NZ Herald nakedly anti-Labour

If the casual observer needed any more proof that Auckland's only daily newspaper is aggressively campaigning for a National party win at this year's elections, we got it over the past few days.

The latest example of the Herald turning a silk purse into a sow's earis the Herald has going out of its way, over several days, to portray the move by the government to phase out incandescent
lighting as anti-choice, anti-free market and coercive.

The move to CFLs and high-efficiency lights could save this country 20% of all power consumed. That is several large power plants we won't have to build. It's water that will stay in the hydro lakes to get us through the winter.

That is an enormous amount of power to save and one could be forgiven for thinking the government's decision is a HUGE piece of good news on the energy front. Plus we will collectively save over $500 million in charges for power not used.

But no. Instead of lauding the move as a long overdue, responsible one demonstrating profound common sense, the Herald bitches and moans about chandeliers and dimmer switches. The Herald's include quotes from clearly uninformed people who think all CFLs are all bright blue or they "aren't sure" what this will mean for their chandeliers or the 2am trip to the loo.

A predictable slew of letters appears from Remuera and St. Heliers championing the endangered dimmer switches and utterly disregarding the fact this country will save 20% of all power now used. Clearly not the sort of folk who provide much support for power saving campaigns in dry winters. Me first-ers and uninformed with it.

I've been using CFLs almost exclusively since 1998 when they were $20 each. The one in my loo is an 11w CFL bulb that provides more than ample light to navigate under any conditions. They are brighter than a string of in-ceiling spots that each cast a small circle of light on the floor directly below and little light anywhere else and use 10 times the amount of power - assuming you only have two of them. I've seen up to 7 in a big loo - 350w vs 11w!!! - and no brighter. There is no contest.

I don't like the "blue" (daylight) CFLs either and don't buy them. I buy the yellower ("warm white") version.

I've been looking to buy a house and have seen as many as 15 in-ceiling light pots in a single room at 50w each. That is 750 watts to (dimly!) light a space that can easily be fully lit by less than 100 watts or 5 x 20w CFLs.

Where overhead fitting weren't appropriate for CFLs, I replaced them with attractive ceiling or wall mounted fitting or standing floor lamps that do suit CFLs.

At the Warehouse, CFLs are as little as $2.99 each last time I bought any. It's hard to keep up with prices as you buy CFLs every few years. Almost every one of mine have lasted 5 years or more. When I shift house, I tend to take them with me.

The point here is the benefit to New Zealand of moving rapidly to CFLs far outweighs the disadvantages.

But the Herald clearly isn't about portraying anything this government does as good.

Contrast the light bulb coverage with the complete lack of coverage by the Herald of a huge story reported by The Standard this week: The numbers on the unemployment benefit (17,465) are the lowest since 1979.

It looks increasingly as though New Zealand needs to look critically at the level of concentration of ownership in New Zealand's print media.

I wouldn't care how the Herald chose to mislead and misinform Auckland and New Zealand if they weren't the only daily newspaper in town. But they are and I am increasingly seeing that as a problem that needs to be addressed.

Freedom of speech isn't much use if there is only one voice being heard. Theirs.

(Disclaimer: I don't even vote for Labour. I'm just disgusted by the naked, consistent and persistent political bias in Auckland's only daily newspaper. We deserve better.)