I saw one of the famous WorkChoices Workplace Relations ads last night - on sbs. If the government thinks it’s going to get much traction from the latest instalment of the $1.7 billion it’s spent on advertising since 1996, that smile on the PM’s face yesterday when he denied they were political (really - what a bad look…) will disappear as quickly as the half a mill or so they were going to spend on nice new chairs and a table for a dining room in Parliament House did. Contentless and pointless, and I’m amazed they had the audacity to repeat the famous line “protected by law”.
I’m still convinced that the commentariat’s puzzlement that people actually dislike their brand new AWAs and don’t act like smily happy worker bees is explicable by the fact that they’re all (a) completely out of touch and (b) on salaries way above the norm.
That’s why the reader response to Peter Lalor’s call for people to tell their own stories about their non-Choices under the unnamed industrial relations laws makes such interesting (and depressing) reading. It’s the lived experience, stupid!
Other choice words from Pyne:
Translation: we’re peeing our pants and some malcontents are mulling over whether dumping Howard now might save us from an unprecedented rout…
‘Contentless’. Yes, even anodyne. The t.v. ads are so thin they could have been fridge magnets.
Why run them? (1) to draw attention to the more rhetorical material (eg newspaper ads trumpeting protections and much ‘fairness’ (2) for same reason feelgood but (relatively) un-spun campaigns about citizenship, energy, super, how to cure your dog’s arthritis will run ‘ad’ nauseum this year.
I have to give credit to the govt - or rather sensitivity generated by public and media pressure - for finally toning down the spin.
But it’s the size and selectivity of the campaigns as a whole that matters, more than whether a particular campaign is too rhetorical. Very hard to draw rules about content, and that’s the weakness of Rudd’s proposal, unless he’s going to hand the Auditor-General the power to actually settle the content of the ads.
I can’t wear the ads are just factual with no embellishment or subliminal spin. If that were true then why writings on whiteboards, cardboard boxes, floating umbrellas etc.
If as Howard contends, they are just stating the fact and nothing else, then why not just a plain black background with white Arial font text giving a contact number for anyone who has questions on the policy, and of course the government website link. Why the need for all the actors, special effects and Liberal Party fonts and colours?
And the neoliberal elites have been telling each other fairy tales so fervently about their coming utopia that they have hypnotised themselves into believing that their fantasies represent lived reality.
This is what happened to the faithful in the original Jonestown.
Memo to all neoliberals: Time to drink the red Kool-Aid folks. Things are about to turn too ugly for you true believers.
Seems to me these ads are being deliberately toned down in the rhetoric area so that later on when the real spin campaigns start they can say, “These ones
will beare just like those last ones: simple and informative.”I don’t think any of this is doing them any good, though. The ads themselves are the issue. The content is superfluous.
Howard has too much to get done and too little time to achieve it. He languished for too long relaxed in the expectation that the Economy would always save him. Now we hear that the government thinks the Economy has been forgotten by the public. I don’t think it’s been forgotten, I think it’s been fully taken into account (the polls say Howard still leads on Economic Management) and put in its rightful place alongside other, more important issues.
Thus, the government is faced with a conundrum: concentrate on IR and let The Economy look after itself (the current strategy), or the converse, concentrate on The Economy and concede IR to Labor.
There is a third alternative: do both The Economy and IR. This is where the “not enough time” aspect comes in. To pursue both lines of attack, the government has to carpet bomb the public with publicity, spin and “informative advertising” from now until the election. It’s going to be all politics, all the time. The danger is that after the past six months the public is already close to saturation point. They’re pissed off with all the money being spent and they’re suspicious and cynical about Howard’s intentions. Take these negative reactions together and I believe the coming campaigns are likely to fail for lack of an audience, an audience which, even now at the start of the campaign, is already mildly hostile and getting sick of having their ears bashed as to why they should re-elect John Howard. “Enough already!”
We may see some slight gains for the government in the polls in the short term (casualties are part of war). But eventually I believe any possible leakages away from Labor will cease after about 6-8 weeks when we get down to their hard-core support, now at a much higher level than it has been for years. That is when the awful reality is going to sink in: the government’s one last big push will have failed as Labor holds the line.
That’s when the Coalition knives will come out, but of course it’ll be too late by then to switch leaders or do anything else about the disaster they will find themselves in… except cop it sweet. Public infighting will only make things worse for them.
Labor’s job is to hold the line, skirmish aggressively with middle-level policy releases and protect their political flanks. No stuffups! When the government has exhausted itself, then Rudd can come out of the trenches and counter-attack an already weakened, demoralised government.
Lordy, even Grattan threatens to jump HMAS Rodent.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/ads-and-plans-just-repeat-themselves/2007/05/21/1179601329994.html
All this kerfuffle and nobody has actually called an election yet. My memory is getting fairly dim but I can’t remember being bombarded like this in the past. Although, I am having a quiet chuckle at the footage of Costello jogging around, tickerless.
But not the ABC. Those of you unfortunate enough to listen to AM this morning would have been greeted with Chris Ulhmann’s ‘analysis’ of more bad polling for Howard:
Listening to this I found it hard to believe that the spinning of the government line could be so blatant, not to mention moronic, but it looks no better in print.
Just like buying a Ferrari. As we all do.
Somewhat off topic, did the PM can the dining room renovations because: (a) the political mileage Labor would make from it, (b) He knows that the only one who’ll get to use it is Rudd, and doesn’t want to give him such a gift.
They have finally admitted what the wasted money will be for the week.
Exactly! It would hurt Mr Howard deeply to know that Mr Rudd would be the only person who’d enjoy this.
Exactly. It seems that lack of interest in empirical detail and impatience with the contours of the moral economy of the subject, is not confined to stalinists. These palukas are about to find out that despite the ‘calling’ of its demise, history continues to be made. There is nothing like an unpopular and failed war together with financial shenanigans on the part of an elite who are widely distrusted and despised, to bring about a jolt to assumptions about the timelessness of the current dispensation.
Serfchoices made it clear, in an easily understood way, exactly where ‘all of us’ really stand, in the schemes hatched by the battlers’ many friends.
Every utterance, every op ed piece, every grand scheme to render the employment contract null and void in the latest attempt to roll back the 20th century, has been the gift that keeps on giving. Faithfully copied, distributed, discussed and analysed for portents to the future of work, and the place of the battlers in it, the schemes and dreams have been met with a mixture of incredulity, anger and visceral understanding. And that’s the point really. People really do get it. In spades. Thanks guys.
Chris Uhlmann gets the Sunbeam Mix Master Award for the most mixed metaphors in rapid succession.
“I’m drawn to the conclusion that these polls are perhaps something of a house of cards.”
“if there is a strong breeze before the election, the whole thing might blow away very quickly”
“there might be a trigger”
“the real race will be neck and neck”
“when you scratch the surface”
“they’re saying it’s like buying Ferrari, really - it’s sexy, it’s exciting but it comes with something of a large price tag.” [Yes, it’s a simile not a metaphor. But it’s a dumb simile, so worthy of mention. Kevin Rudd is sexy and exciting? His whole campaign is based on the theme that he is boring and safe.]
“people will start thinking about the price as much as they think about the car and their hands will begin to shake as they look at that cheque.”
Where does the ABC get these people? I blame declining school standards.
It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up.
Ladies and Gentleman, we have a winner! Thats the best yet, imho.
Now, I know CK has done some good work on Serfchoices 2.0. Im also putting “Mind where you stand” out there, for improvement/ comment.
Indeed.
Spiros, I agree that those are lame metaphors, but I don’t think any of them are actually mixed metaphors. He keeps changing his metaphors, but that’s not the same thing.
Now, if he’d said ‘The polls are a house of cards that could be erased by a midstream change of heart closer to the finish line …’
Agreed.
[cough cough koff koff *hack* *hack* koooffff….]
It’s nothing. I’ll be fine.
[cough]
Hockey admits ‘We got it wrong’so why not fix it by scrapping the whole silly law?
Because Rudd just wants to ruin things.
No wonder all the old hands are bailing out to run for Parliament.
Too late. Backdown, caving in, weak leadership etc. Mining companies would abandon the Libs and fundraising would dry up tomorrow. This would be political suicide on Howard’s part, and he is the last person in Australia who actually believes in it.
Also relates to the moderate liberal line as espoused by Pyne about how they’re all united: the moderates accept the coming loss. They are not going to be blamed for disloyalty: they know that the Howard-lovers will turn on them and pin the Downfall on those who were never fully convinced about Howard. They are right behind Howard in word and deed, so that any blame falls squarely on those who accepted what Howard said and did unquestioningly. If you’re going to spend a decade or so in the wilderness, it’s best to get a head start on those who are still surfin’ the hubris.
THe Rodent has all but admitted he’s lost.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,21775273-5005361,00.html
What a nice old swipe to the back , Hockey gives Kevin Andrews on the way through. If you knew it was a load of rubbish Joe, then why take till last week to do something about it?
This is simply a rather pathetic strategy to get all these ignorant voters who don’t realise just how lucky they are to wake up to themselves and realise Dear Leader could actually be defeated.
So we won’t joke around with these pollsters no more.
Adrian, true but they won’t be able to control the infighting that will be involved as their whole fourth term agenda unravels before their eyes.
Was Hockey really sleeping in cabinet when Andrews explained the legislation to him? I don’t think so.
Were the ‘your Rights at work campaigns so quiet that Hockey missed them. Of course not, Hockey even mentions the ‘Your Rights at work Campaign in the article himself.
It is the first sign of the infighting that can only get more bitter and nasty as the realisation sinks into this unconscious Government and now the knives are out.
What I don’t understand about the workplace legislation that cannot be named ads is that they don’t actually say anything - because they can’t as no-one, especially Joe Hockey, seems to know exactly what the new no disadvantage test actually means.
Once the government works out exactly how the legislation will change, and get parliament’s endorsement and the GGs assent, will we have another lot of ads that explain how a carpark is better than christmas with the family?
Oh boy, that’s just asking for the knives to come out. What use is a magician with an empty hat?
Just remember you stupid voters, no rabbit this time. So you’d better get serious or little Johnny won’t be around for much longer.
That should do the trick.
Howard trying the Debnam tactic of capitulating before the polling day. It worked really well for Debnam… not, but worse we aren’t even in an election campaign proper and throwing in the towel.
The changing of minister portfolios is a tactic Howard has practiced for 10 years now whenever a government policy goes tits up (which is surprisingly often if you investigate it). It is always the same, with the new incoming minister saying that the cock-up was under the previous minister and “I know nuthink”. If the previous minister is questioned they just refer the journalist to the current minister as this not an area of their current responsibility but they would be more than happy to answer questions on what they are now doing, as long as its not about a stuff up by a previous Coalition member, then of course its their fault, but don’t bother asking them as it’s no longer their responsibility, but they will be more than happy to answer any questions on the current responsibility, as long as its not about a cock-up under a previous minister.
Of course there a handful of ministers who are glued to their portfolios including Howard as PM, deal or no deal with Costello, but other tactics are used for their cock-ups, mainly blame shifting to staffers or personal advisors who then get bonuses and promotions for taking the fall.
Speaking of choice words from young Chris:
On the Offsiders program last Sunday he let another cat out of the bag -
“… as the person responsible for drugs in the Commonwealth Government, I want to talk to Andrew Demetriou …”
and
“… as the person in the Government responsible for dealing with drugs, I am concerned …”
Who’d have thought, a nice clean looking boy like that, dealing drugs for the government, or am I reading it wrong?
I’ll get out of your way now.
Here are the results of a poll to be released in The Bulletin tomorrow. Anybody nervous about the ” who is better to run the economy ” question should have a look. Also 55 per cent of people feel no better off despite 11 years of economic growth.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=94387
I hate to spoil the party people but unless you missed it, Labor has abandoned yet another one of those principles which “progressives” have run to the barricades over - compulsory student unionism.
Add that to the born again “economic conservative” Rudd who feels that faith has a role in politics, political correctness is out of control and cannot run away quickly enough now from dear David Hicks and remind me that apart from IR and whales, exactly what is the left in this country getting out of Rudd’s Labor?
I take the general point Matt, but speaking as a former veteran student union office-bearer, I don’t think it’s a bad thing.
I might put a separate post up about it.
“They are an inexperienced team, they are reckless … and they have demonstrated over 11 years exactly where they stand on the economy,” Mr Turnbull said.
Says the least experienced Minister in a long time.
FFS, what were Costello, Downer and others when they took power. It’s the most pathetic argument ever mounted.
Bloody hell! http://bulletin.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=268707
Nice link Kapunda. Ive never heard of the IPSOS poll, but it has a decent sample of 1000.
erm, shield you eyes if you’re a Team Rodent supporter. Its very bad news.
53% believe the Rodent should have retired.
Only 32% believe the Coalition are better managers of the economy. Admittedly a whopping 35% are undecided. And as Kapunda noted, 55% feel no better off (whcih includes 36.5% who feel worse off).
Now, Id like to see the questions used, which appear to elicit less committed responses than the other, better known polls.
But still, is it just possible that we will indeed see some “more realistic” trending and bouncing over the next months? Thats is, to a more critical view of Howard’s economic legacy and firming of the view that he’s a tired ol coot past his use-by, perhaps?
If this type of finding starts to show in other polls, Howard better watch his back. Or jump ship himself.
Comment in Stalag Moderation again!
Howard’s not doing a Debnam - Debnam was a neophyte campaigner who spoke the truth in a bleak moment.
Howard is responding to those $weetie backers who called for him to sound desperate, and indirectly briefing the media to paint him as an underdog, deserving of sympathy.
Can News Ltd please buy Steve Lewis a dictionary? His report starts: ‘During a terse three-hour meeting of Coalition MPs in Canberra…’ Terse - clipped, polished. 3 hour meeting - unruly, prolix, aimless.
Graeme: “Can News Ltd please buy Steve Lewis a dictionary? His report starts: ‘During a terse three-hour meeting …”
I suspect that he meant “tense”. Hopefully, he knows the difference, but given MSM journalists today, you never can tell.
But I do take exception to the lazy metaphor about “vacating the Lodge”, when Ratty hasn’t actually lived in the place. During the Howard era, I would have liked to see much more use of “Kirribilli” to replace figurative uses of “The Lodge” or “Canberra”, since the latter terms have become doubly inappropriate.
Shamaham’s Call to Arms :
But the comments aren’t biting
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/dennisshanahan/index.php/theaustralian/comments/this_time_its_serious/
Now the AWA that sacks you for yawning.
Don’t know if this latest bout of Liberal Party infighting belongs here or on the Mate vs Mate thread but it was a hoot to see the desperate losing Tories tearing themselves apart.
Oh Dear, another Raid in the Printgate affair. Things aren’t going good for the Rodent at all.
Frank, I’ll see your Oh Dear and raise you another Oh Dear.
Seems that an investigation is about to be announced into the Exclusive bretheren funding of Howard’s Campaign.