Exclusive: National Party strategy convergency

Recently the National Party invited MyThinks to their latest strategy meeting entitled, “The Party Strategy Convergency.” Apart from being a grammatical mouthful, this meeting brought together all the bright lights and blue sky thinkers of the election-winning National Party. Followed several hours of meeting, a keynote address was delivered by Sir Archibald Fountain-Penne.

Good afternoon everybody. Thank you all for coming to this strategy convergence. I’m sure I don’t have to tell you, what is said in this room, stays in this room.

I can tell you, over the past few hours we’ve listened to all your ideas, ignored them, and I am here now to give you the official National Party talking points when you are confronted by any media questions.

When you are asked by any journalist about any policy the National Party has been in charge of over the past decade, it’s important to use the language of disaster. Our housing issues are now a housing crisis. The challenges we faced in health are now called a health crisis. Any problems in education or the economy are called the education crisis or the economic crisis. Other words you could use are catastrophe, calamity, cataclysm or disaster.

Of course, when National were in government, these words were resisted, and rightly so. The last thing you want is people thinking your running a series of disasters. It’s not nice to be called useless, incompetent, disastrous, dreadful, awful, appalling, horrific, horrifying, horrible, horrendous, atrocious, abominable, abhorrent, frightful, fearful, shocking, hideous, ghastly, grim, dire, hateful, unspeakable, gruesome, monstrous, sickening, heinous, or vile.

The great thing is this: the government is now dealing with all the issues we were dealing with as a result of our own policy errors. That’s not the important thing. The important thing is we sell the idea that this government is failing. Sure they are failing at fixing up the range of messes we left, but that doesn’t matter. Voters are stupid. Why else would Winston still be getting votes? Why would 44% of New Zealanders still be supporting the opposition?

Another thing you can do is suggest we were only “following advice.” This is a great argument. Mainly because it puts the onus for our failures on the bank of faceless public servants. I mean, how were we meant to know? We were only following the very best advice. We are only mere politicians. We can’t be expected to know everything about everything, can we? Of course, the fact we were in charge of the policies that led to the development of the advice we were given does not need to come into it. Just repeat to the journalist you were following advice.

Lastly, if you are new to the portfolio, you can always blame the previous person in charge. This works better than anything else because, more often than not, the former politicians will remain exceedingly quiet on the issue. Who wants to be that former MP making their way in the private sector standing up and admitting to abject failure. That doesn’t look good on the front page of the CV.

Remember, the underside of a bus is best seen by the person you shove beneath it.

Thank you all for listening.


An apology about recent Mike Hosking post

Last night MyThinks posted a short satirical piece where we suggested that broadcaster Mike Hosking was, in some way, not special.

We suggested that because he just sits there and talks into a microphone that somehow he wasn’t deserving of the millions of dollars he has been paid to talk about stuff.

We at MyThinks have been contacted by lawyers representing Mr Hosking’s car dealer urging us to cease and desist. They have reported being concerned that if the public started to ask questions of Hosking’s vastly inflated pay, he might be jettisoned for someone younger and more relevant. Therefore he would no longer be able to head down the supercar showroom and pay cash for one of their European penis extensions.

We apologise for suggesting that Mr Hosking was anything other than what he is.

If this gets us out of any legal issues, then congratulations to us.

Racist rich person: “I’m not racist”

Racist star of the joke reality show Real Housewives of Auckland Julia Stone is demanding an apology from the Race Relations Commissioner after Dame Susan Devoy called her a racist last week following her use of a racist term to describe a fellow cast member during a show.

The Human Rights Commission confirmed it has received a letter from Ms. Stone’s racist lawyers claiming her racist use of the racist term wasn’t racist.

The incident, featured on a recent episode of the programme showing Ms. Stone using a racist term in a racist and derogatory way, garnered international attention with various media organisation around the world reporting Ms. Stone’s racist language.

After being confirmed as hugely racist, Ms Stone went on the offensive saying the racist term she used wasn’t “that racist” because she used it all the time and because she wasn’t racist, the phrase wasn’t racist.

Ms. Stone confirmed she has called in the lawyers who will be looking to sue the Human Rights Commission for defamation for calling the racist language she used racist.

Ms. Stone’s public relations consultant Deborah Pead has pointed out, “she is concerned that her character has been vilified in a sweeping, snap judgement, based on a reality TV show. It’s important to remember if the television cameras hadn’t been there, Ms. Stone could have been casually racist as she normally is and nothing would have happened because she wouldn’t have been filmed using the racist language she loves to use.”

Clarification from media man

Good evening.

There were a few interestingly fruitful statements of anguish following my explanation yesterday regarding our reporting on David Cunliffe’s recent holiday.

As I said yesterday, the fact that John Key was on holiday at the same time, and for much longer, and in a far warmer and far further away place has absolutely nothing to do with our reporting into the 2-day break of Mr Cunliffe.

It’s also important to point out a few things.

Firstly, when the Labour Party released their comprehensive and thoroughly well thought out education policy at their congress last week, people were still speaking about Mr Cunliffe apologising for being a man. We know this because several of those people have very well-read blog sites. Those sites were talking about it so that must mean than everybody was. Nowhere on those blog sites was reference made to Labour’s education policy. If there was, it was all very, very negative.

Secondly, I don’t feel the need I have to defend myself. We in the media have a great deal of responsibility in reporting the news as it happens. The fact that Mr Cunliffe’s important policy news is nowhere near as important as we in the media trying to dismantle his arguments in case people decide they actually hate John Key and want to start voting Labour or, god forbid, the Greens.

Thirdly, I have no other points to make. I feel my previous points succinctly sum up my position and the positions held my many of the people who own me.

Good evening.

Media man defends himself

Hello there.

I work for a very well-known national daily paper. I’ve been asked, by some of my fellow Press Council members, to respond to some of the criticism being levelled at us from some of the left-wing blogs.

There has been some voicing of the opinion that we are biased against David Cunliffe after publishing criticism from an un-named “Labour insider” who has expressed some f***ing concern at David’s brief holiday in Qu***stown.

I would like to categorically state for the record right here and now that we in the mainstream media are in no way biased against the leader of the opposition.

Yes we often publish stories that are less than flattering to Mr Cunliffe. And yes it’s true that after the release of each political poll we go out of our way to thoroughly question all those Labour Party members of parliament who are low on the party list or standing in a marginal seat. And yes we over-report National’s polling results by discounting the 10-20% of voters who say they are undecided, yet fail to make clear in our reporting that National’s result is actually a percentage of decided voters and not all voters. And yes we could have easily got stuck into John Key for heading off on holiday to Hawaii at exactly the same time as David Cunliffe. And yes we got Key’s comment on the Labour MP after he arrived back in the country as if he is the “go-to” political pundit when dealing with issues from the opposition.

But as I said at the start, that in no way makes us biased. So you can clearly see that we have covered all the bases.

Thank you for listening.