Written By: - Date published: 9:04 am, February 10th, 2012 - 35 comments
Categories: labour -
Tags: red alert
Does it strike anyone else as strange that National bloggers are full of ‘great’ advice for the Labour caucus about how they can use Red Alert more effectively, when their own party has a pretty pathetic online presence?
I guess they could make the same suggestions for the National MPs blog, but given no one reads it, it would be pretty redundant.
Incidentally, Farrar’s latest suggestion – that Red Alert includes a list of bills to be voted on, and how Labour intends to vote – isn’t a bad idea, especially if it’s accompanied by a qualified explanation, although in a round-about way, that’s exactly what Red Alert already does.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
I originally thought Nationalmps.co.nz was a satirical site put up by someone with a really good sense of humour. Then I realised that it was the real thing …
Labour does get far too much advice from the tories. It should all be taken with a grain of salt. They are not working for Labour’s best interests.
Having said that Red Alert could use a revamp and I have suggested that they should crowd source the development and consider the views of the blogosphere.
Some suggestions I have previously made:
2. Some MPs are better than others at keeping up with the discussion and responding to questions and comments.
3. The linear style for comments is awkward and does not allow for multiple ideas to be developed. I much prefer the Standard’s nestled comments.
4. The site is an opportunity for troll attacks. Trolls are invariably the first to complain about their comments going into moderation but IMHO more intense moderation is important.
5. The site administrators need to work out their privacy policy. There have been complaints about use of IP addresses and emails to identify who commenters are. If commenters choose a pseudonym then in the absence of some breach of acceptable and clear standards their anonymity should be respected.
6. A good blog post is different to a press release. MPs should speak from the heart rather than push their thoughts through the PR machine. Although I accept this can conflict with what is thought to be a good PR campaign can I suggest that ordinary people prefer discussion to spin.
“Labour does get far too much advice from the tories. It should all be taken with a grain of salt. They are not working for Labour’s best interests.”
No micky, not with a grain of salt. It should be ignored entirely. It shouldn’t even be considered for a moment.
Even if it’s advice you agree with, ignore it. It’s not relevant. Don’t even think about it.
Every moment spent wondering about these “advisor’s” motives, wondering whether they’re concern trolling you, leading you astray, or offering genuine advice is a moment you should have spent working to drive them out of power ffs.
There is no value whatsoever in taking any notice whatsoever of what National and their allies think about Labour. None. Doubt this? Then reverse the roles and tell me what you see.
Considering that the Oily Orca has become a sort of Blue Alert , with bits from parliament question time and even Farragoblog has been providing more space to parliament than he ever did.
It would appear one or both is fully funded by national these days
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
The orca may be very blue, but alert? – always looks like he just woke up to me!!
So because the party they support has a crap online presence they can’t offer advice even though they run successful blogs themselves?
I thought it was pretty well agreed view (even amongst Labour supporters) that Red Alert is a great idea and does offer more transperancy but the way it is being used currently is not effective or beneficial for Labour as a political party. Therefore something does need to change in relation to it.
meh.
I don’t see anyone saying they *can’t* offer advice to Labour.
Yeah, the question is more why aren’t they bestirring their lazy arses to help National get an effective online presence? If they put the effort into passing their skills to the National party and it’s MP’s….
Mind you, cooperation isn’t exactly the thing that you expect from right wing bloggers. They only seem to be able to tolerate each other when they’re not having to cooperate.
I see that Cam has quietly shifted away from gotcha as his main domain these days. Remember those halycon days of Cam and Kate when they were cooperatively working check and jowl on the brand new gotcha website. 2 weeks wasn’t it?
Surely a political parties online presence is about communicating to the public why you are the most competent and able party to vote for.
When Red Alert performs this task for so well for the Nats why would they want to waste money on a decent site of their own.
The Standard would also be up there as one of the best online tools for getting votes that the right have.
“check (cheek?) and jowl” If nothing elese Whale certainly sports an impressive set of jowls.
Tories have comprehensive psychological and organisational problems with open discussion and honest debate when it comes down to it. Useful debate requires the ability to receive as well as transmit. Many Nat MPs seemingly won’t open their traps on anything unless they are in receipt of the latest CT memo from Headquarters.
Heh heh heh…
I recall just after Brash took over from Rodney Hide, that there were a couple of threads here about how Brash could improve ACT.
One of the mods had to pull us up short and remind posters that we weren’t here to improve ACT’s chances for election. (Fair point, too, I must admit.)
If Brash had taken even some of our suggestions onboard, history would have been quite different, and the Banks/ACT circus would be a Parallel World we would never have know.
As for Slater and his website, “Gotcha”… why does it remind me of the old “Truth” newspaper from the ’60s and ’70s (sans Page 3 woman)?!
The odd occassion someone points me to “Gotcha”, for something Slater has written, leaves me feeling “ick”.
As least Farrar presents his p.o.v with something approaching intelligent analysis…
It is rather amusing that David Farrar should exert so much effort making Red Alert all that it can be, when he could be helping the National MP’s list their online standards.
After all he gave probably one of the better descriptions of them when he said
The problem is of course that the National MP’s just appear to so damn boring and give the distinct impression of never quite gotten to getting to grips with that new-fangled e-mail, so it’d be hard to see how they would do anything in opposition. I guess we’ll have to get used to the National party being represented by the polite face of DPF, and the nasty aspects of the real party by blubberboy.
Oh and welcome to authoring on The Standard. You will probably live to regret it.
Visited the National MPs website for the first time and er ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ……
Since the election last year, right wing bloggers and propagandists seem to have shifted their attention from trumpeting their own wares to trying to exert influence over the left. It is quite noticeable both here and at Red Alert. Mention something like “poverty” or “union” and they are out in droves. I think it is because in terms of public discourse the TINA narrative is no longer the only game in town. Other ideas look to have a chance of gaining traction, and they want to nip this in the bud. Do not listen to them Labour. They have their own interests at heart, not yours.
I think most of the Nats realise they are unlikely to win the next election, and want to ensure Labour stays on a rightward course, and will therefore do little to undo the work (the bulk of which has yet to be done) and change the general direction they’ve set. Having a National-lite Labour-led government is the next best thing to being in power themselves, and frankly, from their point of view, shaping-up to be almost as good.
They also have reaped huge rewards from turning different sectors of the community against each other, knowing that a united left would be a powerful beast. They have led Labour by the nose to foster this by desperately, as cued, competing for the red-neck, self-interested soft-tory vote, to the complete neglect of the majority of its one-time natural (and much larger) constituency.
The right is continuing to call the tune, but Labour is voluntarily dancing to it.
my thoughts entirely, well put
That does seem to the be the strategy of the right, especially the bloggers and commentators. In my view it explains a lot of the continuing vocal attacks on this site as well. They really don’t like their inability to isolate and separate people on the left who come and argue here – in the most part reasonably amicably. The site is clearly not going away. Must worry them
For that reason, I’m anticipating seeing a lot more of the Fran O’Sullivan style attacks on the pseudonym policies on this site. It allows them to avoid answering critics
* BTW: You notice that Fran O’Sullivan is completely unwilling to engage when I criticized her. It doesn’t matter if it is from someone with a real name or not..
In my opinion she is a gutless arsehole for launching attacks on this site, all of the authors who use their real name on it, and those who use pseudonyms. She does it from the shelter of her job and the protection of the NZ Herald using the excuse of a pseudonym. But of course she doesn’t engage if there is a real name either.
It does fit the general behaviour pattern of such pontificating fools who do use that type of idiotic argument – completely unwilling to engage. Needless to say, I can’t see us changing our policy to conform to some unrealized ideal of the journalists profession. Authors and commentators can decide what they feel comfortable with.
Just wanted to make a more explicit link to my comment at 5.1 and the topic at hand.
It’s been clear for a while, that the right is deliberately bombarding the social media including talk-back radio with extremist right wing propaganda and hate speech. As has been noted, anytime any genuine conversation about poverty, inequality etc. begins, it is all but closed down in many cases. The right is successfully not just manipulating popular opinion, shutting down discourse, and dissent, and creating disunity by these methods, it is also successfully creating a false impression about public opinion, and by all these methods effectively having considerable control over the Labour Party.
I was chilled when I heard Phil Goff quoted as saying he liked to listen to talkback when he had a chance, to hear what people were saying.
goff doesn’t need to bother with talkback,
he can just listen to pagani/mallard
Do not listen to them Labour. They have their own interests at heart, not yours.
Well said. It was my observation and experience last year that some of the RA authors spent more time responding to the opposition commenters than their own site supporters – especially if they had a public presence of some sort eg. Farrar, Slater, Hooton et al. Sometimes it seemed the rest of us were only incidental to the real area of interest which was to establish dialogue with their perceived online National equivalents.
The site is an opportunity for troll attacks.
Oh the irony!
With a few exceptions, most of the trolling was by individuals who had been sent to the site to undermine it in election year by… Farrar, Slater, Hooton et al. The consequence was that a number of excellent Labour supporting commenters walked from the site in disgust. Most have never been back.
I read somewhere that National had donated funds to Red Alert because it was doing such a good job for them. That has got to be a worry for Labour.
no ts… worrying about bitchy comments from right wing syncophants is what stupid people do…. last time i looked, none of the posters on red alert struck me as stupid….. the trolls that plague the site and try to stymie genuine discussions are another story altogether though…
Hahahahahahahaha …
Err, the National Party actually has a pretty effective online presence.
But if you think that “nationalmps” blog has anything to do with it you haven’t been paying attention.
Perhaps he should have said the “formal” online presence.
Hasn’t the lack of an (apparently uncontrolled) website for their MPs helped National though? Clare Curran has gained some respect for engaging in the debate (while also making some bloody stupid statements) but Mallard’s entries are actively destructive. Raymond Huo makes some good points but often looks like a half-baked fool. Don’t start me on Darien Fenton.
National controls the message. As much as that might be disliked, it’s very effective among the wider electorate. I have no knowledge of what happens in the Greens, but they seem to do the same. Party picks a line, MPs follow it. Find an issue, let your big guns front it. Don’t let someone spoil a perfectly good idea (or attack) by an undisciplined, ill-thought through impromptu statement.
Clare Curran has gained some respect for engaging in the debate
Where, in Bizarro World? You don’t get respect for engaging in the debate, you get respect for having something USEFUL to add to the debate. She’s a total waste of space.
Whether or not Ms Curran’s contribution is “useful” or not is a subjective matter. The fact that she is contributing should be the main point.
If you think any issue(s) she has raised is not “useful”, then address it.
Calling someone “a total waste of space” is not helpful to debating issues.
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/05/27/lets-all-admit-it-our-internet-speeds-are-rubbish/
Curran finds out about a site on the interwebs called “speedtest.net” (/facepalm) and has discovered that NZ is actually geographically remote and its “bandwidth data” or something is, um, less good than that of someone somewhere else.
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/05/28/advertised-vs-actual-broadband-speed-there-is-a-difference/
Curran discovers that broadband in South Korea and Japan is faster than in NZ and DEMANDS AN EXPLANATION.
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/07/03/beyond-lol
Curran, Labour spokesperson for Communications and Information Technology, decides that typing “LOL” is silly and that everyone should stop it.
Curran, Labour spokesperson for Communications and Information Technology, seeks crowd-sourced assistance with Open Source content management framework. Shortly before it was revealed that Labour’s “Droopol” installation was sharing confidential donor information with the entire Internet.
There was her hard-hitting poll on Red Alert:
“Internet speeds: are they fast enough?”
[ ] YES
[ ] NO
Who can forget her glorious campaign to defend the long heritage of the Highlanders jersey, a taonga with the immense cultural significance that comes with not actually existing before 1996 and being manufactured by Adidas in China.
Curran also demonstrated her in-depth knowledge of telecommunications, her feel for the zeitgeist, and her sense of strategic timing when she announced the Labour Party’s desire to investigate and legislate regarding the pressing issue of audio volume levels during TV advertisements… during an election campaign.
In conclusion: total waste of space.
I’m not surprised at the activities of Farrar & Co but I am bemused by Labour’s handling of it. Admittedly we tend to view scenes through our own lens & I see this as two businesses competing against each other so mine is a sales & marketing perspective. Labour are making some pretty fundamental mistakes IMO. MPs don’t talk to opposition bloggers, that’s like the area manager taking on the competitors shop assistants. What on earth are they thinking?
The business analogy isn’t a bad one for Labour to follow; they’re both competing against each other & they’re trying to sell similar products into the same market. Labour wouldn’t go amiss if they took a leaf out of the Nats book & hired some experienced sales & marketing people to develop a decent PR strategy. There’s some fairly universal rules of selling that Labour would benefit greatly from following.
Red Alert has to go IMO, the connotations from that title are cringeworthy. They’d be better off using sympathetic sites to spread the word & offload the dirty stuff. People here for example are far better equipped to sort out right wing trolls & there’s no political fallout then either.
Its no secret, the right want Labour MPs to use red alert more because its a great tool for the right
I (and I admit to a great deal naievity in this) had an impression that to be an MP one had to be reasonably intelligent and make good, sound arguements
red alert changed my mind very quickly of this (quaint) notion
Why would it do that? I’d expect MPs to be picked on what they bring to the table, each ministerial role requires a different skill set. Being a good debater is a skill in itself & doesn’t make someone more able to run a country or fill a ministerial role. Many of the smartest people in history had poor or limited social skills, didn’t stop them being smart though did it.
The problem being that red alert shows some of the MPs being as thick as a post, not really the impression you want to have of your MPs
Why is that a problem. We knew that already.
National will not let their MP’s talk without a minder because they think we do not already know.
I thought of a few replies to this but it is hard to argue. Some of them do create an impression, right or wrong, that’s not conducive to winning votes. The Nats approach is more effective PR, they gag those who aren’t good public speakers.