Written By: - Date published: 11:32 am, September 15th, 2008 - 78 comments
Categories: activism, crosby textor, dpf, humour, john key, Media -
Tags: google bomb, rochelle rees
Well it turns out my niece has been having fun and done an effective google bomb on John Key. I’ve just been watching her TV3 clip when I wrote this post. Rochelle shows her experience with the media in expressing her opinion. This is something that belongs in the Tips on campaigning.
I’ve had something to do with enhancing her programming skills, but very little to do with her skills at activism. Those have been honed since she started campaigning on animal rights when she was about fourteen.
It appears that the Herald On Sunday reporter didn’t listen closely enough to what Rochelle said – that she is not currently affiliated to any political party. This has always been the case, her primary focus has always been on animal welfare. Her main focus as a member in the Labour Party was to put forward remits on animal welfare legislation. She has also promoted animal rights with other parties as well. Over the last few years her rapidly changing career and life has been limiting her degree of activism in most areas including labour, greens, other activist groups, and even in animal rights. But apparently not entirely.
I see that the updated article in the Herald on Sunday now correctly states that she is not currently affiliated to any party. The crucial dropping of a single word in the article was pretty poor editing. Rochelle is not exactly invisible on the net either, if any confirmation was required. This is what happens when media organizations shed too many staff and the quality of the media reporting suffers through lack of fact checking.
An astonished uncle.
Update: NZ Herald article today. Looks like John Key has been whining – face it John – you got done by a 22 year-old with a brain.
BTW: David Farrar did a post about Rochelle yesterday. The comment section was a bit turgid with conspiracy theories, but the post was amusing and fair and heavily updated, thanks…
DPF asked.
I also found it amusing that that they are trying to suggest with their Google bombing that John Key is clueless. The bombing works better if it is an attribute that many people will agree with. They should have gone with ‘swallowing dead rats’ or something.
That I can explain having done some reading today. It either takes a lot of time with few people to setup a google-bomb or it takes a lot of people a short time. It looks like Rochelle took the former course
Most of the phrases you’d now consider to be relevant weren’t current even at the end of last year. At that time John Key was an enigma to most people, and probably still is. About the only thing that was known about John Key at the time was that he made policy and speech gaffes regularly (and still does). Who can forget his claim to be leading the Labour party… That was quite clueless.
However there is nothing like a long hard election campaign to shine a bright light on leaders. It is going to be a long 8 weeks. Lots of time for the voters get to know him better and to figure out if he is politically clueless or not, despite the usual Crosby/Textor techniques to avoid it.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
He’s not clueless about making millions of dollars. Well spotted. But does that mean he’s not clueless?
I’ve met people (and you probably have too) who have made a pretty good pile of money for themselves but don’t really have much of a clue about anything else. From what I’ve seen of Key I’d say he probably isn’t that interested in much else.
Do we want a leader who has spent his whole life making millions of dollars for himself? Is that really a qualification to lead?
actually most of it was in bonuses for firing other people who underperformed!
FFS, you guys are incredible. Always going on about the real issues not getting debated and then thinking it’s great when a little fema-nazi cyber smears JK.
Keep up the dirty stuff though as its playing right into the Nats hands.
[lprent: There is a reason that phrase in the moderation (as I guess you've found previously). I don't like it. Take 8 weeks off to contemplate why it isn't a good idea to offend a male-nazi sysop. ]
The top execs at ML, Bear Sterns, Freddie and Fannie, The L’ Brothers and so on all made bloody great piles of dosh for themselves over the last few years.
Ask the shareholders of those firms for a reference on their awesomeness.
Felix:
I have never met anyone who has made that much money for themselves (unless its a lotto win) that was clueless.
If he was that clueless, he would of lost it all by now. Its crazy to say the guy is clueless, its like the right in the states saying America is doomed because Obama doesn’t understand the issue of security.
Key is not Clueless, Clark is not Clueless and talk like that just brings the debate down a peg or two but hey if ya want to be a bunch of little Karl Roves, be my guess.
I want a leader who understands what personal responsibility is and that isn’t Clark.
Rochelle from hell.
From what I’ve seen of JK over the last 2 years I’m absolutely certain he does, as a matter of fact, know what personal responsibility is – and how to avoid it.
“Do we want a leader who has spent his whole life making millions of dollars for himself?”
Yes Felix I do. If it’s a choice between a self starter with real life experience or a career civil servant who puts her own lust for power before the NZ public then go figure
Ah right Mike, the kind of real life experience that has resulted in the Lehman Bros bankrupcy today… or BOA having to buy out Key’s old alma mater … is this the kind of experience you have in mind?
So if Rochelle is engaged in dirty tricks because she once held a minor position on labour’s youth council and is related to Lynn then what is it when a current National party office holder who is on the National Party pay roll and the nephew of a very senior National Party MP gets involved in spreading smears about a Labour candidate’s sex life?
http://robinsod.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/stalkathon/
a little fema-nazi cyber
Why do so many of your right wing boys have problems with competent women? It is sad that you feel so threatened.
(Captcha: ‘socialists might’ – well they might indeed!)
That’s right mike, international bankers hate power, especially when compared to teachers. The are truly the salt of the earth.
rOb
The right loves powerful woman, Margaret Thatcher, Sarah Palin, Trisha Yearwood, Ann Coulter,
We just dont like woman who play on the fact that they are woman.
A politician’s sex life should be private has long as they aren’t doing anything illegal.
If Larry Craig wanted to hid the fact that he is gay and hung around in airport bathrooms that is his business.
Brett – what about the National party connection? Surely that’s not a sign of an “upbeat and positive campaign”?
Im sure this nephew of someone would be told not to do it again, unless the left who encourages this sort of thing.
We just dont like woman who play on the fact that they are woman.
And Rochelle has done that how? She needs to be called a “fema-nazi” because?
As for Sarah Palin, playing on the fact that she’s a woman is positively the only thing she has going for her.
Rob:
If anyone dares says something bad about Aunty Helen, the left automatically jumps up and says “Your just saying this because she is a woman”
Im sure if a relative of someone from kiwiblog had googled bombed a Maori MP, then you guys would be up in arms.
As for Palin, well she has a good record in Alaska, but personally I hope Obama/Biden wins
I don’t think people should come down too harshly on Rochelle. It was an amusing prank, and quite novel in its approach. I think she could have been more up-front about her political affiliations and leanings, when asked, because I think it is material that she is a recent office-holder in the Labour Party. She set up this google-bomb, by her own admission, a year ago. She is, by LP’s admission, an LPG voter.
I’ve said in another thread that I have noticed the tendency of some blog-writers and commenters to say they aren’t members of the Labour Party, while sounding, acting, and writing exactly as if they are. The Exclusive Brethren weren’t members of the National Party, either. The Exclusive Brethren members don’t vote. That doesn’t mean they weren’t campaigning against the Labour and Green Parties, on behalf of National and its friends. It’s just insulting to anybody’s intelligence to say otherwise. Rochelle isn’t alone in this, of course. As I’ve said, I think it seems to be a common theme.
On the face of it, it also seems that Rochelle was not alone in setting up this google-bombing stunt. A number of people appear to have been involved in it. I very much doubt any of them were National supporters or right-wingers. Some of them appear to be commenters at the Standard, if this google-search is anything to go by:
http://www.google.co.nz/search?hl=en&q=clueless+site%3A.thestandard.org.nz&btnG=Google+Search&meta=
[lprent: Ummm This is a site with literally millions of words in in. Typing in almost any phrase gets a massive hit rate.
Try lemme see pejorative terms - pathetic, poppycock (an HS special), idiot, moron, dickhead, troll, whale etc...
Hell you even get a few hits from gormless, dildo, wanker, etc..
In fact you even get a few hits off pejorative
I'd say that wasn't particularly conclusive. Besides have a read of the wiki link - it is the hidden stuff on a link that does it]
I guess “Clueless” is the buzz word for the extreme left. Oh well ya got to have a catch phrase I guess.
If anyone dares says something bad about Aunty Helen, the left automatically jumps up and says “Your just saying this because she is a woman’
I’ve never said such a thing Brett, and I don’t recall it on The Standard. But We weren’t discussing HC, we were discussing the pathetic use of “fema-nazi” to describe Rochelle.
Some of them appear to be commenters at the Standard, if this google-search is anything to go by
Ahhh Tim, all you’re displaying there is ignorance of how a google bomb works.
Perhaps we need a guest post from Rochelle to get the righties really wound up haha
rOb
People have been called “Retards” on this site, do you agree with that?
Brett. You are a retard.
People have been called “Retards’ on this site, do you agree with that?
What’s that got to do with anything Brett? No, I don’t like it when people get insulting. Except when ‘Sod does it – it’s part of his “thing”, like d4j and his surreal nonsense.
Yo seem to be upset because someone was called a fema nazi, but not upset if someone is called a a retard.
Jeez, are all lefties bloody ugly… clark, rees, et al…
Pity clark’s social engineering doesn’t run to looks!
Try googling ‘labour funded blog’ from NZ pages and see what come up. Now that’s way more amusing than ‘Clueless’
You couldn’t make it up any funnier. It just shows that you have to be carefull what you make a big deal out of as it may come back to bite you.
Im sure there are many, many more variations out there in google land for both Labour and National. At the end of the day its just silly and who cares.
Robinsod:
Thanks for sharing! Your a funny guy, you should rent yourself out for formal occasions, well maybe not for the IHC fund raisers they might take offense.
Yo seem to be upset because someone was called a fema nazi, but not upset if someone is called a a retard.
I said I didn’t like it Brett. Whereas your only comment on “fema nazi” is: “We just dont like woman who play on the fact that they are woman”.
Jeez, are all lefties bloody ugly clark, rees, et al
Pity clark’s social engineering doesn’t run to looks!
Not as ugly as your mum matty – not as easy either…
Brett – no problemo my retarded hombre…
Clueless is a good start, but perhaps someone should create google bombs around other words too: Slimy, rat, dirty, filthy, hopeless, incoherent, Armageddon, earthquake, black abyss, Lord Ashcroft, Hannibal, plague, economic ruin, flip-flop, idiot, moron and pond scum, to name a few.
Let the Bombing begin!
rOB
Like most people, I despise anything that comes out of Rush Limbaugh’s mouth, I understand he came up with the phrase Fema-Nazi.
Like most on the right I love strong woman, and my take is, a lot of feminist are not out to make woman stronger, but make them into victims.
-”a lot of feminist are not out to make woman stronger, but make them into victims.”
Brett Dale is clearly right. It’s obvious that the majority of feminists have a secret burning desire to be repressed. They love being victims. In fact, it’s cruel not to persecute women. Let’s support the feminist movement by victimising women!
Brett Dale, visionary. He spreads the light.
I salute your towering intellect.
That’s not what I said at all.
The true strong feminists are all about power and making woman stronger and not playing the part of the victim, unfortunately a lot of people fall into the trap of doing this.