t necessarily matter what the politician enacting a law actually means nor intends for it to cover. Whether intentionally (by somebody) or inadvertently, these things grow. And they don’t always grow particularly rationally, either.
Best to be very sure that this is both the path, trajectory, and mechanism we want to go down before we start upon that road.
Because the risks inherent in doing this badly – are quite some “objectionable” content and conduct, indeed.


thedailyblog--2020-06-04--Crisis, Disintegration and Hope: Where to for New Zealand’s News Media?

How many media analysts predicted this course of events ?
Twenty two months after Australian television network Nine Entertainment absorbs Fairfax Media , the New Zealand arm , Stuff , is purchased by its Chief Executive Sinead Boucher .
Her proposals for a charter of editorial independence and a staff-based shareholding structure have attracted favourable comments from media commentators , public media lobbyists , Stuff journalists , Nine CEO Hugh Marks and Communications Minister Kris Faafoi [ Stuff CEO Sinead Boucher buys the company , announces ‘ great new era ’ , Stuff NZ , May 25 ] .Co-editor of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headlined his opinion piece “ Behold St Sinead of Stuff ” before acknowledging the future requirements – financial backing , government subsidies , internal costs and debt management [ Tim Murphy , Behold St Sinead of Stuff , May 25 ] .
Behind these messages of hope , the Stuff initiative signifies that a crisis-ridden media system is rapidly disintegrating .
COVID-19 has accelerated this process .
Threats to public health , national lockdown and long-term economic contraction have been commercially disastrous for all private media organisations .
Redundancies and closures have gone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , owner of the NZ Herald and approximately half of the country ’ s commercial radio stations , abandoned its nationwide sports operations and 25 full-time staff .
Less than a week later , German company , Bauer Media , suddenly closed down all national holdings including the NZ Listener , the NZ Women ’ s Weekly , North & South and Metro .
The first two magazine titles had been in print more than 80 years .
On April 13 , NZME initiated 200 further redundancies – 15 percent of its workforce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buyout , MediaWorks , owner of a nationwide television network ( TV3 ) and approximately half of New Zealand ’ s commercial radio stations chopped 130 staff [ MediaWorks takes razor to radio , Mark Jennings , Newsroom , May 25 ] .
The government response so far has been belated , partial and narrowly focused .
On May 23 , a NZ $ 50 million emergency package included $ 21 million to cut television and radio fees for six months , $ 16.5 million to reduce media organisations ’ contributions to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2021 financial year and $ 11 million of targeted assistance for particular media companies [ Kris Faafoi , Media support package delivers industry requests for assistance , press release April 23 ] .
This initial tranche of funding was too late for Bauer magazines and could not prevent spiralling job losses within NZME , Stuff and MediaWorks .
More support was allocated to television and radio than print journalism , an imbalance which needs urgent attention as part of a media reconstruction strategy .
Before moving forward , though , we need an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has exposed a double crisis in New Zealand ’ s news media system .
For decades , the weakening viability of commercial media organisations has damaged the sustainability of news reportage , journalistic enquiry and national media culture .
Meanwhile , underfunded public broadcasting institutions have long battled to pay staff , create content and advance digital platforms .
This double crisis arose from the restructuring of Radio New Zealand and Television New Zealand into state owned enterprises ( 1987 ) , the arrival of TV3 ( 1989 ) , the formation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the privatisation of Telecom ( 1990 ) and the abolition of all restrictions on foreign media ownership ( 1991 ) .
Together , these events allowed transnational media conglomerates to colonise the national media domain .
After TV3 began transmission , financial insolvency allowed Canada ’ s Canwest to accumulate a controlling share .
Similarly , Sky TV became a transnational corporate vehicle as News Corp-controlled Independent Newspapers Ltd ( INL ) became the largest shareholder .
Telecom ’ s privatisation allowed American buyers Bell Atlantic and Ameritech to dominate telecommunication infrastructures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ownership restrictions triggered an unending succession of transnational takeovers .
By 2010 , four major players dominated the New Zealand media market : APN News & Media , Fairfax Media , News Corporation/Sky and MediaWorks .
News gathering and journalistic practices had been radically restructured .
Fairfax , for example , in July 2008 , announced the establishment of hubs in Wellington and Christchurch to centralise the subediting of news across all their major titles , which was soon followed by 160 redundancies .
From 2007 , listed and unlisted financial institutions ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies ) acquired media holdings as short-term revenue streams ( see Merja Myllylahti ’ s JMAD annual media ownership reports ) [ free online ] .
The recent history of MediaWorks illustrates how financialised ownership threatens the journalistic public sphere .
The company has been owned by private equity and investment funds for 12 years since the exit of Canwest .
Successive MediaWorks managers introduced multiplatform broadcasting , low-cost reality TV shows and infotainment programmes with a skeletal staffing structure .
The axing of TV3 ’ s flagship Campbell Live in May 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affairs on New Zealand television .
However , financialised ownership can not entirely explain MediaWorks ’ difficulties , within its television holdings especially .
As Peter Thompson noted , scheduled television ’ s share of advertising spend in New Zealand has declined from 34 percent in 1988 to 21 percent in 2018 .
The revenue foregone has been absorbed by Google and Facebook .
Digital/online advertising is now worth NZ $ 1 billion , about 40 percent of New Zealand ’ s entire advertising turnover ( before COVID-19 ) [ Peter Thompson , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousand cuts .
Policy Observatory AUT , November 5 , 2019 ] .
Meanwhile , broadcasting audiences were fragmenting as more people accessed news and other content through online and mobile platforms .
Print media was also haemorrhaging .
From 2018 to 2019 , every major newspaper lost circulation .
NZME and Stuff continued to lay off staff , integrate newsrooms , delete print editions and close regional titles .
In desperation , the country ’ s most popular title , the NZ Herald , introduced digital subscriptions for its premium content .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ prices and stalling revenues persuaded major players to amalgamate , if they could .
The strategy failed .
During the 2017 , attempted mergers between Sky TV-Vodafone and NZME-Fairfax were prevented by the Commerce Commission .
In the former case , a successful merger would have allowed the combined company to dominate mobile and broadband access for the premium sports content market .
An NZME-Fairfax monolith would have controlled half of the commercial radio market , 90 percent of daily newspaper circulation and most online traffic to and from online news sites ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Against this historical background , and amidst the recent carnage , allow me to outline a news media reconstruction strategy .
First , Sinead Boucher ’ s Stuff buyout deserves government support to complement private sector financial backing .
A funding mechanism specifically designed to foster public interest journalism within Stuff and other media organisations should be established .
Second , a national interest test in regard to overseas investment in New Zealand should also apply to transnational media acquisitions .
As media commentator , Gavin Ellis , observes , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over which New Zealanders must have control ” [ Gavin Ellis , There are no benefits to foreign ownership of media , NZ Herald , May 21 ] .
Third , earlier government proposals for a RNZ/TVNZ merger within a new multiplatform entity needs urgent development .
The new organisation should , at a senior administrative level , identify exactly what services are to be insulated from commercial pressures .
A public service philosophy for the relevant stations , channels and platforms should be clearly stated and legislatively entrenched .
Here , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , current affairs and popular culture to succeed the NZ Listener .
The organisation ’ s board must be independent and nationally representative with informal links to the Māori Television network .
Finally , as Peter Thompson suggests , the government should impose a digital services levy on social media companies that have ciphoned off domestic advertising revenue without investing in local content .
This would generate the necessary funding revenue for public interest journalism initiatives [ Peter Thompson , Should the public subsidise media companies , Newsroom , 22 April ] .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of New Zealand ’ s news media system will continue .
This is an expanded version if an article published in The Conversation , June 3rd 2020

How many media analysts predicted this course of events? Twenty two months after Australian television network Nine Entertainment absorbs Fairfax Media, the New Zealand arm, Stuff, is purchased by its Chief Executive Sinead Boucher. Her proposals for a charter of editorial independence and a staff-based shareholding structure have attracted favourable comments from media commentators, public media lobbyists, Stuff journalists, Nine CEO Hugh Marks and Communications Minister Kris Faafoi [Stuff CEO Sinead Boucher buys the company, announces ‘great new era’, Stuff NZ, May 25].Co-editor of the Newsroom website, Tim Murphy, headlined his opinion piece “Behold St Sinead of Stuff” before acknowledging the future requirements – financial backing, government subsidies, internal costs and debt management [Tim Murphy, Behold St Sinead of Stuff, May 25].
Behind these messages of hope, the Stuff initiative signifies that a crisis-ridden media system is rapidly disintegrating. COVID-19 has accelerated this process. Threats to public health, national lockdown and long-term economic contraction have been commercially disastrous for all private media organisations. Redundancies and closures have gone viral. On March 30, NZME, owner of the NZ Herald and approximately half of the country’s commercial radio stations, abandoned its nationwide sports operations and 25 full-time staff. Less than a week later, German company, Bauer Media, suddenly closed down all national holdings including the NZ Listener, the NZ Women’s Weekly, North & South and Metro. The first two magazine titles had been in print more than 80 years. On April 13, NZME initiated 200 further redundancies – 15 percent of its workforce. As Sinead Boucher announced her Stuff buyout, MediaWorks, owner of a nationwide television network (TV3) and approximately half of New Zealand’s commercial radio stations chopped 130 staff [MediaWorks takes razor to radio, Mark Jennings, Newsroom, May 25].
The government response so far has been belated, partial and narrowly focused. On May 23, a NZ$50 million emergency package included $21 million to cut television and radio fees for six months, $16.5 million to reduce media organisations’ contributions to the NZ On Air funding agency for the 2021 financial year and $11 million of targeted assistance for particular media companies [Kris Faafoi, Media support package delivers industry requests for assistance, press release April 23]. This initial tranche of funding was too late for Bauer magazines and could not prevent spiralling job losses within NZME, Stuff and MediaWorks. More support was allocated to television and radio than print journalism, an imbalance which needs urgent attention as part of a media reconstruction strategy. Before moving forward, though, we need an historical diagnosis of recent events. COVID-19 has exposed a double crisis in New Zealand’s news media system. For decades, the weakening viability of commercial media organisations has damaged the sustainability of news reportage, journalistic enquiry and national media culture. Meanwhile, underfunded public broadcasting institutions have long battled to pay staff, create content and advance digital platforms.
This double crisis arose from the restructuring of Radio New Zealand and Television New Zealand into state owned enterprises (1987), the arrival of TV3 (1989), the formation of pay subscription Sky TV (1990), the privatisation of Telecom (1990) and the abolition of all restrictions on foreign media ownership (1991). Together, these events allowed transnational media conglomerates to colonise the national media domain. After TV3 began transmission, financial insolvency allowed Canada’s Canwest to accumulate a controlling share. Similarly, Sky TV became a transnational corporate vehicle as News Corp-controlled Independent Newspapers Ltd (INL) became the largest shareholder. Telecom’s privatisation allowed American buyers Bell Atlantic and Ameritech to dominate telecommunication infrastructures and markets. The lifting of foreign ownership restrictions triggered an unending succession of transnational takeovers. By 2010, four major players dominated the New Zealand media market: APN News & Media, Fairfax Media, News Corporation/Sky and MediaWorks. News gathering and journalistic practices had been radically restructured. Fairfax, for example, in July 2008, announced the establishment of hubs in Wellington and Christchurch to centralise the subediting of news across all their major titles, which was soon followed by 160 redundancies.
From 2007, listed and unlisted financial institutions (banks, hedge funds, private equity companies) acquired media holdings as short-term revenue streams (see Merja Myllylahti’s JMAD annual media ownership reports) [free online]. The recent history of MediaWorks illustrates how financialised ownership threatens the journalistic public sphere. The company has been owned by private equity and investment funds for 12 years since the exit of Canwest. Successive MediaWorks managers introduced multiplatform broadcasting, low-cost reality TV shows and infotainment programmes with a skeletal staffing structure. The axing of TV3’s flagship Campbell Live in May 2015 signalled the end of prime time current affairs on New Zealand television.
However, financialised ownership cannot entirely explain MediaWorks’ difficulties, within its television holdings especially. As Peter Thompson noted, scheduled television’s share of advertising spend in New Zealand has declined from 34 percent in 1988 to 21 percent in 2018. The revenue foregone has been absorbed by Google and Facebook. Digital/online advertising is now worth NZ$1 billion, about 40 percent of New Zealand’s entire advertising turnover (before COVID-19) [Peter Thompson, Mediaworks Television: The death of a thousand cuts. Policy Observatory AUT, November 5, 2019]. Meanwhile, broadcasting audiences were fragmenting as more people accessed news and other content through online and mobile platforms. Print media was also haemorrhaging. From 2018 to 2019, every major newspaper lost circulation. NZME and Stuff continued to lay off staff, integrate newsrooms, delete print editions and close regional titles. In desperation, the country’s most popular title, the NZ Herald, introduced digital subscriptions for its premium content.
Impossible profit rate expectations, fragile share prices and stalling revenues persuaded major players to amalgamate, if they could. The strategy failed. During the 2017, attempted mergers between Sky TV-Vodafone and NZME-Fairfax were prevented by the Commerce Commission. In the former case, a successful merger would have allowed the combined company to dominate mobile and broadband access for the premium sports content market. An NZME-Fairfax monolith would have controlled half of the commercial radio market, 90 percent of daily newspaper circulation and most online traffic to and from online news sites (a High Court appeal did not succeed).
Against this historical background, and amidst the recent carnage, allow me to outline a news media reconstruction strategy. First, Sinead Boucher’s Stuff buyout deserves government support to complement private sector financial backing. A funding mechanism specifically designed to foster public interest journalism within Stuff and other media organisations should be established. Second, a national interest test in regard to overseas investment in New Zealand should also apply to transnational media acquisitions. As media commentator, Gavin Ellis, observes, “journalism [is] a strategic asset over which New Zealanders must have control” [Gavin Ellis, There are no benefits to foreign ownership of media, NZ Herald, May 21]. Third, earlier government proposals for a RNZ/TVNZ merger within a new multiplatform entity needs urgent development. The new organisation should, at a senior administrative level, identify exactly what services are to be insulated from commercial pressures. A public service philosophy for the relevant stations, channels and platforms should be clearly stated and legislatively entrenched. Here, I would include an online magazine of arts, current affairs and popular culture to succeed the NZ Listener. The organisation’s board must be independent and nationally representative with informal links to the Māori Television network. Finally, as Peter Thompson suggests, the government should impose a digital services levy on social media companies that have ciphoned off domestic advertising revenue without investing in local content. This would generate the necessary funding revenue for public interest journalism initiatives [Peter Thompson, Should the public subsidise media companies, Newsroom, 22 April].
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Without the initiatives outlined here the disintegration of New Zealand’s news media system will continue.
This is an expanded version if an article published in The Conversation, June 3rd 2020