Readers' Comments on Military Rule and NZTV Coverage of Recent Events

 Don't like military, don't like ...

Croz – What I don’t get is this. Opponents of Frank Bainimarama and the military takeover in Fiji do so because they don’t like military rule .  Attorney-General  Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum  is civilian. Ratu Tevita is annoyed that Bainimarama chose the AG over Ratu Tevita and Colonel Driti . Doesn’t that tell you something? 

That Frank Bainimarama is prepared to go against military advice if he thinks it is not for the good of Fiji and its future. I do wonder if there is a little bit of jealousy here. In fact - is Ratu Tevita throwing all his toys out of the cot because he couldn’t get his own way. Something just doesn’t add up.

You would think that Oz and NZ would be pleased, a bit, that Frank B has chosen the AG over two military officers. Cheers,  Tamaki

Tamaki, The AG is an Indian.  This makes him a fair target for racially-motivated attacks. Croz

Why  does NZTV use old photo footage from the Speight Coup?

Cornelius has left a new comment on your post "Someone's Not Telling the Truth":

Here in NZ, 'Dreadful' Dreaver has said tonight on national TV that Ratu Tevita is Ratu Epeli Nailatika's brother. As NZ TV's 'expert' on Pacific Affairs, she is woefully ignorant. Why on earth can't we be kept informed on Pacific affairs by someone who at least knows the basics.

Another grizzle - why does NZ television insist on showing 10-year-old clips and passing them off as current? Occasionally they will annotate "file footage" but mostly not.

Cornelius,  I'm sure you know the answer. One picture is worth a thousand words, and most New Zealanders will think that's what Fiji is like today. This is what now passes as balanced reporting. Croz


Imprimatur said…
Simple tests should be applied to the efficacy of good governance - Media Governance especially. Any institution which permits 10year old clips to appear as 'current' is basically lying to the viewing public. Is this mere laziness? Is this deliberate spin (lies) or.... blatant political manipulation? We recognise it all: the Fiji Media, almost wholesale, indulged in it for five years. Fiji Media outlets had been bought by political corruption and masked their donations to an entity, the Duavata Fund. So, effectively there was 'No News'. It was mostly political propaganda in drag.
Son of Fiji said…
I'm no fan of the AG, but "Fair target"????!! Sure being Indian may make him a target, but I wouldn't say its a fair one.
And the News wore drag........ said…
The Silence of the Lambs on the role of the Duavata Fund initiative within the Fiji deafening. What have you go to say? Because this situation was and is fundamental to our dilemma. So the news in Fiji for years 'wore drag'? Now, it is censored? There is more than just a story in this?

Popular posts from this blog

Lessons from Africa

The Ratu Tevita Saga, Coup4.5, Michael Field, the ANU Duo, and Tonga