A column containing acidic opinions about a powerful political media personality mysteriously fails to show up on the author's regular spot on her newspaper's website. Another major news outlet, after allowing criticisms to be made of the same public figure on one of its shows, hurriedly issues a grovelling clarification. Does this sound like a case Nicky Hager ought to be investigating?

It would indeed if it weren't the slightly inconvenient fact that the media power broker in question also happens to be the same gent.

The country's best-known left-wing activist, with a notable flair for inserting himself and his latest conspiracy theories into general election campaigns, has been making news again recently with his "revelation" that National Party leader John Key uses a mainstream public relations company that is known to have worked on several elections abroad. Worse, according to Hager, the same Australian agency is known to rely on focus groups to help find out what voters want.

What's more, the firm had even been "employed to manage Key's public image and political strategy since he became leader."

Just fancy that.

Even by the usual standards of this self-appointed scourge of the capitalist establishment in general and foe of the PR business, it all seems pretty puzzling stuff. So Key has employed "political tacticians" to better hone his message? Oh, and the Canberra-based firm he uses also happens to be the same one used recently in London for Conservative candidate Boris Johnson's successful mayoral campaign.

Since when did the presentation of such humdrum items constitute news of the first order?

And why, some in the mainstream media are finally starting to wonder, is the work of Hager in publishing them being treated with uncritical reverence by many otherwise sensible political reporters?

Part of the answer to the last question probably lies in his impressive work in the past. Earlier this decade, Hager performed something of a public service in ferreting out hard-to-get information about the cold war-era electronic system known as Echelon, which among other things can be used to snoop on people's email.

One had to respect, if not always appreciate the shrill moral tone of, the activist's heartfelt belief in people's right to go about their lawful business without having their correspondence ransacked in such a fashion, as well as (another big theme) Hager's concern at the lack of media scrutiny some in public life to often seem to enjoy.

Lately, though, it has become increasingly clear that Hager rather exempts himself from some of the rules he insists others live by.

Snooping on private email is therefore not okay - except when Hager's crusade du jour demands it, as was most infamously the case with his use of purloined correspondence as the basis for his book The Hollow Men .

Scrutiny of public figures is also always to be encouraged - unless the object under media scrutiny happens to be Nicky Hager.

Immediately after the activist's latest expose, for instance, Radio New Zealand made room for two of its political commentators, Laila Harre and Matthew Hooton, to hold an on-air discussion about the case. Not surprisingly, Harre praised the work while Hooton was critical of the ongoing surveillance of the National Party by "the Patricia Bartlett of New Zealand politics,” in particular with his troubling use of private email.

The conversation didn't seem any big deal until shortly afterwards when the state broadcaster, reportedly at Hager's behest, issued a public grovel: "We accept Nicky Hager's continued assurances that he did not steal the emails which were published in his book The Hollow Men - Radio New Zealand apologises to Nicky Hager for comments which asserted the position was otherwise."

As blogger David Farrar later noted, it would have been a much better idea for Radio New Zealand to resist Hager and his legal advisers and insist on a defamation trial in which the plaintiff would be cross-examined at length on his sources.

Meanwhile at the Dominion Post, veteran journalist Rosemary McLeod was also cocking an eyebrow at Hager's increasingly outraged revelations about local politics.

When it comes to media manipulation and spin, McLeod wrote, "I rather think Hager is the ultimate exponent. He is so adored by the media that his claims are never seriously critiqued, and his every word is raptly hung upon."

Perhaps, the columnist wondered, it was a case of cynical journalists being overwhelmed by Hager's sincerity, but she had her doubts: "I'm left wondering why his point eludes me."

But mediaphiles hoping for an online read of McLeod's July 3 column might be in for a long wait. Eerily, all trace of her piece has since disappeared from the website of Fairfax Media. Whatever could this mean and who might be behind it?