New Zealand taxpayers paid $10 000 to get John Key a slot on the Letterman Show?
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww!
That news makes me feel very uncomfortable, especially in light of the tacky performance Key gave while he was in Letterman's limelight.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Buying popularity
New Zealand taxpayers paid $10 000 to get John Key a slot on the Letterman Show?
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww!
That news makes me feel very uncomfortable, especially in light of the tacky performance Key gave while he was in Letterman's limelight.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Cheap at half the price when compared with the cost of Helen Clark's Discovery Channel doco...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=1293547
Another Labour beat- up
Always with the 'Labour dunnit too' Inventory2.
Never facing the facts.Inflation, unemployment, Kiwis leaving for Australia, GST rise..nothiong to see here 'cause John's in the Woman's Weekly!
Actually, I should have simply agreed with you - cheap!
Yes.
It's just lucky tourism NZ aren't relying on you for their branding and marketing Robert.
Paranormal
Well paranormal, it seems that relying on Key, Minister for Tourism, has seen the tourism figures plunge since his term began.
Perhaps I'd be a better bet.
I'd not prostitute myself on 'Letterman' for a start.
Gravitas eh?
Not a drop!
Oh dear Robert. Let me see if I can explain the modern world to you.
Branding is an important element of a marketing programme. Tourism travel is something people do with discretionary income. (Robert discretionary income is something people have in a post Luddite economy after they have paid taxes and the cost of living). In a world where the GFC has reduced discretionary income/spending, having a brand front of mind when people come to make discretionary spending is important. That's why what Key did is so clever.
By the way the punters don't give a rats arse these days about 'Gravitas'. If gravitas comes with a rumbly voice, voters saw too much of it under the Clarkula regime. It seemed her voice got lower and more rumbly the more she lied.
Paranormal
Paranormal - you say that 'what Key did' was so clever. The general consensus though, was that Key's appearence on Letterman was embarrassing, that his comments were trite and that he came across as a goof. It's water under the bridge now I guess and wasted on you certainly, given that you believe that 'the punters don't give a rats arse these days about 'Gravitas'' Perhaps you are right and 'the punters' (punters? are we talking gamblers here?) prefer their leaders to be goofy, but that's no justification for it, other than it wins votes and perhaps that's where you are coming from - the end justifies the means, no matter if that results in a fall in quality. Have you read The Authoritarians? You'd possuibly benefit from even a skim.
Robert I am a political junky and am no fan of John Smile and Wave. Like Clark I think he has wasted real opportunities that their initial huge political capital provided to improve New Zealand. The problem with Clark was her ideology. The problem with Key is his lack of ideology.
However I can see where he does well, and he does being the slightly gawky bloke thing so well. Cactus sums it up perfectly in "Women Love John Key". The whole Letterman thing wasn't aimed at us thinking kiwi's, but at the millions of Americans watching Letterman. I don't think the execution was particularly stunning but the concept was perfect.
And yes I use the word Punters for Voters on purpose. They are not thinking, just gambling on the most popular man in the country to 'do the right thing'. Of course you and I will disagree on what the right thing would be but that's another issue. At least we're thinking about it (and I think you'd be surprised what we would agree on).
Paranormal
Well paranormal, yours are interesting thoughts. When I heard Key declare last night that the election was about who the country wanted for its Prime Minister, rather than which party or parties the country wanted to govern it, I knew where the game lay (though it's been obvious all along but such bald statements still make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up).
I don't really care about letterman and so on at all, but I do care about integrity. To me, the end doesn't justify the means, whereas to others (Key et al) it does. Brash and Shipley have both made clear statements about how little the public need to know of the real deals going on and I'm certain Key is cut from the same authoritarian cloth. I don't challenge the effectiveness of a 'John and Wifey on the pages of the WW' campaign but I don't admire it, despite its cleverness.
Do you like my photo of Key btw?
I think it's quintessential.
Post a Comment