Disinformation campaign in full swing

I’m guessing that there is a direct correlation between the establishment of an organized oposition to the proposed new stadium, and the public disinformation campaign now being played out in the local media.

Just last week there were sensational claims made with respect to the information available to councilors before they made a crucial vote. That got front of the newspaper coverage, while the truth dispelling the suggestion was burried deep in the next days paper.

Just yesterday, councilors opposed to the development made claims calling into question the plans for facilities in the stadium now lack original specifications. This too has been dismissed the following day.

It’s always easy to put the classic kiwi knocking machine hard hat on and rubbish something, even if those claims have little or no grounding in the truth.

I’m just going to have to get used to reading rubbish claim time and time again, with retraction or correction following. But in true Kiwi style if enough mud is thrown, the poor public will be left thinking the mud slingers.

Advertisements

9 Comments

Filed under Media

9 responses to “Disinformation campaign in full swing

  1. Meg Davidson

    Malcolm Farry dismissed the claims but what he had to say about the details of the ‘conference facilities’ at the stadium was so lame and so laughable, Paul, that even you must be embarrassed. Conference facilities with floor coverings in ‘many’ parts and ‘basic’ equipment?

    What do you have to say about akB Conference Managemet director Ali Copeman’s comments, in this same ODT report?
    “… she said she had been to a recent meeting where the trust promoted its conference space and most people attending were amazed by what they heard.

    Up until that point, she had fully supported the stadium… But the meeting was told the space to be used would be in the stadium, where 5000 temporary seats would be removed and the area isolated: “in other words, the Edgar Centre.”
    There would be no carpet and no audiovisual facilities, which meant there would be cost for ‘dressing’ the space, providing things like carpets and wall hangings. As well, the height of the roof would be ‘huge’. Ms Copeman said the space would be no use for a conference.”

    I suppose you will now claim that Ms Copeman is not a director of a conference management company but is actually part of STS’s ‘disinformation’ campaign. Ms Copeman, STS, now the ODT … Yes, all very sinister. When will we hear about the STS spying on the CST through Malcolm Farry’s television set?

  2. Two things.

    The last two conferences I attended. One was in a Plush Boston Hotel with names like Georgian and Victorian Halls, and a grand ball room that housed the main dinner – lovely.

    The second, was held in a sports stadium in Seattle, no carpet, the most basic of audio visual equipment, but then again, it didn’t need it.

    If they say that Audio Visual equipment will be available and/or hired when needed, then it will be. Not all conferences need such equipment for every single presentation.

    I can only assume that the type of conferences Ms Copeman holds conferences that need that most plush of luxuries – carpet, that seems to be a necessity. BTW, the stunning Hotel in Boston, not a single carpet in sight, lots of hardwood floors – but then I didn’t do a lot of looking down. The other conference, lots of temporary matting and lots of draped material, gave just as intimate experience, but then again I didn’t look down too often then either.

    The conference I will be attending later this year, no AV equipment what so ever. They have decked the whole place out wi-fi and assume that since it’s a web conference most people will have laptops, blackberries and iPhones to follow the proceedings. Makes sense, there’s nothing more boring being 20 rows back and not making out tables or charts on a screen too small, when it could be on your screen in front of you to keep for ever.

    Maybe Ms Copeman could investigate such technologies, could save her on hire of AV equipment. BTW how many acres of carpet woul be required to carpet the Field Days in the Waikato – quite popular I understand?

  3. Meg Davidson

    Good point Compie. You wouldn’t carpet the field days site, but then it doesn’t claim to be a multipurpose venue, does it? One of the things Ms Copeland was surprised about was that the ‘conference facilities’ turned out to be a partitioned-off part of the stadium. Perhaps it WILL be like an indoor field days – or perhaps the circus in the big top. Ah, that evocative smell of crushed grass…
    But I shouldn’t mock.

    Paul, you are pushing it uphill. Sounding, in fact, rather like the CST person who fielded a phone call from a man who was interested in the CST’s claim that there would be equestrian events. (This is a true story – happened a few weeks back.)Where would the horses be stabled? Ah … outside. No stable facilities provided. Wouldn’t the horses cut up the turf? They would be confined to a special strip. What about spectator safety, very important for equestrian events? Fences, high fences specially erected … and hay bales! The guy obviously knew nothing about horses. He was making it up as he went along. That’s what it sounds as though you are doing Paul. Sure, you don’t need carpet when you’ve got posh hardwood. But I rather doubt that that’s in the CST’s budget for the parts of the ‘conference facilities’ that aren’t carpeted. As you will know, seeing you have read the peer reviews, fitout of the lounges is not in the budget.

  4. OMG

    Meg, please stop, you really are doing yourself a great disservice.

    If there were to be equestrian events at the Stadium, it would not be impossible to house temporary facilities over at Logan Park. Was the person at the CST the expert putting the Equestrian event together, I doubt not, hence not needing to know all of the ins and outs of running an equestrian event at the stadium 3 years out from completion.

    As for cutting up the turf. The well being of turf in all indoor multi-purpose stadiums is always in question. For instance where they have motor cross exhibitions (Crusty Demons and the like), there are all manner of mounds of dirt and soil etc all over the turf. It’s par for the course. Are you now suggesting we put up nice little English “keep off the grass” signs. Turf management for any such facility is now an exact science, and this would have been factored into the operational running of the stadium.

    Meg, the Stadium will have facilities to provide for the supply and vending of all manner of fast food etc for Sports Events, these combined with whatever temporary measures are in place, will suffice for conferences.

    Is it really that hard to start thinking outside of the narrow confines that “this simply can’t be done, and everything is a barrier”?

    And no you shouldn’t mock. These are all excellent suggestions, why shouldn’t Dunedin host the South Island field days? Why shouldn’t it host the National Rodeo Champs, come on why!?

  5. Meg Davidson

    When someone books a multi-use venue, they do so expecting the facilities to be there to meet their needs. If they had to provide those facilities themselves as well as hiring the venue, and the hire was expensive because the venue was roofed and had cost so much to build, why would they bother? The possiblity of bad weather doesn’t seem to deter spectators from the Crusty Demons and rodeos. I just wonder why they would bother relocating from the venue they’re using now. I’m not saying these things are impossible, just very improbable.
    The CST’s business case is predicated on the stadium being multi-purpose. They have continued to list a number of possible uses for the stadium including equestrian events. One would suppose, therefore, that SOMEONE at the CST would have taken the trouble to investigate the requirements for equestrian events and work our ways of meeting those requirements. No, the stadium hasn’t been built yet, but the business case for doing so depends on reliable information about possible users, and the CST hasn’t done its homework. If it had, the guy on the phone at CST would have said ‘Just a moment Sir while I access our equestrian file’.

  6. Meg,

    someone does not bother hiring a venue until they have investigated all of the facilities that it contains.

    If the business model for conferences at the new stadium involves outside catering (which happens every day all over the world), and the potential customers are happy with that, then who is the aggrieved party?

    Well the StS because all of their silly claims have been shot down.

  7. To claim the CST hasn’t done it’s home work is disingenuous.

    I do not expect the CST to have a full analysis of the requirements of equestrian events, or the motor cross events, the NZ crochet champs, the origami world champs or even the rugby matches 3 years out from construction of said stadium.

    They are in the process of planning. The very nature of the word plan, means to find the variables and put into process then needs of that plan.

    After London, we don’t now where something as large as the Olympics are to be held, and that’s only 8 years away. Surely under your and the StS’s tight time frames, the Olympic body is failing.

  8. Peter Entwisle

    Paul said:

    “Meg,

    someone does not bother hiring a venue until they have investigated all of the facilities that it contains.

    If the business model for conferences at the new stadium involves outside catering (which happens every day all over the world), and the potential customers are happy with that, then who is the aggrieved party?

    Well the StS because all of their silly claims have been shot down.”

    The potential customers are not happy with outside catering, or with the facilities on offer, or with the stadium’s location.

    This is known from the CST’s own Horwath report and now also from Ms Copeman, among others. So far no-one wanting to use the minimal facilities has come forward and the city council has agreed, conferences will at best be a minimal activity at the stadium.

    It is only Malcolm Farry of the CST and you who are trying to deny this – he in order to keep the public believing in the supposedly multi-purpose nature of the facility and you because you are daft enough to try to support him in this fantasy.

    If you want to deceive yourself that’s fine but if you want other people to follow you you’ll need to find a way around these awkward facts – not to mention quite a few others.

  9. Peter Entwisle

    Paul said:

    “Is it really that hard to start thinking outside of the narrow confines that “this simply can’t be done, and everything is a barrier”?”

    It isn’t hard at all but the CST is claiming uses for the stadium which couldn’t be catered for with the proposed facilities. To accommodate them more would have to be built than is allowed for in the present over-optimistic estimates. The likely uses and consequent revenues are less than those being claimed.

    This is an argument about the credibility of the claims for the stadium, not about the limits of imagination.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s