Asenati at it again…..

It is hard keeping up with all the things Asenati gets up to on Twitter and Facebook. I am blocked from following her on Twitter, and suspect if I tried to add her on Facebook, the same thing would happen. But every so often I see something of hers retweeted into my timeline. I always make sure to check that it is the real account and not the parody. Last night this got retweeted into my timeline:

Twitter___asenatitaylor__Perverts_at_Swimming_pools____

Street prostitution is an issue that Asenati has a track record with. But I am not sure what this tweet is about, or what it was meant to achieve. Resorting to calling people perverts, even without naming them, and suggesting they “check” the street prostitutes is not going to achieve anything.

Greens, Berl and the pre-PREFU

Today is PREFU day. The lock up started at 10am this morning. Before the PREFU lock up, the Greens held a press conference. They have commissioned  Berl to analyse the Governments accounts and projections. I will leave it up to others to blog on the content of the announcement and the analysis. But I would like to comment on one element of the social media promotion of it.

 

The Greens account ran a series of quotes from Russel Norman during the press conference:

Twitter___NZGreens____RusselNorman_reveals_evidence____ Continue Reading

Jami-Lee Ross and Wikipedia edits

Since the release of Dirty Politics last week, there has been reference to the alleged editing of Labour MPs wikipedia pages by those mentioned in the book. I don’t think the malicious editing of Wikipedia pages is a acceptable form of political engagement. However, if you are an elected office holder, it is sadly something that does happen. It has apparently happened to Jami-Lee Ross. Who took to Twitter with it:

Twitter___jamileeross__My_Wikipedia_page_was_altered____

Considering the alleged edits that have been being undertaken by those mentioned in the book, these alleged edits are at the lower end of the spectrum. What makes Jami-Lee’s tweet more interesting is the number and content of the images included in it.

Twitter___jamileeross__My_Wikipedia_page_was_altered____2
Twitter___jamileeross__My_Wikipedia_page_was_altered____3
Twitter___jamileeross__My_Wikipedia_page_was_altered____4
Twitter___jamileeross__My_Wikipedia_page_was_altered____5

It is obvious from the time at the top of the screen grabs and the corresponding dates on the posts, that Jami-Lee has felt the need to go back and find these posts, just to make his point. It comes across as if Jami-Lee is taking the actions very personally.  Is the issue of someone editing your name on Wikipedia really worth kicking up a fuss about, particularly in the days following the allegations in Nicky Hager’s book? Why not just quietly fix it and move on? Things like this probably happen more often than we know about. By complaining about it, all he is going to achieve is attracting attention and negative comments:

Twitter___Timothy_Malcolm___jamileeross__RPamatatau_look____

Twitter___ImperatorFish___jamileeross_Forget_the_Hager____

With the possibility of more allegations to come from the hacking of Cameron Slaters emails, this time should really be about National MPs and candidates keeping their heads down when it comes to allegations of this sort. The public are not going to give them any sympathy, especially when the evidence is as weak as Jami-Lee is presenting. Six weeks ago this may have been something worth drawing attention to, but right now all that will be achieved is negative attention.

Twitter Conversation of the Day 17 August: Peter and George

The Greens have announced their child poverty/tax policy today. It involves a top tax rate of 40% for income over $140,000. This has prompted Peter Dunne to tweet the following:

Twitter___PeterDunneMP__Greens_using_my_taxes_to_count____

Unsurprisingly this prompted a bit of a reaction, but the one in particular I think is worthy of attention is George’s:

Twitter___mrdarroch__They_re_not__your__taxes_____ Continue Reading

Swipe Right with a Difference: A candidate on Tinder

Connecting with voters is getting harder and harder. News paper circulation is declining, people are not watching the news as much as they did, they are watching either streamed or downloaded content. This means that there are less places for them to be exposed to political news. This is why social media, like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram is being used. Through sharing and retweeting, it is possible to get a political message in front of people who may not be seeing political messages anywhere else. Add in the element of it being shared by friends and it is more likely to get attention.

 

However there are a couple of social networks/aps that aren’t really being used. But one candidate has taken the brave step onto Tinder

 

Tinder is not normally associated with political discussion and campaigning, but Jacinda has broken the mold .

 

Tinder has been in the news a bit lately, it is how the young New Zealander who died on the Gold Coast apparently met the owner of the apartment. I haven’t used Tinder, but I know what the aim of it is. But for those who don’t know, a quick Tinder 101:

Tinder is a dating/meeting people app that uses your Facebook information, mutual friends, likes in common and photos to create a profile in which people can then swipe left to say no or right to say yes, if both people say yes they match and can then chat and romance can flourish.

If you want a bit more information about it, check out Elle Hunt‘s stories on the Wireless here and here.

 

I first learned about this when Dan News tweeted this screen grab:

Twitter___dannews__There_s_someone_on_tinder_wanting____

I had to check with Jacinda that this was actually an account that she controlled and wasn’t a parody. She did confirm that. It is a novel approach to pushing the #AskJacinda hashtag. I have blogged about #AskJacinda before, where I commented on the fact that she was linking it in with more traditional media formats. This seems to be just another way to generate exposure for the hashtag.

 

Apparently so far most of the response has been pretty positive, which is good. I suspect a number of people who come across it are a little taken aback by a political candidate using the platform. But as Jacinda says “I just wanted to find new ways or reaching people and making sure they can get their questions on the election answered”.

 

There is obviously some risk in using this platform for political campaigning, but in some ways I think our MPs and candidates are too risk adverse. It is also a matter of how you approach a new platform. Learning the rules of the road so to speak, and sticking to them always helps. Jacinda does have the added bonus of being the trail blazer, so can be forgiven some slip ups, but there doesn’t appear to have been any.

 

It is good to see candidates, particularly high profile candidates, taking some risk and doing new and unusual things. But the ones that pay off are the calculated risks, that have been well thought out. Will being on Tinder generate any, political, returns for Jacinda? Hard to tell, but by the sounds of it she has been getting a number of questions from it, that she may not have other wise got. So there is obviously some users on Tinder responding in a positive way.

 

And to answer the question I am sure all of you are asking, so far there have been no asking her for what Tinder is intended for.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A United Front: For better or for worse?

One of the issues this election is the potential make up and structure of a left wing government, should they have the seats to create one. Will the Greens and New Zealand First be able to work with each other? Will the Greens and the Internet Party be willing to work together? Will David Cunliffe offer the Internet Mana Party seats at the cabinet table? Will the Internet Mana Party even get into Parliament? With this as background, some on the left have been attempting to provide a united front, showing that at some levels the parties can work together, hoping to present the image that they can work together. Some examples are:

Twitter___TrishTupou__Look_at_this_beautiful_united____

Twitter___lailaharre___InternetMANA___nzlabour______

As well as these from here:

united 5

 

Untitled 2

Plus I have seen many other examples over recent weeks of some in various parties on the left trying to present the image of cooperation.

 

It is all good and well having low level activists and candidates promoting a united front, or the leader of a minor party claiming a united front, but how does this contrast with other social media posts from other parties?

 

Kelvin Davis is already on the record with his views on the Internet Party:

Kelvin_Davis 3

Banners_and_Alerts_and__1__Kelvin_Davis4

So is Phil Goff

Phil_Goff

Phil_Goff_-_Internet_Mana_Party_You_have_to_ask_the_question_why___

And Chris Hipkins:

Twitter___chrishipkins__Finally_had_a_chance_to_see____

Twitter___chrishipkins__Getting_a_bunch_of_people_drunk____

Twitter___chrishipkins__I_want_more_young_NZers_to____

and here:

Twitter___chrishipkins__The_good_old_days__when_political____

At the same time that the minor parties are trying to present this united front, that the Labour MPs are trying to pull down, there is the poll by TV3 that has the following result:

Latest_poll_more_bad_news_for_Labour_-_Story_-_Politics_-_3_News

 

The Greens and Internet Mana obviously has something to gain by presenting a unified front, but the Labour party has to consider how this unified front, particularly with the Internet Mana Party, will impact on their party vote. It is obvious that Kelvin, Phil and Chris see the risks in being associated too closely with the Internet Mana party.  Social media makes it harder for the party to keep control of the message that is going out. In the past a photo, like the first one in this post, might have been seen by half a dozen people. Those in it would have been happy about the “united front”, but that message would not have reached such a wide audience. As well,  previously parties would not have been able to so easily hijack the message of another party, like Laila did in the tweets above. But the use of social media as a means of political communication makes it a lot easier for it to happen. Now it is there for all to see, and despite the view of those out campaigning for the various parties, it may not be helping the overall cause of the left in their aim to change the government.

Public Service Announcement: Hashtags

I have seen a number of people, not just MPs or candidates do this lately. When you are using a hashtags, punctuation of any form breaks up the hashtag.

Twitter___Megan_Woods__Masses_of_people_resplendent____

So if you are going to try and create hashtags, make sure they don’t contain punctuation. Twitter, and hashtags in particular, doesn’t really place a lot of weight on correct grammar. It is about getting a message across, and hashtags are to hep with searches. So stop trying to apply grammar and punctuation to them.

A short post about Metiria

Recently the Greens have been taking a much less serious attitude to things. Showing that they can have a bit of fun, and poke fun at themselves. Metiria has done it again this morning.

Twitter___metiria__Here_s_some_political____

Politics can be a bit serious sometimes. It doesn’t have to always be. It is known that I get on well with a number of Green MPs, they are all decent people.

 

However, I must point out that the photo is the wrong way around. Metiria isn’t the only one ot do this, but it would be great to see MPs and commentators taking a little more care with how they create images and how they post them.