Posts by Christopher Dempsey
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: What if We Held an Election…, in reply to webweaver,
Her technique was multi-stepped and went something like this:
1) Very confident voice, made eye contact with voter, had the whole spiel down pat right from the get-go.
2) Carried on doing the talk while she was writing the number on the voting paper, handing this to the voter first while folding the referendum paper (so they could see something else was coming and they should wait for it), meaning that timing-wise she was still holding onto the referendum paper by the time she got to the bit about going behind the screens.
3) Voter stays put and looks obediently towards the screens as she points them out like an air hostess pointing out the emergency exit.
4) Still holding onto the referendum paper but now proffering it to the voter, she finishes her spiel with the bit about the voting boxes at the same time as finally letting go of the paper, does another air-hostess point towards the boxes while they are paying attention to grabbing hold of the referendum – which means that again they look obediently towards where she’s pointing before finally shuffling off to vote with an “oh right – thanks…”
Brilliant. Worked every time. I bet she practiced in the front of the mirror for days beforehand :)
She most likely would have worked in retail, and probably was the star salesperson.
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
So are we any closer to moving away from my meme Taxes pay for Civilisation , to something a little clearer?
Good health, good homes, good jobs.?
Thinking of Dionysus, perhaps Good life, good times, good memories?
-
Hi Chris, this is interesting… is there a pattern to the types of words or syllables that are the most difficult for you to interpret; or can it depend on the speed, accent, etc that define the actual speech-pattern?
And is this type of hearing affliction relatively common?(Apologies if this sounds trite or patronising – certainly not meant in such spirit.)
Hi - no worries at all and it's not patronising at all. I haven't analysed if there is pattern to the words, that is, I've not paid attention to that aspect of the problem, as I am more worried about the fact that I can't 'hear' the word (which sends me off on all sorts of cognitive workstreams til I can figure out the word).
It would be an interesting study to undertake (the study design would be awsome to figure out). I suspect there is a pattern there. There are particular consonants/vowel sounds that come across as simply 'noise' to me, and I presume other deaf / hard of hearing people. Usually this is indicated by barks of 'what?!' (meaning, what did you say/mean?).
I find myself concentrating more on enunciation because I figure the usual kiwi mumble is probably harder to lip read, also trying to position myself so the hearing impaired person in the discussion can see my lips.
Thankyou!!
Good propaganda doesn’t talk about the other team’s policies. “Tax” is National’s word. “Tax and spend”, even.
and
Eventually, people ask hard questions about your soundbites.
So, if the soundbite (i.e. frame) is not Taxes pay for Civilisation, then can you suggest an alternate frame that encapsulate what taxes paying for civilisation is? Genuinely curious here...
-
Up Front: What if We Held an Election…, in reply to FletcherB,
That's what happened to me as well. They must have been very bored as it is a way of filling in time.
She triple checked everything and I did wonder if she was going to ask for my passport as well... but I gave her the benefit of doubt and thought she was being extra careful.
-
Actually, images of suburban and urban American would help more.
-
I think there are a *lot* of people in NZ that kind of osmose their beliefs based on what they hear in the media, and ever since the baying for tax cuts began, that’s been National (and I also think that the american right wing has had an effect here as well) cracking on about personal responsibility.
Framing. There's plenty of examples of how this works.
My antidote: TAXES PAY FOR CIVILISATION. Repeat everywhere.
I’ve heard that lip reading can be easier in some cases if people speak more slowly. Loud, not so much.
I am deaf (to use your term, hard of hearing to use mine), wear two HA's (hearing aids) most of the time except for on the street cause it's bloody noisy (how on earth do people cope?).
SPEAKING LOUDER doesn't help me cause the sounds become simply a wall of noise where individual letters merge into each other. Using different phrasing or words helps enormously. The words I may have trouble hearing is NOT because I can't hear the word (I hear it thank you very much), but the combination of consonants and vowel sounds in that word is 'unreadable' to me. Using different words (and hence different combination of consonants and vowel sounds) helps.
Seeing people's lips does help me, but it's not critical - I just have to concentrate more if I can't see the lips.
-
I am a bit dubious about the advantages of improved rail to Auckland Central residents. Most of them either live within a painless walk, bike ride, bus ride or car trip from the city, or actually live in the city itself. Or they live on Waiheke, which will never ever be connected by rail to the city. It’s one of the only electorates that doesn’t really have much to gain
Except of course we gain relief from the now hundreds and will/would be thousands of buses pouring into the city centre during the day to transport all you lovely folk from the outer reaches of Antarctica cause you love downtown. We get a huge benefit from the CRL right there.
But they didn’t have to swallow it wholesale.
You're asking the media to do their job?
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Hebe,
Laws against that kind of thing surely?
The same laws that apply to finding female parliamentarians 'babes'. I am here simply equalising the power of straight men to transform female politicians into babes - if they can do it, I can transform male politicians into studs.
The one thing the MPs I have met have never persuaded me of is their “hotness” quotient.
You are correct to a large extent, but as with all things, there are exceptions. Nathan and Chris are hot. (am trying to think of other hot male MPs...)
-
Or alternatively, we can ask Granny to develop a list of parliamentary studs - you know - Nathan Guy and Chris Tremain. These boys are hot studs alright...
-
Or will ACT self destruct before then?