You know, one way to make money from ads would be to categorise readers (based on their browsing/comments) by political views: core Labour, wavering Lab/Green, etc. You could also identify trigger issues.
Then you could sell targeted advertising to political parties based on this - so if I'm wavering Labour/Green and seem to have an interest in global warming, Labour could show me ads advocating (somehow) for their ETS policies.
I'm sure only a tiny minority would complain about privacy. Plus, if it works, you could sell it to Google / Facebook for squillions..
Donation: A voluntary gift or contribution for a specific cause
Parliamentary Services are funding parties information campaigns in compliance with a statutory duty they've had based on them. That isn't voluntary, so it isn't a donation.
The TV advertising is just the same - it isn't a "donation" by the Electoral Commission.
I read that as Key saying that the Herald's doing such a good job at campaigning that the Nats don't need to bother.
And Clark's office have not said it will be declared - Audrey Young has blogged that she has asked five times for the cost and whether it will be included and they won't tell her.
The EFA requires a return of election spending 50 days after the final election results are declared. It does *not* require a rolling account to be given to rival parties and their supporters as the advertising appears.
The promoter statement identifies the advertisement as possible electoral advertising. If anyone wants to monitor such advertising, they can make a list of campaigns and try and validate this against the eventual declaration - that's the point of having the statement.
You know a lot of people in many, many ads aren't actually Kiwis, don't you? They even sometimes dub TV ads for different markets (in the UK, they revoice ads with different regional accents for different parts of the country).
What Che said. If they weren't under a spending gun, they might have afforded a paid shoot with Labour-supporting models and puppy.
Besides, I just read this in the NZ Herald. It's great how the National Party not only produces a propaganda leaflet on a daily basis, but convinces Aucklanders to pay $1.20 (or whatever) for it.
More crimes of Garth McVicar. One day I hope to see him convicted of something - although unless he gets into a libel/perjury trap one day, I doubt it'll happen.
Unfortunately, I think cases where a key prosecution witness has been offered or given excessive inducements are quite common, aren't they. There was the suitcase murder where one of the conspirators got away with accessory to murder by testifying. I don't think there was any doubt there, but avoiding maybe 5 years in jail is a big inducement, isn't it?
Density Church/Family Party are all over Mangere at the minute
Does anyone want to explain how, if South Auckland is such a hotbed of social conservatism, they elected the not-very-socially-conservative David Lange seven times?
Also, although the wierdo wingnut churches are very prominent, none of the Pasifica people I know actually go to church any more than Europeans.
I saw the NZD250 (I guess) price tag for the iPhone. And then the NZD140 annual charge for MobileMe - which seems to be mostly functionality GMail has for free?
Does the "openness" of the iPhone allow Google, or opensource hackers, to create an alternative to MobileMe?