Blog wars
David Young and Ben Thomas, of Dog Biting Men fame, have their first politics column in the NBR today.
It’s about blogging by political parties. Noticing that only Act and the Greens have taken to blogging, Young and Thomas note a difference between these two parties’ blogs which I think accurately describes the difference between the two parties more generally. Act, at least under Hide, is about bluster and scandal, personality and getting under the skin of its opponents. He does all of that very well. The Greens are about tirelessly trying to raise awareness of issues important to us.
Of Rodney Hide’s blog, Young and Thomas write:
The weblog reinforces the politician’s reputation as a stirrer and unreconstructed populist. Hide recounts half-formed scandals and jokes about Helen Clark’s dentistry, Tamihere’s downfall and troubles for National. Less often Hide writes an astute item on taxation or provides a link to a soundbite-laden speech…
As it stands Hide is not just preaching to the converted, but slaying them in the spirit… Hidesight seldom focuses on Act messages and caucus activities. In the first three weeks of April, the only colleagues Hide mentioned were Heather Roy and Deborah Coddington – one for asking the prime minister a question about Tamihere, and the other for resigning. Act has achieved one goal of political blogging – creating a community – but now must focus on growing it.
Of frogblog, they write:
Massey University research shows 18-25 year-olds are the biggest internet users. The Green Party, which gets its largest support from this group, is the second party to develop a weblog…
The tone is right for the iPod generation – “More whores on the streetâ€? was one recent headline – but avoids the ‘yoof media’ trap of being cynical and try-hard ironic… Upbeat FrogBlog is well-managed without feeling overly spun. Co-leaders get maximum exposure while other MPs are given a regular airing. More than 70% of stories deal with the party’s own policies and initiatives, often providing a ‘behind the scenes’ perspective. The remainder criticise other parties, respond to news stories, or analyse polls.
The goal is to build a growing online community that extends farther than the party members’ forum on the Green website. Frogblog is likely to focus on convincing supporters to get to a polling booth: the young are less likely to exercise their vote. The internet is a cheap way for the Greens to connect with ex-pat Kiwis. Theirs is the only party to score significantly higher with overseas voters than with New Zealanders at home.
Young and Thomas conclude that other parties are unwilling to join the blogging fold in the same way: NZ First because it’s chasing people who seldom use the Internet; United because it’d be better to turn up at church meetings; and the major parties because they get enough media penetration anyway and are more likely to be averse to the inherent risk involved in blogging. Like, what happens if one of your bloggers says something really embarrassing? Though, I suspect Labour’s had enough bad luck in that department in the last month to last a lifetime.
It would be a shame if Young and Thomas’ prediction about other parties ignoring for blogging comes true - though National and Labour at least have worthy proxies fighting the blog war for them…
April 29th, 2005 at 10:12 am
I’d still quite like to see a Labour blog… and would not mind seeing you expand your view about the risks of blogging. It seems to me they are win win, so long as the comments remain useful.
April 29th, 2005 at 10:25 am
Well, the risks I was envisaging mainly stem from the immediacy required with blogging.
In usual circumstances, something written for public release by a political party would go through lots of checks: usually with the party’s media unit, a researcher and the responsible MP. The speed required with blogging doesn’t allow for such checking (if what you’re talking about is emulating the type of “heavy volume blogs” that David Farrar, Rodney Hide, No Right Turn, and NZ Pundit do), and thus there is a greater risk that the person blogging on that particular day might say something embarrassing/damaging to the party. This of course can be mitigated by having someone (or several people) not prone to embarrassing outbursts in charge of the blog. (And when I say “embarrassing outbursts”, I’m mainly thinking of people prone to offering quick-fire opinions without getting their facts straight, and thus saying things which are potentially defamatory.)
Also, the blog will sometimes stray into areas where the party might not have a position or where the party’s position isn’t clear. So, opinions that some MPs might not agree with are inevitably going to be expressed. A party’s caucus has to be comfortable with this for a blog to work, which is unusual: MPs would usually see things written by their staff before it goes out into the public. With blogs, this is impractical, and indeed would be undesirable, as the bloggers have to develop their own voices, and thus can’t be overly “managed” by the MPs in the party.
I don’t think this is so much of an issue for us or Act: debate within parties over issues is healthy, but I suspect parties which have top-heavy “message management” - I’m thinking here National, Labour, and NZ First - would be reluctant to give up central control of what the party is saying…
April 29th, 2005 at 3:05 pm
A National blog would be excellent. But I think it is unlikely. Hell there are enough people in National who have even tried to close down my personal blog, that they would die at the thought of an official blog.
April 29th, 2005 at 3:08 pm
National Party people who’ve tried to shut your blog down? Do name names
April 29th, 2005 at 3:11 pm
God that was a quick comment. It may be Friday afternoon but don’t you have some cars to ban
I won’t name names but lets just say some of my comments on the civil unions bill did not find favour universally.
April 29th, 2005 at 3:19 pm
Ahhh, the old culture wars within the National Party. I, for one, shall be cheering the liberal wing on in that particular fight…
Oh, and no, we don’t want to ban cars. We just want to make driving them less attractive than taking the bus or train… Anyway, don’t you have some eyebrow billboards to erect?
April 29th, 2005 at 3:40 pm
Don’t forget the Libertarianz blog by Peter Cresswell: http://pc.blogspot.com/
Put it down to prejudice if you want, but it has rocketed to the top of my “Must Read” list.
Cheers
April 29th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
most parties have a few aligned but not official bloggers, eg kakariki and resistant soy have been holding up the end for the Greens until now (although they still do of course); Just Left, Betrand Bargolias, Philosophically Made, (some of) About Town, NZ Political Comments, etc for Labour; myself, Joe Hendren and Victor Billot for the Alliance; PC for the Libz; i could go on and on - most nz pols bloggers seem to have some kind of party affiliation.
i think what DPF points out is very true - many parties would not cope well with the freedom of message inherent in giving someone (or some group) control of a blog - think of the factionalism!
June 15th, 2005 at 5:28 pm
did you know that there are many many blogs called “frogblog”?
http://keroppakerokero.splinder.com/
http://frogblog.flashesofpanic.com/
http://yoneyuta.txt-nifty.com/blog/
http://blog.frogbody.com/frogblog/
http://frogblog.journalspace.com/
http://www.jeremy-henderson.co.uk/wp-frogblog/
http://www.9thcircle.co.uk/frogblog/frogblog.html
http://frog.badbrain.net/weblog/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/frogblog-sa/
http://anzairox.blogspot.com/
http://www.flerdle.net/frogstar/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/frogblog/
http://jsopper.blogspot.com/
http://frogicide.blogspot.com/
are just the recently updated ones