What do the following phrases all have in common?
"Our numbers are rock solid and I have shown you our numbers"
"Absolutely we sill sign a Free Trade Agreement with India in our first term"
"Six years of economic vandalism by the previous government"
"Government spending is up by 80% over six years"
"250 dollars per fortnight for the average family with two kids"
"The entire 1.9 Billion dollars for Corrections is all operating expenses"
"There will only be on store in Northland selling cigarettes if we do not repeal these smoke-free laws"
"It takes ten years to build a windfarm, eight to consent and two to build"
"Treasury say Kāinga Ora have to sell off 10,200 houses in the coming years just to balance their books and stay financially unviable"
If you said they are all terms repeated by Christopher Luxon you would be correct - and if you said they were all misleading, lopsided, half truths, mistaken or not true at all - you would also be correct.
Together they form the reality that I think New Zealanders are witnessing from their Prime Minister - that he talks a lot of bullshit which is mostly not true and pure propaganda.
When asked to verify these misleading statements, the Prime Minister of New Zealand deflects away to his talking points, fails to address the question and then wonders why he is being asked the question again - until he wears down the clock saying "Look I don't know how to be any clearer...repeat talking points" - until eventually the interviewer moves on to the next question.
Last night I asked readers on G News how much respect they had for New Zealand's Prime Minister after all they had seen.
Out of 487 responses about 486 said - none or less than none - while 1 well known National supporter who claims to be a Labour supporter - said Luxon was telling us the reality.
There's a strong evidence base behind the majority view and it sure takes quite a bit before ordinary kiwi people feel this strongly cos- we are mostly fair minded folk.
The way I see it people who pay attention see better than those who do not in general ( there are exceptions like blank slate observations from a distance ).
I think people see - that pure propaganda is coming out of the mouth of the New Zealand Prime Minister while our media do a very poor job of putting Luxon's misleading messages under scrutiny. In fact sometimes media just amplify the misleading focus rather than expose the whole story.
The imperative of news concision, sound bites and being "time poor " ( gotta go to a commercial break ) have not helped our democracy.
Luxon's gang have learned to use the clock and media's need for access to him - as leverage - and media are dismantling news programs as we speak as they seek more sustainable finances.
When Luxon messes up some of our media look the other way - like can they bash the Greens or talk about Labour's tax policy?
Thomas Coughlan has spent his time overnight festering over what Labour are talking about regarding the latitude the Labour Party hierarchy should have over policy - like Captain's Calls concerning ruling out taxes before an election.
His article this morning misleads about the "term by term" context Chippy spoke about "ruling out" - but where was Thomas' deep analysis into Sir Bill's claims?
Where was Thomas' deep dive into the " independence" of Sir Bill and his report, or - the assets value ratios to debt at Kāinga Ora - or first home buyer demand side incentives and Labour's range of supply side initiatives in housing?
Was there a story somewhere in the NZ Herald about the 10,200 houses that need to be sold if National stop funding building houses from 2025?
Nobody at the NZ Herald has really examined Luxon and Bishop's one sided demolition of Kāinga Ora in my opinion. We even witnessed Luxon and Bishop telling the public to focus on their one sided narrative about financial viability solely by talking about short term rising debt - not on the value of Kāinga Ora assets.
TVNZ 1 News also solely presented the short term debt forecast at Kāinga Ora - but not the accompanying value of their assets - in a "cost of everything but value of nothing" news segment.
To me we are witnessing a "half truth story" portrayal across our media - one that played strongly into the hands of Luxon and Bishop's narrative. The news did not mention the long term picture with the value of assets included... and there was no follow up analysis from any newsroom that focused on these points.
Instead over at the Post Luke Malpass ( Atlas Network affiliate ) has tried to lend support to Bishop's sales pitch about scrapping First Home Buyer grants - by suggesting ( without evidence ) that free money for first home buyers probably increases the price of houses - in some kind of pass through subsidy, that the amounts are small licks of money, and it only tackles intergenerational inequity at the margin.
What stands out about Luke's selective neoliberal take - is how it excludes all the other supply side policies Labour took with regard to housing ( Medium Density Residential Standards, streamlined consents, massive build programs etc ) - and how tilting the property market in favour of first home buyers was actually working. Their share had increased.
I must note that Gordon Campbell is a refreshing exception amongst the media - but he's a one man band.
The point is New Zealanders are being led by the nose - by our media in concert with Bishop and Luxon - down the neoliberal path into the privatisation of state assets and the corporatisation of state housing.
Media sheep dogs bark at the flock to move like Luke, or just look the other way like Thomas.
The level of pure propaganda have increased to the point where we are saturated and drowning in it.
There's five main rules of propaganda :
1. ) The rule of simplification - reducing all data to a simple confrontation between 'Good and Bad', 'Friend and Foe'.
Examples might be "six years of economic vandalism by the previous government" that denies there was a pandemic and a cyclone. "Labour are Soft on crime" when no laws really changed to make them softer. Or - "We inherited an unholy mess from the last government" when much of the story was relatively good in a global context - AA credit ratings, low debt to gdp ratios compared to other comparable nations, a global slowdown in GDP, and a world leading pandemic response with 20,000 fewer excess deaths than if we had not saved lives.
2. ) The rule of disfiguration - discrediting the opposition by crude smears and parodies.
Crude smears are a daily event from Christopher Luxon. "I gotta tell ya, I will not listen to Chris Hipkins, he's a desparate man"
3. ) The rule of transfusion - manipulating the consensus values of the target audience for one's own ends.
"New Zealanders voted for change" and "New Zealanders are sick and tired of wasteful government spending". "It's time to get back on track"
4. ) The rule of unanimity - presenting one's viewpoint as if it were unanimous opinion of all right-thinking people: draining the doubting individual into agreement by the appeal of star-performers, by social pressure , and by 'psychological contagion'.
"It's common sense Mike", "Hosking is always right". "Let's take our country back", "The Greens are a basket case" and see 3.) above, "
5. ) The rule of orchestration - endlessly repeating the same messages in different variations and combinations.
"We are working incredibly hard", "We are working at pace", "He is doing an incredible job", "He is doing an exceptional job", "We will deliver on our quarterly plans"...
Yes the rise of propaganda levels is suffocating and obvious and drowning us ...and it's not going to stop any time soon.
But at least we can see it.
We can also see the fingers of the Atlas Network behind the puppets.
I am heartened by the way this community sees these matters very clearly based on the evidence - and now I gotta go make the coffee.
A portrayal of pure propaganda
Morena
G