September 13, 2025 • 9 mins
This week on The Sunday Panel, managing director of 818, Chris Henry and journalist and editor, Jo McCarroll, joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more!
How concerned are we about the growing political violence in America following the Charlie Kirk incident? Is there a way back to being able to debate and accept different views - or has that ship sailed?
Can information really be suppressed in a global media world? A suppression order has been put in place around the Tom Phillips case, but suppressed information has been reported on the internet. have we lost the ability to give people a fair trial or the privacy they need?
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudgin
from News Talks edb.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Okay, it is time for the panel now, and I'm
joined by managing director at eight one eight Chris Henry.
Good morning, Chris, al Kyoda, and also journalist and editor
Joe McCarroll, Good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Joe, Good morning, Francisco and chras So the Swarning.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
We spoke to the Washington DC bureau chief for The Guardian,
Dave Smith, and we were just sort of getting a
bit of a sense about how Americans are feeling post
the killing, the assassination of Charlie Kirk this week. And
you know, we were talking about the fact that, you know,
America is losing the ability to exercise reasonable disagreement or
(00:47):
disagree agreeably or disagree better, whatever you want to call it,
and look at something that we are also experiencing here
in New Zealand. But are you concerned about the violent
nature of politics and America?
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Joe, I'm absolutely concerned, and I think if you're not,
you know, really think more deeply about it. I think
it's not even a rise, it's a normalization of political
violence and political assassinations. And I mean Charlie Kirk's discourse
that gun deaths were part of the price you pay
(01:22):
for having the right to carry arms. It's such, it's wild,
you know, you hear that and you think, surely not.
But I think everyone, everyone should be deeply concerned.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
What about you, Chris.
Speaker 4 (01:40):
Oh, I totally agree with your points, Joe. I think
it's coming top down, and I think that's the terrifying thing.
And the normalization of the retreat coming down from the top,
both in America and then also here locally, is deepally worrying.
My only hope, and perhaps it's a bit Pollyanna of me,
is that this will be cyclical and we will swing
(02:00):
back the other way in due course. But you know,
those are marginalized communities and those that are affected by this.
It's not a good time to be alive.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
No, And you know, David was saying this morning that
he doesn't believe that under this president that it will change,
that the sort of political weaponizing of a tragedy like this,
you know, will improve, And.
Speaker 3 (02:23):
I think that's you know, yeah, yeah, I do think
it would help if the president were happily pouring gasoline
on the finals.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
I know, I mean, I think if you look at
the response from God, should we call them old school
you know, the old school politicians and previous presidents and things,
that is kind of the response we wanted or that
we were used to. Maybe maybe that's maybe it's our problem, Joe.
Maybe we're just not used to kind of being able
to push back against this kind of new rhetoric that
(02:53):
we hear.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Well, I mean, I think it is our problem in that,
you know, I think we've got a long way towards
re establishing a rational discourse. Well, we don't agree, but
we are able to communicate. If everyone was able to
step back and recognize how manipulated they are being by
disinformation systems, that where content is being intentionally created with
(03:18):
designed to elicit a particular response and designed to drive division.
And people will be listening to this and they will think, O,
Luckily I wouldn't fall for that. But I think we
are all far more vulnerable to that kind of targeted
misinformation and disinformation and selected information. And you know, the
(03:38):
absolute aim of these external operators is a reduction in
social cohesion, and that is what we are seeing. And
you know, I would say, unless you literally know the
person who's created the content online or posted or tweeted,
or exed or commented. I would stop and think, is
this an attempt to manipulate you politically or emotionally?
Speaker 2 (04:01):
Well, that's the thing, isn't it, Chris. You can find
evidence to back up your belief somewhere on the internet.
Speaker 4 (04:08):
You know, you absolutely can. And I mean, we live
in such an echo chamber these days. You know, long
gone of the days where we all sat down and
what the six pm news, where it was arguably fair
and balance. Now you find the people that are telling
you the news that you want to hear, and then
our algorithms are serving us the rest. I mean it
is very hard. You think you're a smart person and
(04:28):
you can kind of find the space, but when all
the things are yelling around you and they're saying a
particular thing, it is hard sometimes to work out what
is right and what is wrong, and very easy to
find people that believe the same thing as you and
for that to become gospel.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Because Joe I found a study that was undertaken by
the University of a Tigo and they released the information
last year, and it found a disturbing rate of abuse
and threats of violence towards New Zealand politicians. I think
that fifty four MPs took part in the research. Social
media attacks were experienced by ninety six percent. Forty percent
of those attacks included threats of physical violence, fourteen percent
(05:04):
sexual violence. And of course, you know, we've heard from
politicians themselves about how women experience, you know, misogyny and
misogynistic abuse and things. Are you concerned about, you know,
things become potentially violent here in New Zealand. I mean,
I'd like to think we're not going to get to
that point, but I don't know whether I'm being acutely naive.
Speaker 3 (05:26):
I think we have a real tendency to be naive
about this, and that's because some of these real world
implications we're not actually seeing them here in New Zealand
to the same extent. But what I would say is
what I am seeing in terms of the content I consume,
it's probably radically different to what my teenage nieces and
if you are seeing. And so I would look at
(05:48):
what younger people are seeing online, and I think we
are so much more vulnerable to those sorts of what
you might have called, you know, sticks and stones, hollow words.
They will translate into real world actions, and when that happens,
we will say I can't believe that happened.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Here, Okay, Chris. We don't want to talk specifically to
Tom Phillips and the injunction which is currently in place
over information about that case, but some of it has
been reported on the internet, and the same thing happened
in the Grace Melane's case, and suppression orders are in
place for a particular reason, but they're kind of becoming
(06:29):
futile because of social media, international publications. Then publishing information.
Should we try Should we keep trying to hold the
line when it comes suppression? Is that important or is
it futile?
Speaker 4 (06:47):
I couldn't see any further on the fence about this one.
I mean, I know personally from the way that I've
been consuming the Internet, the more you watch about the
non suppressed information, the more it comes to you, the
more mainstream it feels. It's I also find that people
around you have come from those things where people want
to tell you things that they have seen or they
haven't seen. I think when there is a situation right
(07:07):
this where there are children involved, and there is obviously
a lot going on, it is really important to be
having those suppression orders, but the ability to execute them.
I mean, it's only a matter of time, really, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
It's getting pretty tricky, isn't.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
It, Joe, Well, it is, I mean, and actually it
has been tricky for a while. I mean, this is
a few years ago now, and I'm going to talk
quite generally about it. So I don't reach any suppression orders.
But there was a public figure who was accused of
quite an unpleasant, a particularly unpleasant crime, whose name was
suppressed and I didn't know who it was. And I
just Google search something like celebrity court case and accidentally
(07:46):
hit image instead of you know, answers, and it actually
brought up a photo of the person whose name I
didn't know. I hadn't entered, And so I'm like, the
algorithm is connecting all the dots and it has no
respect for suppression orders. And I am entirely confident there
is a solution that exists and rolled out, and the
(08:07):
technology is already at that level, but I am very
cynical about whether the big tech will come to the
table to take responsibility for their role here and discuss
what that solution might look for.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
We've also got to be pretty proactive about it ourselves.
You've got to make sure that you're sending all these
suppression orders to all these global media platforms. They need
to be informed about it. I mean, we talk about
the geo blocking, but that doesn't seem to work because
you've got one and six keywi's living overseas, so you
know your daughter or your cousin or your mate will
be texting you going gosh, I've just seen this, you know,
So that doesn't work either.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Anyone who's trying to content any of the major sort
of social media companies, well, it's like shouting at clouds
what you hear back and who you connect to. And
I think that's another part of the problem too.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
But we've also seen this, Joe. You know, we do
need Google another platforms to be more responsible, but you know,
they're not bound by the rules and laws that regular
media are. And for example, going back to Charlie kirkping
shop that has been widely shared on social media, I
make decisions that I'm not going to view that stuff,
but people have said to me it just popped up
(09:11):
like I don't I didn't really, I didn't go looking
for it. I couldn't control that it's there in front
of me.
Speaker 3 (09:17):
It is being surfaced to you by an algorithm that
promotes the content that is disturbing or divisive, and I mean, honestly,
it does make you feel pretty depressed about the state
of the world.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
Just do what I do, guys, just get off the
social media. We don't need the social media. Thank you
so much. I know, Chris, I'm sorry. It's not what
a publicist wants to hear. Chris, Henry and Joe McCarroll
love me to talk to you.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
For more from the Sunday session with Francesca Rudgin. Listen
live to News Talks it'd be from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudgin
from News Talks edb.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Okay, it is time for the panel now, and I'm
joined by managing director at eight one eight Chris Henry.
Good morning, Chris, al Kyoda, and also journalist and editor
Joe McCarroll, Good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Joe, Good morning, Francisco and chras So the Swarning.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
We spoke to the Washington DC bureau chief for The Guardian,
Dave Smith, and we were just sort of getting a
bit of a sense about how Americans are feeling post
the killing, the assassination of Charlie Kirk this week. And
you know, we were talking about the fact that, you know,
America is losing the ability to exercise reasonable disagreement or
(00:47):
disagree agreeably or disagree better, whatever you want to call it,
and look at something that we are also experiencing here
in New Zealand. But are you concerned about the violent
nature of politics and America?
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Joe, I'm absolutely concerned, and I think if you're not,
you know, really think more deeply about it. I think
it's not even a rise, it's a normalization of political
violence and political assassinations. And I mean Charlie Kirk's discourse
that gun deaths were part of the price you pay
(01:22):
for having the right to carry arms. It's such, it's wild,
you know, you hear that and you think, surely not.
But I think everyone, everyone should be deeply concerned.
Speaker 2 (01:38):
What about you, Chris.
Speaker 4 (01:40):
Oh, I totally agree with your points, Joe. I think
it's coming top down, and I think that's the terrifying thing.
And the normalization of the retreat coming down from the top,
both in America and then also here locally, is deepally worrying.
My only hope, and perhaps it's a bit Pollyanna of me,
is that this will be cyclical and we will swing
(02:00):
back the other way in due course. But you know,
those are marginalized communities and those that are affected by this.
It's not a good time to be alive.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
No, And you know, David was saying this morning that
he doesn't believe that under this president that it will change,
that the sort of political weaponizing of a tragedy like this,
you know, will improve, And.
Speaker 3 (02:23):
I think that's you know, yeah, yeah, I do think
it would help if the president were happily pouring gasoline
on the finals.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
I know, I mean, I think if you look at
the response from God, should we call them old school
you know, the old school politicians and previous presidents and things,
that is kind of the response we wanted or that
we were used to. Maybe maybe that's maybe it's our problem, Joe.
Maybe we're just not used to kind of being able
to push back against this kind of new rhetoric that
(02:53):
we hear.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Well, I mean, I think it is our problem in that,
you know, I think we've got a long way towards
re establishing a rational discourse. Well, we don't agree, but
we are able to communicate. If everyone was able to
step back and recognize how manipulated they are being by
disinformation systems, that where content is being intentionally created with
(03:18):
designed to elicit a particular response and designed to drive division.
And people will be listening to this and they will think, O,
Luckily I wouldn't fall for that. But I think we
are all far more vulnerable to that kind of targeted
misinformation and disinformation and selected information. And you know, the
(03:38):
absolute aim of these external operators is a reduction in
social cohesion, and that is what we are seeing. And
you know, I would say, unless you literally know the
person who's created the content online or posted or tweeted,
or exed or commented. I would stop and think, is
this an attempt to manipulate you politically or emotionally?
Speaker 2 (04:01):
Well, that's the thing, isn't it, Chris. You can find
evidence to back up your belief somewhere on the internet.
Speaker 4 (04:08):
You know, you absolutely can. And I mean, we live
in such an echo chamber these days. You know, long
gone of the days where we all sat down and
what the six pm news, where it was arguably fair
and balance. Now you find the people that are telling
you the news that you want to hear, and then
our algorithms are serving us the rest. I mean it
is very hard. You think you're a smart person and
(04:28):
you can kind of find the space, but when all
the things are yelling around you and they're saying a
particular thing, it is hard sometimes to work out what
is right and what is wrong, and very easy to
find people that believe the same thing as you and
for that to become gospel.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Because Joe I found a study that was undertaken by
the University of a Tigo and they released the information
last year, and it found a disturbing rate of abuse
and threats of violence towards New Zealand politicians. I think
that fifty four MPs took part in the research. Social
media attacks were experienced by ninety six percent. Forty percent
of those attacks included threats of physical violence, fourteen percent
(05:04):
sexual violence. And of course, you know, we've heard from
politicians themselves about how women experience, you know, misogyny and
misogynistic abuse and things. Are you concerned about, you know,
things become potentially violent here in New Zealand. I mean,
I'd like to think we're not going to get to
that point, but I don't know whether I'm being acutely naive.
Speaker 3 (05:26):
I think we have a real tendency to be naive
about this, and that's because some of these real world
implications we're not actually seeing them here in New Zealand
to the same extent. But what I would say is
what I am seeing in terms of the content I consume,
it's probably radically different to what my teenage nieces and
if you are seeing. And so I would look at
(05:48):
what younger people are seeing online, and I think we
are so much more vulnerable to those sorts of what
you might have called, you know, sticks and stones, hollow words.
They will translate into real world actions, and when that happens,
we will say I can't believe that happened.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Here, Okay, Chris. We don't want to talk specifically to
Tom Phillips and the injunction which is currently in place
over information about that case, but some of it has
been reported on the internet, and the same thing happened
in the Grace Melane's case, and suppression orders are in
place for a particular reason, but they're kind of becoming
(06:29):
futile because of social media, international publications. Then publishing information.
Should we try Should we keep trying to hold the
line when it comes suppression? Is that important or is
it futile?
Speaker 4 (06:47):
I couldn't see any further on the fence about this one.
I mean, I know personally from the way that I've
been consuming the Internet, the more you watch about the
non suppressed information, the more it comes to you, the
more mainstream it feels. It's I also find that people
around you have come from those things where people want
to tell you things that they have seen or they
haven't seen. I think when there is a situation right
(07:07):
this where there are children involved, and there is obviously
a lot going on, it is really important to be
having those suppression orders, but the ability to execute them.
I mean, it's only a matter of time, really, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
It's getting pretty tricky, isn't.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
It, Joe, Well, it is, I mean, and actually it
has been tricky for a while. I mean, this is
a few years ago now, and I'm going to talk
quite generally about it. So I don't reach any suppression orders.
But there was a public figure who was accused of
quite an unpleasant, a particularly unpleasant crime, whose name was
suppressed and I didn't know who it was. And I
just Google search something like celebrity court case and accidentally
(07:46):
hit image instead of you know, answers, and it actually
brought up a photo of the person whose name I
didn't know. I hadn't entered, And so I'm like, the
algorithm is connecting all the dots and it has no
respect for suppression orders. And I am entirely confident there
is a solution that exists and rolled out, and the
(08:07):
technology is already at that level, but I am very
cynical about whether the big tech will come to the
table to take responsibility for their role here and discuss
what that solution might look for.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
We've also got to be pretty proactive about it ourselves.
You've got to make sure that you're sending all these
suppression orders to all these global media platforms. They need
to be informed about it. I mean, we talk about
the geo blocking, but that doesn't seem to work because
you've got one and six keywi's living overseas, so you
know your daughter or your cousin or your mate will
be texting you going gosh, I've just seen this, you know,
So that doesn't work either.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Anyone who's trying to content any of the major sort
of social media companies, well, it's like shouting at clouds
what you hear back and who you connect to. And
I think that's another part of the problem too.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
But we've also seen this, Joe. You know, we do
need Google another platforms to be more responsible, but you know,
they're not bound by the rules and laws that regular
media are. And for example, going back to Charlie kirkping
shop that has been widely shared on social media, I
make decisions that I'm not going to view that stuff,
but people have said to me it just popped up
(09:11):
like I don't I didn't really, I didn't go looking
for it. I couldn't control that it's there in front
of me.
Speaker 3 (09:17):
It is being surfaced to you by an algorithm that
promotes the content that is disturbing or divisive, and I mean, honestly,
it does make you feel pretty depressed about the state
of the world.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
Just do what I do, guys, just get off the
social media. We don't need the social media. Thank you
so much. I know, Chris, I'm sorry. It's not what
a publicist wants to hear. Chris, Henry and Joe McCarroll
love me to talk to you.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
For more from the Sunday session with Francesca Rudgin. Listen
live to News Talks it'd be from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.