It is that time of year where you are expected to gaze at your navel and reflect on the events of the past 12 months. I thought that a post of the Standard’s ten most popular posts would give a feel for the events that were most important for the Standard’s readers and participators over the past 12 months. Anyway here goes:
Number 10 was a post by Anthony R0bins about Labour’s housing policy posted on July 28. The policy of restricting the ability of foreigners to buy land locally hit a real nerve in the debate. Was this a nationalist policy by Labour wanting to preserve local control or was it a racist dog whistle designed to discriminate against foreigners? 702 comments later the debate had covered a number of areas and showed the benefit of online participation. The debate covered everything from compact urban form to xenophobia. The post was relatively concise but the debate was intense.
Number 9 was a provocative post that I put up . It was during the Roastbusters debate and linked to John Tamihere’s expressed desire to stand for Labour out west. I thought there should be a discussion about whether or not he should be a Labour MP and I believe the overwhelming response was that he should not even think about it.
Number 8 was a prescient post by Eddie on Shearer’s leadership of the Labour Party put up a month before Shearer stood down. It suggested that his handling of the Manban was the last straw and there had been a sea change of opinion about him. It rightfully predicted that his days were numbered.
Number 7 was David Cunliffe’s guest post during the leadership campaign. A guest post was also provided by Grant Robertson. Shane Jones did not do the same but I posted about his leadership announcement to provide some balance. Interestingly the views were in the ratio of 56:28:16 and the membership votes in the leadership contest were in the ratio of 60:27:13. That is some coincidence …
Number 6 was a post by Eddie on Labour’s three factions that was put up on March 25. It gave by far the most sophisticated analysis of Labour’s factions that I read all year and essentially predicted that the careerist left would splinter and cause a change in the leadership which did occur. It also hinted at the problems that Caucus had at the time.
Number 5 was a post by Helen Kelly about the film industry and the slave wages being paid to talented technicians. She also suggested a means of organising the workforce so that their rights could be protected and enhanced. Although it attracted few comments (only 45) it obviously struck an international chord and was immensely well read.
Number 4 was a post that I put up about Bevan Chuang during the height of the Cameron Slater inspired Len Brown witch hunt. I thought that Bevan’s treatment by Slater, and for that purpose by Len Brown, had been awful and that discussion of her predicament was necessary. Most of the post was provided by a commenter who shall remain nameless but it was an attempt to see the whole issue from Chuang’s perspective.
Number 3 was Karol’s post on Simon Bridges’ implosion on John Campbell’s show. If you ever need to see reinforcement of how aggressive, obnoxious and conceited a tory Politician can get then the film clip in the post has to be seen. Bridges was outrageous and his performance should be compulsory viewing for every progressive person thinking about getting involved in the next election.
Number 2 was Mike Smith’s post on Chelsie Crayford posting a photo with John Key with a sign saying that she was “with stupid”. She was attacked by all the usual suspects but her bravery and her ability to accurately describe the current Prime Minister was a worthy addition to the posts of the year. Interestingly Facebook provided a number of the hits.
And …. [drum roll] … the most popular post of the year is …
A guest post by BLiP where he documents the many lies that John Key has said over the past few years. Congratulations BLiP and please, please keep up the good work.
May 2014 be even more satisfying and rewarding than 2013 was.
Chelsea crayford…. thats democracy folks
Yes, that’s serious grassroots political action.
or, democratic materialism ?
btw, that’s the ‘freedom’ to trade and consume.
Obviously Photoshopped….
I think your educated guess was better than the opinion polls. We may need it again around October next year
Probably be a bit later than October. The election probably won’t be until mid-November and even if Cunliffe quits on election night, after Labour’s big loss, the election for the new Labour leader probably won’t be until the new year.
Wrong buddy, Key’s in Hawaii getting the mansion refurbished for next year’s “homecoming”!!
Ron
it will not be as reflective of the election because this site attracts more of the left hence a frighteningly accurate reflection of the labour leadership race?
Thanks micky. By most popular do you mean most commented on?
Most pageviews Weka. Interestingly there was not a great correlation between comments and page views.
Also, I’m not sure page views equates with significance or quality of the post – at least not if my post at #3 is anything to go by.
For some reason that post attracted a lot of views – via Facebook as I recall, going by my recollection of Lynn’s comments at the time.
That post was written in haste, and didn’t involve as much research, reflection or care as many of my other posts during the year: not the one I would have picked as my best of the year.
However, BLiP’s tireless monitoring of Key’s lies and distortion of the truth does deserve the highest commendation.
I found the compilation of the list an interesting process and there is no determining factor of what will or will not work. Often the immediacy of a post reflecting what is happening in real time is just as important as something that it thought through and considered.
BLiP does deserve a medal tho …
Will you do a list of the most commentated posts?
Will give it a go Chris. You may feature prominently in these!
Oh dear
Which is why it would be essentially meaningless!
C’mon who wouldn’t be interested in seeing which posts had the most comments…
Weka
might be views cos helen kellys got 45 comments?
Well I checked the most “popular ” post of BliP, and the one cited had 61 comments. Now I know it has been reposted on a number of occasions, so maybe the cumulative number of comments is the highest.
Otherwise the post is propaganda, and you will be committing the same sin as BLiP accuses JK of. And of most of the BLiP list is actually interpretation, opinion etc. Which is why NZ’ers, by and large, (Standardnista’s excepted) do not think that the PM is an inveterate liar, and also why Labour will not be able to run a campaign on that theme. Though I appreciate the modern campaigning also uses friendly blogs as an underground campaign tool.
By the way I note that this blog basically equates the Labour/Green bloc as the equivalent to National. I understand why that is the case under MMP. But I would suggest in the public mind, that if National gets 45% and the Labour gets 35%, they are not going to be seen as the equivalent. National will be seen by much of the public as having the right to have first crack at forming government. Such a gap between the two main parties will be a powerful message to NZF, which in this situation would almost certainly have the balance of power.
Now I realize there is nothing in the law that says that the largest party has first option, but you can see why Shane Jones keeps talking about the importance of Labour being north of 40%, even if that was largely at the expense of the Greens. He is clearly concerned about moral mandates.
A party that oversees a massive increase in child poverty and does nothing to deal with it has the gall to claim it has a ‘moral’ mandate.
That’s a laugh.
+1. Wayne is not wise to suggest that morality can justify any of National’s destructive and antisocial policies. If policies have to promoted using “spin” and subterfuge and involve ignoring all scientific evidence which points to the negative effects of those policies on society, then citing moral mandates is a bit rich!
+1
National have no morals.
also + (the desperation sets in before the old year departs)
Hi Wayne
The popularity of the posts is measured by the number of page views, not comments. As can be seen with Helen Kelly’s post there were few comments but a large number of views. Her post was obviously of an issue of significance.
I challenge you and BLiP to debate line by line his analysis of Key’s statements to see if the assertion is correct or not …
In an MMP environment the Labour Green block is the equivalent of the National block. Check out on election night if Labour and Green get 47% and National gets 43% there will very probably be a change of Government.
I challenge you and BLiP to debate line by line his analysis of Key’s statements to see if the assertion is correct or not …
As if he ever would.
Apparently John Key’s history of lying doesn’t actually make him a liar. That was just him lying, quite different from him being a liar…..apparently.
I understand why that is the case under MMP. But I would suggest in the public mind, that if National gets 45% and the Labour gets 35%, they are not going to be seen as the equivalent. National will be seen by much of the public as having the right to have first crack at forming government.
I’m curious to know exactly where you got this “first crack at forming a government” rule from Wayne?
Because immediately after an election all parties are in exactly the same position – either they can negotiate to be part of the government, or they become part of the opposition – in one form or another. Our electoral laws and constitution are quite plain on this matter.
It’s disappointing hearing someone of your experience Wayne plainly pre-figuring the Nats plan if they don’t have the numbers after 2014; that they intend on smearing the government as a “coalition of losers”.
I do really wonder where this bizarre idea of “first crack at forming government” comes from.
The process (as much as it can be called a ‘process’) is necessarily carried out in parallel. The parties don’t all line up like kids in a school ground waiting to be picked for the rugby team.
It comes from an ideological position that only understands “we won, so now we get to do whatever we like, cos we won. Did we mention we won? “
Yeah, but that doesn’t make sense, because forming the government is the bar by which “you won”, not whatever number of seats you might have happened to win.
What’s making sense got to do with anything that National says?
Two points.
1) Nz’ers are increasingly coming to the view Key is a liar. In recent months I’ve heard it openly expressed by some non-politically aware people I know. Interestingly, it was after the Dotcom/GCSB fiasco that I noted the change which is a tad amusing given John Key claims nobody cared about it.
2) The boot’s on the other foot now Wayne. For years we had to put up with rwnjs screaming “Helen Clark’s a liar”. No way would she hold the position she does today if she was that way inclined. Nevertheless, I don’t recall any Nat./Act MPs making any attempt to correct the claim about Clark, so don’t expect Lab./Green MPs to be of any assistance re-Key. They don’t have to run a campaign on that theme either because the view is already well and truly out there…
“NZ’ers, by and large, (Standardnista’s excepted) do not think that the PM is an inveterate liar…”
What are you basing that statment on Wayne?
Perhaps his “evidence” is the polling which shows that if you spend your money wisely you can tell lies and/or mislead and the people will still love you because your wool pulling is of superior quality. In my opinion Wayne is confusing the concept of someone telling mistruths with the concept of covering them well enough that the public dont know they are being misled.
Of note is the use of the adverb by Wayne, inveterate. It seems he has moved from stating the PM is not a liar to a qualification of the statement. he lies, but it is not ingrained, so it’s ok. i suspect a career in politics and around spin doctors and those who agree with you makes one begin to believe their rationalisations of their fibs…
Inveterate
having a particular habit, activity, or interest that is long-established and unlikely to change.
“an inveterate gambler”
synonyms: ingrained, deep-seated, deep-rooted, deep-set, entrenched, established, long-established, congenital
Beware the dissonance drag
“Cognitive dissonance is an innately human process that can muddle the ethical values of an individual without him or her even realizing that it is happening. The most basic of cognitive dissonance scenarios occurs when a person whom an individual regards highly adopts a behavior that the same individual deplores. The gulf between the individual’s admiration of the person (a positive attitude) and the individual’s objection to the behavior (a negative attitude) must be reconciled. The individual can lower his or her estimation of the person, or develop a rationalization for the conflict (the person was acting uncharacteristically due to illness, stress, or confusion), or reduce the disapproval of the behavior.
This is why misbehavior by leaders and other admired role models is potentially very harmful on a large scale: by creating dissonance, it creates a downward drag on societal norms by validating unethical behavior. Tortured or inexplicable defenses of otherwise clearly wrong behavior in public dialogue are often the product of cognitive dissonance.”
http://www.ethicsscoreboard.com/rb_fallacies.html from Ethics Fallacies Myths Distortions and Rationalizations
Wayne has obviously not been reading the comments on the Herald opinion pieces over recent months. IMO there has been a definite shift in the comments (and the number of likes) well away from the previous fawning idolisation of Key – although not in most of the opinion articles themselves (eg Armstrong etc).
Are you saying this was the first time you had viewed it, today Wayne?
“Now I realize there is nothing in the law that says that the largest party has first option, but you can see why Shane Jones keeps talking about the importance of Labour being north of 40%, even if that was largely at the expense of the Greens. He is clearly concerned about moral mandates.”
TIme for you and other NZers who don’t yet get it: it’s MMP. There is nothing morally wrong with Labour and the GP forming a block and forming govt ahead of National. Many left wing voters understand this and vote accordingly. Time for the right to get with it.
And yet they “get” the gifting of a seat to create a partner???
Keep on beating that drum of National Party ‘entitlement’ Wayne. I grant you’ve not expressed definitively as to percentages in 2014 but entitlement is your subtext.
Ever contemplated a ‘finding out’ coming along Wayne ? I guess not. There’s the entitlement I suppose. I refer to April/May next year (maybe as late as July) when Key has to answer to parliament for wilfully misleading parliament about his knowledge (detail and timing) of Kim Dotcom.
Your response to this question: do you really believe that Paul Davison QC would permit Kim Dotcom to be as bold as he has been before the event if his claims weren’t ultimately provable ? Clean hands and all that………
Further question – you’re sure that the topic of this NBR article will never filter down far enough ?
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/nz-politics-daily-honesty-bigger-issue-cronyism-ck-138154
Ah, the old No, you misinterpreted what he said defense of the leader.
And the answer to that is, No we fucken didn’t. When Key says two things that directly contradict each other then, at best, one of those things he said was a lie and that’s happened quite a lot in that list if BLiP’s.
And out comes the BS about being the bigger party and thus must form the government. Having the largest vote doesn’t give any sort of moral mandate to form the government – that only belongs to the party or parties that can form a majority of the vote which is unlikely to be National.
Geez Wayne, thanks for explaining about Sealord Jones and his morals. I always thought his dislike of the Greens may have had something to do with his desire to get his fingers into a few mining profits in Northland. I am happy to stand corrected, unless this is the morality you are talking about?
‘
WINRAR!!!
What a nice surprise to come home to after a Christmas. We spent a few days out in the boondocks without even constant electricity let along internet access or cell phone coverage. The “tech detox” was quite enjoyable, for the first couple of days. But now I’m back and I see there is already another item to add to “the list”.
I have repreatedly asked for people to challenge items on the list of John Key’s lies. I did get a few such challenges, I even took a couple off the list when I couldn’t DOX the statements with adequate references, and I dropped the “I am a Christian / Jew / Agnostic” lies because of the discomfort it caused some readers. I stand by each and every item on the list as a blatant lie even if some can be referred to as “brain fade” – the “I was doing School C at that time” one being an example of such. The idea that there are some on the list which are “subject to interpretation” is itself propaganda and I am in no doubt that most New Zealanders believe their Prime Minister is a flat out liar. The trouble with that message, though, is that generally speaking, most people I have talked to about it seem to believe that being a liar is acceptable and, pretty much, de rigueur for any politician. Such is the level of cynicism within the electorate.
Once again, I request that if any items on the list of John Key’s lies is incorrect or “a matter of interpretation” then, please, let me know and I will happily either remove said item or prove “beyond reasonable doubt” that it was a lie.
Here, for handy reference, is the current list:
. . . bring it on.
Thanks again BLiP. Wayne, just say the word and I can set up a separate post where you and BLiP and others can argue the accuracy of his list to your heart’s content …
holding one’s breath can turn one blue
Is that your last party political broadcast on behalf of the national party for 2013 wayne?
Key is clever to make sure his lies are not so blatant wayne and he and his writers rely on your conveniently narrow definition of lie. Lets substitue deliberately misleading or the other option which is lazy and stupid… eg in the bmw bs
Rofl @ at the newly coined notion of moral mandate. Apparently the rights effort to reclaim fpp by stealth. Nats appear able to apply morality to efforts to gain power but little else.
Press the reply button to keep thread sequential!
Paul. No reply option on mobile
Good point. I must get back to that before I disappear to the deepest south…
a thumbs’-up to that number one..
..i have posted it/linked to it (again).
..and how about listing the most commented-on..?
..that could also be of some interest..
..phillip ure..
I thought I had a good memory on Key’s lies, but BLiP’s list is amazing. I’d like to see that run as full page ads in all the daily’s closer to the elections next year. I wrote to Goff after the last election, when Goff called Key a liar in that first debate, Key was stung, he had no comeback, because he knew Goff was right. The arseh**e of a man.
If Labour/Greens/Mana do win next year, and by God I hope they do, expect National to pull every dirty trick out of the book. Even in the lead up to the election, as we’ve seen with Len Brown, they’ll be trolling through the rubbish bins and waste skips looking for any bit of damning evidence to hang on Labour or any potential coalition partner.
As for Wayne’s comments that National will want/deserve first crack at forming a Government next time around if the two sides are roughly level-pegging, it just shows how conceited the Tories are. What next, should we allow them to print a few extra votes to get them over the line? Come on Wayne, what kind of banana democracy are you living in? Oh, that’s right, John Keys!!
His list, from memory is not even complete… The whole Len Brown thing has shown that even though people say they expect politicians ot lie or whatever, they actually dont like it when it is blatantly exposed…. is it because individually those voters feel they have been made a mug? If so, cherry pick the porkies very carefully with key…
find the audio ones, and get them youtube bound and viral…
In fact the only politician who has recently advocated the view that that the largest, in terms of number of seats, party has a moral right to have first crack at forming a Government is Winston Peters. As he may be the one to be the king-maker after the election his views probably need to be considered. On the other hand Weasel Winnie has never allowed anything he said yesterday to affect what he is going to do or say today.
In terms of trolling through rubbish bins, I was not aware that the National Party had been accused of trolling through Len Brown’s bin. John Key, in particular seems to have remained entirely neutral on the subject of Len and his various pecadillos. The only examples of going through the rubbish bins was in 2008 when the Labour Party supporters did it to the rubbish fron Key’s electorate office.
Mike Williams, then Labout Party President got pretty close when he tripped off to Australia in the middle of the campaign on his fiasco of an attempt to smear Key. He went of promising to find an H-homb and came back with a great big fat zero for his efforts.
Alwyn – my little piece of shyster profanity, what occurred to a certain starlet being coerced into revealing details of her torrid affair with the Mayor to his main rival in a moon-lite carpark is the equivalent of trolling through the rubbish bins at midnight.
Blubber-oil ranted as if this was the story to end all stories, now we see the quislings on the Council chattering like Quasimodo.
As for John Key, nothing happens in the right blogosphere without the say so of some senior National Party official. They don’t want anything turning rogue, not even some dim-witted pug like you alwyn. And Key’s “dirty little secrets”, in the fullness of time, they will be revealed. Money can buy silence, but only for so long.
Proud to have done my bit. I believe it is the quality of the comments that generates page hits. Looking to refining my technique in the New Year……
I am looking forward to that too grumpy.
have a healthy and happy 2014
Cheers Tracey…..
There can be, but only one outcome to the general election in 2014, surely? A huge Labour landslide and National exiled to become microbe life (just) on Mars? Surely a party thats inficted draconian polices on the poor, vunerable, welfare, healthcare, anything else that moves and trying to sell us stuff we already own is destined for oblivion? Surely Mr Keys should be packing his suit case, ready to join the other failed right wing nutcases of the world at “Fascist View Retirement Home”? Other residents include Mitt Rommel (Usa) Paul Von Ryan (Usa) and in transit Cameron (Uk) & Abbott (Aus) surely? Yet “Are You Thinking What I Am Dreading”? That Nationals recipe for electoral success will be appauling electoral tactics that appeal to the lowest common denomantor & predjudices in people, add a huge chunk of voter apathy, sprinkle with loads of smoke, mirrors & chicanery…Put said menu in the oven to cook into the publics mind for the next year and add huge dollops of dubious cash donations to campaign..et Voila! One National Victory! Please some one? Tell me I am niave, stupid, and The National Night Mare After Christmas is not going to happen? Plse!
And further to the link above to Blips April post. These also are comprehensive lists that he has compiled and we can bring them forward regularly in 2014 as I am sure they will be still on the spot, age shall not wither them etc.
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-20052013/#comment-635333
http://thestandard.org.nz/the-king-stay-the-king-the-pawns-in-the-game-they-get-capped-quick/#comment-631772
Blip 1.3.1.1.1
1 September 2013 at 3:00 pm
But wait . . . there’s more: http://thestandard.org.nz/liar/#comment-685886