Is this really news?

/
 

So last Thursday at around 2pm, I received an email out of the blue from a journalist at Stuff.

It included the following questions and a response deadline of 5pm the same day - three hours later:

  • Are you working for [private media company] in any capacity? If so, what is that work?

  • How long have you been working for [private media company]?

  • Who hired you?

  • Are you involved in training any [private media company] staff in any way - if so, what’s that training about?

  • What makes you suitable for training journalists?

  • Did [private media company] have any concerns about hiring you, including in relation to numerous allegations about inappropriate workplace conduct, including at TVNZ and Al Jazeera?

  • Have any [private media company] staff expressed concerns about your hiring?

And then later that evening, a follow-up asking for my response to a series of revised questions, with a new deadline of 5pm Friday. These included:

  • Your meeting with [personal friend] at the [private media company] office in Auckland on January 24, what was that about?

  • Who initiated that meeting between you two?

  • There are a number of very high-profile allegations about your workplace behaviour. You have also apologised for what you describe as “flirtatious, over-friendly” behaviour at work. So why did you consider it appropriate to hold a meeting at the [private media company] office in front of members of their editorial team?

  • Was employment, contracting or any other work for [private media company], paid or otherwise, discussed between you and [personal friend]?

  • Why were you introduced to members of [private media company] editorial team after that meeting?

  • Are you still, or have you ever been, in discussion with [personal friend] over employment at [private media company]?

  • If not, what was your meeting with [personal friend] at [private media company] about on January 24?

And then again, on Monday morning, a further email asking:

I’m following up on these questions from last week.

Do you intend to respond?

No, I didn’t respond.

Why should I?

What is there to respond to?

I do not work for [private media company] in any capacity, and I never have.

I am a private citizen, who met up with a personal friend at their place of work.

And yet an experienced journalist - at a time of national emergency and crisis immediately following Cyclone Gabrielle - felt it was important to inform the nation that I went into an office three weeks prior to meet someone who I knew.

So, as an experienced journalist myself, here are my own (very much rhetorical) questions:

  • How is the content of a private meeting between two individuals subject to a journalist’s scrutiny (and, from the tone of some of the questions, their judgement)?

  • Are my future employment prospects now a matter for the media to weigh in on?

  • IF a private firm wanted to hire me - be it a media company or the local hardware store - is that always going to be a matter for the public to be informed of?  

  • Is this really what’s now considered ‘a story’? 

I know my employment at TVNZ was of public interest.  It was high-profile and TVNZ is a state-owned entity which makes it something the New Zealand taxpayer has a stake in.

And I know the allegations of my workplace behaviour in the past will inevitably give people pause. For any behaviour that may have made anyone feel uncomfortable, I have apologised and will reiterate it again now. I am sorry.

I would remind people however that those allegations remain, in most part, anonymous hearsay.  Some lack context, some are lies, and I will speak to them when I am able.

The Stuff journalist informed me that I apparently made people feel uncomfortable just with my presence at [private media company]. Again, I am sorry people felt that way - though it’s not surprising based on what’s been reported so far. When people eventually have the full story, I hope they will reconsider their previous views.

The facts right now however (in relation to this ‘story’) are simple.

If I was going - or indeed do go - for a job interview, then that’s between me and the prospective employer.

And if I go into an office - or indeed anywhere - to meet someone who I already know, then that’s definitely not the media’s business.

But I WILL answer one question which was posed to me: “What makes you suitable for training journalists?”

  • 24 years of broadcast journalism experience, reporting or anchoring from 23 cities in 14 countries;

  • 16 years as a frontline presenter for one of the world’s biggest international news channels;

  • 4 U.S. presidential elections, broadcasting for 12+ hours at a time, plus anchoring a live presidential inauguration from Washington DC;

  • 3 weeks covering a controversial and tense Zimbabwean election from Harare - the only international broadcaster to do so;

  • 2 panel discussions and multiple interviews with presidents, prime ministers, and political leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos;

  • One-on-one interviews with two former British prime ministers;

  • Hundreds of hours of live unscripted broadcasting of revolutions, shootings, celebrations, coups, natural disasters, anniversaries, and pandemics;

  • Thousands of hours preparing for interviews, discussion shows, economics programmes, and creating carefully-crafted broadcast television;

  • An Emmy nomination for a news bulletin which I presented, on a programme which I part-created;

Suffice to say, if anyone IS interested in utilising all that experience, do get in touch.