by frog
Just as proof that Buy Kiwi Made does work, this election’s campaigns have become a study in contrast. It seems we have National’s dour ‘Things are bad, we promise not to make them worse’ campaign of blue planes leaving our shores, bought to you by Australian firm Crosby Textor. Then there is Labour’s ‘Vote for Helen, because, well, you always have’ campaign of austere red ticks, bought to you by US firm Blue State Digital.
And there is the Greens’ future focused campaign to vote for something positive from little New Zealand company Special.
“Not hectoring or bombastic, just a simple reminder of what is at stake.”
The Greens have also used a locally owned market research company and are using a locally owned media buyer, as well as swathes of local on-the-ground volunteers (and some overseas volunteers) to put together its election campaign. Which all just shows promoting kiwi made does work.
Published in Campaign | Economy, Work, & Welfare | Media by frog on Tue, October 7th, 2008
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
It does nothing of the sort
It indicates one agency went with an approach people liked.
Let’s not pretend Buy Kiwi Made is anything other than what it really is: empty marketing puff.
Hey, perhaps there are parallels….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Blue Peter – the use of mo nga uri on this billboard must really do your upoko in!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I have no idea what it means. “Vote For Car Tires” perhaps?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It might say that BP or it could say……….. “she is off to school and I am not because I am suffering from colonisation, or at least thats what my social worker told me”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes, the use of these PR companies for politics is very interesting. I’ve written a bit of analysis of Labour and Blue State Digital here:
http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2008/10/labours-foreign.html
And it’s interesting that both Labour and National use international agencies and the Greens use a New Zealand agency. But isn’t the bigger issue that all these parties use PR companies. Didn’t the Green Party used to design it’s own billboards and messages etc?
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m sure there was a time when the Greens had no money at all and so did everything themselves or not at all. Good to see we have enough to produce more effective communications now. There is nothing inherently wrong with PR techniques, so long as you believe in the message. The better companies won’t even work with firms or organisations that they can tell are trying to put one over on people. Of course there’s also the Crosby/Textors of the world who advise that the very point is to discover what people want to hear and then say to to them, even if you don’t believe it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
They were briefly the best billboards, but have been trumped now.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0809/S00330.htm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Mr Dennis – you’re a dag. Reading down, you get pff…………
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If Greens think the Family First billboards are vacuous, now you’ll understand others’ reaction to the Greens billboard
They are the same, after all.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I don’t think many Greens would say that, PB.
I do like that Green Party ad right next to the photo on scoop though
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think the FF billboards are a very fair reflection of what they offer.
“Others’ reaction to the Green billboards have been overwhelmingly positive, thanks BP.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I’m sure there was a time when the Greens had no money at all and so did everything themselves or not at all. Good to see we have enough to produce more effective communications now.”
Are they more effective? I’m concerned that people who want to run the country don’t think themselves capable of thinking up their own election slogans/images.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I like the Green billboards. I think they are bang-on for their target demographic.
I also think they are vacuous
Like a car ad, with bunnies….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I have no idea what it means.”
Never mind, we can’t all be bright.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>we can’t all be bright.
You smart. Me so thick
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
- “Which all just shows promoting kiwi made does work.”
‘Does work’ to do what?
To squander money and resources? Certainly.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Not thick, BP, but you’re inability to ‘get’ the Green billboards indicates a certain impenetrablility
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I do get them. I understand the demographic they are targeting. They do their PR job very well, and the agency should be applauded.
But it amuses me that the Greens are using the same techniques they have been so dismissive of when others use them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP said
“But it amuses me that the Greens are using the same techniques they have been so dismissive of when others use them”
Like refering to christians as fundamentalist murderers.
If that were a christian speaking about a muslim like that the greens would be outraged. So why do they do it? cause for some reason it has become socially aceptable to attack this group, thanks to the efforts of liberal left wing media, and the greens are only too happy to join the band wagon.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“But it amuses me that the Greens are using the same techniques they have been so dismissive of when others use them.”
I really don’t think so. Take the Nats ads in 2005, like Iwi/Kiwi. I remember we all thought they were so devastatingly good, both because they were effective, and because it was obvious it was really what the Nats thought. We hated the ads for their cynicism and dog whistling, not because it was good PR.
“Like refering to christians as fundamentalist murderers.”
Gee, this story grows anew with each telling. Russel referred to the makers of death threats as fundamentalists, which could be right or wrong, but is really quite different to what you claim.
“If that were a christian speaking about a muslim like that the greens would be outraged.”
If a muslim made a death threat against someone, the Greens would be just as outraged as if a christian did it and would support the person being threatened, not the person making the threat, as you do.
“So why do they do it? cause for some reason it has become socially aceptable to attack this group, thanks to the efforts of liberal left wing media, and the greens are only too happy to join the band wagon.”
How many conspiracy theories does that make today? Must be a record.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“How many conspiracy theories does that make today? Must be a record.”
Oh come on!! christian bashing has become a national pass time for those on the left!!
Which “fundamentalists” was Russel refering to, cause all the term means is someone who believes in the “fundamentals” of something.
Is Russel a fundamentalist greenie?
It was a blatant attempt to smear a large group of people as extremists and potential murderers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
See other thread, Shunda.
http://frog.greens.org.nz/2008/10/07/green-party-campaign-launch-video/#comment-59544
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hyperbole – check!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Oh come on!! christian bashing has become a national pass time for those on the left!!”
Yeah – those bloody extremist Christians that punctured the Waihopai dome got the drubbing from the left they deserved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
So how do the lefty christians bash themselves?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly, Family First and The Family Party are two unrelated organisations.
http://www.familyparty.org.nz
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)