Loading ...NB: You can answer more than one question
Loading ...NB: You can answer more than one question
This entry was posted on Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 12:00 am and is filed under #OpenLabourNZ, blogs, Red Alert. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
First of all, some perspective: you will never hear a National MP express an interesting or independent opinion about anything. Their job is to say “John Key” a lot, and laugh at his jokes. I would love to engage with National MPs and right-leaning voters on a blog, but I’m not very interested in discussing issues like: “Is John Key totally awesome, really awesome or just incredibly awesome? Vote now!”
So let’s give Labour MPs some credit … they give us half a loaf, on bad days only a quarter, but National won’t even give you a crumb. Direct any “free speech” complaints to them, please.
As a left (Labour/Green) voter I am often disappointed in Red Alert, and I think you need to re-assess its role in the election campaign. Obviously MPs’ time and resources will be stretched, and I don’t think arguing with a handful of partisan voters is the best use of that time.
Let’s get hard-headed about this: you need more votes in November, not the “2011 Best Opposition Blog Award”. Moderate as tough or as soft as you like, but don’t waste time worrying about hurt feelings of people whose votes won’t change.
And (as I’ve said before) make sure MPs posts are peer-checked by somebody with political antennae, before you publish. One dumb line off-message, and you can only help your opponents.
Cheers!
I used to comment a fair bit but stopped because I felt that what I had to say was unwelcome.
In my view the MPs who post here should welcome comments from those who don’t currently support Labour more than those from the party faithful.
However much some commenters may try to delude themselves, your message isn’t getting over to the electorate at large, and those are the people who you need to win over. Especially those who used to be core voters of yours but have left the fold.
Although I’m in my 50s I’ve only ever voted Tory twice in an election – in 2005 when you won by the skin of your teeth, and last time round when you lost. Whatever the (seemingly permanently nasty) Anne may flame about people ‘pretending’ to be former supporters, it’s us who you need to be hearing from, to try to understand why people who were once staunch supporters and loyal party workers now vote for the other side.
Encouraging the sort of circle j3rks referred to by Curious in post #2 isn’t going to give you any value whatsoever.
You had (and perhaps still have) a great channel here for discovering why fewer than 10% see your leader as a potential PM come November, and why you’re polling at historic lows. At the moment you appear to be squandering that in favor of group therapy.
It’s your choice.
Allowing the regular posters from the militant left to describe anyone who disagrees with their dogma as a RWNJ is hardly likely to encourage anyone to engage in a debate that in the final analysis would be of value mostly to yourselves. So you end up finding out exactly what you knew before – that you have a number of nutty relatives in your family who keep making an embarrasing exhibition of themselves in public. Hardly worth the effort really, is it?
@ George
George echoes my sentiments exactly. Preaching to the converted is a waste of time in election year.
I don’t condone personal attacks (although I have often seen National MP’s/supporters subject to them here at Red Alert) but there should be scope for humour and the cut and thrust seen in Parliament.
What about those of us who fit between the “Comment a lot” and “Never comment”? Those that comment every now and then.
I really love that Red Alert isn’t a marketing machine for the Labour Party and/or for the election. It is honest and allows decenting opinion. But, being election year, and knowing what mass media is like, maybe more attention needs to be paid to avoiding gaffs.
I think it is true that the tone of the comment threads is soured by a very loud minority of RWNJs (never heard this acronym until just now but it is very intuitive, 10 points).
There are plenty of dissenting opinions expressed in moderate terms. In a sense, it is a credit to Red Alert that dissenters/non-Labour voters like to spend their time reading what Labour MPs have to say… a handful of them may even be swing voters who are reading the blog as a sounding board for their logic and may, come November, vote Labour.
That is a good thing. This blog isn’t and doesn’t need to be a forum for vote-grabbing, but it is a plus if it has that function. Keep it up!
Clare, I used to read RA a lot, and very rarely commented, but I gave up reading this blog months back. I glance through the RSS feed once a week perhaps, but that is it.
The comments get heated here often I know. But that did not bother me as much as the tone and content of posts from certain Labour MP’s.
I am more left leaning than right. But really I have not seen any substantive and consistent message from the left in quite sometime.
Until that changes, I am simply not interested in reading, let alone engaging with comments.
Red Alert is a great initiative, none of the other parties have such and active interface with the public, and the Greens are the only other party that has anything active like this.
What Labour have to decide though is whether they want use Red Alert as an extension to their PR machine and as an ego stoker for MPs seeking pats on the back from their party faithful, or if they want to genuinely connect with the wider voting public and share and discuss ideas, issues and policies.
I think Clare understands how a blog would work best, as she comments on her own post, (but I suspect there may be party and colleague differences of opinion on this):
That’s great – as long as Clare and the other MPs actively involved can remember that social media is much more about ordinary people being involved, and traditional party methods have limited appeal and can repel more than attract participation as well as votes.
As posted on http://yourdunedin.org/2011/08/08/news-views-%E2%80%93-monday-8-august-2011/
Red Alert should just pack up its tent and disappear – it has become an embarrassment to those of us on the political left. We weep, for a missed opportunity to have a constructive dialogue about policies, leadership and the future of the Labour party.
You are banned unless you can prove you are who you say you are. Clare
YOu are banned unless you can prove you are who you say you are. Clare
Curious makes me not want to come here, it’s a constant rant about beneficiaries, but bringing the earthquake into it is just sinking too low.
Hi Spud:
There’s an orchestrated attempt to undermine this site and destroy it in advance of the election campaign. No prizes for guessing who’s behind it.
I have not commented on Red Alert for some time now. The reason for this is three fold.
First is that my comments elicit no meaningful response from the MPs active on this blog. Why would I take the time to write something that is well-considered and relevant when it seems to be ignored? If Red Alert is about debate then debate with us Clare.
Second is that Trevor Mallard’s posts are just plain childish, ill-considered and not at all constructive.
Third is that too many posts here are like talk back radio – shallow, one-eyed nonsense that adds absolutely nothing to a well-considered discussion of the issues. This topic is an exception but too many posts are simply cringe-worthy. I’ll take some flak for that comment I expect – but at least I have thought about the issues before posting.
My observation is that too many of the cringe-worthy posts are from Labour supporters who hide behind aliases. Oh, and yes I do use my real name.
I think we should ban everyone who doesn’t strictly follow the Labour Party policy.