Written By: - Date published: 6:30 am, July 1st, 2008 - 39 comments
Categories: election 2008, john key, slippery, spin -
Tags: brand key, crosby/textor
It comes as no surprise that Brand Key has been a Crosby/Textor project from Day 1. The hit and run, the bait and switch, the cake and eat it, the shoot the messenger, the misdirection, the dog-whistle, wedge politics, the outright lie – these are all elements of the classic Crosby Textor strategy that have been used by Brand Key, and they show a contempt for Kiwis.
The entire premise of Crosby/Textor political marketing is that voters are easily manipulated, greedy fools. It is about making democracy dumber – spreading ‘feelings’ (that Key’s nice, Clark is tired and arrogant, it’s time for a change) rather than making an honest argument that National has the best policies for New Zealand and hoping an informed citizenry will choose National because its policies are best. It’s not about proving themselves deserving of governing it’s about finding voters’ weakness and exploiting them – pushing your buttons so you’ll tick their box.
It’s disrespectful to the media too. Crosby/Textor sees the media simply as a vehicle for disseminating its lines; there is no respect for critical journalism as a crucial part of a functioning democracy. They’re played for chumps and expected to buy into the ‘time for a change’ meme themselves. Any journos that breaks the rules by reporting Key when he goes off message or seriously challenging National on their competence to govern is shouted down, threatened, ostracised, and discredited.
National’s supporters are arguing we should just accept the dumbing down of democracy, so that parties rule not by the informed consent of their citizens but because they could fool enough of the people enough of the time. No thanks.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
As for the media picking up on it….
http://www.stuff.co.nz/0a17217.html
interesting interview with an ABC political analyst who basically said the left has a strategy of demonising everything CT does mainly because of its close associations with the Liberals. They even accuse them of things they don’t do, or hype up perfectly normal political activity into something sinister. Sound familiar?
I do wonder if CT’s biggest crime was their success for right winger…
http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/national/mnr/pm_scathing_of_australia_political_strategists
insider: I’m sure people are shocked, just shocked, that both sides of a two-side battle are interested in making the other side look as bad as possible.
Antony Green takes the line that C/T do the same thing as everyone else, they just do it better, and for the right, which is fair enough. He cautions that C/T’s tactics are only one factor in an electoral win, and he’s right. The only objection he raises is that Aussie Labor have been quick to cry push-polling for things which aren’t actually push-polling (not that they don’t do push-polling), and that some of the tactics employed natively by other parties (that is, without being seeded by a PR firm) are just as bad.
Hardly the leftist conspiract against C/T and the right that you imply.
L
Lew
He said more than that. He clearly said the Labour attacks on CT here, in the UK and AUs are not becuase of CT’s actions – he says WInston Peters uses far worse on immigration for example – but primarly because they are aligned with right/conservative parties.