Written By: - Date published: 3:30 pm, November 15th, 2008 - 58 comments
Categories: crosby textor, national -
Tags:
The topic of Crosby Textor has emerged again with a story in the NZ Herald. While it is unsurprising to read that Crosby Textor is “drumming up business after last week’s election by offering insights into the new Government and its personalities” there’s another aspect I think also deserves examination.
How and why is this material entering the public domain – apparently after National’s electoral success?
Earlier this year it was reported that Crosby Textors advice to the National party was being paid for out of Parliamentary funds, and the information:
included diary-type references and dates and details of Mr Key’s meetings, prompted the party to raise concerns about security with Parliamentary Services.
I don’t think we ever had a definitive answer on how that material got into the public arena. But we do know it wasn’t Parlimantary Services who told TV3 about the visit of Lord Ashcoft. Duncan Garner said that came from within National. So will the signing of the Ministerial warrants lead to silence? Or will the leaks continue?
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Felix suggests:
I certainly hope so… I don’t want to waste a fine Saturday afternoon just talking solely to you lot
Actually there’s been a survey of journalists that suggests the blogosphere has quite an influence on the MSM at least in the US (pdf summary here).
There’s also research that suggests they influence buyer behaviour more strongly than search.
There have been several surveys (including this one, albeit a little old now) that suggest most Americans believe blogs influence public opinion. And presumably that belief is based on the fact that blogs influence the respondents’ opinions… or maybe they just think everyone else is suggestible.
edit: Anita et al: For someone to be succesfully portrayed as “arrogant and out of touch” they have to behave in a way that at least suggests they are both these things. Unless you think Kiwis really are so indelibly stupid they’ll fall for someone being painted against type?
The common figures for Blog participation are 90:9:1
That is:
90% just read
09% post sometimes
01% post most of the time.
I often wonder about the impressions formed after reading some of the mean, nasty stuff. Would the 90% of readers be swayed by this? “Hey! Let me get in there with KG!. He’s the MAN!”:
KG said:”It’s simple, boys and girlsKiwis are heartily sick of a bunch of nannying, corrupt and arrogant socialists. And their retarded followers.
Hopefully we’ll see benefits slashed and you lot will have to go out and get something called “jobs’.
Liar I dont think so
if it was then you would not be on here telling lies!
you and your tory mates want to destroy everything and anything that reminds you of your crimes and that that you are fallible.
furthermore the keys coalition if it ever gets off the ground will be unstable and wont fly for long
it is as rotten as a wonky old worn out dud shyhawk
eat that
oh before you do that
take the carrot out or something really bad might happen
hehehehe
Keep dreaming randal. It is clear you are irrational.
ther you go a again gingakrucnh
telling people what to do again
it is a defining feature of tories that they want to boss people
must be something wrong with their heads to go round in the world wanting to strongarm everything to make themselves feel big when inside they are scared and fearful of losing their money and ability to boss
you are crummy gc
Crummy oh dear. Shall I cry now?
And really if anyone wants to boss people. Its the left. Not sure how your analogy works.
do what you like
I dont care
but if you want to understand what someone is saying then stop drinking and look for the subject the predicate and the object for a start
and
anyone who supports natoinal is crummy by definition
are you hip to that?
the delusion continues.
randal, you can get medication for what ails you, and for those on welfare it’s probably free.
Dunno about the IQ though–nothing will fix that.
Cosby and Textor now there is a fine pair.
And what do you get when you ask them for “help”.
You get the CIS or the centre for “independent” studies.
Who are they you wonder?
They are a right wing neoliberal think tank. That’s right they are the sort of people the Americans are desperately trying to get rid off.
Who are on their board?
Michael Darling Chairman
Greg Lindsay AO Executive Director
Marco Belgiorno-Zegna AM
Rob McLean
Gordon Cairns
Nicholas Moore
Michael Chaney AO
The Hon. Ruth Richardson-Yep, she’s back. Be afraid, be very afraid.
Robert Champion de Crespigny AC-Chair of the three man strong board of directors of Cosby and Textor. The others being Cosby and Textor
Geoff Ricketts
Chum Darvall
Chris Roberts Deputy Chairman
Dr Peter Dodd
Steven Skala
Sir Rod Eddington Executive of Rio Tinto
Lucy Turnbull
Dr Peter Farrell AM
Dr Don Turkington
Ross Grant
Steven Wilson
John M. Green
Peter Yates
All these people are a who’s who of the banking, oil and mining world. You guess what they want.
My guess is they want what we’ve got and you National voters just gave it to them.
Well done.
Enjoy the honeymoon ..
Tamairanga
Oh yep.
Rex Widerstrom,
One of C|T’s strengths is finding and growing the kernels of resentment and disaffection. Sure Clark’s behaviour made the “arrogant and out of touch” meme possible, but it made many memes possible. It was C|T that dug around to find the possibilities, chose the most damaging and then worked on growing it until it became “everyone knows”.
yes anita
the ct modus operandi was to appeal to the most base apects of human nature by using the biggest slobs in the meedia to continue repeating a litany of prejudice, bigotry and untruths till they had had effectively whipped up a form of mass hysteria one level below a lynch mob
that’s true, one of CT’s most successful strategies is to specifically target the more gormless and indolent journalists. it’s very effective.
I gather from the above that these Crosby, Textor chaps are bloody good at what they do. Does anyone know what they charge?
John BT,
I think The Hollow Men might have some indication of the costs of C|T, do you have a copy around or shall I look it up for you?
travellerev:
The Lucy Turnbull on the CIS board is Malcolm’s wife, by the way. She’s quite an adept politician in her own right, having been first female Lord Mayor of Sydney.
Anita:
Oh I agree Helen Clark has a multi-facted personality and many of those facets were positive. But one can hardly expect rival political consultants to seize upon those. It’s also incredibly hard, if not impossible, to convince the public of something about which they don’t at least have some feeling themselves. As you say, an effective consultant will first probe the pre-existing negatves, then seize on those that suit their strategy and endeavour to amplify them.
It’s a much harder job to completely reverse perceptions – for instance to portray the anti-corruption crusader as corrupt himself.
Thus I suspect C|T did research that told them people saw Clark, and her government, as arrogant and aloof well before they embarked on that strategy. I’d be surprised if Labour’s own research wasn’t telling them the same thing, yet they made little or no effort to counter it over the past three years. If anything some of their behaviour reinforced it. Thus they were the authors of their own misfortune – they could have neutered C|T’s strategy early on by simply listening to people and being seen to respond.
randal, gingercrush:
IMHO you’re both right. And wrong. It’s not the left or the right that want to boss us around. It’s politicians.
Rex,
In early 2005 (possibly earlier) C|T were asking focus groups “regardless of your overall view of Helen Clark, what would you acknowledge are her weaknesses at the moment, even if they are slight or begrudging weaknesses?”
That focus group series found that, among other positives, people saw Helen Clark as “aware of what is happening”. They did find
To continue to quote from The Hollow Men
So sure, they found the kernel of a grudging resentment toward Clark three-and-a-half years ago, then advised National on how to build that kernel into something big enough to win the election for National, all the time acknowledging that it would not even have existed if they hadn’t fed it.
Pretty much the perfect example of manipulation of the public and negative personality-based campaigning.
Would other consultants have done the same thing? Would other political parties have used those strategies? I don’t know.
What we do know is that National chose those consultants, chose those strategies and continues to do so.
I still have not read Hollow Men. I still have not read Absolute Power either.
What I know however, is that labour ran a nasty personalised attack campaign and they lost . It appears to have been the sort of vicious campaign that Crosby Textor would be involved in.
O no. They worked for that nice man Mr Key who would not stoop to such mean behaviour. And he has such a nice smile.
I wish I could remember who labour had as their chief strategist.
The Herald describes CT as National’s friends – but spin is spin is spin I’m afraid.
Mind you… the week before they ran large a front-page pic of Key holding a kitten (called, rather appealingly, ‘Picton’), while at the side on the same page was a smeary little piece on the Vela family having the temerity to exercise their freedom of choice and give a donation to Labour and NZ First.
Where does the National Party’s not insignificant cash pot come from I wonder? And why is this never reported?
Perhaps TC have made some good friends in the NZ Herald?
After 48 tax increases Dr Sullen gave us 2 decreases. One for Maori trusts and one for the racing industry. I hope the Velas dont fall into either of those categories because that would look a tad shadey, dont you think?
Anita:
We’re broadly in agreement, though I suspect Hager is downplaying the results of the research and that the perception of Clark as not listening was stronger than that.
What C|T did with that research is pretty standard and yes, other consultants would do it. Carville, Greenburg & Shrum is headed by three leading lights in the US Democratic Party consulting world and claim to promote “progressive politics”.
Yet the firm worked for Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, a centre-right incumbent in Bolivia in 2002. “Goni”, as he was known, imposed IMF guidelines and market reforms in his first term so, while reasonably moderate, was hardly Democrat material. And while he went into the election favouring privatisation – notably of the country’s gas reserves – his major opponent was much further left.
Long story short, CGS derived a focus-group driven campaign which played on fears that his opponents were corrupt and got Goni re-elected. A measure of the success of the campaign in fooling enough of the people enough of the time is the fact that within a year there were bloody riots and Goni was forced to flee to the US.
It’s all documented in a fascinating film Our Brand is Crisis. I’d recommend it to anyone wanting an inside look at the way consulting firms operate.