Thursday, April 1, 2010

An Insight Into The Cesspit........

.........that is TVNZ.

John Drinnan has interesting commentary on the debacle that was TVNZ's implicit endorsement of Hanover Finance.

The dolts at TVNZ seem not to understand that when their news reader endorses a company, TVNZ is in with him, whether it likes it, knows it or not. The giveaway line is here:-

Yet despite the failure of companies that destroyed many investors' savings - and allowing a former newsreader to present ads for the Hanover train-wreck - TVNZ has not changed its policy. "It's not black and white," said spokeswoman Megan Richards.

"The collapse of finance companies raised everyone's consciousness, including ours, in the sense that we were naturally concerned at our clients' ability to pay their bills," she said.

"There is no restriction at all on potential sponsorships from within the finance sector.

Says it all really. They still think it was all OK and all she's worried about is whether TVNZ would get paid.

9 comments:

homepaddock said...

The client's ability to pay the bills vs the ethics of selling shonky products to the gullible? No contest.

Graeme said...

I think the bigger crime that the media plays is that they do no real investigative journalism into the scumbags who perpetrate these crimes either after the fact or before the gullible public invest in them.

Anonymous said...

To be fair, I don't beleive TVNZ should be deciding whose advertising they run based on TVNZ's opinion of their potential clients business ethics. On this basis TVNZ possibly wouldn't have any customers left.

People still have to accept responsibility for their own gullibility and greed. There is a huge lesson here that will again fail to be learnt by the masses, until the next time it happens.

Paranormal

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Para, it's not a matter of whose advertising they run. That is a different issue. Here we are talking about whose products they recommend which is entirely a different matter.

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

I see Richard Long says he lost $50,000 with them.
Just desserts?

Anonymous said...

This is just another example of the means justifying the end.

What matters to these people the most is that their pay cheque can be cashed each week.

Everything else is inmaterial.

And somehow I don't think Long would be crying over loosing 50k for too long.
Lou

WAKE UP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
WAKE UP said...

The really sad thing is that obviously someone somewhere believes people will buy something if Richard Long (for example) endorses it.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the 50K Long lost was the final installment for being the front man - I bet doesn't say how many thousands he pocketed for fronting for them. Also after the thousands he got for being a news presenter I don't think Mr Long will be scraping the bottom of the barrel for a while yet.

Jimmie