Forest & Bird » Marine and Coastal

New steps to maintain NZ hoki con

(5 posts)
  • Started 2 years ago
  1. Kirstie
    User Profile

    Most of us Kiwis know that the environmental certification of our hoki fishery is a great con. It's got one of the worst environmental track records, killing hundreds of seabirds and fur seals every year and using destructive bottom trawl gear in the process.

    Some months ago the New York Times open the world's eyes to this spin - you may have heard about it. As a result, the Seafood Industry Council, the Ministry of Fisheries and even the Minister himself came out guns blazing to protect our dear fishery and it's wonderful reputation (ahem).

    In doing so, some very novel (are dare I say incredibly naughty) tactics were deployed. The following article cites some extreme new strategies employed by the fishing industry council. It just shows the depths to which they are prepared to sink inorder to continue this scandalous public con:

    http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/11/new-public-relations-beating-back-bad-press-with-google-adwords/

    NZ hoki is ranked a species to avoid on F & B's Best Fish Guide:
    http://www.forestandbird.org.nz/what-we-do/publications/-best-fish-guide-/hoki

    Interestingly, this very same industry council employed another naughty tactic against this eye opening consumer guide - they bought the url 'bestfishguide.com'. Rather conveniently this links to their "Great Fish Guide" - a consumer guide on how best to eat fish, including recipies and .... more spin: "It's it's from Aotearoa, then it's sustainable"

    Where's that damned Tui billboard when you need it?!!

    Posted 2 years ago #
  2. Christ almighty, I knew about they'd bought a whole bunch of google adwords (hoki, new zealand, new york times, laura chang), but I didn't realise they'd also snapped up the best fish guide domain name too......

    I just tried googling 'hoki, new zealand, laura chang (the NYT science editor)' to find the original article, and it's no where to be found, it's just a whole bunch of seafood council links.....

    Anyway, after a bit of scrummaging, I managed to unearth it, so here it is folks -

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/science/10fish.html?_r=1

    Just looked at the cost of buying five google adwords 'hoki, new zealand, new york times, laura chang' and the estimated cost is $297- $500 per day.

    If only the ministry spent their money on cleaning up their fisheries, rather than employing aggressive PR tactics.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  3. brent
    User Profile

    interesting read. certainly suggests that the F&B of the future will need a strong and well resourced digital strategy. and a consistency of message and data (where available) on the actual story.

    as for the Times Inc., presumably they haven't gone after the 'counterpoint' crew and they are probably quite used to this sort of thing happening. makes you wonder how happy their reporters are with working for an organisation that apparently takes no notice of their work being maligned by the spinsters.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  4. Oh, it'd be great if the NYT went out to defend the honour of their reporters, and champion their stories, unfortunately, newspapers (esp in this day and age) aren't particulary well resourced, even big ones like the NYT.

    Last time I walked into a newsroom it was full of 20 year olds sipping instant coffee behind big beige (shouldn't that be in te papa?) computers. It was like walking back into the early 80s.

    Unfortunately, organisations like us don't have the big bucks to get into a bidding war for google adwords, so it's a matter of mobilising people through social avenues (Blogs,facebook, twitter, chat rooms).

    As you probably know, the google ranking system is a complex thing, but we do know that it works on popularity (hits etc) & freshness. It also sorts the information according to how many sites point to you, so if we want to make a hoo haa, we really need to spread the word on a variety of websites/chatrooms/social networking sites.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  5. brent
    User Profile

    I'd stick by the 'well resourced' and add 'clever'. its high time we spent a bit more effort liberating the viral side of our marketing machine...

    Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.