Key takeaway. If some faceless group doesn't know what you want, then don't tell them what you want. They are not one of you. You need to discard them out of hand.
Its been a veritable shitshow ever since.
If you think this is something only done by centre-right neo-liberal parties (including those news media mistakenly call "left" parties), I think you'll find that's not the case. Further right neo-conservative parties like the US Republicans, Liberal and National parties in Oz, and National in NZ do it too, and the new wave of far-right nationalist parties do almost nothing else. But none of this has anything to do with the NextElection platform or Scoop.
Quite 'right', mind the pun.
Yes, the "Right" were argueably doing it first. The so-called "Left" decided they would play along in the 90s rather than build #awareness of the practice, much to the apparent disillusionment of advisors at the time, such as #RobertReich (we need a bot of his on fedi btw, if he's not been #shadowBanned already and given up completely)
Thanks for the added context.
I'm not sure what you mean by ...
> Those things
... but Scoop are not ...
> some faceless group
They are the oldest born-digital independent media company in Aotearoa, 100% owned by a not-for-profit trust that funds public interest journalism:
I've personally met and even worked with many of their people over more than 20 years.
That might be okay then. We are only speaking of the practices that we have seen and learned about in #Australia, #England, #US. Our #voteCompass'es and the like are captured by a very #neoliberal lot, and #astroturf groups from what we can tell.
If this doesn't apply to #NZ then you are doing better than us. :)
I'm surprised to hear that about the UK, given that at least one of their "vote compass" type tools was promoted by Jonathan Pie, hardly a neo-liberal type ;) That was in the last election though.
We are not familiar with that specific VoteCompass but as you'd know the promoter is just one part of the stack, so to speak.
I'm confident that the creator of the Jonathan Pie character did his due diligence, as do I before I promote such tools.
I wonder if we use the term "neo-liberal" to mean the same thing? I use it mainly to describe state-corporatists who spent the 1980s-90s using fake economic and social liberalism to recruit market-libertarians, and weaponize them against movements that oppose the consolidation of corporate power. This has been the established meaning since the term came into common use among activists in the mid-1990s.
More recently, neo-liberal strategy seems to have shifted to recruiting left-liberals - and even some radical leftists too - to build identitarian populist movements that ignore or even oppose the economic egalitarian goals of the traditional left. Some people have started misusing "neo-liberal" to describe this weaponized social liberalism, but that mistakes symptom for cause.
@strypey Are you in NZ? Interesting how this is happening around the world.
Yes, I'm a kiwi and currently back in Aotearoa. It does seem to be an unintended consequence of the politicization of the net, especially it's distortion by corporate datafarming.
It also ignores the fact that the same neo-liberal corporatists have also been recruiting neo-conservatives and nationalists to create identitarian populist movements on the right, for exactly the same purpose. Classic divide-and-rule. One example is the "Bad Boys of Brexit", now interfering in the NZ election via NZ First:
This change of neo-liberal strategy may be an adaption to the increased tactical cooperation among libertarians of many flavours (eg in digital rights, ethical tech, and tech cooperative movements), and perhaps the rise of the left-libertarian movement. All of which makes it harder for corporatists to divide and weaponize different types of libertarians against each other in pursuit of corporate interests.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!