They changed their minds because the story was false, case closed!

Does anyone (other than committed lefties) really believe Key wants to see wages fall ? Obviously a beat-up story.

"(EPMU) National secretary Andrew Little has just issued a statement accusing National of muzzling the press" - he seems far more incensed at this than the fact the EPMU has been (at least temporarily) muzzled by his comrades' Electoral Finance Act, funny that...

Colin - I think that any hoo-haa over this would make sense if there was anything in the original story, but you say yourself 'I doubt very much Key did mean to say he wanted Kiwi wages to drop' so what on earth is wrong with an organisation making strong representations about the Bay Report continuing to push the story?

Now if JK had been taped spending 10 minutes outlining his strategy to dump all the 'window dressing' center right policies once he'd been elected and replace them with a platform based around the wishes of the far right, AND had been reported as saying such, AND had denied that, AND the Nats had pressured the holding company to shut the little man up THEN there would be a story.

As it is what you've got is:

- JK makes a clear verbal error which doesn't make sense in the wider context of what he said.

- Someone tries to make that into a big story. (And who's to blame the unknown local journalist? It could be a way to get his name known more widely, and a step up in a difficult industry.) - JK tries to give some sort of explanation for what he hadn't realised he'd done in the first place. Not surprisingly he has several stabs at this. As he didn't know he'd done it, how could he really know why he did it in the first place?

- The Bay Report doesn't let up. And others join in try to make it into something more than it really is (presumably to try to damage National because the media really need a much closer gap by the time the campaign proper starts so that they can portray it as 'head to head'.)

- JK gets p155ed off.

- Someone puts on a bit of pressure.

Sorry - I can't really see the problem here.

I may be cynical, but I think it's down to the fact that you need to try to balance stories that are detrimental to Labour with those that are harmful to National so that you don't get accused of supporting one side over the other. Unfortunately at the moment that's proving very difficult for you as Labour seems to have a death wish and has pushed the self destruct button...

This is extraordinary. The <I>Bay Report</I> quoted Key accurately, faithfully, and in context, and let his words speak for themselves. Any "impression" is due to Key, not the <I>Bay Report</I>. So why are they apologising?

Yes the story was false BUT did it stop LABOUR from verbally abusing KEY NO.

As far as I am concerned it is LABOUR MPs and supporters with EGG on their faces and you can bet there will be NO apology from any of that bunch.

I SAY Call an election NOW!

Update: The Bay Report has now been published. Here is the correction:

"Point of clarification. An article published by the Bay Report on 20 December may have left readers with the impression that National Party leader John Key wanted a drop in New Zealand wages.

"From an examination of the transcript of the interview, and the context of the comments made by Mr Key in relation to the loss of skilled workers from New Zealand to Australia, The Bay Report now accepts that was not intended and that impression would be incorrect.

"The newspaper acknowledges that its news report was based on part of a conversation between president of the local Kerikeri Business Association Carolyne Brooks-Quan and Mr Key.

"Mr Key accepts the Bay Report reporter did not act with malice or intent.''

Interesting. The transcript is presumably the same one the paper previously said was OK. It's clear there has been some to-and-fro between Key's office and the newspaper over this correction.

For the record, the Herald's gallery office tells me it got hold of the correction via its own sources, and not through APN management.

Colin, It might be more useful to have put up the whole paragraph following the "we would love to see wages drop" line. It makes clear that when he then talks about wages rising he means only when productivity rises, he also talks about getting the inflationary element out of wages - ie. wages won't increase with inflation, and so will go down in real terms.

The full quotation can be found at the Standard. http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=1214

".....and whose editorials haven’t had a good word to say about the Government in over a year."

Probably Colin because there has not been anything good to say about the Government for at least a year - except by die hard socialists.

Also was the transcript ever released by the Bay Report? I think perhaps you are trying to see some smoke where there is none.

Eddie, Yes I agree that Key's 'I'd Love To See Wages Drop' statement was taken out of context, however this is not a one off occurrence for the media and I don't see them running out clarifications on how they stuffed up on other recent stories.

Having a go at the media is never a great idea, even Winston doesn't seem to get any decent mileage out of it these days, so for National to go to the point of extracting such a turnaround from the Bay proves that this particular issue is a real problem for them. Which of course it is! They are at pains here to continue to try and hide the fact that they are NOT the party of the people and NOT really concerned about your wages.

The only concrete statement we get from Key during the debacle is some ambiguous tripe about raising 'productivity'. In other words, we'll give the employers the reward and rely on them to filter it down to the workers.

I'd say what has happened here is APN has weighed in on the Bay and reminded it to get back on message. The Herald running the story before it's even happened is proof enough of meddling from above...