In such cases the media can be so thin-skinned as to be transparent.

The NZ Herald and Dominion Post/Fairfax became positively hysterical this week when Prime Minister John Key voiced his opinion of them on Leighton Smith’s Newstalk ZB programme.

He suggested, “The media are in a more aggressive and hostile mood towards us [National], I am not bent out of shape about that, I expected that.”

The Herald headlined its resulting story as an “attack” by Key. Fairfax’s Stuff.co.nz for a while ran a picture of Key headlined with the words “Poor me.” Words he never used and meanings that he specifically ruled out in the substance of the interview.

Talking of increased media criticism of his government Key said, “I don’t mean that as a complaint, I’m not moaning about it, it’s just a statement of fact.”

Fairfax’s Vernon Small ran a story headlined “Key bemoans ‘hostile’ media.”

Didn’t he actually say, “I’m not moaning about it”? Yes, actually, he did.

In both cases of apparently wilfully misrepresenting what he said, it almost seemed like the Herald and Fairfax were determined to prove John Key’s point for him.

The thrust of what John Key said on ZB was that, after a long honeymoon in the first term, the media were becoming more antagonistic in the second term and, if he won a third, it would increase. “History shows you it’s even more aggressive,” he stated.

Hardly an “attack” or even a “criticism”, let alone an example of “Key slamming the media”, as the Herald subsequently wrote.

Key ventured his opinion that the Herald was becoming more tabloid in format and content to boost sales, describing the Herald front page as “a pretty sensational sort of front page and that’s a deliberate strategy to get more sales at the dairy.”

The Herald’s Editor in Chief, Tim Murphy, tweeted later that day, “More sensational ‘so-called investigative journalism’ coming to your broadsheet Herald Wed. Good yarn. Might even inspire a purchase at the dairy…”

That comment made it difficult not to believe there was some malice in Wednesday’s enormous front-page story, “Minister’s high life”, subtitled “We’re paying for flash hotels … and laundry.”

The story revealed that cabinet ministers Murray McCully, Tim Groser and Jonathan Coleman, when travelling, were getting their underpants, socks and shirts washed at public expense. Shock! Horror!

Strangely enough, in the past, I’ve travelled overseas with Herald journalists and I’ve noticed their employer appeared to be paying their laundry bill. Perhaps the Herald will now set an example by not paying for its staff’s laundry bills when abroad and the government will follow suit.

Although the spectre of Murray McCully or Coleman washing their smalls in their hotel room hand basins is too awful to behold.

McCully and Groser were taken to task for running up travel bills and staying in expensive hotels. They are the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Trade. They have to travel. It’s part of their jobs. They end up staying in expensive hotels because that is usually where the talks are being held and the other delegations are staying. What are they supposed to do? Check out and stay in a backpackers?

This week McCully goes to North America for a series of international meetings and Groser is off to Washington DC for a conference. Both should cancel their meetings, stay home, and do everything by Skype. It would be much cheaper. FFS!

Wednesday’s Herald front page was a classic “Gotcha!” story and a superb illustration of the sensationalism practiced recently by the paper. His comments were no more an “attack” than what Dr Brian Edwards and I have been saying on the media panel on TV3’s The Nation on Sunday mornings over the past couple of weeks.

To reassure the Herald’s Shane Currie and Tim murphy, and the delicate flowers at Fairfax, I am not “attacking” or “slamming” them. Like Key, I’m just stating facts.

The media’s role is often to be “hostile, aggressive and antagonistic” to governments and politicians when they merit it. That comes with the job of being the “Fourth Estate”. I was once so hostile, aggressive and antagonistic” that Prime Minister Jim Bolger banned me from his press conferences.

It is the media’s job to apply scrutiny, to critique, and to commentate on events and individuals. It is just a shame that it cannot stand it when others do the same to them.

Message to Media: Stop being so pathetically thin-skinned and get on with the job.

I’m not going to descend into another Grade 10 grovel (it’s unseemly) and yes, there has been a bit going on since the last post. Not the least of which was TVNZ’s appearance in front of the Commerce Select Committee at the beginning of the month.

This is an annual flogging for TVNZ’s executives – after all, they’re the SOE everyone loves to hate.

This time round, though, it shone a light on the balance of power between the sixth and seventh floors and News and Current Affairs at the state broadcaster. It seems the latter is losing the editorial war over the formers commercial imperatives.

There’s been a lot of huffing and puffing in blogs and on websites about Labour’s broadcasting spokeswoman Clare Curran’s accusations that TVNZ’s Head of Programming instructed reporters and other staff at “Fair Go” to instruct them not to produce programmes that would upset advertisers.

TV One and TV2 boss Jeff Latch was called to the meeting too, apparently (as Elaine from “Seinfeld” once famously said about a former boyfriend, “He’s a little, little man”) to impart his editorial wisdom as well.

I’m sure the long-suffering “Fair Go” staff responded to Latch’s exhortations for them to use “balance” in their stories (surely, that wasn’t code for “don’t scare the advertisers off”?) with a nodding acceptance.  After all, Latch and Co are their bosses.

I hope they would’ve gone away, yelled, screamed, threatened rebellion.  Oh, that’s right, they did – hence Latch’s justified humiliation at the Commerce Select Committee.

This shoddy little episode is further proof of News and Current Affairs being knobbled under CEO Rick Ellis’s stewardship.

Yes, the State broadcaster has posted a $19.2 million half-year profit up from last year’s $4.9 million.  As an aside, last year’s much smaller result wasn’t as a result of poor advertising revenue (although I bet TVNZ sales will claim that) but because of the company’s $14.8 million write-off of its stake in the TiVo set box-tops, another spectacular fail.

And with Ellis’ departure (and old mate Kevin Kendrick, formerly from Telecom, tipped to take over) along with several other news department paper-shufflers, News and Current Affairs is presently at the bottom of the downward swing.

How else can you explain why they decided to let Political Editor Guyon Espiner go? His departure to TV 3 is a prime example of the arrogance that seeps through the place.

TVNZ’s News and Current Affairs Department has more talent per square metre than anywhere else.

The trouble is, once you enter the Belly of the Beast that talent is never acknowledged or nurtured.

The result is that the place burns through more talent than a series of “American Idol”.  That’s what you get when management knows the price of everything – and the value of nothing.

Other bloggers have taken to their sites to express their fury at this. And while I don’t blame them, this time round I’m not joining the fray.

Why? Because a period of enforced recuperation has allowed me the luxury of reconnecting with A Great Love, one that almost became a career – food and cooking.  These days it’s a love that has to satisfy itself with the eye candy of the Food Channel.

And while I wrote a column for “Cuisine” magazine last year lambasting the telly fashion for food-as-competition shows, in the spirit of accentuate-the-positive-delineate-the-negative that has heralded the start of 2012, here’s my choice of absolute faves that take pride of place on my MySky.

Luke Nguyen’s Vietnam

As much a cooking show, as it is a travelogue, Nguyen introduces us to everyone in his home country, from his grandmother to the lady cooking street-food in Hanoi.  It’s the show to watch if you’ve never been to Vietnam but want to go, if you’ve been but want to go back and, most importantly, if you want to learn to cook Vietnamese.  A lush, visual, sensual splendour.

Nigel Slater’s Simple Suppers

Yes, Nigel style is depressing, yes, his flat delivery drives me crazy at times (it’s not quite as bad as Rick Stein’s nasal whine but its getting up there) BUT this is a beautifully directed show, which transmits Slater’s passion for food. It uses clever visual techniques to introduce and shape the programme, allowing the recipes to take centre stage.  Slater’s food philosophy is true to the programme’s title. His food is easy to follow tasty-takes on classic ideas.

Raymond Blanc’s Kitchen Secrets

A show that’s unashamedly one to watch if you’re a foodie’s foodie.  This show doesn’t muck around with false concepts of “competition” to keep your attention. It assumes you want to watch the art of haute cuisine being demonstrated by a master chef who can still give his apprentices the rounds of the kitchen.

Again, well produced and shot (the British are so much better at food shows than Americans), its style is a mix of plain old-fashioned cooking demonstration interspersed with voiced-over instructions.

If you’re the type of cook who bought Julia Child’s “Mastering the Art of French Cooking, Volumes One and Two”, this is the programme for you.

It’s one to watch, also, because it challenges and cajoles you back into the kitchen.  And that’s never a bad thing.

Anthony Bourdain’s No Reservations

Ok, this isn’t so much a cooking show as an eating-and-travel show but if you’re as much a greedy cow as I am (hey they didn’t call me “Gannet” for nothing…), this programme can take you to some of the most fascinating places, with cuisines that run the gamut from “A” for amazing to “B” for barfing.

Bourdain’s rock n’ roll style is complemented by his commentary, that sometimes contains more beeps than anything else.

Nigella Lawson – All & Any of Her Shows

I know what you’re going to say.  How can I include a woman whose skills in the kitchen are highlighted by her ability to flirt down-the-barrel and eat quantities of grub in the most sexual way?

Lawson’s a cook, not a chef, but what she does do well is demystify food, making it accessible for those who can’t cook/won’t cook.  I love the way she show cases “Ham in Coca-Cola” one minute (that gets the anti-obesity brigade frothing no doubt) alongside Temple Food such as “Vietnamese Chicken and Mint Salad”.

Al Brown – Various Shows

What’s not to like about this quintessential Kiwi bloke?  Brown’s been able to pole-vault from his days as Head Chef at Wellington’s swanky award-winning “Logan Brown” to a variety of telly programmes promoting his straight forward eats, shoots & leaves  food philosophy. Its about time we saw a bit of ourselves mirrored on our screens.

Ok, time for your thoughts now during these lazy, hazy days of summer.  Let’s start a conversation, folks, not a rant.

Play nicely, people!!

The lists, the bests and worsts of the year, have started to sprout like rare end-of-year funghi.  If you can’t beat ‘em, I say…..

Best News Story

Christchurch Earthquake 1, 2, 3, 4 …

In a country where annually news is thin on the ground, both channels share the honour of Best TV News cover of the quakes, even if 3 News had the by far the most extensive video on February’s killer quake (if only because ONE News’ building was virtually destroyed and its equipment largely lost or inaccessible in the wreckage).

Best TV reporter in the February quake has to be TV3’s Hamish Clark, anyone who saw his superb walkabout in the immediate aftermath, capturing the terror of the immediate aftershocks and running vox-pops with stunned survivors as buildings continued to crumble onto the street, got as close as you could to the disaster without actually being there, cowering or stumbling for your life.

Best camera coverage of the February disaster, all the news crews who got out on the streets, shot whatever they could, edited in the camera and filed some much of their field footage live to air.

Best newspaper coverage of the quakes, the Christchurch Press which never missed a day in print, despite its building being largely destroyed and its staff injured or shocked – even if the state of the streets made home delivery a forlorn hope.

Stuff.co.nz and herald.co.nz came into their own as rolling, quickly updated, news sources with excellent video and stills people were seeking so that they could try and comprehend what had happened.

A Breaking News Award to the citizen journalists of Twitter who beat every form of media for getting information, news and rumour out within seconds of every shake and all developments in the city.

Worst News Coverage goes to the dickheads – you know who you are – from both home and abroad who breached the CBD red zone trying to gain a “scoop” – and were promptly arrested.

Best Election coverage (on the campaign and on the night)

3 News takes the title for the campaign TV coverage, even if it was grossly sensationalist over the “teacupgate” – which proved to be a storm in one.

Patrick Gower’s superb baiting of Don Brash should feature in Journalism 101 courses for years to come – even if his story did, in fact, prove Brash’s point that Paddy was a “deceitful bastard”.

TV3 again takes the title for Best coverage on the night if only because its graphics were better, its panel smaller and saner, and it didn’t cutaway at vital moments to comments and events that were irrelevant.

The Royal NZ Herald wins best newspaper coverage of the campaign, it remained uncharacteristically extremely challenging to the National Party incumbents and Claire Trevett’s “fly on the wall” coverage of the leaders out on the trail was unfailingly funny and insightful.

The Dominion Post gets a highly commended for its use of Vernon Small’s well-trained eye on the leaders but, somehow, we were left feeling he was underused.
No newspaper gets an award for election night coverage as this came the next day in the Sunday papers and, as we all know, the Sundays are complete crap.

The Best News Website Coverage was undoubtedly Scoop, which seems to pride itself on “being there” and “being first” – old news values serving new media well.

Worst Election News Coverage had to be The Standard whose hard left rhetoric rendered it blind to any rational coverage.

Labour’s Red Alert was a much better and clearer standard bearer for the left and while right wing sites such as Whaleoil were almost as blinkered as The Standard, the blubbery one saved himself – just -by the liberal use of humour.

Then there’s The Worst Awards….Teacupgate, as mentioned, and the “accidental” (yeah, right) taping of the conversation between Prime Minister John Key and Act’s John Banks.

No-one came out of this silly debacle with any honour, least of all the media who tried to stand on the high moral ground but found it crumbling away around them as public sentiment lined up against them. It proved that the ends don’t justify the means every time, and yes, while the pollies were stupid to be discussing sensitive material as hacks were pressed on the other side of the café window, the means don’t necessarily justify the ends.

Most improved Telly Critters

This award goes to TVNZ’s Breakfast.

In the lunar crater left on TV ONE’s Breakfast by the stellar implosion of Paul Henry, new hosts Petra Bagust and Corren Dann were hung out to dry for several weeks.

Attacked by razor-toothed packs of commentators and critics they staggered on until, miraculously, one day – they found their own characters. Yes, it’s frothy and light with a snap, crackle and pop but at least it is once again watchable.

Those who prefer healthier muesli can opt for Rachel Smalley’s creditable effort at pumping out nutritious hard news on TV3’s Firstline.

Gone But Not Forgotten

He has an ego bigger than Paul Holmes, his career meltdown was the envy of Michael Laws, but Paul Henry ain’t seen nothin’ yet. His trans-Tasman leap to Channel Ten’s new morning show has a “into the valley of death…” air about it. Quite frankly Ten has a reputation for being a newsman’s graveyard but, luckily, Paul is more showman than journalist so his reincarnation on what Lachlan Murdoch apparently wants to shape into an Aussie Fox News might not be the disaster we all expect.

His co-host is touted as being Lachlan’s former supermodel wife Sarah and, serious career advice here, Paul, this is not the TVNZ newsroom! Keep it zipped (and I don’t mean your mouth)….

Meri Kirihimete to all…..

And so it’s proven to be. He was well liked by staff and by management during his time at the Deathstar.

Let’s be fair, Flannery was no doubt chosen because his predecessor, Mad Bad Bill Ralston, caused so many waves for the Good Ship TVNZ, management was no doubt desperate to sail into calmer – but less courageous – journalistic waters.

But those editorial waters were so calm that Flannery’s news and current affairs legacy is less about rigor and more about reporting rumour and tabloid gossip.

Anthony Flannery, TVNZ's departing Head of News & Current Affairs

Since he’s arrived on the scene, TVNZ has moved back into its former 6pm torpor of taking that morning’s Herald front page and dutifully reporting it 12 hours later.  After all, they cry, we’re different, we’re broadcast news and a little bit special.

So editorially flabby but what how does TVNZ News rate in a production sense?  Dressed up like a hooker on K Road on a Saturday night. Despite across-the-newsroom job cuts Short-Flannel-Pants decided to employ those news shamans Frank N Magid Associates, Midwestern consultant wannabes, who gave us the most pimped up One News Kiwis have ever had the misfortune to view.

Because when the Magids (or Maggots as the hacks like to call them) come in, originality leaves by the back door.

What you get is dull donuts of live crosses set against concrete walls, containing information that is crying out to be placed in the story itself, a formulaic approach that dulls the senses and fogs the brain.

The Maggots favour stories that focus on the reporter, rather than the facts. After all who needs them when in fact you’re a news promoter not a news producer.

Short-Flannel-Pants is reputed to have spent more than a $1 million dollars on these puff-piece promoters. Why? Maybe it was because he didn’t have any ideas of his own when it came to the international mystery of how to be relevant to your audience in today’s ever changing media world.

His disappearance back across The Ditch has been predicted for at least a year as his wife and family moved home back months ago.

His new gig as the head of news and current affairs for the Ten network will no doubt suit him. The channel has been labeled “troubled” by Granny Herald (which is tabloid-speak for down-the-toilet-and-sinking-fast), Flannery will be eminently suited to Ten’s ambulance-chasing-court-reporting style of news.

And, as the small battalion of TVNZ’s middle news managers sense that their time of glory has come, there’s no doubt that TVNZ management, still caught in a strange Cultural Cringe Tango, will choose an offshore figure to be their HONCA.

Anyone from the UK or Aussie will do.

After all, a Kiwi couldn’t do it could they?

The best competition of all though, has to be “Homai Te Pakipaki” over on Maori Television. “Homai” takes karaoke singing and elevates it to an art form.

Each week the programme plucks all comers out of their home-towns and marae and thrusts them in front of a live audience where they belt, croon and reggae their souls out. This isn’t simply getting up at the pub in front of your mates but in front of a live audience with the iwi watching at home. Pride is at stake here.

The winner is decided by text poll. But, whoever wins weekly, the result is always television gold.

The live audience – usually whanau supporting their boy or girl up on stage – hold up signs of love and support and start dancing spontaneously during the show. Sadly, if you want to catch it this year, you’ll have to wait.

Matai Smith, co-presenter of "Homai Te Pakipaki"

The Grand Final went to air last Friday and had plenty of ‘feel good’ from whoa to go.  From the slick professionalism of presenter Matai Smith to his cohort TeHamua Nikora, who’s so loose he makes geese look uptight, this is the show where everyone is a winner without the artificial jeopardy that blights other competitive shows.

TeHamua exhorted the live audience at Auckland’s “Logan Campbell Centre” to “paki up” (pakipaki means to clap but pakipaki also means a dried human head! But I think he meant the former) and they did clap and roar as finalists choose their songs from the authorized song-book.

TeHamua Nikora, "Homai's" main man and resident loose goose

Paki Number Seven, Ngati Porou’s Chad Chambers, complete in bro’ couture of white meatworks gumboots was asked what he wanted out of the show. “A recording contract,” he replied quick as a flash.  Some savvy recording exec should oblige.  He was the winner on the night and his style of reggae-flavoured R&B was a huge hit with the punters.

“Homai” is what happens when a network knows what its viewers want and gives it to them. They’ve put the wairua back into heartland television. The result is a show that reflects its audience, showing us a part of Kiwi life we don’t get to see on any other network. We’re all the richer for it.

And, given that success, I know now where I’ll be watching Rugby World Cup 2011 – on the warmly human Maori Television Service.

********************************************************************************************************************************************

You don’t need to be Einstein to work out that I probably rank as the world’s most unproductive blogger.  Excuses aside (ok, if you want to know I have been pretty busy….yeah, lame eh?) I’ve taken matters in hand and given myself a bloody good talking to, which has resulted in an attitude readjustment.

Good blogs are like good columns. The author allows you to walk into their brain and try ideas on for size.  Up until now this blog, like so many others out there, has been all about anger. And like talk-back radio, while it can be energetically entertaining, it’s pretty much a cul-de-sac ideas-wise.

No more, long suffering reader. I promise to blog more frequently and about more diverse and positive subjects.

And, hey, you get to hold me to account if I don’t.  See, just like talk-back, only better.

Vote for Change promptly booted Mr Fogerty out of the group but not before dear old Bob Harvey quit the campaign in disgust saying, according to the Herald website, he did not want to be part of a group that had not “done their homework” on their members.

It feels a little odd to be giving kudos to Bomber Bradbury as his views and rants generally can be labelled as “loony conspiracy theory left” but a scoop is a scoop and anyone who hooks up with rabid racist groups deserves to be given the boot from a lobby group that hopes to persuade a majority of New Zealanders to again change the voting system.

Vote for Change has already had a fair battering in the mainstream media, despite the best efforts of its articulate spokesperson Jordan Williams. The main criticism coming from MSM commentators is that it does not argue for one clear alternative to MMP.

That is a little tough on Vote for Change as the coming referendum offers several alternative systems to choose if we dump MMP:  First Past the Post (FPP), Supplementary Member (SM), Preferential Voting (PV), and Single Transferable Vote.

Vote for Change rightfully argues that we can’t really debate these alternative systems unless we actually “Vote for Change”. If MMP was scrapped I presume the group and its supporters would then pick up sides on whatever voting system they individually favoured.

Vote for Change, winning friends and influencing people?

Left wing commentators and blogs attacked Vote for Change as some kind of evil right wing conspiracy, a front for National and Act – neatly overlooking the fact that without MMP Act would be dog tucker and National seem quite capable of putting together coalitions under MMP.

My guess is the final referendum vote will be a narrow win for MMP – which is a shame as some of the alternative systems deserve a second look.

However, in the absence of an early Electoral Commission’s education campaign and any serious attempt by the MSM to explain the alternatives I suspect people will opt for the MMP status quo.

How many of you out there understand STV, SM or PV? I spent a good hour with Mr Google trying to get my head around the way they work and eventually decided STV sounds promising if somewhat complicated.

Hopefully the TV networks will organise debate programmes on the issue prior to the vote and newspapers will devote some space to explaining what the hell these systems mean and how they would work because I’m sure the Electoral Commission’s education campaign will be drowned out by Rugby World Cup and the party fight for the general election. Otherwise I doubt many people will seriously explore the alternative voting options.

I reckon it’s a debate we need to have so hopefully people won’t be distracted by some of the mud being thrown at Vote for Change and, instead, concentrate on the question at hand: Do you want to keep MMP or not? And, if you don’t – what do we replace it with?

Deciding to put the item on in the first place is the fault of the producers.  No doubt, Executive Producer Graeme Muir wrestled with whatever burnt-out news morals he has left and came up with the rationale, “ I know, if we put a nutritionist on-air as the presenters scoff it down, that’ll present fairness and balance into the segment!” Wrong, wrong, wrong.

It was all a chimera. Claire Turnbull the Editor of the Healthy Food Guide was left to intone piously on what was wrong with this kind of food while the presenters issued cries of “It’s so bad but it’s so good,” and, “My problem is there’s no chips and a coke.”

As the minutes ticked by you could see some balloon-blower PR hack almost wet their pants at the four minutes and fifty-six seconds of unpaid editorial they were getting.

But the buck here stops with the presenters.  They could have simply said “No” to the story.  They were prepared to sell their credibility out to a company that made a $25.1 million profit last year largely off hugely increased sales in KFC.

I can’t wait to hear Nadine Chalmers-Ross intone earnestly of Restaurant Brand’s next end-of-year profit hike.  Honey, you can take some of the credit for that.  As you’ve lost yours, they’ve gained in the process.

Corin Dann, The Double Down Woofer

Any doubts about why the presenters were doing this segment were encapsulated in Corin Dann’s throw line, “ It’s been everywhere, as if we need to jump on the bandwagon actually. As if they needed more promotion.”  Couldn’t have said it better Corin.

Problem was, you chose hype and hoopla over your own currency as a presenter.  Don’t think I’ll be believing a word you say at the next big news event.

Interestingly the only person who seemed to have real doubts about this was the only non-journalist presenter, Petra.  She tried her own version of balance with, “Oh no, he’s groaning in ecstasy, I can’t stand it,” as Corin’s own credence went west as fast as he chomped on the piece of secret herbs n’spices fat.

Then in acknowledgement of his own blind stupidity Rawdon Christie tweeted:

Wish I’d bought shares in Restaurant Brands last week. The KFC Double Down is getting unprecedented attention. Well done KFC marketing team.

If only you had bought those shares Rawdon but then, considering your shameless plugging of KFC, it could constitute insider training.

Rawdon Christie, gulps down on a Double Down

Congratulations to commentator David Slack who tweeted:

Reporters wanting their self respect back after shilling for a fast food company will have to walk for at least 800 minutes in deep thought.

I thought the show that did all the infomercials was “Good Morning”. I guess now we’ll be getting Abdomizer and Wet ‘N Forget demonstrations on Breakfast too.

On the one-hand we have a small, tightly knit group of top White House and National Security Staff with the Navy Seals and the CIA pulling off the coup of the century and on the other, there is the ensuing farce of claim and counter-claim from the White House and the Pentagon and this sad sorry tale becomes a classic lesson in How-Not-To-Announce 101.

So, how could the operation itself have operated so smoothly while the White House Comms team faltered in the aftermath?

Let’s analyze it against some commonly held precepts when it comes to Comms.

#1 – Once the operation has been successfully carried out don’t tell anyone ahead of the Big Announcement

The chances of rumour and conjecture being given any place in this event increase incrementally the more folk who know about it before the Official Announcement is given.

You have to question why President Obama informed not only the Senate and Congress leaders before he spoke to the nation, but also Presidents Clinton and G Dubbya Bush and many other senior administration figures

The Osama Situation Room

When you’ve got cartoon characters like actor Dwayne – “The Rock” – Johnson tweeting “Just got word that will shock the world – Land of the free….home of the brave DAMN PROUD TO BE AMERICAN!”, a full hour ahead of the official announcement you’ve got communications issues.

Similarly, at the same time, Keith Urbahn, former Defence Secretary Donald Rumfeld’s chief of staff tweeted, “So I’m told by a reputable person they have killed Osama bin Laden. Hot damn.”

#2 – Announce only the facts, the facts and nothing but the facts…

When the Big Announcement finally came, it was short on detailed facts. The White House failed to adequately control and direct the information flow.

What really happened during the raid? Who was shot, in what circumstances?

A full description of the raid was vital and should have been made available immediately Obama spoke to the world.

In the resulting information vacuum journalists did what they’re paid to do; they spoke to their contacts and questioned them to get details of the most sensitive operation the US military has arguably been in involved in this century.

Various sources start talking and the stories start rolling out…. bin Laden’s wife, we were told, had been used as a human shield, a claim that US officials later denied.

Osama was killed in a firefight, he was shooting at the raiders, ooops, no he wasn’t.

The helicopter was shot down, no it had mechanical failure.

The journalists were ringing administration sources who were not in the loop but who were determined to sound as if they were – so many “winged it” and passed on information from second or third hand sources and, I suspect, possibly just made it up.

The conflicting stories sowed confusion and doubt, turning what should have been a triumph for Obama into a debacle.

#3 Confirm in advance of any announcement who will talk and who will not, as well as deciding what you will and will not discuss

The CIA announce pictures of bin Laden’s corpse will be released. No they won’t, says the White House.

Throughout the whole communications fiasco there has been too many spokespeople making official announcements that are contradictory.

Because President Obama refuses to release the pictures of the dead Osama, the paranoid conspiracy theorists have had a field day.

An image of bin Laden’s dead body which was widely circulated throughout the news media and the web was pronounced a photoshopped fake.

Then came the real humdingers, some of them too funny not to mention.  There’s the fact that bin Laden was killed on the eighth anniversary of George W’s infamous “Mission Accomplished” speech, a fact that folks at right-wing blog’zines such as “The Nation” and “The Huffington Post” find noteworthy.

Or how about the theory that like the movie “Wag The Dog” Osama isn’t really dead at all?

Or the fact the Americans killed the wrong guy, the DNA proves it but they’re covering it up?

Or, even more bizarre, bin Laden never existed in the first place, he was an US invention to justify all the crap the US has done to the Middle East and Muslims.

#4 Anticipate in advance of the announcement likely media demands and work out a response

It was fairly obvious that if you are launching a military raid to kill the world’s most wanted man the media will want:

(a)  Pictures to illustrate the story – decide what images you can release and what cannot

(b)  To know exactly how the mission unfolded – establish the facts and publish them immediately

(c)   Proof of bin Laden’s death – make the DNA tests available – find a reliable witness (e.g the medical experts who examined the corpse).

All of this begs the question if any of the White House Comms Team was involved at any stage in the announcement, until immediately prior to it?

If that is the case, then Obama needs to learn that his Comms team always need to know….

Tuesday’s earthquake turned that on its head. Journalists around the country were faced with covering the biggest disaster affecting the most New Zealanders since World War II.

How individuals fared forged reputations – and destroyed others – but it also gives us a clear roadmap of how punters used the media.

The immediate power of social media to report events and chart feelings was evident even in the first minutes after the 6.3 quake.

Citizen journalists (and some real journos in newsrooms) used Facebook and Twitter in the news vacuum in the minutes after the quake hit. For many those posts were the first they heard of the quake.

People shared stories of their experiences and sent condolences to worried friends and family. The immediacy of these personalized digital media dispatches became a touchstone for people around the country and the world in the hours and days that passed.

The websites weren’t far behind Twitter and Facebook.  Olivia Carville and Daniel Tobin from stuff.co.nz, having survived catastrophic damage to The Press Building, dashed outside with a camera to capture the panic and chaos.

Then the telly networks cranked in.  3News had an advantage over TVNZ because the State broadcaster’s building was damaged and out of commission.  I’m told for the first hours all they had was one SNG (Satellite transmission) unit to cover the catastrophe.

3News hit the streets immediately with reporters covering the chaos and mayhem.  Hamish Clark’s reportage in and around the Cathedral was outstanding, covering what was happening around him, talking to the injured and stunned survivors, then managing to get inside the Cathedral, the symbol of the city, to show the extent of the damage.

What struck me watching from the safety of home hundreds of kilometers away was the professionalism of reporters across the networks.  They had experienced the quake just like everyone else.

Many were visibly in shock but all managed to keep it together.  Their voices betrayed what they had just experienced but that only managed to communicate even more the horrible event they’d been through.

This was most evident with 3News’s Hillary Barry.  As the audience came to terms with the extent of the disaster, Barry was completely professional and in control, her calm demeanor was reassuring despite the fact that at times there was a slight quiver in voice as she, too, tried to keep her emotions under control.

Hilary Barry, the new mother of a wounded nation

Arise Ms Barry, the new Mother of the Nation!

ONE News, their building largely destroyed, started showing their live shots a little after TV3.  Hampered by a lack of resources, their coverage had to be studio based, backed up by a reporter live from the street.

But to add to the disadvantage, bad decisions were made.  Did viewers need to be subjected to a montage of horror and destruction, complete with dramatic music two minutes before the news on the first night?  Times like this didn’t need any added drama – it was already there.  This over-dramatization was sheer bad news judgment.

Still, even the Australian media have managed to largely show unaccustomed restraint in their coverage.

It was interesting to note how the online news sites like stuff.co.nz  and the herald.co.nz began using video to great advantage. Together with pictures from the TV3 and TVNZ sites they gave us a graphic look at what had happened and what was being done.

Twitter and Facebook links helped readers find the best informative streams.

What impressed me is how all the media, mainstream and online, meshed together using their respective strengths to provide us with the widest, fastest, coverage of such a huge developing story.

And while some viewers and readers from around the country are professing fatigue at the stories and images they’ve presented with, they won’t – and shouldn’t – be given any respite.

It’s journalisms role to advocate for the people of Christchurch now and ensure they’re not forgotten as the city rebuilds.