We have been going for a couple of months – and have developed a range of styles and time commitment. Tumeke has given us recognition as one of the better new blogs but frankly we are tiny compared with established blogs.
Clare (the instigator) and the team now want to try and get feedback on how we can do better.
Clearly there are a range of post types. Big issues and policy development. (Cheap?) political shots. And lots in between. Styles go from laboured and worthy to hasty and error ridden.
Right from the start we knew that time availability would vary. I do more than most because I now do the vast majority of my correspondence and writing on line and getting the notifications means it is easy to respond. I don’t think I’ve ever spent more than ten minutes on a posting. For others the laptop is not attached in the same way and take much more care and deliberation.
It has pushed relationships as we float ideas in others portfolio areas. And not everyone is keen on being the subject of a caption competition.
I’m interested in feedback on moderation. We are after a tone that is a bit different from the top rating political blogs. What do you think?
So what do you like and what don’t you like. More importantly what aren’t we doing and what could we be doing better.
At the risk of sounding like myself at a rugby aftermatch this is a long game and thanks to the team for a good start.
I think it’s been great. It is fantastic to be able to converse so easily with Labour MPs – the thread on the medical marijuana bill was a classic example of the benefits of what a blog can provide.
Regarding moderation, it hasn’t been an issue for me and from my perspective I think you’ve been damn fair.
Perhaps a comment from “gingercrush”, someone who regularly comments from a centre-right perspective on The Standard said it best though (in a comment at The Standard):
Huge fan of your blog. Coming from the “other side”—but I’m not important enough for that to matter—I particularly enjoy the big-think, weighty posts, like Twyford on Demeny voting, Mallard on drug-driving, etc.
For someone coming from a non-Labour perspective, cheap shots and hit & runs at the government are less interesting to me: I a bunch of your press releases by e-mail anyway; reading less-polished versions of the same stuff here isn’t exactly rewarding.
So far, so good.
My main advice is to continue to differentiate the blog from all the rest in the blogosphere. There’s already a heap of good and bad blogs out there that lots of us already read. And there’s already a mass of press releases being put out by MPs. Don’t try and comment on every daily issue – that’s already being done. Only post when you have something unique and interesting to say, because we’re already drowning in a sea of info and opinion.
And, don’t be afraid to take some risks. It’s OK in the blogosphere to get things wrong and put some ideas up for discussion even if it’s not the party-line or a fully thought out policy or position. Some on Red Alert are already doing that, and it’s appreciated.
Bryce
You are doing are good job so far. You don’t need to worry about competing with Tumeke top ten, that list is a very poor guide to quality.
It’s great you have avoided attracting the trolls that have infested Kiwiblog. David writes great posts but he needs to kill off flamers like D4J,Redbaiter & PhilU. Their commenmts put off everyone else.
I’m glad you came along, I wanted to follow a Labour party blog but detest the lack of transparency at “The Standard”. We all know who their posters are so why don’t they come clean ? It’s great to have bloggers who are willing to put their name to their opinions.
Agree with Bryce – don’t bother with press releases, I want to hear what lies behind the press release.
Can you turn on email notification of comment replies ? I find this works best for me.
Can you also enable avatar graphics ? I like to have a photo so I can quickly identify fellow comment makers.
Bryan Spondre
Web Community Manager http://www.interest.co.nz
[The blog supports avatars - sign up at gravatar.com - re email comment replies there doesn't seem to be a default setting to enable this (presumably users would activate it via their own prefs anyway, may require a plugin, I'll check) - admin]
Left a comment but I think it got picked up by spam filter.
A few really good purposes I think the blog could be put to:
1) Floating ideas for future Private Member’s Bills – getting some feedback on them from various people before putting them in the ballot.
2) Informing us of what has been going on at various select committees (where possible).
3) Letting us know about a few juicy rumours floating around parliament (where possible).
4) Encouraging a collaborative approach on future policy formation – asking for feedback on policy ideas or simply just asking for some ideas on an issue.
I’m sure other people have more suggestions.
I think it’s great that you’re doing something like this, and certainly a step ahead of National here. However, I do think you need to be substantially more objective in your posts.
Political shots are all very well, and come with the territory, but I think you need to concentrate a bit more on the substance of what is being said rather than the “shot at any cost” approach. If you simply regurgitate questionable propaganda, you’re preaching to the converted, but if you post rational, logically sound arguments you’re far more likely to win over the fence-sitters reading your blog, and even gain sympathy from the right (who do read your blog – I am a National supporter myself).
If you can state clearly where your key policy differences are, and more importantly justify *why* you take this position, that would also be great – it lets people see behind the surface of what the Labour party stands for, and people are far more likely to vote for something they understand than vote for an enigma.
Can I suggest that you be unique. Emphasise the worthy, not the cheap political shots. If what you have to say or comment on is from in the public arena – eg hansard, a report, blog – link it. Don’t regurgitate whats already out the in the media etc. Explain why you take a certain position and defend it. Only moderate comments for good reason, ie abusive or defamatory – don’t delete comments because you don’t like them.
Also, dont blog when you are angry( eh Trevor?).
Above all say something others haven’t said – and say it well. Leave others to write biased inaccurate opinion.
Dave
I think the Red Alert blog site is great and I really enjoyed the caption competition about a certain MP
The Labour policies are already clear to me as I’ve read the manifesto – I’m interested in reading about Bills that may be put through parliament. I have no objection to reading “cheap shots” that are directed at others.
Great feedback so far. I’m keen for us to be using Red Alert, or another similar (and attached) forum to have some policy discussions online, for example on an issue such as copyright. I know it’s a bit out there to be opening up policy discussions to everyone who wants to contribute, but on some issues I think it’s important, and shows Labour trying different things and genuinely engaging with the public. Obviously, it’s not possible to develop all our policy in the public arena, but it is possible to seek reaction to ideas and argue some of the points.
I have a copyright forum in Auckland on Wednesday evening and after that hope to put some ideas up for some general discussion.
Will welcome your input, and be seeking a wider group to participate. This could be a test of how a more open source approach to some policy making could work.
I really like this blog and follow it sometimes. What interests me is the insight from Labour mps honestly, and not the political spin. I find most press releases not of interest because of that. Looking at solutions and talking honestly about them I feel is more valuable to NZ. One of the differences with Obama was his emphasis on really listening the what people said, as well as the professional politicos and lobbies. I don’t mind the political comment that I have read here, as I expect that type of thing from a Labour party blog, so long as it is from the Labour Party value base and not just cheap point scoring. And while it is difficult I guess, being wrong or corrected occassionally in blog posts is ok, as others have said, so long as the posts are honest. Isn’t real engagement that is authentic the point?
I have greatly enjoyed this blog, particularly the participatory democracy aspect, and the link with what’s really going on in the Big House. But it is hard to find as Red Alert is not in the blog’s address and when searching for it I often end up in some Christ’s College site!
don’t use the blog to campaign, so you support Labour – who would have guessed, anticipate your audience will be intelligent and might not want cheap harangues, avoid sounding like every other angry left-wing blog.
present interesting ideas and don’t frame them as gotcha moments for National – we know you don’t support National.
play the long the term, let people be impressed with a fresh and innovative approach rather than pouncing opportunistically on everything.
I’ve already posted my general appreciation here. As for more specific feedback:
* I like the current posting mix, which has something for everyone.
* I’ll happily second jarbury’s suggestions about floating ideas for member’s bills, engaging in collaborative policy development, and telling us about the parts of parliament we don’t normally see.
* Authenticity is important in a blog. The whole point is disintermdiation – seeing Labour MP’s unfiltered opinions. its been fascinating watching them develop their own online voice.
* …which means I disagree with Dave’s advice about not blogging when you’re angry (OTOH, that’s also because I find anger to be an excellent posting aid; OTOH the mdia pays attention to what you say here, so you hav emore reason to be careful)
* You need to continue to moderate comments to prevent the place from being colonised by the sewer. If you do not, you will lose the feedback and comments of the very people you are trying to talk to and motivate: your supporters and activists.
This is a great tool for floating ideas, telling us things we didn’t know, and communicating with and (most importantly) strengthening your relationship with your supporters and activists.
Loving the blog so far, I am one of those lurkers who says little but does read a lot of blogs. Like others have said the positive posts with real juicy policy and comment in them is best, leave the cheap shots for question time (and The Standard), this blog could really take off if it kept itself as a professional and polished outfit.
Oh and I should add keep the comment moderation on, it helps prevent a lot of flame wars and the like, I do not mind a small delay in waiting for replies to show up.
I think this site is a really good innovation. I understand this is also a learning curve for some of the Labour MPs who are working out how to use it. It will obviously evolve over time.
I don’t disapprove of moderation to remove trolling behaviour, but I think to an extent the comments will reflect the tenor of the posts. If posters write inflammatory posts, they will likely be responded to in kind.
I was a bit disappointed with the comments on the Demeny post, because it seemed like an issue that was worthy of debate, and critiqued on its merits, rather than howled down.
However, if a post does make outrageous claims, then it is likely that they will be pounced on pretty quickly.
I also agree on not blogging when you’re angry. If you make factual claims, be sure of your facts. It does more harm to you rather than your target if you’re found out to be making false claims.
If you make false claims, and you get caught out, make a point of apologising. Don’t try dancing on the head of a pin in order to avoid taking responsibility for what you’ve said.
I think the most value of this blog is the stated intention, for MPs to be able to post ideas and get critique and feedback. I think it is much less valuable as an article of spin, because like it or not, you will get found out very quickly.
Keep up the great work.
It’s a great blog, and you shouldn’t read anything into the “league tables” (heh!) at this time. It’s still very early days, it takes time for blogs to grow, and I suspect this one will. (Doesn’t matter if it doesn’t though, it’s still filling a niche).
Not much to add to the above except a couple of small random comments. My fave post so far was Trevor’s on why he voted the way he did on medical marijuana. It was the sort of information that could only come from the inside, and made something that appeared crazy suddenly make a lot more sense. So that’s what sets this blog apart for me. The insider insights.
I also like the big picture kite flying stuff, like Phil’s on Demeny voting, excellent. I agree that you guys can stay out of the ordinary day to day stuff and cheap shots, there are other places for that.
As for treading on each other’s toes – get over it. It’s clear (or make it clear!) that opinions here are of individuals, not speaking officially on behalf of portfolios or the Party. You have to be free to float and explore ideas in an informal way, and this blog increases the participation in that discussion. If it is seen as the informal forum that it is, no one should get upset about “territory”. Similarly, sending each other up with caption competitions etc – fair game I hope! A lot of folk out there who don’t know any politicians sometimes see them as a separate species, strange, aloof and unlikeable. Anything you can do to break down those barriers, show your ordinary human side, probably a good thing.
Final thought – the blog is a risk though. I’m sure I’m repeating the obvious but I’m going to say it anyway. The informality of the blog might lead posters to say things that they wouldn’t in other media. The internet never forgets, and the right wing clobbering machine will pick up anything it can use from here and beat you about the head with it – forever. So think before you post, maybe vet each other’s posts. This is a bold experiment – it could be fantastic – but be careful…
As someone who is more from the right than some of your commentators I have enjoyed your blog and how you are running it
Moderation a slippery slope, it seems about right at the moment but it really depends on the type of people who comment
I was a moderator for a short time at Kiwiblog, it was a nightmare!
Do keep up the good work, I think it is good for you and Labour
Overall I’d say you have things pretty right in terms of the big stuff – comment moderation, quantity and quality of posts etc. What has been especially good is most MPs actually read and respond to the comments. Hate it when MP blogs are one way only – that is why (apart from Foss) I never read or comment on National MP blogs.
In an ideal world would be great to have a blog post from the Spokesperson on every bill about to be voted on explaining how you are voting and why – not just those you are against. Realise is a big ask, but maybe a long term goal.
Overall have been pretty impressed with the amount of time Labour MPs have put into Red Alert.
And one other thing using the British word Tories for the right really does not ring true to a NZer
I might be right but I am prepared to bet I have voted Labour more than often than some of the moere fevered young supporters
You need my vote!
Beats the cynical No Minister blog any day of the week, and I also much prefer this to say Facebook, which is utterly one way, static and boring. This is a great idea and fun, and much more transparent than ‘The Standard’. Good work, thanks.
I think Red Alert is good to have on the scene and feel the debate is a lot less myopic here than in other left-leaning blogs. I wouldn’t expect you to worry about ratings/league tables, I don’t think they’re the right metric for you to use to measure success. My assumption is that you are neither interested in advertising revenue nor allowed to generate advertising revenue from this blog, so ratings be damned. You should maintain quality (of posts and comments) over quantity.
I do think certain people need to be careful about posting in the heat of the moment though. Perhaps posts should be put in moderation until a colleague can peer review them?
I think the best thing about here is getting what is not available anywhere else – the informative narrative that is absent from much of the media and unavailable to the average political blogger.
I should point out that there is a big and noticeable difference between propaganda and giving your viewpoints as MPs, so just make sure it’s the latter!
You all obviously have a unique perspective on NZ politics, so thanks for sharing it, and keep it up.
I think the mix of caution and what has been posted is about right. I also support moderation of blatant unwelcome threadjacking and flaming.
I think that MPs should respect each other’s territories to some extent – people in the portfolios probably want to make them their own and show what they can do. If it has already “pushed relationships” then surely giving people space and autonomy to do their own work is probably going to be better for their job satisfaction and for relationships within the caucus.
I’ve really enjoyed the blog.
As others have mentioned, it’s great to get opinions and views directly from MPs. I’ve particularly liked the blogs where various MPs have commented on each others posts.
But recently there has been some worrying signs. The post that David Cunliffe put up on Friday was far too long. Also it read very much like something that had been written by staff. If a step in moderation is a ban, maybe he could be banned for a week for postings like that?
First off I second both I/S and r0b’s comments.
It’s been a great experiment so far – keep letting it evolve.
I’ve been most impressed with the balance struck in moderation. I can’t see what you’ve been deleting but what I can see tends to support a view that you’re allowing dissent through but killing the gutter stuff. – that’s about right I’d say.
I love the different voices of the different MPs – there’s certainly no need to try and strike a more common ground. You are different people with similar jobs and a common values base – let that be enough of a common ground, and let the differences speak for themselves.
A few more links to background material would be good – but you’ll get there as you learn where things are electronically stored.
finally, r0b’s 100% right – the internet never forgets, so if you have to say something stupid (and we all do) just remember that you may have to be justifying it at the next election.
I am really liking this blog, I read it daily… I really like Phil Twyford’s posts generally – they’re substantial and thought provoking.
I like that Trevor is clearly really enjoying himself, and I must say the caption competition was pure comic gold.
I would like to see more posts here discussing what happens in Select Committees of issues that just don’t get any media coverage.
I also like the jibes, and the theatrics of the political game play – so long as it’s clever, and justified. Grant’s post on the Crosby Textor lines was something that doesn’t resonate outside the blog world, but is a fun read here.
Thought it was brilliant to see Carol and Iain blogging about their trip to the UK, and showing how much value can be bought back from those business class, all expense paid trips.
Would also be good to see a few more about social issues, particularly what Annette is dealing with. More international affairs would be interesting.
Ok, enough from me. Good work, and you’ve retained my vote.
I enjoy this blog very much and agree with comments on the quality of the posts.
Agree with David Farrar that it’s good to see MPs tracking their posts and responding to comments, when they can.
Hearing about MPs overseas trips is excellent and stops criticism of the “junket”.
Please encourage all MPs to post. We want to hear what they’re up to in their specialist areas.
Must say I enjoy and appreciate the Red Alert blog as it is. I’ll ditto what Idiot Savant said with a couple of added comments.
Point the second: all good for some reasonable kite flying. You’ll be assured of robust and constructive criticism without the MSM going all gooey over it. It works for frogblog and the Nats have done well with DPF and WhaleOil as tasting plates for larger ideas.
Point the third: FFS keep it real. One problem The Standard suffers from, apart from the pseudonymophilia there, is the obvious impact of spin merchants and line toers. Red Alert’s signal to noise ratio is much higher than The Standard because of this.
Point the fourth: Anger is OK. Concise and eloquent anger is better. Justify your anger. If in doubt, write it, save it, sleep on it, check it in the morning, then post it.
Fantastic! Loved that in this whole thread – everyone, no matter what ’side of the poll’ they sit upon is agreed – it’s great to air views, to have a platform that is relatively safe, to explore ideas and to ‘discuss’ events and ideas.
Got to love technology, isn’t it more fun that watching the 6o’clock (or read the Herald) and live on the surface? People have the opportunity to ask questions, contribute – laugh at the funny and rage against the stuff that used to happen around us.
No problem with the troll species, it keeps it real – as is shown here.
@ Trev – ‘Well done that man!’ Keep it going and watch it develop and prove its own outcomes, don’t try to force it to become something linear or put it all in a narrow focus frame – that would be defeating its purpose.
The only thing I would say – is to Raymon A Francis – “A rose by any other name, mate!” You could change the term but it wouldn’t change the odour.
Agree with all comments so far, (especially the sewage microfilter) but wouldn’t get too carried away with the caution thing.
By all means be careful with facts, but your point of difference is your inside oil – that’s what the punters come for. Sprinkle with sugar and salt and you’re onto a winner.
After last year, you owe the mainstream media nothing: why not post your inevitable juicy scoops (if not all press releases) here first?
Add the odd bit of infotainment/cartoons/vids/caption contest (regular, preferably, eg “friday nite fun etc) and aim to become required reading. Be ambitious for a Brighter Red Alert!
[...] post is a bit overdue. Reading all the comments on Trev’s Red Alert Feedback Wanted post has made me feel a tad overwhelmed by the importance of this “being an MP” project. [...]
Thanks for feedback and especially suggestions – please keep them coming. Thanks for the warnings r0b james inter alia but I think I’m with I/s on it being ok to show a bit of emotion in posts.
A couple of clarifications, first only the first comment from each source goes into an approval system, after that moderation is retrospective, secondly I’m pretty sure that David Cunliffe wrote his posts – those are our rules – and to me they sound like his fairly cautious approach – I do agree that the length shouldn’t be repeated often.
Good point Mr Mallard.
I was very irritated with Mr Cunliffe’s first post, which I thought was lazy and overblown on rhetoric, for the sake of simple point-scoring. I was even more disappointed with his initial comment to me on that thread.
I found his second post on the issue to be much more measured, thoughtful, and reasonable. I disagreed with his conclusions, but he was able to make his point without resorting to chest-beating.
I too find the use of the word ‘Tory, Tories’ etc a little much especially from actual MP’s. To me it smacks of bitterness and is not a good look (Master Hipkins).
Haven’t spent much time here mostly because I expected it to be a Standard mkII with everyone repeating whichever mantra is the flavour of the week and sockpuppet bloggers writing everything and putting your guys name to it. I’m pleasantly surprised to see that’s not the case.
So even though I disagree with your politics I will spend time here and will try not to be too much of a flamer (except to you Trev, cause we know you like it)
xxx
S
I second that motion. I’d like Darren Hughes to post on transport issues for one thing!
Great site, and even better to lift material from
I’ve liked the posts but as other people have said, keep the post length down. If posters want to really get heavily detailed, link to it as a PDF in the media library. Then offer opinion on it.
Because of my heavy schedule at present at work, I’m mainly reading on a iPhone on the bus. See if you can make it more smartphone freindly. It isn’t bad, but putting in comments is a pain. So I avoid commenting. (besides. This is where everything is heading). What I have seen is that the sewer I’d constrained. That is great. It is hard work, but at least you started the blog that way (I wish we had).
Keep up the good work and the fascinating opinions. You’re a welcome addition to the blogosphere
I think the blog is a great idea! I was reading an article from 2003, and the person writing it didn’t believe the internet would have a very great impact on politics in the future. How wrong was she, eh?
Keep it up, I echo the veiws of many others that it truly is good to have a greater connection with the beehive.
My only idea for improvement would be this; what about having a guest blogger on occasion? Mabey former Labour MP’s or something along those lines, to see their thoughts on current issues. It could be a monthly thing or something.
It’s going great. Nice mix of items. I like the way Trev is anchoring the affair. Nice to have some of the other old timers chipping in, though.
Another issue for us to sort is how to handle defamation. The C/T experience means we have made a call not to share server space with NZLP (not that I know what sharing server space means! !) but there is still some exposure. I certainly agree with Stephen Franks on the costs issue though for reasons that no doubt some will work out I won’t include a link.
Trevor – how about trying not to defame anyone
I like the blog. Key strengths are that it’s MP only and that you guys write your own posts. Also the diversity of styles is working out quite well.
Other things to try?
* maybe some audio podcasts – quick chats among one or many of you?
* Get more of the caucus involved if they will.
* Keep not worrying about straying. It’s a bit nuts to pretend that MPs don’t care about areas outside their portfolios. That has to be manageable, esp. given this is not a spokesperson or media release forum.
* Maintain the ability to disagree with each other in a reasoned manner. That’s what normal people do, and the idea that politicians don’t is quite offputting.
David as you know from the work that Stephen Franks has done and the Hager material the power of the gagging letter or writ. It goes to time and legal cost when in fact there is no defamation. I know a lot about it from the Morgan v Mallard case.
Even with Lange and Atkinson I’m sure I have been defamed on kiwiblog comments and certainly have been by your mate with the blowhole.
Good to see the personal in political.
I liked Cunliffe’s last two posts, in particular the title of the first …
I’ve been pondering this, and I have a handful of unrelated thoughts
1) Now you’ve started you can’t stop or tail off – we’ll notice. This’ll matter in 2011, but probably before then as well
2) If a post leaves a big opening for “so, what are you going to do?” then the poster needs to actually have an answer. Brendon Burns post about pigs is an example of this, but there have been others. We all know that Labour could actually make a difference right now to some issues, so mouthing off but doing nothing pisses your allies off. Sure there are policy processes and strategic concerns, but it looks far worse than not mentioning the issue at all. IMO you can get away with “I will have some next steps out in x weeks”, but blatant non-action is pretty unacceptable.
3) Political blogs in NZ are largely pakeha male domains, and this blog is following that trend. Of the 15 front page posts at the moment I count 12 by men, and 13 by pakeha. Labour has a really diverse caucus, and it would be great to see more diversity here. I think it would make the blog far more interesting and engaging to hear from a wider cross section of Labour.
4) It might be nice to hear from some non-MP Labour people from time to time, I think it would make the policy process more transparent, which has got to be good.
5) It would be great to see some good policy debate and consultation, but I don’t think a blog is the way to do it – it’s too linear and works best for small discussions of small things.
6) When it comes to moderation I think it’s useful to differentiate between swearing and swearing at (has everyone else seen the third segment on Media 7 from the 9th?).
7) Defamation, firstly I doubt it’s your fault if I provide the link. Anita I have taken it out. As is known about town there are currently legal discussions between me and a couple of persistant litigants. The blog involves others and I’m not prepared to expose them without consent. Trevor
Secondly, the only way to deal with bullies is to stand up to them. Thirdly, what is Labour planning to do to protect free democratic speech from wealthy litigious bullying?
Either Clare or I will respond to your substantive points and some others in the comments to this posting at some stage in the future. Remember tho that we are all still learning and that some regard posting as a big deal while others are more prepared to let rip. Please don’t expect us all to be as frequent and substantive as Phil. Trevor
Taking on the hate mongers would be a good start. The right will stop at nothing to marginalise those at the bottom of the heap. You need to take them on. Cutting that WhaleOil guy down to size would be a good start. He needs a good beating.
Hi, really like the site. Check up on it regularly. Some interesting posts, and I like the level of critical engagement.
I’m very pleased that you filter out the unproductive nastiness. It disturbs me, and I also like the open way that you do it, so that everybody knows that a part of a blogged reply is missing. The exchange of between the moderator and the blogger are often amusing too. All in all, it makes politics more accessible.
One thing that I don’t like though; over the last little while when I scroll down the page, instead of a nice smooth flow of information down the screen, I’ve been getting a weird, jerky shuffle, sort of like a caterpillar hunching itself along. I don’t know what it’s about but I think it’s horrible.
Cheers
[Will look into the caterpillar shuffle - admin]