Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
La Colombe

Rob Callister

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Hang on - you're comparing Donald Trump being voted in as U S President ( when the country was largely in a mess and what got him in was a largely disenfranchised country) and a manx politician using social media?

So if a iom politician uses social media and the internet to publicise themselves by using some savvy (say he has a mate who's handy with SEO etc) at no cost that's ok?

Should they also be disclosing what else they spend their money on so we can sense check it?  

This is small time politics in a tiny island.  If RC or anyone else is going to get elected it wont be because they bombarded you with paid or unpaid social media content.  If anything it'll have the mob like you feeling the opposite.  I'm no fan of RC but there is 70 odd pages here and your agenda is spewed all over them.

SEO on it's own won't get you far nowadays

You do have to pay to get your product in front of the faces of your desired readership

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

If Quayle, as a millionaire, suddenly started blitzing Facebook with bought for ads saying how ace he is I’m sure there would equally be some sort of public outcry (probably on IOM News and Politics) not dissimilar to the above. It amounts to the same. It’s buying publicity with money that’s been given to you by the same taxpayers you are trying to impress. And expenses are there to assist you to support services to your constituents. Not to buy ads to big up yourself online. As I said this is nothing to do with Callister directly but his silly self funded Facebook antics exemplify the point perfectly - there should be rules on disclosure of bought for social media spend even outside of election corridors. 

He'd never pay to have the public openly deride him

He steers well clear of encounters with the plebs, especially media engagements where the electorate get to ask questions he isn't prepared for

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would any money spent on self-promotion be counted as ''Election Expenses''?

One MHK spends a good lump of his yearly expenses allowance on newsletters. Is that informing his constituents or electioneering?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

Ah, general election spending is a different matter - they should all be limited to a total print/online media budget for the duration of perhaps £5,000.00 each

That’s what the limit is in effect, now that constituencies and electorates are more or less standardised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

You do have to pay to get your product in front of the faces of your desired readership

I would hope that people don’t regard politics as a product nowadays? There are 9,000 people in Onchan I think. Odd that anyone would feel that they needed to pay to reach an audience that a bit of shoe leather would deliver to them for free. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

If Quayle, as a millionaire, suddenly started blitzing Facebook with bought for ads saying how ace he is I’m sure there would equally be some sort of public outcry (probably on IOM News and Politics) not dissimilar to the above. It amounts to the same. It’s buying publicity with money that’s been given to you by the same taxpayers you are trying to impress. And expenses are there to assist you to support services to your constituents. Not to buy ads to big up yourself online. As I said this is nothing to do with Callister directly but his silly self funded Facebook antics exemplify the point perfectly - there should be rules on disclosure of bought for social media spend even outside of election corridors. 

Definitely and if it's done throughout the year or in the run up to a General Election then any spending on it needs to be factored as part of the spending rules for elections. It's just a protracted form of electioneering, doing it slowly over the long run instead of during the General Election campaign itself. I think this kind of spending and paid advertising needs to be kept in mind as part of a full review of the Election rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Hang on - you're comparing Donald Trump being voted in as U S President ( when the country was largely in a mess and what got him in was a largely disenfranchised country) and a manx politician using social media?

The issue here isn't Rob spamming social media. He can do that, however irritating it is. The issue is protracted SPENDING on SPONSORED ADs --- should they be counted as part of election spending limits? I can't think of any other reason for a politician to be paying to advertise their social media page except as a self-promotion to be re-elected, especially when the same page will be used as part of their re-election campaign.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rushen Spy said:

The issue here isn't Rob spamming social media. He can do that, however irritating it is.

That’s the only bit that makes you laugh. It’s still the same content he’s producing but now he’s paying to put it in front of more people. It’s a bit like running a social media campaign for turd awareness; paying to show even more people exactly what shit looks like. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say it is hilariously sad if he has resorted to sponsored ads of his blog, on the Isle of Man where everything good is word of mouth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to disappoint you but the sponsored ad wasn’t for his blog. It was to share the Eastern Plan and to report on all his efforts this far. A sponsored ad for his blog really would be a step too far. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter which blog entry it was a PAID ad for. It was a promotion of the blog and even included an option to "like" the page for the BLOG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ecobob said:

Sorry to disappoint you but the sponsored ad wasn’t for his blog. It was to share the Eastern Plan and to report on all his efforts this far. A sponsored ad for his blog really would be a step too far. 

Steady now.  Let's not let some facts cloud the views of the numpty brigade.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rushen Spy said:

Fascinating that a new poster should show up and only post to defend Rob. Reminds me of Teddy Smith.

The new poster sounds not very well. Angry, shouty, and a persistent confrontational needler returning to the same old tired arguments. 

Edited by Cheesy Wheezy

Share this post


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...