Are the Greens now the astro-turfing party?
September 22nd, 2011 at 4:00 pm by David FarrarIn my “By the numbers” blog at Stuff, I ask whether the Greens have become an astro-turfing party.
55 Responses to “Are the Greens now the astro-turfing party?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 22nd, 2011 at 4:03 pm
No, they haven’t. They are trying to win votes, and lack the media power that National enjoys, such as having a featured blogger on the country’s biggest news site.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 4:08 pm
No they haven’t or….. no they are not??
Oh dear folks, another leftie joins the ranks.
Yes they are.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 4:11 pm
These email alerts don’t seem to be having the desired effect awb.
Your’ve the only one answering the call.
Ooops, nearly forgot
Right wing blogger slams Greens electioneering tactics.
Greens cheated by media bias.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 4:46 pm
Nope – they’re not. But then in my opinion neither is the Tea Party (and nor is the Tea Party racist).
Vote:So the logical conclusion is: it depends on the opinion of the observer.
September 22nd, 2011 at 5:03 pm
What I’ve always wondered since the first day I started reading this blog, is there a single Green party supporter who actually cares about what David Farrar says about them?
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:08 pm
thedavincimode – I’m not receiving any alerts. I just read blogs.
Michaels- Actually my 1st post was correct. Read the link that has been highlighted.
Pretty uninspiring stuff from you guys, I expected to at least have my ideas challenged. Disappointing that your party which is completely lacking in original though is running the country.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:08 pm
YesWeDid – was that meant to read like a dating profile?
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:25 pm
I think you are right David. You just have to read today’s comments on the NZ Herald site for the Greens Job Policy. Fair enough that they use new technolgy , but everyone is to some extent. I think the left side of the political divide are trying it more than others.
Vote:The question has to be –how many people read them ? How good is the content ?
I first noticed this sort of organised “advocacy” on AGW blogs. On any anti AGW blog there is always one poster from the pro AGW side and they recite the same stuff as you see from another pro AGW believer on another anti AGW blog. The problem is they don’t get anywhere because they generally don’t understand what has been fed to them. ( I often wondered if they are paid/post !!)
September 22nd, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Would that be your idea that an individual, long-time poli-blogger who disclosed his identity and affiliations is doing the same thing as multiple anonymous commenters on blog posts and forums running intererence on shallow and stupid policies and making it look like a party has more support than it really does?
Your ideas are challenged enough already.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:31 pm
YesWeDid
I don’t know. What does the research say?
My non peer reviewed anecdotal observation is that there are occassionally sufficient of them who care to come scuttling here when the balloon goes up (they get the automated email).
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:31 pm
If you cant be the most intelligent voice, be the loudest.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:36 pm
Using technology to alert self-selecting Green grassroots supporters to blog posts they may be interested in commenting on or giving them some advice via the Green website’s members-only pages on improving the likelihood of letters to the editor being published is not “astroturfing”. It’s just smart use of technology.
The Nats will catch up – eventually! In 2014 they will be probably be attempting to use MySpace and Bebo to do the same sort of thing.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:39 pm
I wouldn’t be too tough on them David. They are making a better fist of it all than Labour is managing.
Sure, there’ll be some silly mistakes such as you’ve chronicled but hey, it’s all part of becoming the mainstream party which Labour isn’t, any more.
Will we see Greens 21% party vote in November with Labour 19%?
As every day goes by it seems less unlikely. Political historians will have a ball, fussing over the blame for Helen’s legacy.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:39 pm
It should come as no surprise that as the Greens mature they become more like the two larger parties.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:42 pm
“One local example I use in talking to business audiences on astroturfing was the promiment NZ ticketing company that had someone criticise their website design on a blog. A woman commented that she thought the website was great and really easy to use, and that the blogger must just be a bit stupid if he found the website difficult.
The blogger checked the IP address of the commenter, and found that she was posting from the Auckland office of the company in question. So he exposed her astroturfing, and the company got ridiculed both locally and globally.”
This is called shilling… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill not astroturfing.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:43 pm
Ross12, I believe their may have been some British govt money spent of advocacy of AGW that lead to some people fulltime doing just that. Could explain how their deficit ever got so big. Green jobs are counterproductive.
Anyway you must have really hit their astorturf buttons from the reaction you got on Stuff DPF. I couldn’t be “stuffed” putting a comment on as I think the pro green commentators including the one who said they voted National last time and will vote for Green this time are either paid Green party workers or just retards who want to vote for the environment and have no feaken idea what they are doing.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:46 pm
Great just what we all fucking want. More spam from political parties cluttering up the internet. Making forums and comments sections unusable.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:59 pm
@Adolf Fiinkensein 5:39 pm
Guess that is why DPF is now doing many more attack posts on the Greens, and fewer on Labour.
All good from where I’m sitting.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 5:59 pm
“All good from where I’m sitting”
What? Blatently lying to the newspaper about not being a Green activist? Or were you talking about something else?
Because that’s what I thought was the most significant bit in the article. The bit where the Green candidate’s partner lied through her lying teeth.
Did you see that, toad?
I’m not sure you saw the bit where the Green candidate’s partner lied through her lying teeth.
Can you confirm that you saw that?
Toad?
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:00 pm
@Kimble 5:46 pm
Get into the 21st century, Luddite!
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:09 pm
@wat dabney 5:59 pm
My understanding is that was not condoned and is being addressed by the Green Party. But you can’t condemn the Greens for a supposed (because I don’t know the details) indiscretion by someone who has no position in the party but happens to be the partner of a Green candidate. I don’t even know if she is a Party member – she says she used to vote Labour.
It agree it was a dumb thing for a Green supporter to do, given her partner is a Green candidate, but it was not something orchestrated by the Green Party.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:13 pm
“she says she used to vote Labour.”
Er, toad? She lies.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:24 pm
And the sooner venues stop giving catering and ticketing companies a stranglehold on their venues, the better. One venue seems to have changed caterers recently and the food is even crappier and overpriced. The Wiener Volksoper displays the seating plan and lets you choose your seats (admittedly I last looked some years ago), so why not ticketing companies operating in NZ.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:33 pm
toad, I am a creature of the 21st century.
I grew up in a digital world where not every discussion was open to being bombarded by n00bs fired from a spam-canon at party HQ. Now we have to worry that genuine discussion, debate, flaming will be interupted by poli-bots screaming the shit over and over again. And the problem will only get worse.
You reckon every party will be doing this? Fan-fucking-tastic. Go to any popular poli-blog and all you will see in the comments is the party-line vs party-line vs party-line. Result? Dead thread.
Spam, banner ads, Green comment-bots. Difference?
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:38 pm
I despise, not admire, toad’s blind loyalty in parroting the party line.
Vote:He shows neither trace of independent thinking nor the ability to arrive at his own conclusions. No, he just repeat what he’s told by his Luddite masters.
September 22nd, 2011 at 6:41 pm
The Green Party. Never been in government.
Vote:What’s it like going to ball every year but never being asked to dance?
September 22nd, 2011 at 6:46 pm
“The Nats will catch up – eventually! In 2014 they will be probably be attempting to use MySpace and Bebo to do the same sort of thing.”
Haha!
“When News Corp bought MySpace for $580 million, that looked like an extremely savvy play by the old media company. But due to mismanagement and Facebook, MySpace stopped growing and then kept faltering. News Corp would be lucky to get $50 million for MySpace now.
AOL makes more than one appearance on this list. While News Corp’s acquisition of MySpace was a good bet that went wrong, there’s no serious explanation for AOL’s acquisition of Bebo or how much it spent. AOL bought Bebo for $850 million and then sold it for $10 million.”
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-11-worst-mistakes-in-tech-history-2011-4?op=1
These are self-interested businesses risking their own futures on technology, and how they made a mess of it. Why would politicians spending other people money be any better do you suppose?
Because the Green Party confidently tells us that there is a fortune to be made in the “green technology” industry, and is willing to gamble hundreds of millions of taxpayers’ earnings on their prediction.
Not their own money you understand. Your money.
They are planning to gamble hundreds of millions of your money on madcap technology schemes which have already cost billions in the United States.
Whilst keeping their own money safely in the bank.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:47 pm
@Kimble
We reserve the right (but we won’t always use that right) to delete or edit posts which:
Are considered likely to provoke, attack or offend others
Are personal or offensive comments about individual members of the public
Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable
Contain excessive swear words or other language likely to offend
Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes breach of copyright, defamation and contempt of court.
Advertise products or services for profit
Are seen to impersonate someone else
Repeatedly post the same or similar messages (‘spam’)
Include contact details such as telephone numbers and postal or email addresses
Contain links to other websites which break our editorial guidelines
Describe or encourage activities which could endanger the safety or well-being of others
Are judged to be blatant or destructive attacks on the Green Party itself with no redeeming value to Green politics (we do have a little bit of self preservation)
TOADS RULES
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 6:51 pm
EWS
Well actually, they did get asked to dance a little bit by Key, but seemed repulsed by his perceived spots.
They much preferred it when they weren’t asked to dance by Klerkula, but were simply wisked out of the dance hall, put in the garden shed, and then had the lights turned.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:03 pm
John Key has gone quiet on this one. About 115 New Zealand citizens left each day in August to live in Australia. Net migration in the year to August was the worst 12 month outflow since March 2009 just after the last exodus that John Key was so worried about. This is a silent revolt. It’s how the young protest in New Zealand. They buy a one way ticket to Australia and then they stay there. Let’s call it the Quade Cooper effect
Net permanent migration loss to Australia 32,700 in year to August, highest since year to March 2009, Stats NZ figures show
Posted in News September 21, 2011 – 12:52pm, Alex Tarrant
Share
New Zealand recorded a seasonally adjusted net permanent and long-term migration gain of 200 in August, snapping a negative streak since March 2011 following the February 22 earthquake that hit Christchurch, figures released by Statistics New Zealand show.
Unadjusted figures showed a net gain of 300 migrants during the month, down from 900 in August 2010. The main reason for the fall was 1,100 more departures of New Zealand citizens to Australia in August 2011 than in August 2010, Stats NZ said.
There were 3.496 New Zealand citizens who left New Zealand permanently to live in Australia in August, while only 769 citizens returned.
http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/55549/bernard-hickey-talks-marcus-lush-radio-live-650-am-about-feds-new-twist-strategy-chris
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:04 pm
>No, he just repeat what he’s told by his Luddite masters.
Which is probably true in this case. Unless the ‘masters’ thought the partner of a candidate could speak in a local newspaper without being outed as such. Wasn’t exactly clever.
‘Get our profile up in the media through letters’ (etc) is the tactics of protest groups and charities. Which is where the Green Party have their roots.
Being a protest group, or in permanent opposition, is easy. You can say ‘we wish for the moon’ and lots of people will say ‘what a great idea’. You don’t have to deliver and the fact no one could can be brushed aside.
A spell in government and their fine ideals would come up against a harsh dose of reality
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:06 pm
When Russell Norman and Nick Smith were on Q&A last week it was funny… to see Norman being owned by John Key. Russell Norman pointed out the great home insulation fund that was put in place and how it’s great to ‘get stuff done in politics’. And Nick Smith agreed too, that it was really good with a slight grin. It was good. John Key cemented in the mind of NZers that he’s nice and central (which is where politics always is) and dealt Labour an upper cut. And secondly Norman has to play nice (well, nicer) with National – all the while knowing that the Greens (in a National-Greens coalition fantasyland) will never get Ministerial roles. Not an upper cut, but perhaps a bitch slap.
Owned.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:10 pm
@Adolf
This would be excellent for two reasons 1) we would actually get an effective opposition in the next government term and 2) New Zealand would see what a bunch of freaking idiots these guys are and they’d struggle to get over 5% ever again.
@Mary Rose
A little bit what Labour’s like at the moment. They can promise anything they like at the moment but they’re almost certainly not going to be in power after the next election so it doesn’t matter what they promise.
Absolutely. There’s all sorts of compromise when you get in power. The problem is, if we do see a Labour-Green (or worse a Green-Labour) coalition in the future, the country is F U C K E D. If you think a lot of people are leaving the country now just wait and see what would happen if the Greens had power. The only upside is after screwing the country over for three years they’d be consigned to political oblivion.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:11 pm
‘Toad’ doesn’t quite rhyme with ‘owned’. But close enough.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:17 pm
Anyway, night all.
Vote:Better things to do than fight greenies.
Keep on rocking for the kids.
September 22nd, 2011 at 7:45 pm
And so the green party will throw you under the bus when you get caught. Don’t get caught and its three stars and a smiley face stamp.
Thanks for clearing that up toad. Good luck feeding off Goffs leftovers.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 7:52 pm
Could this be the beginning of a right wing split…
Vote:Whaleoil has mentioned DPF’s shot comings on posting this thread…
September 22nd, 2011 at 8:07 pm
@Adolf “Will we see Greens 21% party vote in November with Labour 19%?”
@ Toad “All good from where I’m sitting”.
The other angle to DPF’s fabulous article is that there is potential for dissent from factions within the Greens (that would be sympathetic to the Bradford / Mana Party “purity” and “message”, and also be not too impressed with the Greens embracing the middle ground etc).
How much will the Green party vote be diluted by election day thanks to Mana?
I think Toad and the Greens wish us all to think “not very much actually” … but I bet not, so how much in reality ?
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 8:28 pm
Opponents of the legislation say the battle over the foreshore is not over with a promise from the Greens that it won’t let the foreshore and seabed issue die as it heads into the election campaign.
Greens co-leader Metiria Turei says the Maori Party has betrayed its supporters.
“I’m very distressed about this, this should not have happened,” she says. “The Maori Party had the power to fix the 2004 legislation, to repeal it and to put in place a just outcome, and they chose not to.”
Ms Turei is furious at the Maori Party.
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyid=193090
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 8:34 pm
Of course the truth is that the Greens will ignore their strongest (other than Mana) position on Te Tiritti and the foreshore and seabed until after the elction so they get Muggins votes.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 8:35 pm
@niggly 8:07 pm
The Greens and Mana share a lot of principles in common. Despite your attempt to shit-stir, niggly, I see Mana as a Green ally, not an enemy.
@hj 8:28 pm
Guess I should just ignore you, because you are obviously a NZ First supporter, and they will remain irrelevant.
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 9:26 pm
Shit-stir Toad, ya reckon?
More like the truth hurts eh!
Whatever principles are shared, at the end of the day, come the election there can only be one winner.
Hone and Mana will be sharpening their axes, figuratively speaking, whilst the nice Gweens apply the platitudes!
Vote:September 22nd, 2011 at 10:48 pm
is it not telling like with all lefties, the moment they get caught, the party runs for the hills, throwing the person to the wolves. oh we had no idea, oh she did it without his knowledge.
for a party that tries to control the message as much as the greens they seem to be pretty in the dark when its convenient.
also, where has this idea that they are the most honest party come from? they have been the most duplicitous since before they even officially formed (winston excepted). for some reason they get away with it due to some collective idea that the hippies are too dumb to know any better, and all power to them they play the idiot hippy card well.
every green support i have met tells me they support the greens becuase they are honest and have good policies. when i ask which policies they can never actually articulate them (as they don;t actually know any of them and just like the vibe). when i point out some of their dishonesty they tend to go quiet and just mumble, well i like them, or we need all views in parliament(though they rescind that idea when spitting about act)
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 7:24 am
@hj 8:28 pm
Guess I should just ignore you, because you are obviously a NZ First supporter, and they will remain irrelevant.
…………………..
That’s not answering the question Toad.
The question is: will the Green Party make the foreshore and seabed an election issue as promised by Meteria?
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyid=193090
“The Greens support responsible access to the foreshore, which is compatible with Customary Ownership governed by tikanga Maori and the concept of public domain.
Vote:“The clearest example is Lake Taupo, where ownership of the lake bed rests with Maori but everyone enjoys recreational access.”
http://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/denial-customary-rights-unacceptable-say-greens
September 23rd, 2011 at 7:49 am
@hj 8:28 pm
Guess I should just ignore you, because you are obviously a NZ First supporter, and they will remain irrelevant.
……………………………………………..
Anti-immigration feeling has no place in the Green party Immigration and Population policies released today, Green MP Keith Locke says.
“The Green Party policy is not based on prejudice, but an objective analysis of what level of migration is compatible with a sustainable New Zealand.
[despite such things being described as "excruciatingly difficult"]
The Greens seem to believe that you can have an increasing population and maintain the same quality of life yet as Rod Oram says:
Fast population growth over the past decade has strained infrastructure, boosted house prices and reduced the quality of life in the Auckland region.
http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/0705/RMA__Oram_Paper_May_2007.pdf
“Immigration and tax breaks for investment in residential property are being cited as the underlying causes of steep increases in the cost of housing over the past decade.
The report added that there was little evidence that immigration boosted local incomes. In fact, the need to build roads and schools meant that net migration contributed to the national deficit. ”
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/4622459/Government-policies-blamed-for-house-prices
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 8:00 am
Is it honest to present a one sided election platform while ignoring the drastic (elephant in the room) aspects of your policy such as a commitment to the indigenous version of the treaty of waitangi?:
Kevin Hague
printed in Te Awa, the Magazine of the Green Party of Aotearoa.
Our Charter also explicitly accepts Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the founding document of this country, recognising Maori as Tangata Whenua. Part of the public discussion that has followed from the recent arrests in Ruatoki and elsewhere citing anti-terrorism laws has been an assertion of Tuhoe’s “sovereignty”. The sense of consternation from some quarters that has greeted this assertion must remind us that this preamble to our Charter is not just a form of empty words but rather a commitment to principle that demands our action.
We are moving into a new phase of the collective national discussion about the Treaty, and as Greens we have a responsibility both to be an active and ethical voice in that discussion but also to work to equip others to participate in that discussion from an informed and principled basis, rather than sheer short term self interest.
Discussion to date has focused on the return of usually a small fraction of those resources unfairly taken from Maori as reparation, on reducing inequalities and on the rights of Maori as an ethnic and cultural minority with a threatened language and culture. While some of these issues have been addressed in part through the deliberations of the Waitangi Tribunal, these issues are, in fact, largely unrelated to the Treaty. If there were no Treaty, as there is not in a number of other societies around the world, these would all still be issues that would need to be addressed in a fair and just society.
The phase of the discussion that we now need to move into is one that that focuses on Maori status as the indigenous people of this country and on the actual content of the Treaty: a statement of the terms and conditions for the presence of non-Maori. The Maori right to self-determination pre-dated the Treaty and was not altered by it. What is at issue in understanding the Treaty are the rights of non-Maori.
not that I’m suggesting you’re a bunch of dangerous zealots Toad
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 8:05 am
The State of the Pakeha Nation
Vote:by Catherine Delahunty
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0702/S00068.htm
September 23rd, 2011 at 8:26 am
@hj 8:00 am
Thanks for highlighting that, hj. You are doing a great job yourself in getting the Green position on the Treaty out there, so no need for the Greens to campaign on it.
And, no, the Greens are not interested in trying to dog whistle to Treaty-denying racists. Unlike some Parties, the Greens still have principles.
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 8:30 am
“….the Greens still have principles….”
Yup – we all saw evidence of that courtesy of the patsy article (and the subsequent apology) in the Waikato Times.
Thanks for the reminder.
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 8:56 am
One good thing about this astro turfing is we get to poke fun at green fuckwits.
DPF seems to be whistling for watermelons once a day so they have an equal opportunity to be laughed at on this blog.
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 9:00 am
Yes Elaycee the Greens have no principles because 1 person did something wrong. I guess that means National also have no principles because of Patsy Wong’s husband and let me see, this is an easy game to play, ACT has no principles because of Garrett and that stolen identity and I don’t even need to mention Labour and the huge list of why they have no principles.
So who does that leave with any ‘principles’? Whoops no one.
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 12:10 pm
YesWeDid – don’t be silly.
The partner of a list candidate from the Gweens tried to use a regional newspaper (The Waikato Times) to promote their voting preference by claiming to be a neutral interview subject, whilst clearly they were not. They lied. And when the reporter from the WT asked whether said partner had any links to the Gweens, she said “No’ – another lie. Then, when the bollocks ‘story’ was exposed for the fraud it is (by Whale), the same Gweens ran for cover.
But if you think that Pansy Wong’s husband is a liar, then perhaps you could explain to me how this is the case, as I can’t see that suggestion passing the veracity test.
Do tell.
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 12:44 pm
@hj 8:00 am
Thanks for highlighting that, hj. You are doing a great job yourself in getting the Green position on the Treaty out there, so no need for the Greens to campaign on it.
And, no, the Greens are not interested in trying to dog whistle to *Treaty-denying racists*. Unlike some Parties, the Greens still have principles.
………………………………….
Oh you aren’t going to campaign on it because of me?
Or because it would go down like a dead rat with the public?
“A willingness on the part of Pakeha leftists to be guided by the Maori nationalist advocates of tino rangatiratanga had by the mid-1980s become the litmus test of authentic revolutionary praxis. As proof of their commitment to the cause of the tangata whenua individuals and institutions were required to elevate Te Tiriti o Waitangi to the status of holy writ. In these matters, the Greens proved to be no exception.”
Vote:http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2010/05/taking-greens-seriously.html
September 23rd, 2011 at 12:48 pm
Toad croaking: racist…..rrrr racist………..rrrr racsit …..racist!
Vote:September 23rd, 2011 at 1:06 pm
The Green mission seems to be iPredict today.
Vote: