TVNZ, Fairgo 30 years on

Don’t worry we didn’t miss it:

Just the other day the founder of Television New Zealand’s Fair Go program, Dr Brian Edwards, penned a scathing piece on how the “Fair Go” show had lost its way, in fact one might be inclined to say gone terribly wrong.

We here at Lauda Finem have decided to respond to Dr Edward’s piece in three posts, each of which will produce evidence of corruption within New Zealand’s Media, in particular Fair Go, the BSA and  TVNZ.

We will start with the first ever series of Fair Go and a brief survey taken by the program in the last episode of 1977 , a survey that at the time slammed car dealers, insurance companies and lawyers as being amongst the most dishonest people in New Zealand.

Seems fast forward nothing has changed, ironically 1977 would have been roughly when people like car salesman and odometer fraudster Sir Colin Giltrap, Lawyer and bent pollie Sir Douglas Greame and insurance industry ACC Chair Mr John Judge were just starting out.

In a strange twist of fate, this trio were anything but “Charlies Angels”, currently three of the most significantly corrupt men in New Zealand (in Sir Colin’s case enjoying the high life that a National party gifted knighthood buy’s in London).

But we’ll start with Dr Edward’s  blog post then we’ll be posting another two pieces that outline exactly why Dr Edward’s might now hold the view that Fair Go should in fact be dumped, we’d go further in calling for the sacking of its gun happy hot shot journo’s.

Fair Go’s relevance its failure to get it right, its use by those who hold hidden malevolent agenda’s and its ability to destroy real people, their careers and their contribution to public debate and democracy are all good reason to get rid of this televised shite sheet and the dribbling idiots, the likes of Kevin Milne and Simon Mercep, who are just masquerading as investigative journos:

A Kafkaesque story that should horrify you. And it’s set in New Zealand!

Posted by BE on May 30th, 2012

On Wednesday an email arrives in your inbox from the court. It tells you that you have been charged with a range of offences. The charges arise from complaints to the court made by a number of named individuals and one unnamed person who wishes  to remain anonymous.  The offences, some of which may go back several years, are outlined.

To assist the court you are asked to respond in writing to  a list of questions relevant to these offences. You are told that your case is to be heard in court next week and your evidence will be taken on Tuesday or Wednesday.  It is indicated to you that the trial will proceed whether you choose to appear in court or not. You are given the option of delivering a written statement of defence, though this is discouraged.

You panic. The charges against you are serious and could destroy your reputation. You are also extremely busy and the deadline for the trial allows you very little time to research the cases or prepare a defence. You seek the advice of a lawyer.

The lawyer can offer you very little comfort. He tells you that in this particular court the accused may not be represented by legal counsel but must mount their  own defence. What’s more, there is no judge, none of the prosecuting team are lawyers,  the normal rules of evidence do not apply, and objections are pointless.  

Continue Reading……………..

Source:  A Kafkaesque story that should horrify you and its set in New Zealand (Brian Edwards Media)

Part Two: ACC, Lazy-boy Chair decision instrumental in setting up black ops unit

Part Three: TVNZ; Fair Go: Kevin always liked the lime-light, so lets let him have it

We’ve decided to add to this story given that there is so much interest!

Related articles

Categorised in: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: