September 22, 2025 • 12 mins
THE BEST BITS IN A SILLIER PACKAGE (from Tuesday's Mike Hosking Breakfast) If it Doesn't Matter, Why Not Do It?/You Can't Bank Morals/Nothing Worse Than No Access to Food/The Media Really Are Useless
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 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from News Talk sed B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
There and welcome it to the rewrap for Tuesday. All
the best, but it's from the Myclasting Breakfast on Newstalk
SEDB in a sillier package. I agree in art today,
Jimmy Kimmel's back again. So remember he wasn't sack, he
was just suspended. So I guess that meant that they
could bring it back wherever. It turns out that's happened
(00:47):
quite quickly, so you'll be back tomorrow. We don't have
access enough access to food for our kids apparently, and
the New Zealand media are terrible. But before any of that, Palestine,
Why is it so hard for some countries to recognize
them when other countries can recognize it straight away and
(01:08):
doesn't make any difference anyway, A.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Couple of simple questions I have for you about the
recognition of Palestine. How come the media are so obsessed
about it given most of the country isn't. We had
a poll here the other week. Forty percent think we
should announce recognition. The rest i e. The majority say
we shouldn't or we don't know, They don't knows are
a very big number. In fact, do you know why?
Because we've got bigger fish to fry and it makes
no difference. It simply isn't on the radar of most
(01:31):
of us as an immediate actionable thing. The number in
Australia is actually even lower. You may have noticed yesterday
we asked the Prime Minister about a whole bunch of
stuff on this program that I would regard as more important,
things like power generation, pending announcements around reform, dumping of
product onto New Zealand markets by China, fast tracked decisions.
But it was his once again noncommittal comments to palace
(01:52):
design that our newsroom decided to pick up and run with.
There's a massive disconnect between the media and what increasingly
looks like their obsession and Middle New Zealand, who are
currently more exercised. I bet about the school holidays last
week post cabinet. You had to see it. The journalists
questioning only came to life, in fact, came almost hysterical
when Palestine was raised, almost as though there is one
(02:13):
single issue facing New Zealand in twenty twenty five. Now.
To be fair, the government haven't helped themselves. Dithering, which
is what they've done, doesn't help the media's obsession ruler
and ruler that get on with it. You cannot tell me.
Winston's busy ferreting around the un corridors as we speak,
looking for late breaking takes on an issue that's remained
and will remain unresolved for decades. Clearly, the National Party,
(02:36):
the New Zealand First Party, the Act Party views differ
and they've got to drum up some sort of deal.
I mean that's MMP. But honestly, what we say and
when we say it changes nothing never was going to
part of the news in its coverage, and here's the problem.
Part of its news in its coverage is to look
through the moment. It's more than just the hero and
now where does the decision take us? What changes? What
(02:57):
are the material outcomes in this case? On this issue,
it's nothing, nothing, nothing and nothing. It's always been nothing.
It's the mole hill that got turned into a mountain
and drey far too much energy in the process.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
It is as though some countries have sort of got
international face blindness on this, you know that condition that
is a brad I think it's Brad who has it
he can't remember people by looking at them, doesn't recognize them.
Apparently that's a thing, and I guess it can work
with whole countries as well.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
So we wrap.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
Speaking of famous faces, Jimmy Kimmel's face hasn't been on
screens so far this week. Really, he's only had one
chance to be there. But tomorrow he'll be back.
Speaker 3 (03:47):
Here's why Kimmel's back as of tomorrow night. So that's
a that's a major the theory or thinking has just
literally been announced. But the theory is that Disney they were
taking such a hit from cancel subscriptions billions of dollars,
so they panicked. Business is funny, isn't it? What happened
to morals and business? So what happened to the morals
of the business when initial they decided to pull them
(04:10):
because they were under threat from the what's it called
the CIA, whatever the hell the federal FAA. So where
were the morals then? And then all of a sudden,
the bottom lines set? Where are the morals now? So
I mean, what is they're backing free speech then to
free speech and not really, well, they're into the bottom line.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
You can't bang morals, mate, you.
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Can't think no, that is free. You can't. You can't
get an overdraft of morals right. He is from Disney,
which ownes ABC. Jimmy Kimmel Live would return. Show would
resume tomorrow. Last Wednesday we made the decision to suspend production.
We got the two and two confirmation on two for
act on to the New Zealand first yet we have okay,
it's two and two. So last Wednesday we made the
(04:50):
decision to suspend production on the show to avoid further
inflaming a tent situation and an emotional moment for our country.
It's a decision we made because we felt some of
the comments were ill timed and thus insensitive. Really so
we're just pulling television shows off when we're a bit
and sensitive? Are? We mean?
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Give me a break too soon?
Speaker 3 (05:06):
Does anyone believe this crap? We've spent the last days
having thoughtful conversations with Jimmy. What they mean is his
lawyers have been hounding us the whole time, and after
those conversations, we reached the decision to return the show Tuesday. Previously,
of course, they said he would have to publicly apologize.
(05:26):
I assume he's not going to do that because he
didn't really do anything about outrageous and we all know it.
And that's the difficulty of all of this.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
I guess that's interesting. The interesting question will be viewership.
Do you reckon more people watched the Charlie Kirk memorial
service or we'll tune in for Jimmy Kimmel's opening monologue.
We'll have to wait and see. Right, So, heaps of
(05:58):
our kids don't have access to food or the right food.
But what's going on here?
Speaker 3 (06:05):
More than a quarter of kids are struggling for food,
That's what the Selles told us yesterday. More than the
court of kids are struggling for food. They talk of
food security. It's bad, according to the Sellis, and it's
getting worse. Are they telling us over a quarter of kids?
Twenty seven percent of kids to be precise, can't get food? Now,
the definition they use is the United Nations one people
having access to safe and nutritious food towards a healthy life. Now,
(06:29):
that's the problem with people like the Sellies quoting groups
like the United Nations. What the UN mean in that
circumstance is the sort of food security you have in Gaza?
I eat none, or floodplain regions or drought prime regions.
That definition is not designed for wealthy First World countries,
of which we are one. So I feel the selles
are mis interpreting what the UN means and using it
(06:50):
for political purposes, i e. The idea that we can't
get access to food. They then claim or make some
claims around cost, which is of course different to access,
although I suppose technically cost can prevent access in the
sense you can't afford it. They cite meat, dairy, food,
and vegetables as part of what's gone wrong. But just
quickly they argue, and this is the really dangerous part
(07:11):
that the food we sell to the world, This is
their push, the food we sell to the world should
be prioritized first to locals. Here they don't for a
moment suggest who would pay for that, although I'm guessing
they think the government. Yet again, so the major income
earner for the country should be adjusted until we all
get the meat and butter that we want. Is that
what they're saying? Anyway, they claim on dairy meat and vege, dairy, yes,
(07:33):
we know why that's actually good for the country. Meat well,
that can be expensive, doesn't have to be that expensive,
and fruit and vegetables is actually not as they claim
up in price. In fact, if we look at the
latest numbers, a lot of it's down, and any given
season fruit and vegetables can in fact be a bargain.
Of course, So the upshot of their plea is it
is as always driven by a motion, not fact. And
(07:54):
to be blunt, I don't actually believe in excess of
a quarter of all kids in this country don't get food.
Do you believe that? Do you believe that twenty seven
percent of kids in this country don't get access to food?
Part of it, of course, will be bad parenting and
bad choices. To solve a problem, you see, if there is,
in deed a problem at all, you need fact and
an understanding of the fact, and logical sensible solutions, not
a motive clickbait alarmism that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
It's easy for him to say, I know what it's
like to be kept from food, restrict the access to food,
because I'm doing that at the moment. I've got about
twenty kilos at least to lose. What were we talking about?
This is the problem, you see? I get brain fogged
and I can't concentrate.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Anymore the rerap.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Maybe that's the problem with these media people. Mike seems
to love hating on so much.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Speaking of the media, just a couple of things that
I need to inform you, but be get your feedback on.
So the Prime Minister's Office, i read in the Herald
this morning, is refusing to release communications between Christopher Luxen
and an individual associated with Travis Kelce. This goes back
to the wedding announcement, the engagement announcement, when Luxon said
(09:07):
there's no better place than you see them to hold
their wedding or have their honeymoon Kelsey and Tata. He
said in a speech, this is lux and one of
my best friends in America is actually in business with Travis.
So the Herald requested that communication with Kelsey's business partner
under the Official Information Act. My question, my main question
here is is that an abuse of the Official Information Act.
I mean, honestly, one of the problems you have with
(09:27):
the Official Information Act in this country is getting access
to information. And part of the argument is they all
argue they be snowed under, and they're snowed under with
a sort of crap, So the guy said, you know,
it was a nice thing to do. Anyway, the Prime
minist As office said they're refusing it because the communications
referenced in the media was seen and received by Luxon
in his capacity as a private individual, not as a
(09:49):
Prime minister, which seems legit, but really, I mean we
just officially information grabbing everything.
Speaker 2 (09:55):
These being stupid and pointless, the same as abusing.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
It's not a bad question. We'll have some thoughtful conversations
about it, Glenn to see if we're here tomorrow. Independent
review by the way, by Television News this is the
one to really get you racked up this morning. So
are they biased? Is TVNZ news biased? No, that's official
because they've done their independent review this morning, only minor issues,
no evidence of systemic bias or lack of impartiality. They
(10:22):
are also refusing to I hope the hero is listening
to this. They're refusing to release the report, so obviously
the Herald will be straight onto the Official Information Act.
The review includes comment on specific TV employees, TV and
Z employees, so they don't want that release into the
public domain. It was done by a former ABC and
SBS executive guy called Alan Sunderland, who I know, not
of him. The review took place over a seven day period,
(10:43):
which doesn't sound particularly comprehensive to me seven days, but anyway,
be that as it may. Here's my main point. The
point is this, if you believe TV one is biased,
you believe TV one is biased, and no one called
Allen is going to write a report to change your mind,
is it really? If you've decided, you've decided. So One
then wonders, what was the point of the report so
(11:04):
that we can all sit around and go, yes they
are no, they're not. Yes they are, no, they're not. Well,
well what about that time they were that? Well, yeah
that was that's true. But no, it's not that bad,
isn't it.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
I think the problem with TVAN is wouldn't we like
it to be a little bit more biased sometimes actually
have a point of view about things. I mentioned it
in news Talks had been earlier today, which I'm sure
you've already listened to. It's the other podcast that's appointment
viewing and listening, and I don't think you really want
(11:36):
to look at it while it's playing, but definitely appointment listening.
It's like this, but it doesn't have as much Mike,
and it's got more of everybody else in it. Anyway.
On that this morning, I said that weirdly, I saw
some of One News last night I don't normally watch,
but somebody else in the house put it on, and
they literally asked a girl who appeared to be about
(11:59):
nine years old. I'm guessing what she thought about if
the government should recognize palace or not. And at that
point I thought I was making the I'm making the
right decision not watching this program. Go back to my
aliens and my car chases and secret agents and my explosions,
(12:21):
and I'll see you back here and get into work.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
You're listening to a podcast from News Talk sed B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
There and welcome it to the rewrap for Tuesday. All
the best, but it's from the Myclasting Breakfast on Newstalk
SEDB in a sillier package. I agree in art today,
Jimmy Kimmel's back again. So remember he wasn't sack, he
was just suspended. So I guess that meant that they
could bring it back wherever. It turns out that's happened
(00:47):
quite quickly, so you'll be back tomorrow. We don't have
access enough access to food for our kids apparently, and
the New Zealand media are terrible. But before any of that, Palestine,
Why is it so hard for some countries to recognize
them when other countries can recognize it straight away and
(01:08):
doesn't make any difference anyway, A.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Couple of simple questions I have for you about the
recognition of Palestine. How come the media are so obsessed
about it given most of the country isn't. We had
a poll here the other week. Forty percent think we
should announce recognition. The rest i e. The majority say
we shouldn't or we don't know, They don't knows are
a very big number. In fact, do you know why?
Because we've got bigger fish to fry and it makes
no difference. It simply isn't on the radar of most
(01:31):
of us as an immediate actionable thing. The number in
Australia is actually even lower. You may have noticed yesterday
we asked the Prime Minister about a whole bunch of
stuff on this program that I would regard as more important,
things like power generation, pending announcements around reform, dumping of
product onto New Zealand markets by China, fast tracked decisions.
But it was his once again noncommittal comments to palace
(01:52):
design that our newsroom decided to pick up and run with.
There's a massive disconnect between the media and what increasingly
looks like their obsession and Middle New Zealand, who are
currently more exercised. I bet about the school holidays last
week post cabinet. You had to see it. The journalists
questioning only came to life, in fact, came almost hysterical
when Palestine was raised, almost as though there is one
(02:13):
single issue facing New Zealand in twenty twenty five. Now.
To be fair, the government haven't helped themselves. Dithering, which
is what they've done, doesn't help the media's obsession ruler
and ruler that get on with it. You cannot tell me.
Winston's busy ferreting around the un corridors as we speak,
looking for late breaking takes on an issue that's remained
and will remain unresolved for decades. Clearly, the National Party,
(02:36):
the New Zealand First Party, the Act Party views differ
and they've got to drum up some sort of deal.
I mean that's MMP. But honestly, what we say and
when we say it changes nothing never was going to
part of the news in its coverage, and here's the problem.
Part of its news in its coverage is to look
through the moment. It's more than just the hero and
now where does the decision take us? What changes? What
(02:57):
are the material outcomes in this case? On this issue,
it's nothing, nothing, nothing and nothing. It's always been nothing.
It's the mole hill that got turned into a mountain
and drey far too much energy in the process.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
It is as though some countries have sort of got
international face blindness on this, you know that condition that
is a brad I think it's Brad who has it
he can't remember people by looking at them, doesn't recognize them.
Apparently that's a thing, and I guess it can work
with whole countries as well.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
So we wrap.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
Speaking of famous faces, Jimmy Kimmel's face hasn't been on
screens so far this week. Really, he's only had one
chance to be there. But tomorrow he'll be back.
Speaker 3 (03:47):
Here's why Kimmel's back as of tomorrow night. So that's
a that's a major the theory or thinking has just
literally been announced. But the theory is that Disney they were
taking such a hit from cancel subscriptions billions of dollars,
so they panicked. Business is funny, isn't it? What happened
to morals and business? So what happened to the morals
of the business when initial they decided to pull them
(04:10):
because they were under threat from the what's it called
the CIA, whatever the hell the federal FAA. So where
were the morals then? And then all of a sudden,
the bottom lines set? Where are the morals now? So
I mean, what is they're backing free speech then to
free speech and not really, well, they're into the bottom line.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
You can't bang morals, mate, you.
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Can't think no, that is free. You can't. You can't
get an overdraft of morals right. He is from Disney,
which ownes ABC. Jimmy Kimmel Live would return. Show would
resume tomorrow. Last Wednesday we made the decision to suspend production.
We got the two and two confirmation on two for
act on to the New Zealand first yet we have okay,
it's two and two. So last Wednesday we made the
(04:50):
decision to suspend production on the show to avoid further
inflaming a tent situation and an emotional moment for our country.
It's a decision we made because we felt some of
the comments were ill timed and thus insensitive. Really so
we're just pulling television shows off when we're a bit
and sensitive? Are? We mean?
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Give me a break too soon?
Speaker 3 (05:06):
Does anyone believe this crap? We've spent the last days
having thoughtful conversations with Jimmy. What they mean is his
lawyers have been hounding us the whole time, and after
those conversations, we reached the decision to return the show Tuesday. Previously,
of course, they said he would have to publicly apologize.
(05:26):
I assume he's not going to do that because he
didn't really do anything about outrageous and we all know it.
And that's the difficulty of all of this.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
I guess that's interesting. The interesting question will be viewership.
Do you reckon more people watched the Charlie Kirk memorial
service or we'll tune in for Jimmy Kimmel's opening monologue.
We'll have to wait and see. Right, So, heaps of
(05:58):
our kids don't have access to food or the right food.
But what's going on here?
Speaker 3 (06:05):
More than a quarter of kids are struggling for food,
That's what the Selles told us yesterday. More than the
court of kids are struggling for food. They talk of
food security. It's bad, according to the Sellis, and it's
getting worse. Are they telling us over a quarter of kids?
Twenty seven percent of kids to be precise, can't get food? Now,
the definition they use is the United Nations one people
having access to safe and nutritious food towards a healthy life. Now,
(06:29):
that's the problem with people like the Sellies quoting groups
like the United Nations. What the UN mean in that
circumstance is the sort of food security you have in Gaza?
I eat none, or floodplain regions or drought prime regions.
That definition is not designed for wealthy First World countries,
of which we are one. So I feel the selles
are mis interpreting what the UN means and using it
(06:50):
for political purposes, i e. The idea that we can't
get access to food. They then claim or make some
claims around cost, which is of course different to access,
although I suppose technically cost can prevent access in the
sense you can't afford it. They cite meat, dairy, food,
and vegetables as part of what's gone wrong. But just
quickly they argue, and this is the really dangerous part
(07:11):
that the food we sell to the world, This is
their push, the food we sell to the world should
be prioritized first to locals. Here they don't for a
moment suggest who would pay for that, although I'm guessing
they think the government. Yet again, so the major income
earner for the country should be adjusted until we all
get the meat and butter that we want. Is that
what they're saying? Anyway, they claim on dairy meat and vege, dairy, yes,
(07:33):
we know why that's actually good for the country. Meat well,
that can be expensive, doesn't have to be that expensive,
and fruit and vegetables is actually not as they claim
up in price. In fact, if we look at the
latest numbers, a lot of it's down, and any given
season fruit and vegetables can in fact be a bargain.
Of course, So the upshot of their plea is it
is as always driven by a motion, not fact. And
(07:54):
to be blunt, I don't actually believe in excess of
a quarter of all kids in this country don't get food.
Do you believe that? Do you believe that twenty seven
percent of kids in this country don't get access to food?
Part of it, of course, will be bad parenting and
bad choices. To solve a problem, you see, if there is,
in deed a problem at all, you need fact and
an understanding of the fact, and logical sensible solutions, not
a motive clickbait alarmism that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
It's easy for him to say, I know what it's
like to be kept from food, restrict the access to food,
because I'm doing that at the moment. I've got about
twenty kilos at least to lose. What were we talking about?
This is the problem, you see? I get brain fogged
and I can't concentrate.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Anymore the rerap.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Maybe that's the problem with these media people. Mike seems
to love hating on so much.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Speaking of the media, just a couple of things that
I need to inform you, but be get your feedback on.
So the Prime Minister's Office, i read in the Herald
this morning, is refusing to release communications between Christopher Luxen
and an individual associated with Travis Kelce. This goes back
to the wedding announcement, the engagement announcement, when Luxon said
(09:07):
there's no better place than you see them to hold
their wedding or have their honeymoon Kelsey and Tata. He
said in a speech, this is lux and one of
my best friends in America is actually in business with Travis.
So the Herald requested that communication with Kelsey's business partner
under the Official Information Act. My question, my main question
here is is that an abuse of the Official Information Act.
I mean, honestly, one of the problems you have with
(09:27):
the Official Information Act in this country is getting access
to information. And part of the argument is they all
argue they be snowed under, and they're snowed under with
a sort of crap, So the guy said, you know,
it was a nice thing to do. Anyway, the Prime
minist As office said they're refusing it because the communications
referenced in the media was seen and received by Luxon
in his capacity as a private individual, not as a
(09:49):
Prime minister, which seems legit, but really, I mean we
just officially information grabbing everything.
Speaker 2 (09:55):
These being stupid and pointless, the same as abusing.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
It's not a bad question. We'll have some thoughtful conversations
about it, Glenn to see if we're here tomorrow. Independent
review by the way, by Television News this is the
one to really get you racked up this morning. So
are they biased? Is TVNZ news biased? No, that's official
because they've done their independent review this morning, only minor issues,
no evidence of systemic bias or lack of impartiality. They
(10:22):
are also refusing to I hope the hero is listening
to this. They're refusing to release the report, so obviously
the Herald will be straight onto the Official Information Act.
The review includes comment on specific TV employees, TV and
Z employees, so they don't want that release into the
public domain. It was done by a former ABC and
SBS executive guy called Alan Sunderland, who I know, not
of him. The review took place over a seven day period,
(10:43):
which doesn't sound particularly comprehensive to me seven days, but anyway,
be that as it may. Here's my main point. The
point is this, if you believe TV one is biased,
you believe TV one is biased, and no one called
Allen is going to write a report to change your mind,
is it really? If you've decided, you've decided. So One
then wonders, what was the point of the report so
(11:04):
that we can all sit around and go, yes they
are no, they're not. Yes they are, no, they're not. Well,
well what about that time they were that? Well, yeah
that was that's true. But no, it's not that bad,
isn't it.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
I think the problem with TVAN is wouldn't we like
it to be a little bit more biased sometimes actually
have a point of view about things. I mentioned it
in news Talks had been earlier today, which I'm sure
you've already listened to. It's the other podcast that's appointment
viewing and listening, and I don't think you really want
(11:36):
to look at it while it's playing, but definitely appointment listening.
It's like this, but it doesn't have as much Mike,
and it's got more of everybody else in it. Anyway.
On that this morning, I said that weirdly, I saw
some of One News last night I don't normally watch,
but somebody else in the house put it on, and
they literally asked a girl who appeared to be about
(11:59):
nine years old. I'm guessing what she thought about if
the government should recognize palace or not. And at that
point I thought I was making the I'm making the
right decision not watching this program. Go back to my
aliens and my car chases and secret agents and my explosions,
(12:21):
and I'll see you back here and get into work.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.