I feel badly for Matthew Hooton. A year ago, he was still the undisputed king of preoccupation for liberal media types. It was his criticism of the government which had the Twitter set demanding he be silenced, locked up or at least banned from RNZ.

But Hooton is no longer the king of Jacindamaniac ire.

Instead, it seems to be Mike Hosking whose every utterance now causes the rending of garments. Once mere background noise, the Newstalk ZB presenter is now the subject of never ending lamentation. Mostly by people who keep claiming to be totally uninterested in what he has to say, naturally.

His evolving views on the COVID 19 crisis was the subject of amateur psychological analysis on the left-leaning Mediawatch the other week, as if he was the only commentator with any inconsistency on these questions. Leftwing tweeter after leftwing tweeter declared they would rather see journalism burn to the ground before they subscribe to the Herald so long as its website includes any Hosking content.

Hooton can still rile up the deranged, of course. His recent article about the need to balance economic justice and public health saw him accused of being a eugenicist (by people who have largely just cheered on the legalisation if eugenic abortion). But such convoluted criticisms just lack the punch to sustain the daily two-minute hate.

I’m not a listener of Hosking’s show and I don’t tend to read his opinion pieces. I prefer the style of others and I don’t really think I’m his audience. Fortunately there’s lots of choice out there and nobody actually has to read things they don’t like reading.

I am not going to go back and listen to his radio show, but I’ve checked out a few of his more recent writings under “Latest from Mike Hosking” on the Herald website.

You wouldn’t call them think pieces, exactly. There’s not a lot of analysis in them. And for that reason I personally much prefer Matthew Hooton, who is currently working towards a PhD in philosophy. But Hosking is hardly alone in using that style.

I can see why people think they’re pretty partisan and predictable. Especially if they’re given a purposively uncharitable reading. But if that was a crime we’d be locking up a lot of pundits, frankly. 

But I guess the thing that most disappoints me about the switch from Hooton to Hosking in the derangement stakes is how much more boring it is now. Hosking doesn’t tweet. His last tweet was about the Warriors back when Barack Obama was president. If there are any signs that Hosking cares about liberal obsession with him I can’t see them.

Hooton, on the other hand, well, he mixed it up. Ridiculous criticisms and the critics who made them were ruthlessly mocked. And while their preoccupation was just as silly and unbecoming, the prospect of pushback at least made the haters better haters.

Tennis players rising to the level of their opponents and all that.

Still, I guess there can only ever be one bogeyman. Hosking has the more flamboyant blazers of the two and that can be interesting I guess. So at least there’s that.