Interesting Website

www.bloodyidiot.co.nz

Comments

[BerlinBear]

Interesting indeed. Not all entirely accurate (but what *is* accurate so far in this campaign?) but I'm certainly sympathetic to the general thrust. Clever, if a little childish.

[Logix]

Like BB I agree with the general iea, but I have reservations about whether it has been done well enough.

Yes there are parallels to be drawn between Bush and Brash...but this doesn't feel right.

[Craig Ranapia]

Well, I agree with BB and Logix on this. Big on attitude and a bit short on argument.

[Craig Ranapia]

BTW, forwarded a link to a friend who works at LTNZ - and she's not very impressed with the screen pull above. Said she's going to pass it up the chain, and see what happens.

[Jordan]

Well, it's about the same as the Yeah Right parodies, Craig. People are free to cadge off others' advertising campaigns. For safety, though, I am going to remove the image from my blog.

[GeniusNZ]

> they both like tax cuts for the wealthy

and they both can only win an election if their opponants get all cocky and start trying to paint them as idiots and pro war and well you get the picture...

[Craig Ranapia]

Jordan:

Little over sensitive, aren't we? My friend's comment was that, unlike the Tui ads, she works for a public sector organisation that invested a lot of effort in developing a strong road safety brand.

Public sector organisations don't like being associated with party political campaigns for some strange reason...

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

Craig. I agree that public sector organisations don't like being associated with electioneering.

That's why I would be keen to know if Tom Hovey - domain contact for bloodyidiot.co.nz and director of Boost Media, will resign his many govt accounts such as ACC, DOC, ESR if National should win.

[Vanzyl]

Jesus Jordan, Where is your back bone man! This morning you happily displayed the ad with a bit of commentary and all. At the first sign of trouble you whip it off while still sort of try to steer people to it. Like a petulant child peeking around a corner sticking their tongue out.

If you think it has merit support it. If you think is is smelly politics then denounce it.

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

And the website is now dead. Tom Hovey of Boost Media has dropped by my blog to explain why:

http://bhatnagar.blogspot.com/2005/07/bloody-idiot-website.html

Jordan, can you categorically state that there is no Labour involvement behind the bloodyidiot website?

[Craig Ranapia]

Aaron:

I'm sure Jordan could - but he'd be a bloody idiot to do any such thing. :) Smear sites of this nature overseas have had a nasty habit of getting traced back to official campaign 'black ops'. If I was a blog-reading journalist, any statement by a member of the Labour Party's governing council would be a good hook to hang a story on.

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

Jordan might yet comment, while he's partisan and proud of it, he is fair-minded.

[Brian S]

In a similar vein to the bloodyidiot site...I drove past Westpac Trust Stadium in Wellington today. There is a massive Labour Party hoarding outside quoting Don Brash saying "I would do what President Bush did". My first response was. Yeah! Go Don! Then my blood started to boil. When did this become a campaign against George Bush? Bush won convincingly last election. 55 million Americans voted for him. They are not idiots. How far does Labour want to push us away from America? This will backfire badly on them.

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

Jordan, this is looking darker for Labour affiliated folks. Please assure us that Labour have nothing to do with the bloodyidiot website.

[Paul]

Aaron,

what's wrong with this site?

As far as design goes, it's brilliant, very much of the time. Nice appropriation of a well known slogan, and hard hitting. Hell of a lot better than the offical stuff from labour.

[Paul]

Brian,

not meaning to get your blood boiling too much Brian, but "55 million Americans voted for him. They are not idiots," is an oxymoronic statemennt, considering the voted Bush back in and now he's experiencing his lowest approval polling ever with the majority of the country against the war in Iraq.

Still you reap what you sow.

[sagenz]

this has incompetent fingers of labour all over it. no doubt the web design would have been paid from taxpayer funds. That would be a really good one jordan. First you backed off. Now we are waiting for you to deny responsibility. Or is that silence incriminating???

[span(ner in the works)]

I have no idea if Labour people have anything to do with this, but I think it's a bit high and mighty to demand that Jordan tell you - to be fair he probably doesn't know. He's not on the campaign group, but on the Council, and in campaign time those kind of things do not go via the Council (probably) and besides which it may well be something done by a group of individuals, some of whom might be Labour members, and I don't think Jordan should take responsibility for that. (These are speculations btw, I have no idea)

Aaron, it's a bit like asking you, as someone involved with Jackie Blue's campaign in Mt Roskill, to take responsibility for something done by Blumsky's campaign team.

[Logix]

As I said above I agree with the general idea being conveyed, but on further thought what I really don't like is that in essence it is a slur on the democratic process.

Sure I PERSONALLY may think that anyone who votes for Brash is a bloody idiot, but to then go out and say so is a needless polarisation and an insult to conservatives who sincerely support him.

We should take a care that we underpin our partisian positions with an understanding that we all live in one small nation and as a people we share a common heritage and destiny.

[Vanzyl]

Logix, every time I think that you are as blinded the rest, you surprise me. Thank you, I like the fact that there are thinking people on your side. Really hope you and mates can come for an amble, make for interesting debate around a billy perhaps

[Craig Ranapia]

Span:

Well, if the shoe was on the other foot I'm sure he'd be demanding National at the very least disassociate itself from an anti_Clark smear site of shadowy origins.

I certainly don't think he'd give linkage to any such thing.

BTW, I don't think the analogy in the last par. of your comment is entirely apt. All of us who are politically active — including Aaron and me on the right, Jordan and you on the left - need to CALL OUT OUR OWN SIDE when the bullshit gets too thick. This kind of site adds NOTHING to the quality or depth of political discourse. And the lack of transparency does matter. I may be a nasty right-wing bastard, but at least I'm an upfront one. :)

[Mark]

I have two degrees, an LLB and a BSc and I fully intend to vote for Brash's party. And I consider myself to be reasonably intelligent. Labour really have buggered up with this one.

[Paul]

Sage,

"no doubt the web design would have been paid from taxpayer funds"

If it's legit political campaigning, they are perfectly entitled to advertise how, when and why they like. Next point.

Logix "needless polarisation" Do we mention Winnie Peters. Also I could hardly imagine any conservative reading it.

[Tom Hovey]

Hi all,

I've come into work this morning to find an interesting email or two waiting for me.

There has been an enormous amount of blogging about the Bloody Idiot website. The gist of it seems to be that at first it was linked to me and my company, but more recently the opinion seems to have swung towards it being a Labour funded 'smear' site or some such.

Here are the answers to all of the questions that you and the National Business Review have been asking:

1. The Bloody Idiot site was contributed to by a few individuals, who, as far as I know, don't belong to any political party. Presumably though, none of them will be voting National. But it's hard to know sometimes!

2. The Bloody Idiot site has nothing whatsoever to do with Labour, or any Labour MP, or any Labour funded organisation. The Bloody Idiot site is not representative of Boost New Media. It was not paid for by Boost New Media. In fact, it has nothing to do with Boost New Media.

3. The Bloody Idiot site was not paid for by anyone. I'm told it was built in someone's bedroom at night. It would be kind of funny if web companies were paid to make these sorts of websites. I doubt that any company would be that stupid.

4. I have worked under both Labour and National governments and have worked with ministers from both parties. I support good policy.

5. The site was hosted on one of Boost's servers. There are heaps of personal projects on our servers, that's the beauty of having your own server, you can let your friends express themselves for the price of a few beers on a Friday night.

6. I think, all up, the website was live for less than 2 days. A short lived experiment.

7. The reason that I decided that the site should be taken down yesterday afternoon was not to 'squash freedom of speech', it was in response to someone's concern regarding the LTSA. I think that it is a valid point that the use of the LTSA's branding could be seen as 'devaluing' or 'reducing' the effectiveness of LTSA's very important safety message. All jokes and political leanings aside, we all need to take responsibility for reducing the road toll.

Regards,
Tom Hovey.

[Jordan]

Aaron - I can state no such thing, because I don't have a) a list of Labour Party members and b) any knowledge about who made the website. Any assurance I gave would be totally meaningless and worth less than the key strokes required to give it.

I'm not *aware* of any Labour involvement in the site. I thought it was a good concept, but I can understand the logic behind Tom Hovey pulling it and the respect for the LTSA. The same thing led me to remove the image, as I noted above in the comments thread.

As it happens, I do think that you're a bloody idiot if you vote for National at this election, because the National Party is a conservative party out of tune with middle New Zealand, and capable of implementing policies which are highly destructive on the economic and social level. They've done it before, and they shouldn't be given the chance to do it again, especially when led by a right wing fanatic like Brash.

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

Jordan, such an artful dance around the issue. It was a smear campaign, clearly it was ethically wrong because a) it was done anonymously and b) it got taken down in next to no time the moment pressure went on it.

If you are not aware of any Labour involvment, then you might be kind enough to let us know who told you about the site?

[Jordan]

Aaron, was it a smear? All I did was scan the site, decide I liked the look of it, and go from there.

And no, I am not going to say who let me know about the site. I'm not into revealing the sources of the wide range of information that flows into my inbox just because a National Party activist (or anyone else) would like to know.

[Paul]

Aaron,

a little too close to the xfiles conspiracy theory there mate.

Emails from all directions went out last week with this site on it. Many in the design community thought it was rather well done (political allegiances aside).

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

Yes Jordan, it was a smear. But of course, I'm sure you and I agree to disagree on that one.

Paul - if people were simply open and honest about who is behind the site, there would be no speculation.

As for plaudits from the design community, Tom Hovey is regrettably unable to take credit for the site, as he has said that it was done in someone's bedroom, presumably by a friend of his judging by point 5 in his response above.

[Paul]

Aaron,

what's the problem?

Site up, good site, poor sensitive tories, site down.

Issue gone?

[Paul]

Aaron

from your blog, "horribly counterproductive website"

Has someone died from this?
Did it cause earthquakes?
were animals harmed in the making of it?

Come on a few geeks with time to cruise blogs over a weekend got their tory sensitivities in a twist.

I'm still pissed off about the Iwi/Kiwi gnat attempt at national unity billboard. Way more offensive.

[Ryan]

Mr Hovey has denied any connection with the bloodyidiot.co.nz, despite registering and his company (of which he one of two directors) hosting the website. Mr Hovey's company has previously worked on Labour Party election website activity. Indeed his company is the contact for the domain name for headsup.co.nz.

How can Mr Hovey say: "The Bloody Idiot site was contributed to by a few individuals, who, as far as I know, don't belong to any political party."

Then say: "The Bloody Idiot site has nothing whatsoever to do with Labour, or any Labour MP, or any Labour funded organisation."

In fact it seems no-one is responsible.

"The Bloody Idiot site is not representative of Boost New Media. It was not paid for by Boost New Media. In fact, it has nothing to do with Boost New Media."

No-one in the Labour hierarchy has yet denied it was a Labour Party initiative.

Everyone is pleading ingorance.

Mr Hovey says he know's "was contributed to by a few individuals", but it refusing to say to who.

Very strange.

[Paul]

Ryan

Again for the risk of sounding boring here.

Has someone died from this?
Did it cause earthquakes/ tsunami/ draughts?
were animals harmed in the making of it?

What's the beef?

[John]

Craig, LTNZ didn't design the 'Bloody Idiots' campaign, its been around in Aust. for a lot longer, so although I agree they may not want to be associated with a political thing, they didn't develop it, and it has been around for so long it'd be hard for them to say no-one else can use it.

[JW]

I am truly astounded at how precious people have been over this website. Get over it!! It was slightly humorous and for people such as Aaron to get so worked up about it is beyond belief. Especially when he states as he did on his site that the website was "devisive" (http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6867511&postID=112277476707174341&isPopup=true) after Don Brash's statements and complete contempt for who he has classed as non-mainstream NZers.

Big-ups to Paul as well.

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

JW, the matter would have never arisen had the people who created the site put their names to it. Of course, the fact that they seek to remain anonymous now that the MSM are sniffing around suggests that they have something to hide.

[Mark]

JW, when did Dr Brash show "complete contempt" for these people. I understand that, as a student, an understanding of life outside your little Labour-loving bubble is impossible to envisage, but making up things about a great future leader such as Dr Brash is just feeble. Get back to your lectures and squeeze your zits.

[Insolent Prick]

The point is surely this. If the site contained defamatory statements, then Tom Hovey, as the domain name holder and host of the site, would be considered the publisher of the site. He is legally liable for any statements that were made on the site.

For him to claim that he has nothing to do with the site is a complete nonsense. On the one hand, he has several quite lucrative contracts with Government agencies and has hosted other sites with direct links to Labour Party political activity. He is also legally responsible for any material published on servers that he owns, and on domains that he owns. On the other hand, he is claiming no responsibility for the content of the site.

Nice try, Tom, but it doesn't wash, in either legal terms, or in reality. For the sake of transparency, given that you earn a good part of your living from the taxpayer, and the fact that you are legally responsible for the bloodyidiot website, you should be up-front about who is behind the website, so that we can determine for ourselves whether it was a genuine Labour Party activity.

The consequence of you not identifying who was behind the website can only mean that you are protecting Labour Party friends, at a time when, coincidentally, you are doing very well financially out of government contracts.

It is completely inconceivable that the website was not put up by supporters of the Labour Party. This is election-time. The only people who would put up a website demonising Don Brash at this time are those who have a political interest in Don Brash not becoming Prime Minister. That IS the Labour Party.

[weizguy]

IP

That's right - it's a conspiracy...

Most of NZ has an interest in Don Brash not being Prime Minister. don't make the mistake of thinking it's just the Labour party.

Just because you say he should name the people involved so you can judge them doesn't make it so.

[Kent]

"He is also legally responsible for any material published on servers that he owns, and on domains that he owns."

I'm intrigued by this statement. Do you think you could provide me with any precendent for this?

[DonaldBrashNot]

WTF is going on over this? Get a grip Nat lovers. Just because someone disses your right wing fantasy boy Brash doesn't make them Labour supporters. Maybe they just did it for a joke? It's a lot less divisive and more factual than the Iwi vs Kiwi billboard.

[Paul]

Aaron.

"put their names to it. Of course, the fact that they seek to remain anonymous"

like so many of the people here who use fictional names.

IP.

Hosts of site are not responsible for the content of sites.

I am not a labour supporter but would be more than happy to create a website pleading with the people of NZ not to vote Brash. this is called legitmate political electioneering, offical or not.

it's no different from having a few beers in a pub and having a good old arguement and telling people not to vote one way or another.

Or is free speech too hard for you folk to handle.

Future great leader - my arse!

[Paul]

I couldn't agree more DBN.

Iwi/Kiwi was far more repulsive let alone insulting.

[DonaldBrashNot]

What's more, this reeks of fascism. Don't like what someone says? Persecute and hound them, make the public service cancel their contracts - just cause they don't support what you believe in. I can't think of a more convincing reason why Don Brash and his ideologues should not be in government, and the harm they would do if they got there.

[Paul]

Another example, The Don wants to remove the Maori seats and STV from local councils, even though they werre democratically voted for in referendum.

From what I reememeber councils have the ability to address these issues at the next set of elections, but the overwhealming support for these systems suggest that they won't be removed.

But again, the gnats are all about removing Central govt fom our lives.

Not!!

[Mark]

You're right DBN. It would be like an Attorney General not granting QC status to an eminent barrister merely because he was a list MP for the Opposition.

[weizguy]

Mark, mark, mark...

He's given his reasons... Believe them or don't, but I better not see you dismissing the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy... That would be hypocrisy.

[sagenz]

"It would be kind of funny if web companies were paid to make these sorts of websites. I doubt that any company would be that stupid."

Tom - there are those of us who have been complaining about expenditure on Wananga & other tertiary rorts, hip hop tours etc. We certainly believe this government is stupid enough to spend taxpayers money on smearing the opposition. That is why there is interest in finding out who is behind this site. If it was whacked up in someones bedroom at night, fine. Jordan has made much of his antipathy to personal attacks but he is the one to advertise one that rips off a public safety campaign. smell of more hypocrisy anyone??

[TheProphet]

2 questions I would like to ask.

1) Why did Mr Hoovey decide to post his response on Jordans blog and not Aarons or DPF's ?

2) Why has every Labour apologist known to man come out of the woodwork to say that theres nothing to it, no earthquakes, get over it blah blah blah?

Hmmm funny smell in here.

Allah protect us.

[Aaron Bhatnagar]

Prophet, to be fair on Hovey, he did post his response on my blog. However, he might be less than impressed to realise that it just generated a new storm of questions for him.