<?xml version="1.0"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title><![CDATA[News - The CT Group]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/</link><description><![CDATA[]]></description><language>en-us</language><pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:23:16 -1100</pubDate><lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:23:16 -1100</lastBuildDate><webMaster>jrobb@crosbytextor.com</webMaster><item><title><![CDATA[Too many voices drown out need for reform]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/too-many-voices-drown-out-need-for-reform/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Herald Opinion It would seem many in business, academia and the commentariat are growing increasingly alarmed and frustrated about the lack of genuine reform in Australia; usually...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydney Morning Herald</p><p>Opinion</p><p>It would seem many in business, academia and the commentariat are growing increasingly alarmed and frustrated about the lack of genuine reform in Australia; usually laying the blame at the door of politicians. Yet at its core our political system has not changed, and other leaders around the world - in New Zealand, Canada and Britain - are implementing radical or controversial reforms. So what lies behind the perceived lack of reform here?</p><p>In a practical sense, 10 years ago peak business and union groups dominated the national conversation about policy and politics; the relationships between respected think tanks, unions and business and governments were more direct. Today, the fragmentation of media has provided smaller groups and individuals with an array of mechanisms to influence policymakers to whom access was traditionally reserved for an elite few.</p><p>This allows a greater range of voices to be heard, but it also makes it more difficult for better resourced interest groups on both the left and the right - whose reform proposals are more substantive but necessarily more complex - to influence public policy.</p><p>In essence, the increase in general chatter reduces the ability for well-researched messages to be heard.</p><p>Another practical effect of media fragmentation is a rise in the number of think tanks that are beholden to narrow industry or issue-specific paymasters, reducing the voice of those with a cross-industry or cross-society view. Further, as I have written previously, the share of the voice being disseminated in 30-second bites through paid advertising is crowding out more thoroughly researched but subtle conversations.</p><p>Now to the political reasons behind a dumbed-down discussion of reform. Some say politics is bad for reform. I disagree.</p><p>Bad, weak politics is bad for reform, but strong politics can facilitate the implementation of reform.</p><p>Those politicians who have successfully implemented change have been able to use personal popularity or popular policies to build on other issues. They have used their political capital earned elsewhere to build stronger social and economic reform. Arguably, Margaret Thatcher would not have achieved her economic reforms without her brutal political skills. Ditto John Howard, Paul Keating, Bob Hawke. The popularity of many of their social policies (for example, work for the dole) ''paid'' for less popular economic reforms such as privatisation, the dismantling of industry protections and industrial relations reform.</p><p>A lack of political capital, or a failure to invest it in improving economic and social wealth, leads to the diminution of political capital so no one can afford the political ramifications of reform.</p><p>Kevin Rudd was unable to implement reform as prime minister because, over time, he squandered the political capital he possessed when elected to ''make things happen''. Arguably, Julia Gillard lacks the political strength to support any comprehensive reform.</p><p>The third factor holding back the reform debate is the failure to make reform personally relevant.</p><p>Just as people become tired of politicians, they become tired of reform language, which is all about processes rather than outcomes. Instead of talking about how to effect reform, we should be talking about the benefits of reform: a strong economy, jobs, higher wages, a cohesive and fair society.</p><p>Can we have a debate about workplace productivity without the dreadful term ''work choices''? Those communicating reform must demonstrate a greater personal relevance of its outcomes to those who are listening. You don't reform your car, you fix it. You don't reform a broken leg, you heal it.</p><p>Further, making cases for industrial relations tweaks to policies that affect old, tired industries arguably has minimal impact on the nation as a whole. Conversely, a small change in policy affecting new and emerging industries has the potential for much more dramatic influence.</p><p>The public suspects that reform means revolution, not evolution. People are alarmed by the idea of radical change that puts their way of life at risk, particularly in the midst of a NAFC (North Atlantic Financial Crisis). The reform debate should communicate how subtle or incremental changes in the direction of policy will fix our economy and our social structures to make people's lives better.</p><p>There is a market for reform, but the conversation is broken and the political toolbox often bare. Reform needs to be made more emotionally relevant by renewing the language that surrounds it.</p><p>The traditional advocates need to reclaim their share of voice and take a more positive and visionary stance. And popular politicians must power it.</p><p><span><br />Read more:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/too-many-voices-drown-out-need-for-reform-20120217-1te98.html#ixzz1msHkLz1w">http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/too-many-voices-drown-out-need-for-reform-20120217-1te98.html#ixzz1msHkLz1w</a></span></p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/too-many-voices-drown-out-need-for-reform/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="2126" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/8/4/84A7A48FD95129FEE09A9258D22A028A.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[Panel appearance on The Drum]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/panel-appearance-on-the-drum/</link><description><![CDATA[Click here to view Mark Textor's panel appearance on ABC's 'The Drum' episode.]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/888240">Click here to view Mark Textor's panel appearance on ABC's 'The Drum' episode.</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/panel-appearance-on-the-drum/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="1667" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/7/5/7528AE033C8D4454A35A80C5D05AD120.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[For whom the poll tells depends on what you ask]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/for-whom-the-poll-tells-depends-on-what-you-ask/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Herald In one of the most thorough examinations of the spectator sport that is political poll-watching, Murray Goot, in his paper To the Second Decimal Point, noted: ''National...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydney Morning Herald</p><p>In one of the most thorough examinations of the spectator sport that is political poll-watching, Murray Goot, in his paper&nbsp;<em>To the Second Decimal Point,&nbsp;</em>noted: ''National elections are occasions &hellip; when journalists keen to attack political leaders for being dominated by focus groups are themselves at their most poll-driven; and when editors seek to increase their share of a newspaper market by bringing their readers exclusive insights into &hellip; how it is likely to divide.''</p><p>This year the media will be full to the brim with polls and experts picking over their entrails, so it's worth examining what insiders think of such polls and taking a ''poll-watching 101'' look at the differing techniques behind published and private polls.</p><p>Most senior campaigners don't find published polls terribly useful strategically. They are important as news events on publication and are respected for their high accuracy but not for insights. They are treated like emerging political stories - good or bad, distracting or not - but not as explanations of electoral behaviour. Campaigners have private polls for that.</p><p>Competent political operatives worldwide do not ''follow'' published polls; they attempt (successfully or not) to create strategies and tactics to influence them in the long term. To do this, they need their own polls that are more frequent, bigger, deeper, more focused and complemented by other forms of research.</p><p>As Professor Goot has observed, that means political parties conduct their own polls in a more frequent, focused fashion. In the later part of an election cycle, they are held weekly, typically with a rolling sample far larger than the fortnightly sample of the major pollsters - anywhere up to between 2000 and 4000 interviews a night.</p><p>Published polls generally have to guess what has, or has not, changed using non-data and casual interpretation of events over the previous couple of weeks (usually based on the biggest stories in their own papers). Party political polling will have reported, days or weeks in advance, movements not only in votes but what issues (e.g. health, tax), themes (e.g. broken promises, competence) and mood drivers (e.g. feelings of insecurity, disempowerment) are driving the vote change, or not, and where.</p><p>A typical finding delivered at 4am during a campaign might be that out of 40 seats tracked overnight, the rolling sample pointing to a 4.5 per cent primary vote loss among middle-aged working women, due to unease on health policy, concerns about competence and honesty on that policy, underlined by feelings of financial insecurity in six key marginal seats.</p><p>All these movements will be defined by specific figures based on advanced statistical modelling, and tracked weekly before a campaign and daily during a campaign; contrast this to pundit interpretation of the sexiest headlines of the fortnight.</p><p>Geographically, political party polling focuses on marginal and target seats, not on the national vote. With money tighter to come by, it is incredibly important to finely target resource allocation.</p><p>Any foray by published polls into issues and attributes, or marginal seat results, is occasional, whereas political parties around the world make a deeper set of indicators the norm, throughout the election cycle. Another integral part of party polling is the differentiation between party vote and votes for specific candidates. This provides vital information, especially in marginal seats where differences are often substantial, because campaigns can measure how much more likely voters are to be loyal to individual MPs than parties.</p><p>The biggest difference between public polls and internal polls, however, is in use and objective. Political parties are not bystanders and observers but rather participants, leaders. Research allows political leaders to understand the rational and the emotional drivers that make up voters' decision-making process. It allows the competent to formulate responses to their policies, candidates, messages and strategies in target areas. Thus, when working effectively, they are adjusting their strategies daily in a way that affects voters before the published polls are printed.</p><p>Polling should never be used to determine what politicians should believe in but to provide political leaders and candidates with the relevant information to ensure their vision becomes a reality, by helping them get the support to actually do it.</p><p><span><br />Read more:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/for-whom-the-poll-tells-depends-on-what-you-ask-20120106-1po64.html#ixzz1iulikrdJ">http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/for-whom-the-poll-tells-depends-on-what-you-ask-20120106-1po64.html#ixzz1iulikrdJ</a></span></p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/for-whom-the-poll-tells-depends-on-what-you-ask/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="2198" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/7/5/75B6E6BFE8F66FEFC23F80C452BC7B4B.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[Does this mean 'Kaching' for political parties]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/does-this-mean-kaching-for-political-parties/</link><description><![CDATA[Does this mean 'Kaching' for political parties Blueprint - NSW Liberal Party Magazine]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1>Does this mean 'Kaching' for political parties</h1><p>Blueprint - NSW Liberal Party Magazine</p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/does-this-mean-kaching-for-political-parties/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="2970" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/0/2/02D5EADD9BDCD7E1C939832A7733683E.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[The battle of the first names]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/the-battle-of-the-first-names/</link><description><![CDATA[The battle of the first names Blueprint - NSW Liberal Party Magazine]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1>The battle of the first names</h1><p>Blueprint - NSW Liberal Party Magazine</p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/the-battle-of-the-first-names/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="2540" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/5/C/5CCF6E37B5690EFEBA67C9CC5F42AD89.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[New form of journalism must adhere to old rules]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/new-form-of-journalism-must-adhere-to-old-rules/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Hearald Faster, cheaper, better. That is what our polls tell us consumers are demanding from products and services; in their airlines, insurance deals, smartphones and apparently in...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydney Morning Hearald</p><p>Faster, cheaper, better. That is what our polls tell us consumers are demanding from products and services; in their airlines, insurance deals, smartphones and apparently in their information.</p><p>As news outlets take more steps to tighten their belts, cheaper but more enticing ways to source original content may thrive.</p><p>One of these is "data journalism", championed recently by&nbsp;<em>The Guardian</em>, the ABC and Fairfax Media, using data to make storytelling visual and interactive via websites. It's a tricky way to create the impression of quality. Visually sexing up data allows journalists to present what appear to be data "patterns" in bite-sized chunks, giving the impression of clarity in complex situations. This allows for allegedly "balanced" opinions and decisions to be formed &hellip; but it only works if the data is sound and the presentation is equally balanced.</p><p>Data is easily accessed and plentiful and it is easy to mask bias with the rhetoric of "facts". But data comes with a warning: one wrong calculation, single mistyped formula or omission error and suddenly the data is unreliable.</p><p>Yet data journalism is good storytelling. When you create a graphic or pretty chart that many can understand, they believe it to be true. But just because data journalism is new, it does not mean you can ignore the age-old journalistic principles including accuracy, objectivity, verifiability and contestability.</p><p>This new form of journalism can be far less balanced than its 20th-century cousin. Coupled with the problem of bad data is the issue of the blurring of the roles of expert and journalist, resulting in a loss of integrity.</p><p>Critically, a journalist would gather competing interpretation of any given data to get both sides of the story. Too often, data journalists suddenly pretend to be experts. But a journalist is a not a mathematician or statistician. With data journalism that is exactly what they pretend to be. They imagine they are something way beyond the pay grade of the average journalist with a graduate degree. Also there is a subtle but significant change in roles that is a dangerous precedent. Rather than independently comparing different data sets, they become advocates for their own information. They therefore become commentators rather than observers, and many see this as a breach of ethics, especially where this comment is not labelled as such.</p><p>A journalist is more likely to interpret a statistic incorrectly just as that same journalist can misrepresent an opinion. They can mask this by purporting to use "facts". A deluge of "facts" or ''factoids'' can also mask errors of omission.</p><p>These are often facts without full context. Factoids are dangerous because they so often lack context and balance.</p><p>Irrespective of whether we're talking about a number or a quotation, a journalist giving prominence to one aspect of a story over another and/or declining to include a conflicting data set or opinion, is failing a basic rule of their craft - to tell all sides of the story.</p><p>The recent bent towards environmentally-focused data journalism by the&nbsp;<em>Guardian</em>&nbsp;and the ABC omits or radically marginalises information and reporting of data about jobs, wealth and small-town sustainability. Given the primacy of these needs in uncertain economic times, this is a curiously odd bias and suggests they are determined to make an opinion columnist's environmental case under the cover of (selective) "facts" rather than a balanced view of the choices being considered by the community.</p><p>The ethical issues of "data journalism" will also be compounded through the use of large teams of folk usually reserved for the famously flaky online advertising industry; graphic designers, art directors, developers and online programmers. Often these team members are outsourced. Even if the team leader does have a rudimentary, if amateur, understanding of data, at every step of the way in these complex projects there are people adding to the story who are not trained as statisticians, let alone in the ethics of journalism.</p><p>Many in the media are calling on industries to halt certain activities until the science and ethics of issues are "settled" - perhaps they should consider applying this rule to data journalism.</p><p><strong>Mark Textor is the founder of the campaign consultancy Crosby Textor. It conducts research work for energy and mining clients.</strong></p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/new-form-of-journalism-must-adhere-to-old-rules/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="1662" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/D/A/DAAF3C0B1636BB2997FF5FB41F8593CF.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[There are no hang-ups in this hung parliament ]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/there-are-no-hang-ups-in-this-hung-parliament-read-more-http-www-smh-com-au-opinion-politics-there-are-no-hangups-in-this-hung-parliament-20111125-1nz23-html-ixzz1jzwlfpbx/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Herald Opinion Never have the conceit to believe your problems are unique; to wit minority governments or hung parliaments. The measure of a politician is how they deal with such...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Sydney Morning Herald</strong></p><p><strong>Opinion</strong></p><div class="push-0 span-11 last"><div class="articleBody"><p>Never have the conceit to believe your problems are unique; to wit minority governments or hung parliaments. The measure of a politician is how they deal with such challenges, not simply whether their positions are "popular". For many, the view on how Julia Gillard has handled minority government is a poor one; broken promises, odd policy compromises and now parliamentary tricks.</p><p>In New Zealand, however, a "hung" parliament has been the norm since 1996 and today its people go to the polls under a voting system that mostly guarantees this.</p><p>Under the mixed-member proportional (MMP) system used in New Zealand, each elector casts two votes; one for an electorate, as in the Australian lower house, and one for a nationwide party "list", like a Senate list - all sitting in one house; the "party vote" determining the final proportions. This system has meant the major parties- National and Labour - have not had a clear majority since 1996.</p><p>In 2008 the National Party's John Key swept into a position to form government and chose to do so with the Maori Party, United Future and the ACT party, cushioning the left and right. What would have been a political straitjacket in Australia allowed Key to form an unashamedly centrist, pragmatic government. That was fortunate, as the challenges to New Zealand have been significant.</p><p>As a trading nation, and without the Pilbara, New Zealand was hit harder by the global financial crisis, and Key did not have the luxury of inheriting a large surplus.</p><p>Key's government also had to cope with a triple-whammy of disasters: the Christchurch earthquakes which destroyed homes, businesses and lives in the South Island's largest city; the Pike River explosion that killed 29 miners; and, most recently, the grounding of the container ship Rena off Tauranga.</p><p>But John Key made the most of what he had to meet these challenges and sought not to rely on political excuses. In one term he has reformed the tax system, rebalancing the country's GST and income taxes for fair incentive; his government has started on the long road to rebuilding Christchurch; he has taken tough decisions to drive efficiency measures in government departments and concentrate on delivering services; and he has implemented about 120 economic and pro-business reform measures. Salvage operations limited the oil spill from the Rena, and the Rugby World Cup was a hit.</p><p>Most Kiwis support Key's co-ordinated set of reforms, including partial asset sales, because they chart a clear path to economic recovery and physical rebuild. Compare this with the majority judgment of our own minority government's performance: a carbon tax people didn't want or need, a mining tax compromised by minority interests, the absence of an effective deterrent on boatloads of asylum seekers, and a rising cost of living.</p><p>Key has based his relationship with the electorate on positivity, honesty and empathy. Regardless of the coalition his party found itself in, he has kept trust and persuaded the electorate to go with him on difficult reforms while balancing expectations of his political partners.</p><p>This openness has led to stellar poll approval and leadership figures - as good as those Kevin Rudd enjoyed in his heyday; the difference being Key has held on to them, and leadership.</p><p>The National Party is predicted to get about 50 per cent of the party vote. To even contemplate this is rare under MMP voting, but this election has also been a wake-up call to voters.</p><p>First, to the annoyance of voters, and Key, some segments of the New Zealand media have been overly focused on the process of politics, not the issues (to be fair, this is now true everywhere). Body language and marketing experts at every turn, endless reporting of insignificant poll movements, and nearly two weeks of coverage of Key's cup of tea with a coalition party candidate. To voters these were unwelcome distractions from policy issues.</p><p>Second, despite overwhelming poll support for Key and the Nationals' direction, they are still only on the cusp of being able to govern in their own right; an ironic outcome in times that call for stability.</p><p>Public polls show the MMP system will likely stay. This outcome would be an endorsement of Key and his team's abilities under this system, not the function of it. But what is certain is that if the Nationals are re-elected, whether in coalition or governing in their own right, they will take on difficult tasks such as reducing debt and implementing welfare reforms with a strong measure of support, unlike Julia Gillard's Labor-led coalition.</p><p><strong>Mark Textor has provided research-based advice to several conservative parties, including the British Conservative Party, the New Zealand National Party and the Liberal Party of Australia.</strong></p></div></div><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 26 Nov 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/there-are-no-hang-ups-in-this-hung-parliament-read-more-http-www-smh-com-au-opinion-politics-there-are-no-hangups-in-this-hung-parliament-20111125-1nz23-html-ixzz1jzwlfpbx/</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[A confession - even the elites have their place]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/a-confession-even-the-elites-have-their-place/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Herald Guilty, your honour. On more than one occasion I have raged against the ''elite''. Recently, even. To many in politics these elites have earned a wide range of descriptions -...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydney Morning Herald</p><p>Guilty, your honour. On more than one occasion I have raged against the ''elite''. Recently, even. To many in politics these elites have earned a wide range of descriptions - pompous, pious, patronising, powerful. Further proof that we are now living in a world of perceptions about perceptions, these elites are seen by many in the right as seeing themselves as a better-educated, intellectually sophisticated and therefore superior social or political group. Usually, more moneyed, better educated, more ''informed'' than others. We think of the academics, the writers, artists, the Melbourne Club folk, the members of the pulpit politics clergy. Even human rights lawyers.</p><p>For a bloke like me, from the suburbs of Darwin, they sound like an awful little group. Their type would be decked within five minutes in one of my favourite Darwin pubs. Two minutes in the old Dolphin Pub. But they're not all bad, all the time. And a particular moment made me reflect on this.</p><p>In 2009 my business partner, Lynton Crosby, and I were mentoring a group of more than 100 candidates for the European elections. Many were standing in former eastern bloc countries; we visited candidates in places including Latvia, Poland, and Slovakia. Many were Catholics (I am not. In fact, I'm an atheist). A key issue was the fear in their constituencies that Brussels was starting to impose secular limits on the church's traditional involvement in the state. Growing and onerous controls over religious studies in schools, the role of nuns in the health system, the ease of divorce proceedings and even the recognition of Christmas as a faith-based holiday.</p><p>We had heard that Jan Carnogursky, a former dissident in Czechoslovakia who went on to become the premier of the Slovak government, was potentially an ally in this debate. We flew to Vienna, then drove to the suburbs of Bratislava to meet him in his modest tower-block flat. A slight man in slacks but with enormous presence greeted us.</p><p>We started to talk about what the European Union was doing to effectively limit the church's right of association and positive influence. ''Hospital wards tending to severely ill patients, even under communist reign, demanded permission to employ nuns as nurses because they were the most strongly motivated to look after severely ill patients,'' he said, and now they were not wanted.</p><p>Sharing his mood, I said: ''Typical of the elites, they would not understand popular opinion if it fell on their heads.'' I vividly remember how his mood changed. He asked me to cross the room with him to look at some fading pictures on the wall. Three of them were of him and his wife sharing tea and a meal with Pope John Paul II. Another was a photograph of a group of men in what appeared to be a forest glade. I recall he said: ''These men were what you would call elites, Mark. Writers, artists, lawyers, priests, and at this meeting we were risking our lives talking about the resistance. It was these 'intellectuals' that fought the 'populists'. They spent time in prison fighting for the rights of others.'' It was the first time I'd heard that description used with passion in the negative. "Without these people, you would not be here and we would not have a vote.'' Then he told me he was imprisoned for his work as a lawyer and activist.</p><p>The thing that struck me about this former associate of the ''elite'' was that he had fought for true democracy, he had earned his stripes. He had done what he'd done for the right reasons. He was, as we say in politics, ''amongst the action''.</p><p>I'm not sure this is always true in the West. There is still too much pomposity for my liking. Certainly many activists appear to be fiscally clueless. And what is an actor ''risking'' apart from a fragile ego in criticising a political position on immigration, or a chief executive doing the same who doesn't live in a suburb affected by social change?</p><p>But one thing is for sure. Whether they're annoying, patronising, paternalistic or not, I'm glad the elite exist. I don't like them, and I disagree violently with most, but I like that they are there, somewhere. Just in case. And I hope they are good.</p><p><strong>Mark Textor is the founder of the campaign consultants Crosby Textor.</strong></p><p><span>Read more:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/a-confession--even-the-elites-have-their-place-20111111-1nb65.html#ixzz1eIUWoy2K">http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/a-confession--even-the-elites-have-their-place-20111111-1nb65.html#ixzz1eIUWoy2K</a></span></p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/a-confession-even-the-elites-have-their-place/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="2714" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/A/E/AE508669796EE8676406C1D11C067B9A.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[Time for conservatives to do the right thing]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/time-for-conservatives-to-do-the-right-thing/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Herald Australians, including conservatives like me, are perhaps about to face the most important referendum most of us have never heard of. The government's expert panel on...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydney Morning Herald</p><p>Australians, including conservatives like me, are perhaps about to face the most important referendum most of us have never heard of.</p><p>The government's expert panel on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples will soon recommend options that formally recognise indigenous Australians in our constitution, with a referendum on the issue possible by the next federal election.</p><p>Now is the time for fellow conservatives to get behind this constitutional change not only because it aligns with the principles of their main party, the Liberal Party, but also because it's the right thing to do.</p><p>Liberals believe in the freedom of self-expression, including the freedom in our strong democracy to vote and express oneself.</p><p>A core part of the Liberal platform is the belief in "equal opportunity, with all Australians having the opportunity to reach their full potential in a tolerant national community".</p><p>How can we say we have achieved this equality, when Section 25 of our constitution specifically references the ability of the states to prevent people from voting in state elections on the basis of their race?</p><p>Most people would be shocked by this, and all true Liberals would also be shocked to know that Section 51 of our constitution gives Parliament the power to make special laws for people based on race.</p><p>Far from suggesting that Parliament should pay no attention to individual differences and diversity, it should eschew a constitution which makes laws based on race and instead make them on the basis of such things as culture and need.</p><p>Some people think a commitment to these issues belongs only to the left of politics, but that ignores the proud tradition of conservative politics when it comes to Aboriginal affairs: the first Aboriginal member of any State or Territory Parliament was Hyacinth Tungutalum, of the CLP in the Northern Territory; the National Party's Eric Deeral was the first Aborigine elected to the Queensland Parliament.</p><p>The Liberal Party gave us the first Aboriginal senator, Neville Bonner, and the first Aboriginal member of the House of Representatives, Ken Wyatt.</p><p>It was a Liberal federal government that introduced the Northern Territory Land Rights Act and a Liberal prime minister, John Howard, who put constitutional recognition for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people back on the agenda before the 2007 federal election.</p><p>These Conservative achievements do not diminish the contribution of other political parties - this issue is not about left and right; it's about supporting equality of opportunity and recognition in our constitution regardless of your political persuasion.</p><p>Many Liberals respect tradition and the preservation of "Australian culture". One of the amendments being considered is to recognise the English language as the foundation stone of the Australian culture, and to acknowledge the importance of Aboriginal languages.</p><p>The Liberal platform recognises: "The Europeans who began to settle Australia more than 200 years ago did not come to an empty land. For tens of thousands of years, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples had lived on this continent. Their contribution to Australia's identity has been, and will continue to be, a vital and enriching one."</p><p>So should our constitution.</p><p>Also at the core of Australian Liberal philosophy is a belief in the freedom to achieve success and contribute to society. My belief is that it's hard to be so aspirational if the constitution allows a person to be discriminated against on the basis of their race.</p><p>One of my Darwin school friends, Johnny Daylight-Lacey, is an Aboriginal street artist based around Mullumbimby. A talented and passionate musician and painter, he wants to share his culture with other Australians, but he is not always allowed to practise his art because of council restrictions. While the considered amendments to the constitution may not give him carte blanche they would give him much-needed encouragement not only to share his culture but also to make a living.</p><p>Conservatives are rightly fond of supporting "a hand up, instead of a handout". If one is true to this value then one must get behind a constitution that truly enables&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;Australians to achieve their desires.</p><p>Conservatives can be at the forefront of a debate to recognise the contribution of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, and to abolish discrimination on the basis on race.</p><p>It's time to step up, my friends. For all of us.</p><p><strong>Mark Textor is the founder of the campaign consultants Crosby Textor.</strong></p><p><span><br /><br /></span></p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/time-for-conservatives-to-do-the-right-thing/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="2207" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/4/D/4D219BEF48F65ABD1A5ED5466B282E79.jpg"/></item><item><title><![CDATA[Who needs a CV when a tweet says much more]]></title><link>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/who-needs-a-cv-when-a-tweet-says-much-more/</link><description><![CDATA[Sydney Morning Herald Mark Textor Not many young boys want to grow up to be a campaign consultant, pollster or media consultant, at least not until they hit 25 and watch The West Wing. Then they...]]></description><content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydney Morning Herald</p><p>Mark Textor</p><p>Not many young boys want to grow up to be a campaign consultant, pollster or media consultant, at least not until they hit 25 and watch&nbsp;<em>The West Wing</em>. Then they instantly want to be CJ, get on professional networking site LinkedIn and send me an invitation to be ''linked''.</p><p>As a recruitment professional said to me: ''LinkedIn is for IT nerds and career desperadoes''. Recruiters operating in accounting and similar professions might be good but in my space they are mostly awful.</p><p>Finding people through political networks was once useful but nowadays many toss up young folks whose only aspiration in life is to be preselected to some council or go to a youth political forum rather than chase girls or drink beer, which is what they should be doing at that age.</p><p>My business advises on public sentiment, campaigns, strategic communication, crisis management, rapid response messaging and political counsel. It's rare that people with hard analytical or literary skills are useful in campaigning like this. It's not a spectator sport for us. So how do we find those with the skill set?</p><p>Until recently it was a hybrid of personal networks, recruiters, word of mouth and dumb luck. But now we have Twitter. Unlike more personal and gated social media platforms, Twitter is a great place to get an insight into potential employees.</p><p>An applicant who is active on Twitter is clearly willing to embrace new technology and communication tools. They can be quickly identified as early adopters, technically savvy characters who have, at least, a basic understanding of the changing dynamics of communication and consumption of information.</p><p>This is why Twitter use is valuable in gaining qualitative information about potential employees. Think of George Costanza's fear of ''worlds colliding'' in&nbsp;<em>Seinfeld</em>. George's philosophy, slightly reworked, went: ''You have no idea of the magnitude of this thing. If personal George is allowed to infiltrate this world, then George Costanza as you know him, ceases to exist! You see, right now, I have personal George, but there is also professional George. That's the George you know, the George you worked with - strategic George, coffee shop George, decisive George &hellip;''</p><p>Jerry: ''I, I love that George.''</p><p>George: ''Me, too! And he's dying, Jerry! If personal George walks through this door, he will kill professional George! A George, divided against itself, cannot stand!''</p><p>George was unable to manage his ''collision of worlds''. For those who do, it is likely they will make the interview shortlist at firms like mine.</p><p>It is invaluable for business owners to gain personal and professional insights into a prospective employee before the interview process begins. On Twitter, people display a range of skills including their communication and writing technique, ability to distil complex issues to their essence, keen judgment, a sense of humour, commonsense and perceptiveness.</p><p>Inevitably, Twitter users publish content about things that interest them. So instead of reading a CV with the usual list of interests - reading, movies and current affairs - you can drill down to what they actually think about a book or nod your head in approval at their latest ''retweet''. It helps determine whether a person is the right fit in the workplace culture.</p><p>Who is ''following'' the applicant and who the applicant chooses to ''follow'' can indicate the person's professional network size [and shared connections], the information they choose to consume and even their personality traits. A person with a large number of published tweets and followers is often an extrovert, opinionated, entertaining, willing to share and a collaborator/seller. Someone with fewer published tweets but who follows a large number of experts is likely to be more introverted, observant, considered, analytical and an intelligence gatherer.</p><p>Social media can reveal a person's attitude towards work, other people and the consumption of, and engagement in, issues of the day. Often I'm looking for the&nbsp;<em>intention</em>&nbsp;rather than the polished output, which can be taught.</p><p>Twitter can identify talent quickly. It provides an informal space to watch and chat with people working in all sorts of industries, allowing you to ''meet'' people you may never have met otherwise.</p><p>It simply allows you to connect with more people, quickly. Obviously the applicant needs to fill all the usual requirements when applying for a job - Twitter just provides you with more information to help make that decision.</p><p>But beware the fine print: ''Online personas may or may not accurately represent actual people''. Rather like politics, then?</p><p><strong>Mark Textor is the founder of the campaign consultants Crosby Textor.</strong></p><p><span><br />Read more:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/who-needs-a-cv-when-a-tweet-says-much-more-20110916-1kdnl.html#ixzz1YejJEiID">http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/who-needs-a-cv-when-a-tweet-says-much-more-20110916-1kdnl.html#ixzz1YejJEiID</a></span></p>]]></content:encoded><pubDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 00:00:00 -1100</pubDate><guid>http://www.crosbytextor.com/news/who-needs-a-cv-when-a-tweet-says-much-more/</guid><enclosure type="image/jpeg" length="1263" url="http://www.thewebshowroom.com.au//media/pics/site/imagecache/6/3/636C08C1BE6B5135D1B69639EB074411.jpg"/></item></channel></rss> 
