Jump to content

Rob Callister


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It seems like they did a briefing last Thursday to members and this is where they "Informed them" of the planned trajectory. This seems disingenous of Quayle. It's one thing to have an informal b

Haha is Rob really complaining about unnecessary questions in Tynwald?  "How much does is cost to send a letter to Jersey?" Idiot.

Hello Mr. PB A family member has alerted me to your posts and as your observations are not correct, it’s only fair that I correct them for you. I joined the civil service on 17th May 1976 wi

Posted Images

22 hours ago, Rushen Spy said:

Not content with spamming all the groups, I've just noticed he is also distributing his blog as a "sponsored" ad.

That’s because next to nobody is reading it. There should be a law against politicians and FB sponsored ads. I wonder if the cost of a FB sponsored ad is being paid by him personally or via his Tynwald expenses? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, thesultanofsheight said:

That’s because next to nobody is reading it. There should be a law against politicians and FB sponsored ads. I wonder if the cost of a FB sponsored ad is being paid by him personally or via his Tynwald expenses? 

He needs to include the precise payment he made to Facebook in this advertisement in his annual published "accounts". If he doesn't, I will bump this thread to point out the omission. We all deserve to know how much of our taxpayer money is going out of our pockets and towards blatant political propaganda aimed right back in our faces.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob, much like Adolf, is an amusing little man. He's very funny as a small time little MHK.

God help us all if he ever becomes anything more than a minister. I suspect if he ever became Chef Minister that Knockaloe Internment Camp would see an increase in "visitor" numbers.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Rushen Spy said:

Rob, much like Adolf, is an amusing little man. He's very funny as a small time little MHK.

God help us all if he ever becomes anything more than a minister. I suspect if he ever became Chef Minister that Knockaloe Internment Camp would see an increase in "visitor" numbers.

Godwin's Law

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2019 at 9:38 PM, thesultanofsheight said:

That’s because next to nobody is reading it. There should be a law against politicians and FB sponsored ads. I wonder if the cost of a FB sponsored ad is being paid by him personally or via his Tynwald expenses? 

 

On 9/19/2019 at 9:40 PM, Rushen Spy said:

He needs to include the precise payment he made to Facebook in this advertisement in his annual published "accounts". If he doesn't, I will bump this thread to point out the omission. We all deserve to know how much of our taxpayer money is going out of our pockets and towards blatant political propaganda aimed right back in our faces.

Someone challenged him yesterday on that very point and asked if MHK’s paying for sponsorship was the way things were going to go in the future. He didn’t reply but this morning the sponsored post and all its comments has gone. 

Edited by ecobob
Duplicate word
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ecobob said:

 

Someone challenged him yesterday on that very point and asked if MHK’s paying for sponsorship was the way things were going to go in the future. He didn’t reply but this morning the sponsored post and all its comments has gone. 

Good on the challenger. I think paid for sponsored distribution shows two things. 1. He’s absolutely desperate to distribute his mind numbing crap that nobody is clearly interested in voluntarily reading despite it already being circulated widely, but more importantly 2. That it sets an awful and unfair bar when it comes to self publishing MHKs who are literally prepared to stop at nothing (including being prepared to pay to generate publicity about themselves) to stay elected. I’d still like to know if those payments to FB are expensed and who the target FB social groups are and if Tynwald is prepared to put in place rules on bought social media content. We’ll have Manx Russian trolls on Twitter next like Brexit at this rate. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites

Political parties pay to promote their meetings etc to as wide as possible an audience

I see no reason why Mr Callister shouldn't pay to promote his blog

Be better if it had more political content of course

Might inspire other #ClubTynwald members to communicate with the hoi polloi

Edited by Donald Trumps
crap spelling
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Donald Trumps said:

Political parties pay to promote their meetings etc to as wide as possible an audience

I see no reason why Mr Callister shouldn't pay to promote his blog

Be better if it had more political content of course

Might inspire other #ClubTynwald members to communicate with the hoi polloi

The issue of paid for content in general raises too many issues for me. Not least disclosure of spend. Say an existing MHK, any MHK, stands for election next time round and spends all their £7,500 expenses on heavily sponsored social media content (which they can do as they do not need to produce receipts for anything) whereas a new candidate with no expenses funds behind them could not compete to reach the same audience as they don’t have the cash to spend to promote themselves. It’s just thoroughly wrong in my book to allow people to secure paid for content as it puts them at a clear advantage over other candidates. It’s simply not a fair fight get once money is involved and puts new candidates at a disadvantage (unless they’re rich and can buy similar coverage) over sitting candidates with expense allowances. I think Tynwald needs to ASAP create very clear rules and disclosure requirements around this sort of stuff before every idiot resorts to these sort of desperation tactics with expenses money that we fund. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

The issue of paid for content in general raises too many issues for me. Not least disclosure of spend. Say an existing MHK, any MHK, stands for election next time round and spends all their £7,500 expenses on heavily sponsored social media content (which they can do as they do not need to produce receipts for anything) whereas a new candidate with no expenses funds behind them could not compete to reach the same audience as they don’t have the cash to spend to promote themselves. It’s just thoroughly wrong in my book to allow people to secure paid for content as it puts them at a clear advantage over other candidates. It’s simply not a fair fight get once money is involved and puts new candidates at a disadvantage (unless they’re rich and can buy similar coverage) over sitting candidates with expense allowances. I think Tynwald needs to ASAP create very clear rules and disclosure requirements around this sort of stuff before every idiot resorts to these sort of desperation tactics with expenses money that we fund. 

Ask your MHK to raise it with the Tynwald Standards Committee and if Rob Callister just happens to be one of your MHK's then you can report it to Julie Edge who happens to be on the Committee.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...