Written By: - Date published: 11:16 am, July 15th, 2008 - 62 comments
Categories: Media -
Tags:
Yesterday, Tracy Watkins wrote something I found a little confusing – “National is winning the war over wages and the price of cheese”. I’m wondering in what way National is winning on wages and food prices.
It’s not in terms of policy. National doesn’t have a policy on raising wages or lowering food prices. Indeed, its only labour policy is the 90 day no rights policy which will, at best, help some bad employers keep down the cost of hiring vulnerable workers.
Probably, Watkins means National is winning in public perception on wages and the price of cheese. I would be fascinated to see the evidence, the survey question or whatever. I suspect, actually, that this is a case of a journalist deciding what the public perception is based on their own feelings and then telling the public ‘this is what everyone thinks’.
Journos have a lot of power, they decide what stories get covered and what angles are taken. They need to be conscious of the fact that they are the public debate on issues – when a journo on Sunrise recently exclaimed ‘nobody’s interested in policy anymore!’ she was really saying ‘very little political coverage deals in policy’. Journos need to be careful that they don’t slip from explaining politics to people into telling people how they feel about politics and leaving the substantive information out. Not only does it not help people understand the major issues of the day but people are turned off by this ‘politics of politics’ coverage where journalists’ assumptions of public perception are all that matters.
We’ve had two really important policy announcements in the last couple of weeks – the privatisation of ACC and the 90 day no rights policy. Both would affect hundreds of thousands of Kiwis each year if they became reality. Perhaps we could see some real analysis of what they would mean for Kiwis so we can make an informed decision on whether to support them or not.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Cue righties (and Lew) running “perception is all that matters” lines…
Steve: Just did a comparison of the last time education policy was updated by Labour & National via their respective websites. ( see policy.net.nz for relevant links). Labours policy was last updated in 2005, Nationals was last updated April 10, 2008.
So it looks like National is really winning the policy war not Labour.
I see you are already linkwhoring for Bernard’s policy site. Given his track record as a partisan hack do you really think anyone will bother clicking through?
Heh.
I was gonna click through ‘sod, but I thought to myself:
“Self, Bryan posted the link. It will be to Bernard”
And thus saved my forehead from a slap.
Thanks for the link Spondre but Hickey’s policy.net.nz doesn’t seem to live up to its claims of non-partisanship. From the front page-
Cue link to Herald fearmongering…
“Cue righties (and Lew) running “perception is all that matters’ lines ”
Isn’t that why no one at the standard is covering the Peters-Glenn Issue. If it’s not on the radar then it doesn’t exist and therefore is not a problem.
[Tane: SP wrote about it here, the day the story broke. How about you do some bloody research for a change instead of coming on here and making a spectacle of your ignorance?]
Sod: You know me so well. Thanks for not explicitly bracketing me with the righties, though.
Steve’s right, there’s a feedback loop in place here. I think he overestimates its importance, though. If people want it why wouldn’t the media provide it? And if people don’t, why would they?
Key’s continued popularity demonstrates people don’t. Until they do, expect nothing to change.
L
Robinsod: So now that you have vented, can we get back to the topic. Are you disputing that Nationals policy (according to their respective website) is far more recent than Labours ?
Bryan. The Government releases education and other policy all the time. When you’re in power, you announce policy via government and put it into action, not via your party website.
Steve: Thanks, so that means those government websites need authorisation statements by the Labour party financial agent under the EFA and their cost should be included the Labour Party spending cap. I appreciate you pointing this out to me, I’ll let DPF know.
perception is all that matters.
Cheers for that link Bryan
Are you taking pills to suppress your chronic stupidity Bryan? It might help.
Dear Helper Monkey,
If you smack Bryan in the head with the keyboard I’ll give you 4 bananas.
5 Bananas if you leave ‘qwerty’ imprinted in his cheek and make crazy monkey noises.
Just checked the Min of Edu website: http://www.minedu.govt.nz/ and it doesn’t have an authorisation statement from the financial agent of the NZ Labour Party. The plot thickens!!!
Ok people, we really need to band together to bring a few more bananas to bear on this problem…
Thickens.
‘Nuff said.
Bryan, if the policy is current government policy I somehow doubt that it requires authorisation (you know, Government versus Party, connect a few dots). I honestly don’t know whether you’re trying to be stupid or not. I’ll be charitable and guess you’re just having a bit of fun (but I will retain a sneaking sense you actually think you’re being clever).
Bryan. Please try to write something intelligent for once.
Mike. shallow world you must live in.
T Rex: “5 Bananas if you leave ‘qwerty’ imprinted in his cheek and make crazy monkey noises.”
I see you have been to the same workshop at the Auckland University Owen Glenn Business School where Helen Clark developed the “Diddums’ debate response.
Tracy Watkins has long been giving National a free ride, and numerous letters to the editor about her were apparently “noted”. She also has a tendency to completely ignore anything productive done by minor parties- probably because she thinks of them as annoying distractions.
It’s part of the reason I’ve largely stopped reading the Dom Post.
Bryan. You make no effort to engage in intelligent debate, don’t be surprised if commentators respond by simply making fun of your apparent stupidity.
But if you keep on threadjacking and bringing down the tone of threads with silly, attention-seeking comments, you’ll be asked to leave.
T Rex – I’ll see your 5 bananas and raise you a bag of peanuts…
Matthew: “Bryan, if the policy is current government policy I somehow doubt that it requires authorisation (you know, Government versus Party, connect a few dots).”
You mean the same dots that Michael Cullen & Treasury connected below and determined that the distinction is not clear:
“All references to a “Labour-led Government” were deleted from the Government’s press releases on the Budget for fear of breaching the Electoral Finance Act.
Finance Minister Michael Cullen confirmed yesterday that on the basis of legal advice the term which has peppered Budget press statements in previous years was dropped.”
http://www.nzherald.co.nz
Steve:”You make no effort to engage in intelligent debate,”
So this from DR is the standard of debate you expect :
“T Rex – I’ll see your 5 bananas and raise you a bag of peanuts ” ?
National is winning the war over wages and the price of cheese.
They are doing an extraordinarily good job of hearing and amplifying the feelings of New Zealanders – I listen to Key et al and I know that they think it would be nice if I was paid more (just like me!) and that they’re sad that cheese is expensive (just like me!). See, they’re lovely people who really understand where I’m coming from.
There are two strands of this approach that are worth examining in a little more detail
1) To what extent are they creating and/or overamplifying these feelings (a la Crosby/Textor – note the obligatory reference
)? While everyone always would like to be paid more, have they made the issue bigger than it would otherwise be (politics of envy anyone?)?
It seems to me that the “Nanny State” issue is clearly both created and then amplified by the right, it’s a transplant from right-wing campaigns all over the world and fits neatly into the script about “capture by special interests”.
2) Why are people willing to vote for people who, while lovely empathetic people-like-me, don’t actually have a solution for the complaints they’re echoing?
(The guy behind me on the bus this morning thought that it would be nice if everyone was paid more and if cheese was less expensive, but I’m not gonna vote for him as he didn’t have a plan to make it better.)
So, if these are the tactics – creating and amplifying anxieties, and being empathetic but content-free – why are they working?
Tracy Watkins rarely says anything I find useful or interesting. I find reality more engaging and verifiable facts more useful.
The same applies to much of the editorial content of the DomPost. I suppose I should still read them so that I know what the latest National party spin-drift and talking points are. Not much use otherwise if you actually want to know what is going on.
“T Rex – I’ll see your 5 bananas and raise you a bag of peanuts ‘
Bryan, the currency of the left has it’s roots in Stalinist Russia – things were pretty tight then..
How is that not clear Bryan? It said Labour led government so they decided to remove those references.
Last I checked, it didn’t say “Labour Led Government” on that Ministry of Education website you mentioned in any document published after the FEA.
And you wonder why people want your monkey to hit you. All I can say is it’s a shame that other people are condecending to reduce the debate to your level.
Let me put it this way – we all know you’re being an idiot here, but if you need to prove it for yourself please feel free to make a submission to the Electoral Commission, and stop wasting our time.
mike – you’re right, Soviet Russia was a paradise where bananas grew by the roadside, and peanuts could be fed to Capitalist-Roaders because the good protein sources were reserved for true Party people.
Hey mike – the only one here getting paid peanuts is you. And rightly so – stop stealing your employer’s time and get back to work.
Reminds me of a scene from “Whoops Apocalypse’ in the 1980s where the leader of Russia welcomes a Westerner with (something along the lines of)
“Here have some ‘prime Russian steak. In Russia we have dozens of such steaks. But Russian people prefer to eat salt.’
Anita,
Thanks for actually addressing the topic. I thought I was going to read the 30 advertised comments and leave much dumber than when I arrived. (I know, most thought that nigh impossible.)
Watkins said “National is winning the war over wages and the price of cheese’ and Steve said she said that because “Probably, Watkins means National is winning in public perception on wages and the price of cheese”.
Correct. The economy is the biggest issue facing the country, and because of international factors, Labour is being punished for being the government in power during the downturn. Them’s the breaks.
And as far as surveys or questions, the polls are the indication that National is winning in public perception. And, at the end of the day, that looks like it will decide who wins in NZ — and quite possibly in the US — this year.
I though Tax Cuts were the biggest issue facing the country? I’m certain it was Tax Cuts. Are you sure it’s not Tax Cuts???
If National plays up the economy they are going to have to start talking what they would do to help it at some stage. Very dangerous indeed…
Scribe,
I agree re Labour being punished for being in charge during the downturn, but…
Firstly, this is very clearly an external downturn over which Labour has no control. People, that I talk to anyway, don’t attribute high international oil, dairy or grain prices to Labour, and don’t think that Labour could actually do anything to change them. So why think that National would/could make a difference to them?
Secondly, is the downturn really that bad? I totally get that peak oil hurts, and that it will keep hurting because it’s forcing us to change how we live, but inflation at 4% is not actually a screaming disaster, wages are at least close to keeping up (particularly in unionised workplaces many of whom are, on aggregrate, ahead of inflation over the last nine years).
High interest rates suck (oh how very much they suck!), but they’re also not a screaming disaster and there are clear signals they’ll come down soon (in fact haven’t some of the longer term fixed rates already started?). My house isn’t going to keep being worth ~$30k more every year, but how realistic would I have been to think that would continue?
So… is the downturn as bad as National says it is? Have they actually created some of this panic? Last election we were talking about National creating a strategic deficit, this time around should be be talking about a strategic downturn in confidence?
Elections 30 years ago were a lot simpler and more direct. Policies and personalities.
I have some sympathy with Labour/left and agree that there isn’t a lot of substantial policies to critique.
However, this is not the first time that SP has played “where’s the beef?” and the answer is the same.
Once Helen tells us when the election will be, it will then force National to show its hand.
Until then, National would be crazy to do anything else.
That’s smart politics – something Labour used to do better than National.
Right now, the bleating about how National’s strategies is like NZers previous aversion to winning rugby via a drop goal when the rest of the world simply says look at the scoreboard.
And p-lease – this is NOT anti-democratic.
So the answer is simple. Set a date for the election and then demand policy.