What’s wrong with RNZ? Here are my headlines
Civis' commentary ‘‘The national broadcaster facing hard truths'’ (Opinion ODT 6.9.25) made me think about the slow demise of my own long commitment to RNZ.
While Civis has concerns over the RNZ staff perception of broadcast as a sunset industry and a lack of an understanding of their audience, I have others.
In my own case it's about the competence that creates credibility, which is different from trust.
I would plea for announcers who speak clearly or don't misuse words, and journalists who are numerate, interview rather than badger, don't fill time with meaningless vox-pops, produce content for their audience rather than themselves, examine ‘‘expert's’’ interests in an issue, be more focussed on fact than personality, and can write concisely.
These things grate the most among many, but I'm hoping coming changes will return RNZ to providing ballast against the choppy ride of the commercial space’s chattering class; a class that RNZ have so sadly begun to resemble.
David Cohen
Kew
Going exploring
The government allocated $200 million for gas exploration subsidies. No gas has been found in New Zealand since 2005 so this is a gamble with no certain return.
There are about 15 renewable electricity projects under construction, 12 of which are solar farms. Twenty-nine other renewable projects have been consented.
If the government isn't happy with the number of new renewable energy projects being built then it should direct its three electricity companies to build more renewable power stations and invest the $200m with them if they need it, rather than wasting taxpayers’ money on gas subsidies.
Gavin Hughes
Timaru
Idiotic thinking
Re Bill Swift’s letter (3.9.25) suggests that this present government is “a bunch of idiots”. We have to assume that those who voted for this government are also a bunch of idiots.
We could also assume the previous government were a bunch of idiots as they lost the last election. Those who voted for the previous government must also be a bunch of idiots.
Now we have the final conclusion. Everyone in New Zealand is a “bunch of idiots”.
Alan Paterson
North East Valley
International confusion
Every New Zealander knows and accepts that te reo is a ‘‘normal’’ language. (Metiria Stanton Turei 22.9.25).
I think the crux of the issue is not against use of te reo but the practice of mixing it with English. It would not be understood in the international arena.
It also makes the assumption that everyone wants to use te reo in this manner. It only shows total disrespect for both languages. Dave Tackney of Fairfield (Letters 27.8.25) is spot on.
Kathleen Baff
Stirling
Back Bruce
I fully support Bruce Mahalski in his action at Dunedin Airport.
It is often said the artist is the conscience of society, and as we know, it can be an uncomfortable feeling to have our consciences pricked.
But inviting discomfort should not be a reason for arrest, as seems to be the case here.
Dunedin Airport should be ashamed of themselves.
Deborah Robb
Clyde
It is the best four-tenths of a cent ever spent
Replying to John Marshall (Letters 3.9.25) about the cost of the SpaceX ‘‘firework display’’, it must be remembered that the Starship spaceship and its booster are still very much experimental.
SpaceX is attempting things that have never been done before and failure is expected, although this latest launch was a success in every way that SpaceX planned for.
Mr Marshall expressed his concern about the ‘‘obscene’’ amount of money and resources expended in the programme and how it is not used to ease world-wide suffering. There is nothing original in his criticism, as the space programme in general has, for generations, been a soft target for critics who talk in sound bites, without spoiling things by going too deeply into details.
Taking Nasa as an example: since spaceflight began, the space programme has been a cornucopia of technological benefits that, without us even noticing or bothering to find out about, have improved our lives in a multitude of ways.
All that technology has come from an industry that has had to fight for every dollar begrudged to it, yet costs each US taxpayer less than four-tenths of one cent.
B. A. Thompson
Weston
Who to back in a conflict of bad versus bad
I was deeply disturbed by the opinions of your two recent correspondents Dennis Horne and Ann Charlotte (ODT 1.9.25), where they express very strong views against Israel.
This tiny democratic country is surrounded by enemy neighbours who seek their annihilation.
A country that they seem to think has no right to defend itself or retaliate.
I wonder if they have the same attitude towards Ukraine defending itself in the war perpetrated by their neighbour, Russia?
Both your correspondents, and many others who express opinions on this subject, refer to the Palestinians in the Gaza conflict, conveniently overlooking Hamas, the militant terrorist group who should be held 100% accountable.
Hamas are the ones who masterminded the attack on October 7, murdering 1200 Israeli citizens, kidnapping, murdering, torturing and holding 250 hostages.
Both your correspondents need to remember this.
The Palestinians voted in Hamas as their elected government in January 2006. Hamas turned their enclave into a terror network of tunnels and munitions directed towards Israel.
Even before October 7 they were firing thousands of missiles into Israel.
Hamas fighters dress as civilians making them almost impossible to identify. Hamas have been stealing humanitarian aide meant for the civilian population.
Hamas set up attack bases and munitions storage in hospitals, mosques, schools and residential homes.
Hamas reward financially and encourage murder and abuse of Israelis.
War is awful but kidnapping, murder and torture in this Middle East conflict is worse in my opinion.
I know what side I oppose.
M. W. Cowan
Concord
[Abridged - length.]
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: letters@odt.co.nz
