Not a good look

October 3, post by Eddie on The Standard:

Key broke law on radio show

Prime Minister Moonbeam clearly broke the law on Friday on the radio show that he chose to run instead of dealing with the downgrade crisis. The law is clear: Key wasn’t allowed to make political statements.

First, Key promised to “talk to someone important” about Coronation Street moving time … That was, of course, a political promise to act in his capacity as Prime Minister. And it was clearly intended to encourage people to vote for him and his party.

October 4, unauthored post at The Standard:

When things look black

A clever billboard from Labour.  Apparently it has Kiwiblog’s knickers in a bunch, so it must be good!

Pay attention, kiddies:  a non-explicitly political manoeuvre designed to nevertheless build support in a crucial pre-election period by leveraging off popular current events is illegal when it’s John Key on the radio, but not Labour on a billboard.

Though as Idiot/Savant notes, Labour’s own official policy on the former is that it would’ve been fine if they’d given Phil Goff pseudoelectioneering airtime too.

About these ads

6 comments

  1. toad

    Hang in QoT! I’m not defending Labour here, coz they have played fast and loose with the electoral law many times in recent weeks, and deserve to be held to account for that.

    But in this instance Key’s radio show was arguably in breach of criminal provisions under the Broadcasting Act.

    As long as Labour declares their spending on the black billboards and it falls within the legislated limit, that appears to be totally legal under the Electoral Act.

    • QoT

      And yet, they’re still both basically the same thing when it comes to the effect they’re meant to have on the public. If this means that there’s yet another hole in our legislation around electoral advertising (and Labour have, imo, probably lucked into it more than anything given their track record), you may colour me completely unsurprised.

  2. lprent

    And different authors see things differently. That is the whole point of having a multi-author blog isn’t it?

    Btw: this comment editor on the iPad version of the site really doesn’t work well with an iPad. It is a teletype with backspace as the only edit tool…

    Help! I’m trapped in an impure environment :)

    • QoT

      I noted the difference in authors, as you can see above. The juxtaposition still amused me, especially when one post is under the generic “Standard” ID generally used for non-opinion announcements.

  3. irishbill

    There’s also the small matter of the fact the Standard is authored many people and these people don’t all agree on everything (or some days, anything). You know from experience how complicated the dynamics of a multi-author blog can be.

    For the record I agree with I/S on the radio show and Goff’s stupid me-too-ism and I think that the black billboard is a bad idea for a party polling as low as Labour because it looks desperate.

    In other news, I changed that line you were talking about. You were right, it was sexist although my intent wasn’t. Or, at least, my conscious intent wasn’t.

    Also, any chance of another guest post some time?

    • QoT

      As I said to lprent: I noted the difference in authors, as you can see above. The juxtaposition still amused me, especially when one post is under the generic “Standard” ID generally used for non-opinion announcements.

      Life is … busy at the moment. But I’m sure I’ll find something to rant about as the election season really kicks off post-thugby.