Foolishness - Martin Devlin, Devlin Live, Radio Live

Martin Devlin's breakfast show on Radio Live is of extremely poor quality. Devlin often doesn't understand the issues at hand, makes ridiculous claims, focuses on irrelevant points and splurts out stupid offensive remarks he thinks are funny (he makes homosexual jokes for god's sake). These aren't the only problems of course, he lacks a long list of characteristics any quality compere should have. During the so-called media 'silly season' over summer I remember Lindsay Perigo filling in on the Radio Live breakfast slot. Now I'm not a Perigo fan, but it was such an incredibly pleasant change to have an intelligent, lively and focused individual on in place of Devlin, I simply had to e-mail Radio Live demanding Perigo be put on the breakfast slot permanently. Of course, no one listened. And weekday after weekday I continue to be dismayed at Devlin's persistent broadcasts from 6am - 9am. Today, I received a perfect example of how terrible this man actually is at his job (hence the post). A reader sent me a brief e-mail critique she/he sent to Devlin and the two replies subsequently received. I am relieved there are others out there fighting to keep the Devlins of this world away from the public microphone. And here it is, for your reading pleasure, a perfect example of why Devlin doesn't meet the standards of a good radio host in our pluralistic democratic society: (I won't put up Devlin's e-mails without permission, that'd be a bit unethical. But I will make a brief note of the substance of his reply) ------------------------ From: XXX Sent: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 9:13 a.m. To: Martin Devlin Subject: Prebble interview. Just listened to your interview with Mark Prebble. God you're a dimwit Mr. Devlin. ------------------------ Martin Devlin sends an e-mail asking for the listener to 'extrapolate' himself. ----------------------------------- From: XXX Sent: Thursday, 18 May 2006 10:30 a.m. To: Martin Devlin Subject: Re: Prebble interview. Okay, you asked for a reply - fair enough. I hope you honour your challenge and read this on air. * You stated "there has been a $2b mistake here" and "the consequence is the most serious economic disaster for a company ever in New Zealand". Clearly, the money was not wiped off as a result of the leak. Telecom's shares lost value because the government removed their effective monopoly over the local loop. Had it not been for the leak, the shares would most likely have plummeted by $2b today after the budget announcement. So to say that the leak cost $2b is either disingenuous or stupid - take your pick. * You focused a good part of the interview arguing whether the leaked document on unbundling was the "most sensitive commercial document that the country has ever seen" and, even more hysterically, that it was "bigger than probably every other document that has been in that office". Aside from being largely irrelevant to the case at hand, such a claim is dubious at best, especially considering that we as private citizens don't know what kind of documents go through cabinet. * You insisted that a messenger should not have been allowed to handle sensitive documents, but as Prebble points out, these people are employed precisely to handle such documents. Any system relies on a certain level of trust. * You tried to draw a distinction between Maatern Wevers 'offering his resignation' and 'tendering his resignation'. Prebble was quite right when he said "that's complete nonsense". The question was idiotic. I refer you to the Merriam Webster dictionary's definition of 'tender': tender Main Entry: 3tender Function: verb Inflected Form(s): ten·dered; ten·der·ing 1 : to make a tender of 2 : to present for acceptance : OFFER * You implied quite clearly that Mark Prebble - the State Services Commissioner - is a spin doctor for the Labour government. The reality is that he is a highly respected public servant, well known for his record of impartiality. * When you introduced Gerry Brownlee as "the National Party's a-opposite...their State Services spokesperson", implying that Prebble is a minister in the Labour government. Technically, Prebble is a public servant, and hence a neutral servant for the government of the day. To call this into question is a serious charge, and one that deserves a bit more thought than your flippant remark. * Your interview with Gerry Brownlee was ridiculously soft. Why weren't you as critical of his claims as you were of Prebble's? Why didn't you ask him what a National government would have done differently, or how he could possibly talk given National's recent embarrassment over leaks? You again referred to Prebble as a 'spin doctor'. You repeated the nonsense about the leak itself costing $2b. Look Devlin, I'm sure you're a swell guy, but I think your ignorant sports jock stylings are unsuited to serious political commentary and are actually harming our democracy. You constantly make stupid, biased and uninformed claims. You make grievous fuckups on a regular basis, and I'm sick of it. Here are two examples (there are plenty more): * Your treatment of people with mental health issues is disgraceful, discriminatory and not in line with the accepted research on the issue. The "baked beans horsey lala" comments in particular were a new low in shock jock journalism. * A couple of months back you referred to Transpower as 'a government department' when it's clearly an SOE, and complained that it shouldn't be having a dispute with the Electricity Commission because 'they're both government departments'. This showed a laughable lack of understanding about the regulatory regime for electricity. And don't give me the line that I don't have to listen to your show. If I didn't have to listen to your show for my job then I wouldn't. I mean, come on, I mean, Paul Holmes beat you at the Broadcasting Awards for God's sake! All I'm asking is that you do a bit more research and try to be a bit more balanced. If you can't manage that, then I suggest you move on so a proper journalist can take your place. Kind regards, XXX ------------------------------ Devlin tells the listener he knows more about the Telecom leak than he'll ever know about. He doesn't make reference to any other point of the critique. ------------------------------ I don't necessarily agree with all the points made by the listener, but most readers will be able to agree she/he does make good points which deserve an answer. If Devlin can't perform the responsibilities he as a radio host has been entrusted with, then it's about time he made way for someone who can.