Episode 1273: Government money

SPEAKER_00 0:01

Welcome to The Strategist, episode 1273. I'm your host, Annalise Klingbeil, and with you, as always, Corey Hogan, letting us know he's here, and Zain Velji. We

Zain 0:11

Annalise. Because of you, we got Robert Herjavec back to Canada. I

Zain 0:15

I thought we'd lose him. Like, I thought we'd lose him to Shark Tank, to L.A., but honestly, like, now that Damon's taken over

SPEAKER_00 0:22

seat... Do you have any regrets from the last episode? No, I mean, they have so many guest Sharks now. I heard some feedback.

Zain 0:29

so many guest sharks that it doesn't matter that they're like you know what you can take robert you can have him back and we got him we fucking got him back and i'm really excited about this i've

SPEAKER_00 0:38

i've heard it was rough listening for sports fans who already went through it and well there was a little ptsd yeah

Corey 0:44

yeah well that's fair ball but

Corey 0:46

but it's also not fair ball because we got herjavec and not uh yeah you know showcase so and

Zain 0:51

and that's what we wanted the whole time driven by By Robert Herjavec. I think so.

Corey 0:55

Well, I was a little concerned about it until I read that particular book. And then I realized I just need to be driven and move past that.

SPEAKER_00 1:03

Have you bought more domain names since all this happened on Friday? Do you know

Corey 1:07

know what? Not yet. But I think we can repurpose show A for other purposes. Oh, by the way, that was a Patreon episode. A lot of people aren't going to know what we're talking about here. That's fine.

SPEAKER_00 1:18

become a patron. And listen, it was a very dramatic episode. It was

Zain 1:22

was pretty good. I feel like it's what Friday afternoon listening and recording should have been, which was an emotional roller coaster with two people, Corey and I, who were marginally informed about what was happening, Annalise, who was negatively informed, so less than zero information, all concluding to our desperate plea to get whatever we could, which ended up being Robert Herjavec, the dragon and shark from CBC and ABC's Dragon's Den. shark tank respectively so i mean i think it was it was perfect so i've summarized it for you uh you don't need to spend six bucks no

SPEAKER_00 1:59

no go spend that six dollars listen you don't you don't need to i just

SPEAKER_00 2:02

it's good guys we've got things to talk about other than the plane and the baseball news uh ottawa's dental plan big

SPEAKER_00 2:11

big news today out of ottawa uh the feds unveiled their dental plan so

SPEAKER_00 2:16

so starting next year it will cover routine dentistry costs for kids and seniors who meet a certain income threshold and then they kind of have like a staggered rollout it'll go to a bigger audience uh by 2025 it will be the government's largest social program so i don't know if you guys kind of caught the news on this today the the feds were making a big deal like they were branding it as a truly historic moment building

SPEAKER_00 2:39

building on the legacy of thomas tommy douglas who laid the foundation for canada's public health care system uh

SPEAKER_00 2:45

uh the federal health minister called the the program Transformative. It

SPEAKER_00 2:48

It will provide coverage to nearly 9 million Canadians who do not already

Zain 2:51

already have access to dental insurance.

SPEAKER_00 2:54

Interesting kind of strategy piece on this that I want to dig in with you guys is what the NDP are doing here. They are branding it as the NDP's National Dental Care Program and saying that they forced the government to do this. It wouldn't exist without the NDP. So let's jump into this one. And then we've got a bunch of other things things that are also making news that we will talk about. Corey, do you think this is a transformative program? Do you think people care? Do you think it's going to help the Libs?

Corey 3:20

Well, you know, well, let's just say that it's rare to come across a government program, no matter what the size or scope is, that the government doesn't try to claim as transformative in the most breathless language possible, finding the examples of the people that it would benefit the most. I honestly don't know whether this is, you know, some big numbers of people who would get support who otherwise wouldn't get support. That's awesome. them. I think dental care is one of those underappreciated parts of healthcare. I kind of have to say that my wife's a dental hygienist, but I also believe it to be true. But, you know, it's not, it

Corey 3:52

it doesn't seem to be entirely as advertised and maybe a good first step, but really a lot of the dental coverage that people need, you know, it can get very expensive very quickly. And it can, you know, change in scope very dramatically going throughout your life. So So devil is in the details, as with all things, I don't know enough about the details. But I'll tell you, it's

Corey 4:13

it's interesting that the government is once again trumpeting a new spending plan when you have the polyeth conservatives essentially attacking them on spending the inflationary nature of it. We have some limited polling that suggests there's a certain fatigue with new plans. So wondering

Corey 4:30

wondering if this is actually going to be something that bears an awful lot of fruit in the polls you know politically but um you know a big part of that ndp liberal deal was looking at things like this so of course uh you know that's that's the other major component of it zane

SPEAKER_00 4:44

zane let's talk about that thread that cory has put on the table in terms of um in terms of the spending in kind of like that big plan there was this one today um there's reports saying tomorrow a big housing announcement is coming um about about blueprints and how we're going to build houses and stuff do you think there's appetite for sort of these big let's spend a lot of money and veil transformative plans in in this environment it

Zain 5:10

it depends on the audience cory points out something that i was going to lay out as well which is the current sort of

Zain 5:16

political suite of issues that are at the top of folks priority list certainly don't include let's put housing aside for a second certainly don't include a massive multi-billion dollar multi-year rollout dental plan.

Zain 5:32

This was, of course, something that is a byproduct of the deal with the NDP, but it's also a hangover effect from the pandemic, where for that very narrow window, we bought into the new worldview, and we bought into the times of lower inflation, of course, we bought into this big social change moment around childcare, dental care, care, pharma care. And you also saw the government driving very cleanly, at least from a narrative perspective, less so from a how they would get their execution perspective, which, by the way, could be said as a chief criticism of this government around making this their legacy, the cares, right? The pharma, dental, and of course, at the top of it, the one that they've gotten furthest down the line, child care. I think it finds itself right now where there certainly is is going to be an audience for something like this. I think the reason that this program, beyond the practicality of it, starts with the very elderly, at least in its initial rollout, is that those folks vote. Yeah, 87. Yeah, like those folks vote if they think they live. Do

SPEAKER_00 6:36

Do the 87-year-olds vote? Yeah, they do. The

Zain 6:39

The mobile polls in the seniors' facilities, kind of tongue-in-cheek, also totally not, right? Like, I'm actually totally, like, being serious about that. Like those polling stations across the country, it'd actually be really interesting to do a deep dive on mobile polls, especially where they're located in seniors facilities, and look out the turnout at some of those. But the simple fact is, and the reductive fact is that those folks vote, right? So this is a entitlement. This is as well as it's one of those things for the larger sort of bleeding heart progressive clan, which is, this is a social good. The core effects of it from a policy perspective, I still think are years away to understand if it fully is internalized, if it's socialized, two meanings of that word, of course, like socialized in the sense that we keep funding it and socialized in the sense that we accept it. I think that's still years away. There's still a provincial negotiation. There's still a, you know, the dentists competing with each other on if they're going to accept the fee guide that the government has built into this particular plan. But there is a moment and there is an audience for this high spend sort of plan. Now, what the conservatives do with it, how much time they spend on it, and I also want to discuss how much time the government spends on it, because I think that's fascinating in terms of how they brand it. But what I'm really interested in is, are the conservatives, are they going to attack this or not? I see merit for them to attack the fringes of it. I don't see merit of them to get off their main issue, the bread and butter issues that have gotten them the lead in the polls. But I think we're still months away in terms of understanding, if not years away, its true sort of policy impact in that sense.

SPEAKER_00 8:14

So how much time do you think they should spend on it? And I guess, Corey, feel free to jump in. Like, talk about that. We've had that conversation about narrative and storytelling and going into the next election. Do you go really hard on this and this like narrative of we care?

Corey 8:29

Well, maybe. That's certainly a choice. And it still remains to be seen whether the Liberals are going to try to tack to the quote-unquote center and have an economic message or talk about supports and the things that they're doing for people. Well, this is certainly along the lines of supports, right? It is about filling the gaps. It's about providing care to Canadians who wouldn't otherwise have it. You know, the federal government took pains to stress during their presser that this wasn't to replace provincial programs.

Corey 9:00

This was to quote unquote fill gaps. And, you know, it's really, you know, it's a copay based system too, I guess is the thing I would say. So if you are really finding difficulty paying,

Corey 9:12

I'm not, you know, it's great to have 40%, 60% covered. It might not be enough to actually drive you to the dentist. Remains to be seen what the effectiveness of some of this will be over the long term. And so I guess also a little bit risky to go down that path if it looks like it's insufficient for the Canadians that it's supposed to help. kind

Corey 9:31

of brings me back to my point like they're talking in big language is this actually the hugest plan you know 13 billion dollars is a lot of money it's not a lot of money for the federal government if we're going to be frank and will it actually fill the gaps or does it just does it sort of overlay kind of you

Corey 9:49

you know a very kind of whole filled cloth that people will still be popping out of because they just they can't afford it even with the co-payment right remains to be be seen zane

SPEAKER_00 9:58

zane do you think there's appetite for this and i mean you you mentioned um the conservatives and feel free to kind of jump in on on that thread but at a time when polyev is ahead in the polls and when they're you know going

SPEAKER_00 10:09

going hard on on that that housing stuff like is this do people care about hey here's this program that like nine million canadians they can like actually go to the dentist and they're going to be in less pain you

Zain 10:22

you know what's really interesting thing about this. And I'm curious if Corey agrees. And this is just like a momentary instinct that I have, which is that this file is a fascinating one, not just because of what it does with the liberal conservative competition, but there is with the current decline in the poll numbers that the liberals have experienced, they might be in like a classic Ontario-like progressive primary with the NDP around who actually does the progressive stuff. If their poll numbers start are getting in the same range. And I know that there's just a natural sort of precondition that the liberals are always going to be ahead of the NDP. That happens until it maybe doesn't, right? And like, and there is something to be said that taking credit for a big social program might actually have to be the first step for the liberals here, as they battle it out with the NDP in some weird, strange way, the co-authors of this program, right? And then the NDP also has a fascinating political calculation, which is, do they want to make $13 billion sound like $130 billion? Because you can, through narrative and comms, right, by making it the biggest thing ever, when you also might have a chance to complete for those orange-blue, more economic sort of minded voters and say, but these guys just, didn't they put in this like $100 billion dental program? Of course, it's not true, right? It's only $13 billion. But if you advertise it in such a way, And I don't mean that advertised like from a money spend perspective, but if you broadcast it and market in a certain way, you also have certain limitations on your overall growth that you might have as the NDP. So there's a fascinating progressive primary here, not just on this file, but if these numbers remain where they are and the liberals still get a couple points knocked out of them, enter some dynamics that we haven't seen in a very long time, which is the concept of of the NDP and the Liberals competing with each other to figure out who can ultimately be the transfer of the progressive vote when push comes to shove during an election. And I think that jockeying is perfect for Pierre Polyev. It's the same dynamics that Doug Ford has been able to preserve in Ontario. I'm not saying Polyev is on the verge of engineering it, because there still are some Liberal advantages, i.e. government that they have. But there is fascinating sort of elements that could come into play relatively shortly, if not at this current present moment.

Corey 12:42

Yeah, you know, it's really, for me, what I think is most interesting about this plan is that it does seem, if anything, a play for kind of lower income households. And I don't mean like below poverty line households, I mean, below 70,000, where there are no co-pays, right?

Corey 12:58

So the plan does seem to be focused towards that group of Canadians. That seems to be a group that All three of the major political parties are competing with pretty aggressively or competing for pretty aggressively at this point. And I'd be so fascinated to see what the demographic breakdowns are on this particular plan and support for it. Because it's also quite possible that when you talk, and Zane, I love what you're saying about kind of the liberal NDP primary, like maybe they're just trying to get ahead

Zain 13:24

and know that everybody

Corey 13:24

everybody else will fall in line behind as they often do where the votes will collapse. But it's also possible that they see this as something to kind of be a bit of a bulwark against what is growing conservative support amongst lower-income Canadians. You know, this is obviously focused at first towards senior citizens, which tend to be a more conservative group. It's focused

Corey 13:47

focused towards children as of next year.

Corey 13:50

It's just really fascinating to see how some of this might break down and what the thinking might be here. I

Corey 13:56

I guess all to say, tough

Corey 13:59

tough to say what the politics are on this particular one right now, but everybody seems to think that there's some upside with a certain demographic, which I'll say is Canadians below 70,000. Can I add one lesson for the liberals

Zain 14:11

liberals that I would give them? And it's just based on hopefully they've learned this lesson, is that trying

Zain 14:16

trying to make dental care into a cost of living argument is not a good strategy. Just like you tried to make childcare as your response to cost of living. If you recall during two Christmases ago, right, cost of living was becoming that issue. Inflation was at record highs. And Trudeau stood out there and said, we're not going to throw any checks in the mail to you. We're not going to give you any sort of reduction on your heating. We understand, but our solution is child care. Just look what we've done here. Don't repeat that mistake. There's two reasons not to repeat that mistake. Trying to make dental care into your response undermines the rest of the suite of things that you're actually doing for cost of living. And secondly, you are taking away from the impact that this dental program could have around clarity, around value, and to Corey's point, around audience. If you muddy it as a cost of living solution for all versus a targeted solution for the few on the lower cost and elderly age, that's where you potentially have the ability to lose out from both sides. You underwhelm on cost of living and you underwhelm on the audience that you're trying to deliver this specific program to.

SPEAKER_00 15:26

So advice for Libs, what about the Conservatives and the NDP? And let's start with the NDP. Like, how do they play this? I think they're coming out of the gate saying, this is the NDP plan. It was us. Yeah, 100%. It was us. Filthy not Tommy Douglas's legacy.

SPEAKER_00 15:38

Like, is that not dangerous when a different party, like when someone else is doing it? Like, what happens if there's, you know, huge delays or huge issues or whatever? Like, talk to me about what you would advise the NDP do here. You

Corey 15:53

You know, I think that's actually not a particularly risky thing for the NDP because they can just blame the Liberals for not implementing it very well, right? Like we got the plan and then this incompetent government couldn't deliver on the plan is like just simple. It's not so hard for them. But it is an interesting question how much credit you can possibly get when it's the other people who are implementing it at the end of the day. Will Canadians see this as an NDP plan or will they see this as a Liberal plan? I'll tell you from the media coverage today, feels like they're going to see it as a liberal plan,

Corey 16:24

right? Because it's like paragraph after paragraph of Mark Holland talking about all the benefits of the plan. And then at the end, you know, smashed in some NDB quote about how good the plan is and how it's them who did it. And that's just, you could think like, you know, some people are like, oh, it's at the end, it's the last thing they'll remember in an article. Absolutely not the case. I think, you know, we've got three media professionals here. No, you want to be at the top of the story.

Corey 16:51

don't know. It feels like they have actually a fairly legitimate claim to say it's an NDP plan. I'm not convinced the Liberals would have done this if they didn't need confidence and supply. But I do think ultimately, people are probably going to credit the Liberals more than the NDP. Here's

Zain 17:05

Here's my crazy strategy idea for the NDP. Well, first of all, both of these pieces would have to be in place already. So this is advice for four months ago. Go back to your time machine. Yeah, so this is great. It's really good. Number one, in the agreement, I would have actually told the governing liberals how much I wanted the ad campaign for this particular rollout to be. That would have actually been one of my negotiating terms. Alongside the policy, I would have wanted a dollar amount. I wanted to have seen the media spend proposed plan. I wanted to have that spend be pretty sizable from a government dollar perspective. And then what I would have wanted to do is run parallel ads, which are going to be a fraction of the government ads, because we're the NDP, right? Right. We don't have all that money right now. And we're probably holding it till the election to run on crazy things. I would have actually talked about it being the NDP dental plan. Roll it out on a similar timeline. Make it really interesting, creative, perhaps like conversational creative. That is the best chance to have the volume and reach and frequency of government advertising with you doing a victory lap on your own for you to take credit on with this particular file. I don't know if it would work. I

Zain 18:14

I would have proposed it, though. But the main sort of strategic point is, if you want it to go loud, you can't do it with your own money. You don't have enough. You don't have enough earned media. You're going to be at the bottom of the article. Leverage the government's resources with a sizable media spend. If it's a $13 billion plan, get a sizable media spend. Say it and justify it. Make it terms of the plan. Run your parallel advertising. Hope that there is a collective conflation in the minds of Canadians. Even if that means a couple more points towards you around taking credit, you'll take that. And it was worthwhile, the party investment, and you frankly paid fuck all for it on the government side.

Corey 18:49

Well, look, I mean, I think that's a canny plan. I don't think it's super ethical to

Corey 18:55

to spend government money

Zain 18:57

politically. But, Corey, Corey, that

Zain 18:59

that could have been terms of the arrangement.

Zain 19:02

could have been terms of— You would have to

Corey 19:03

to find a justification for

Corey 19:05

Yes, you would. It's a little tough

Zain 19:07

tough to do when they're saying, like— It's a historic plan, and seniors are everywhere. Who knows where these 87-year-olds go for media, Corey? Okay, we've got to be at all grave sites. We got to be at all TikTok.

Zain 19:15

Okay, we got to be at all coffee. They're all visiting their partner, right? Okay, we got to be at every coffee news. We got to be in every community. Listen, I think there's a case to be made here. If the NDP want to take credit, there was some plotting a few months ago that maybe could have happened. And frankly, I'm not going to like, you know, unilaterally put my sword down just to be like, you know, this is maybe not like, this is how the world works in some ways, and they should have taken advantage of it if there was an opportunity. Now, are there other considerations? Absolutely. Am I being a bit reductive? Yes, on purpose. But to make a point around the fact that there is something to be said around taking credit and using some of the liberal sort of halo on this or energy on this or even earned media analysts on this and trying to divert it to you. And there's nothing to say you can't do your own little ad campaign, something that's creative, something that's already in the can tested around this, especially if you were saying this is the largest social program in Canadian history, and you want legacy level credit for it, there's got to be something more than, you know, an earned media strategy that ends you up in the sixth paragraph of every article. hypothetical

SPEAKER_00 20:20

hypothetical yeah but zane under your under your hypothetical situation you

SPEAKER_00 20:24

you you have in the ndp have input on ad

SPEAKER_00 20:29

ad spend needs to be this much but they wouldn't have any control over the creative that's

Zain 20:34

that's why they do their own advertising they do their own advertising in parallel to try to try to have a conflation around who took who's effectively put this together look

Corey 20:42

look so it's an interesting strategy the idea of drafting off government ads i think that like people have done that yeah because Because, you know, they'll run a government ad and then they'll run their own party ads coming up to an election or things like that and hope people smash these things together in their minds. You see that almost every election with a government here. You

Zain 20:59

You see it at the tail end

Corey 21:02

What's unique about what you've said here is like you're basically telling the government they have to advertise. Then you're taking credit for the government ads and you're drafting off the government ads.

Corey 21:11

Which is very interesting. This is why I'd never be hired.

Zain 21:14

I'd never be. I mean, I thought of this like 15 seconds ago. ago so like so give me some credit but but i feel like i feel like there is something to explore there and and the main thing to explore is even if you put the government part aside around around ethics around whatever right like and there's an interesting discussion there to be had around like government ethics etc and like and i know we've chatted about it on this show especially nearing the end sort of thing but this is middle of a term so there's something interesting about that on the timing but also around like what they could what is in their control right now right Right now, should they be spending money on advertising and taking credit for this particular plan? I'd say even without these government ads, which may or may not happen. I don't think they are, but it may not happen. But who knows? Time will tell. And we may not even see them because we're not part of the Target demo. If Stephen was here, he would certainly see them as an 87-year-old man. But the fact is I still think there is something to be said about the NDP trying to do something creative on this to create a bit of ownership and credit for themselves on this particular file.

Corey 22:17

Yeah, look, let's broaden the point. If you're not getting it through earned, we've said this a hundred times, you've got to pay for it. That's kind of the purpose of paid in a general mix of owned, earned, and paid, right? You can't get them to write what you want. You pay to get exactly what you want written.

Corey 22:33

And so logic there, not really sure the NDP can afford a national campaign of this scope. it would have to be fairly targeted probably should be anyways because not everybody's going to benefit from this so you certainly want to make sure that you're not advertising to people who say make just over the income cut off we were saying well fuck that's fucking fantastic no good for me right um but

Corey 22:55

i mean it's interesting i have to sit and chew on it my first reaction is not super negative look i think it's clever i do kind of ponder the overall ethical ramifications you're sounding like someone who who works in government who worked at government comms with this i ran government communication so

Zain 23:10

so what if i came to you with that idea

Corey 23:11

idea if i said i would say don't even tell me that yeah

Zain 23:15

yeah yeah that's not for you that's not for you right exactly that's like that's a not a me conversation but what if what if you found out right as as the person executing this that there would be some tokyo drift happening with uh with the ndp surely right there after you on your on your ads would that like fundamentally and ethically actually bother you cory it

Zain 23:35

it would piss me off piss you off that's fine but you

Corey 23:38

you know what but you know what what i what i would say about this is like i'm a big believer in there is a legitimate role for government ads we live in a democracy the people have a right to know the government has a duty to inform you want to know what your government is up to you advertise to them because they have to make decisions at the end of the day whether they support your government's agenda or not right

Zain 23:57

right that's that's all really good but the minute somebody

Corey 23:59

somebody is saying okay

Corey 24:01

okay liberals to support To support your continued governance, I want you to spend public

Corey 24:09

on advertising that will give me political upside. That will give us political upside?

Corey 24:14

Yeah, yeah. That's really pretty

SPEAKER_00 24:17

Just sell it more, Zane. Dude, I mean, that's...

Zain 24:21

Corey, everything the government advertises is a program... Like you are familiar with ad

Zain 24:26

scam, right? No, no, no, no. But look, answer this for me. Everything the government advertises, right, everything, is

Zain 24:33

is a government program created

Zain 24:34

created by the government, which

Zain 24:36

which is ultimately run by, at the end of the day, partisans.

Corey 24:42

Are we just now become total nihilists around political advertising?

Zain 24:45

advertising? I'm sorry, but, like, what

Zain 24:46

what are we talking about here?

Zain 24:48

Like, I'm putting out – but at the end of the day, everything the government runs advertising for helps the government. government

Zain 24:55

so in this case the government one can argue is two political parties stitched together and one of them has fucking leverage over the other like i mean when we're talking about utilizing the power the ndp has like this is the power that they have and

Zain 25:10

i understand this is i

Corey 25:11

i get i get it's not no no no no no like that i think like

Corey 25:14

like don't discount the ethics i think it's a pretty important line that needs to be drawn i'm not going to pretend it's always clear like

Corey 25:20

like the amount of gray you have to deal with in a day-to-day basis in government is just really wild in this space you know i can't tell you the number of conversations i've had with people political people in both parties who have said oh i think we should be allowed to do this and i've said i really don't think that's appropriate and we go 12 rounds on it and you know sometimes they convince me of like the precedents that make it actually appropriate and sometimes i convince them of the precedents i my job in those situations was to hold the line and keep pretty clear public sector rules of division on this particular one where

Corey 25:50

where the part that makes me uncomfortable frankly frankly, Zane, is not the NDP drafting off government ads. It's part A. It's part A. It's saying you must spend the money on these government ads which we will then draft on, right? To make it conditional on support for parliament. Corey,

SPEAKER_00 26:05

Corey, on that, is there like an amount? Like, is there a level or an amount where you're like, this is uncomfortable or it's black and white? But Corey, you're also

SPEAKER_00 26:12

the same guy who

Zain 26:12

who says, you know, duty to communicate. Like, the government has so, add that into the mix as we now go two hosts on one person who clearly can't can't accept the fact that a great strategy came from someone that isn't him i honestly

Zain 26:25

don't think it's that complicated

Corey 26:28

when you're advertising okay first of all let's say this about government advertising most government advertising is not remotely controversial like you wouldn't even think twice about it it's like hey make sure you've renewed your license right and crap like that that doesn't necessarily give any kind of upside to anybody right there are times where you want to advertise on the issues of the day certainly when there's a new policy you need need people to be aware of it you need them to know the pros and the cons but that's kind of for me a bit of the line like you you is your job if your advertisement is informing that's one thing and if it's obfuscating that's another thing like i've said those lines are not always clear in the real world but you know they're generally not that unclear and i can think of examples for example in 2016-17 when the government of alberta was advertising on the climate leadership plan Lots of money spent on climate leadership plan ads. Those climate leadership plan ads were pretty forthright about both the upsides and the downsides. You will pay more was part of those ads. Here's the things that will be done was part of those ads. But it was clarifying for people what was actually occurring at that particular moment. If you were just running an ad saying this is only the greatest thing ever, and concurrently the NDP were running ads saying brought to you by the NDP of the same thing, I'd

Corey 27:42

I'd be a little concerned. I'm

Zain 27:43

I'm not saying it's the greatest thing ever, but I would say, like, here's a great thing that you now get, that we've now developed, starting with this rollout. I mean, like, it's concrete facts about what you're getting and what's being rolled out. It's the duty to inform, and I'm simply suggesting, I mean, not to make this, you know, the entire focus of the episode, that the NDP drift on that.

SPEAKER_00 28:04

I'll tell you this.

Corey 28:07

Yeah, he's not done.

SPEAKER_00 28:07

done. Bring it to

Corey 28:08

to a close, I think. these are the arguments that would occur in government i'm sure all of the time i'm not going to name names i'm playing the role of the

Corey 28:17

am i not like that's in the minister's office

Corey 28:19

we want to run yeah we want to run ad x you know or we want this government ad to run and we think it should have the minister's face on it and i would say well the minister's face is not allowed on ads because of our ad policy here please look at this ad policy and they're like well it actually says the minister's face can be used if it's a town hall and this is a telephone phone town hall so we think the minister's face should be allowed to be put on it right

Corey 28:38

actual examples of conversations i've had and then all of a sudden you're like hmm interesting are they actually advertising for a town hall is this a legitimate use of government advertising or are they just trying to blanket the minister's likeness everywhere illegitimate use of advertising and those lines are not always clear

Corey 28:52

but you have to start from like a principal's base right what is the principle of spending for government advertising and it's to inform and if it's just just create a usable environment for a political party, that's challenging. You know, that's very challenging. And again, not

Corey 29:08

not always black and white. In this case, I think it's a little more black and white, because you're

Zain 29:13

you're saying liberals spend

Corey 29:14

spend public money so that we can do partisan advertising.

Zain 29:17

advertising. Can I just say that none of the ethically dubious things I've mentioned on this program should be taken into account with my Muslim upbringing. Thank you.

SPEAKER_00 29:25

you while we're talking about ads uh can you weigh in on the the new liberal ads um against polyev and kind of as your thoughts as as this man who understands ads uh what you think of the liberals new ad strategy i

Zain 29:41

i don't know if they have one just yet other than the fact that okay there's this toronto star article uh it's just annoying the shit out of me so it's ultimately Ultimately suggesting... Unburden yourself. Well, it's okay. Talk to us about

Zain 29:52

Well, ultimately what it's saying is that the liberals have to be careful about negative ads, that negative ads in their own right aren't sufficient, and that there's going to be positive to reinforce the entire message for the liberals. I'd say that there is some merit in that, but I think it's also like a fundamental misunderstanding of advertising. And I think what you see right now with the liberals is that they have some

Zain 30:15

some things that they are testing in the field, largely like organic social content that's video, which this columnist points out as being advertising. But I think that the more sort of global point here is something that's often misunderstood, that there needs to be like an equivalency between negative and positive on the same medium. And I'd see this all the time when developing ads or talking to folks, which is like, you know, if we do a negative spot, we need an equal spend, same reach, same frequency, same audiences on a positive spot, because, you know, that's how we get both sides of the story. And often it's not that neat, and it's strategically not that neat. There's a lot of cases where you want to top load negative, where you want to go 90% negative, where you want to do positive on different mediums, where negative can be masked as things that don't look like negative, like wit or humor or different flights that you use. So you give people a bit of a break so there's no fatigue on it or replacing the type of creative and pace that you do. And I think the lazy conclusions we often get to and ones that we often accept is that, yeah, I know we got to tell the positive side of the story and we just assume that it's going to be that same equivalent, when often that is not the case. Often campaigns that run multi-million dollar ads, especially in politics, have a tilt. Sometimes that tilt is positive, generally when you're ahead, but a lot of times when you're behind, that tilt is negative. Not because you're not telling a positive story, but because you're trying to do specific things. And often with negative advertising, sometimes it disguises different things, or other times the positive is delivered in other mediums. you gotta you gotta effectively put out a lot more negative than than you um uh than than people fully appreciate is is the larger story and so my concern with articles like this is that it finds itself in terms of conventional wisdom right like that that people are like yeah it's gonna have a the conventional wisdom is that you can't negative isn't sufficient enough sure but negative advertising is often sufficient enough because the positive is being told in other mediums by by other players, by earned media, by other focus points, by validators. And there's so many other tools that help you tell the positive. And I feel like, you know, if I'm the liberals taking in this messaging, I would not burn a lot of money on positive right now.

SPEAKER_00 32:32

Do you have, I mean, you had this cool idea for the NDP for ads. Unless

Zain 32:36

Unless the government can fund it. Here's what I would do, Corey. I would then get the government to fund your positive, okay? Here's what I'd do. I'd go to the guy who runs the public affairs. Give

SPEAKER_00 32:42

Give us your advice. I'd

Zain 32:43

I'd be like, I just want the prime minister just doing positive ads. ads and he's just gonna he's just gonna be there and we're gonna spend 50 million dollars on it 50

Corey 32:52

yeah not not so far off like random requests that

Zain 32:55

that you might get i'm sure yeah yeah

Corey 32:59

yeah look i mean it's it's always interesting when people opine on ad strategy for political parties because political party ad strategy is so different from ad strategy for selling like an rv like we've said this a hundred times right you're trying to change people's minds and And that requires different tools. You're not just trying to get share of money. So when you're selling most products, for those who don't know, we talk about share of mind. We just want to be like one of the top three options that you have so that when you actually go into market to purchase these things, you'll be like, well, I remember Toyota. I remember Ford and I remember Hyundai. So I'm going to go look at cars at those three places. And hopefully, a lot of those other things that you've got working for you in your marketing context, like the nature of the car, you know, the bells and whistles that will appeal to different demographics will get you over the line. And the job of a lot of advertising a lot of the time is just to make sure you remember and that you're at the top of the list or in the top three when you go buying something. something.

Corey 33:55

That's not what political parties do. That's not what advertising for political parties is about. We know the liberals are in your top three. We know the conservatives are in your top three. We

Zain 34:04

We know the NDP

Corey 34:04

NDP are in your top three. You fucking know all of the players. That's not what we're trying to do with political advertising. We're trying to change your mind. And I think to Zane's point, generally

Corey 34:16

there's two streams of political advertising. There's picking the apples off the ground, the things that are loose, the people that are loose, they don't have have an opinion. They're the undecided voters, right? And they're shaking the tree to get the apples on the ground. And sometimes you've got to shake the tree. You've got to remove people from the conservative orbit. You've got to remove people from the liberal orbit. You've got to pick them up. And negative advertising is about shaking the tree. It's about making people say, I don't think I can support them, right? I don't think it's there. Now, where I think that this gets into what this analyst was saying, and look, it's an analyst, as quoted by the Toronto Star, we don't know what the full length of the commentary was. We just know what the reporter found interesting enough to put in a column. But I'll say this, or like the newspaper found to put in the column after it got through the editors, because I think they actually wrote it. But I will say this, it's

Corey 35:04

it's not wrong that sometimes you need to pick up the apples through positive messaging.

Corey 35:09

It's just not necessarily necessary,

Corey 35:11

necessary, right? Because if you are in a two-person race, if you shake them off one tree, they're

Corey 35:16

they're either going to be in your basket or they're not going going to be in anybody's basket and you kind of win right if

Corey 35:21

if it's a three-person race if you've got that progressive primary zanes talking about yeah

Corey 35:25

yeah you might shake them off the conservative tree you want to make sure they end up in your if you're the liberals you want to be in the liberal basket not the ndp basket now historically

Corey 35:33

historically conventional wisdom is that's a shorter walk for people from conservative to liberal and so you've got a natural advantage i think we're seeing that conventional wisdom be shaken up a fair bit here as we start to see what we've you you know, pleasantly called over the last 20 years, these orange-blue shifts. People are willing to go straight from the conservatives to the NDP and vice versa.

Corey 35:55

All to say, though, it really depends on the landscape, depends on what you're trying to do. It depends on the other players on the field. All of this is a consideration as you're building these ad strategies. And

Corey 36:05

where I 100% agree with Zane, it is not one size fits all. You can run all negative ads if you want.

Zain 36:10

And they don't have to appear as conventional like thunderstorm and rain clouds negative, which which often is like kind of seen as one dimensionally what negative ads are yeah

Corey 36:21

black and white you

Corey 36:23

did it like the voiceover like rachel notley wants to take away your children teach them woke ideologies right like that kind of stuff there

Corey 36:32

there are other ways you can do negative ads too so you

Corey 36:36

you know in general i think it's impossible to weigh whether it's good advice or not until we know what the fuck the liberals are doing until we know the story I

Zain 36:44

I mean, I think I think we're fucking further ahead on this podcast than they are right now. Like, seriously, I mean, like this, this writer's crediting them for writing for and producing these ads. They're not ads. They're like, you know, vertical social media posts that, by the way, if they ever advertise, just take a look at them. It would make sense to no one because they're about house votes and like, you know, clips of Pierre saying one thing and saying it's so inside baseball. It's so misaligned to where they need to be. If they're actually doing advertising right now, those are not the pieces, to be clear. this is more so my sort of you know broadcast to them go negative go hard disguise negative as being other things you don't need to spend money on positive right now you're in such a big fucking hole right get to neutral and then figure out your story man well

Corey 37:29

well it's an interesting thing because you're basically arguing you're in a hole so drag the other guy into the hole just

Corey 37:35

see which of you can can pile out better than what they're doing well

Corey 37:38

well and again often works right uh real different from the sunny ways where we saw justin trudeau in 2015 but as we've said he's going to probably need a new brand well

Zain 37:48

well i wouldn't even mind like the dark times require like a punch in the face to fascism if that's like where they want to fully go like i'm not saying that that's that's how hard they but like there is a like a pugilist element to trudeau right now that that that has been historically known for him and it's like fuck it like let the hulk rip his shirt off and like let's get into like the mud right now there is an element of that brand the imagery you're presenting

SPEAKER_00 38:10

presenting is full of ideas tonight i mean listen let's you know what wrap this one up the government should pay for it okay

Zain 38:17

okay that's what i want i want at

Zain 38:19

day i want my tax dollars to go there can

Corey 38:23

can i say like one of the pieces of the content of these ads because we've talked about the strategy but not the content is comparing pierre pauliev to donald trump so there's an awful lot of that and so listen zane's right they seem to be more social posts than anything often with these ad these quote-unquote ads or let's call them messages right you put them out there and you see what's working you see uh what's resonating with various audiences before you blow out those arguments into 30 second spots or anything like that along the way here and and it's quite possible they're doing that right now and trying to see if people are actually going to say oh yeah this guy is saying the same stuff as donald trump oh yeah that's scary right i'm doubtful that ultimately that's going to end up being that that fruitful frankly because it's not actually hurting donald trump being donald trump in the united states yeah

Zain 39:11

yeah so proxies of donald trump are not really yeah

Corey 39:14

yeah yeah proxy like being one step removed in

Corey 39:17

in a country one step removed just doesn't really necessarily strike

Zain 39:20

fuckers up six points in georgia right now like it's terrifying i just i can't even terrify with yes

Zain 39:25

yes no yeah but

Corey 39:26

but yeah like i just don't i think it's just too easy to dust off and say ah and

Corey 39:31

and you know what and at the end of the day unfortunately there's actually still a lot of people who like donald trump too okay

SPEAKER_00 39:37

okay any any final words just on adjunct final advice that's it yeah that's what this is all about okay guys let's move on to our next segment

SPEAKER_00 39:46

um i want to talk about a rumor on friday that was swirling that

SPEAKER_00 39:50

that uh ndp leader in alberta rachel was going to step down this was based as best i can tell on a blog post that was based on a tweet from a conservative operative and

SPEAKER_00 40:03

and not even operative like a conservative political guy it's amazing that's

Corey 40:06

that's about passes for news these days a blog based on

SPEAKER_00 40:09

on a tweet now amplified

SPEAKER_00 40:11

a podcast based on a tweet that amplified on a podcast that led to many media calls to the ndp on um on friday so rachel not only did not step down you

Corey 40:21

you don't say on

Corey 40:22

wait you're telling me a successful

Corey 40:24

successful politician did not step down on a friday in december well

SPEAKER_00 40:28

well so this is where this is where i want your guys's take is like if if you're advising her and

SPEAKER_00 40:35

and i think we're all laughing because when right it was like why friday in december why or north but if

SPEAKER_00 40:41

if you're advising her when should she step down and like how how when is

SPEAKER_00 40:48

is december totally off limits are fridays totally off limits like well just talk to me about your strategy here well

Zain 40:53

well continuing my theme december would be off limits because you want to take that government paid vacation right you want to take those couple of weeks off and you want to really yeah milk

Corey 41:01

milk that from the cover christmas closure we call it so

Zain 41:03

so you want to get that right you want to get paid for that right uh that's

Zain 41:06

that's the only part that i know so far that's the only thing um i'll go and i'm curious if cory aligns um you

Zain 41:13

you want to to own a moment and i and i'd suggest you want like this perfect sort of long not short but also not long until you leave and the reason i kind of like have this middle ground is mainly for one thing which is fundraising your

Zain 41:27

your job right now if you walk us through this thing well i do believe that because of who rachel notley is and and frankly what she has been able to do taking this this party from her leadership nearly a decade ago to forming government and to now forming the largest opposition. There is a lot of pent-up admiration. There is a multiple victory lap, so to speak. And you want to cash in on that, not just for like the halo that that gives you as a leader, not just to run back the clock on the legacy of what she's been able to build, what I've just talked about in broad strokes, what she's been able to do, but also for the money. And you want to be able to activate the donor class. You want to kind of do certain things, whether that's events, final goodbyes, digital fundraising. So I think that needs to find itself in like a medium sort of terrain. I think extending it beyond that looks like you're kind of like overstaying your welcome. I'm not giving you specific times in terms of how long, how many weeks I'm talking about here, but you want to be able to accommodate a few of these final sort of like send-offs that are both financially helpful to the party and solidify her legacy. So that would be, right, start the conversation with her, right? Would be like, if you are planning to do this, which we do not know, but there it is rumored, if you're planning to do this, here's what I would think of. We want to make sure you solidify the legacy, which, by the way, is also code for saying, have some directionality in terms of what your successor looks like. Like, I think there on after the advice is to stay out of it. But of course, different leaders have different sort of models of how they think about that. And then it's about the financial health of the party. What can we do to maximize the send off in that regard? Those are a couple of considerations I would have.

SPEAKER_00 43:08

Corey, what's your advice?

Corey 43:10

Well, I think it really depends on goals. There are leaders who leave and they want to leave quietly, either because they just that's who they are or because they just don't want to draw attention to what was a failed tenure. tenure that's obviously not rachel notley right she was the first ndp premier of alberta she has the largest opposition that's not a failed tenure so i don't see why she would try to make things as quiet as possible like a leaving announcing you're leaving a friday in december is the political equivalent of an irish goodbye right like just ghosting on the party part way through just you know everyone's over by the dip you just get your coat and you slink out the back it's just not It's not what's going to happen. It just seems like a crazy notion that anybody, anybody even kind of fabricated this, you know, it's just like, it's just not how politicians

SPEAKER_00 43:56

politicians act. But there was a standing ovation, Corey. Come on. Sure.

Corey 43:59

Sure. And maybe she won't be leader next time the House comes back. But that's, that's months away. You know, there's a lot of time between now and then. Very well could have been the last time in the legislature that she was leader of the NDP. But could be in January, could be in February.

Corey 44:14

i'll say this as well your

Corey 44:16

your timing question is really dependent too on goals and so zane's already talked about how you want to make a big splash and there's some benefit to use that splash but has rachel notley done everything she wants to do on the way out the door is there anything she wants to do for her party we've talked before about the leadership process does she want to change the leadership process does she want to put a bit of a firm hand on how it's going to to be managed? Does she want to take any grenades for the party, do anything unpopular on her way out the door that her, you know, successor would otherwise have to deal with really early on? You know, maybe it's a fight

Corey 44:50

fight about the place of the unions in the NDP. Maybe it's about making

Corey 44:55

making the party a little more closed off. So take back Alberta can't possibly take over the leadership contest. Like there are things that she might be contemplating at this particular moment that will also play into that equation and some of them might be selfish and some might be very selfless they might actually damage her legacy in the short term but strengthen the party in the long term which in turn does i believe strengthen her legacy so would you would

Zain 45:17

would you actually tell her to step on any like or like take any grenades right now cory like as she's out really yeah i wouldn't yeah i

Zain 45:25

wouldn't i would say don't

Corey 45:26

don't i would say is there anything that needs to be cleaned like you want want to think about it in terms of like who the

Corey 45:32

the next leader if you're leaving on day one what is like the biggest pile of shit that you have to deal with right now that you feel like you need to manage and is there any way for you to manage it on the way out where all of the ill will that goes with you dealing a difficult situation can go with you that

Corey 45:49

that would be good um like i said the leadership rules might be one of those considerations where all of the leadership contestants have the opportunity to say like well i certainly would have preferred a more open contest because i I believe we're an open party. But, you know, this is what the party decided for the rules. And certainly we have got a very strong, robust, diverse, dynamic membership base. It's just a shame that you had to be a member for six months to vote in the leadership or something like that.

Corey 46:12

That might be one of those things that doesn't look super awesome, but it's better Rachel Notley does it than it looks like everybody is colluding to do it. Right. So there are things that you might want to consider if you're an outgoing leader.

SPEAKER_00 46:23

Is there a time frame that's too long? Like you were saying, okay, it can be in the future. Obviously, it was not going to happen on a busy news day in December on a Friday. But is there such a thing as like dragging it on too long while different people are planning

SPEAKER_00 46:41

planning their bids for leadership? And what is too long?

Corey 46:48

i mean it's the worst answer but it again depends on your goals right and obviously

Corey 46:54

obviously there's a leadership contest going on right now and rachel notley has not even said publicly

Corey 47:00

publicly at least as far as i know

Corey 47:02

she's gonna gonna go right she could very easily stick around until the next election if she chose to do it but i think a lot of people

Zain 47:09

people she'd have parties apart the two side i'd imagine very yeah

Corey 47:11

and there's a lot of jockeying now though and there's people drawing camps and there's folks going out and meeting with folks and you can sort of understand where these lines are being drawn and speaking speaking

Zain 47:21

are we pushing those

Corey 47:22

those in for leader posters sorry

Zain 47:24

sorry we should this is probably a good time to push those by

Zain 47:28

the way I'm available at this strategy yeah I'll just declare that I'll be running in this leadership race as well okay

Zain 47:33

okay yeah we haven't paid the entry fee at any of the previous ones I've run it so maybe this time but

Corey 47:40

haven't done worse than a lot of other people I

Zain 47:42

I So I actually came just behind Jean Charest. It

Zain 47:45

It was very true.

Corey 47:49

Yeah. So, you know, I don't know. I mean, if she, if there is to your point, I think Annalise, a challenge where if everybody quote unquote knows you're leaving and they've sort of moved on in their minds and you've sort of lost authority as a leader, that can become deeply challenging. But because I think of the unique character of the Alberta NDP at this moment and that that unique character as it was basically created by Rachel Notley in its modern form. She's got a lot of latitude to stick around and she's going to have a lot of authority. Yeah.

Corey 48:20

I could easily see if she was Erin O'Toole in a similar situation,

Corey 48:25

this would be, this would be way too long, right? She's not Erin O'Toole. So it really does depend on the situation and the leader's connection with the party. And, and honestly, I can't imagine a stronger one. So I think she's got a lot of latitude to do what she wants to do when she wants to do it.

Zain 48:40

it. Yeah. I'll just jump in. And like, I think, I

Zain 48:42

I think like any good government paid political ad, Corey's been able to persuade me that party health should be looked at beyond money. So I would kind of like, to me, I would almost dictate those goals saying like, your legacy has to be top of it. The party health, I talked about fundraising. I think that's huge because, you know, that is. And frankly, the fundraising element also extends to the rules of the leadership race. So when Corey talks about it, like how you contour that, how your influence looks like on that, the entry fee, do you want to take care of that before you go, the rules around like how long you have to be a member, all those sort of things, like all of that will actually affect the financial health. And then this is where I initially disagreed, but would probably agree with Corey around like the health of the party beyond like around the shit, the baggage, all that sort of stuff, what you can clear out of the way for the next person. But I would still say the number one goal is like, as long as you feel like it does not affect the long term legacy here, because I think Rachel Notley, she's young, relatively young, has probably another chapter to write in some way, shape or form. It may not be politics, but she will be remembered as the greatest progressive premier that this province has had. And I mean, that is a huge accomplishment. accomplishment and um so there is another chapter for you as a person there's another chapter for you and how you are celebrated politically um around how you're kind of seen within the ndp wherever it goes from here regardless of the next leader and i think solidifying or at least beginning the process to try to put it on a track i think is one of those first things cory might disagree with me that you that you can't do that right now it's all about the the short strokes in the moment but to me if i'm advising her and just her like and that is my like client so to speak that would be top of the list for me well

Corey 50:25

well look i think it does go back to goals i i actually think it's a worthwhile exercise to sit down and say this is what i want to accomplish on my way out the door and actually define those things because it's helpful in clarifying the actions you then take and even the act of writing them down and seeing consistencies and inconsistencies can really strengthen a plan it's advice i would give to anybody for any plan right don't just think

Corey 50:48

you got it in your head actually put it on paper and see if it makes any fucking sense when you've actually wrote it down as one page just great strategic advice in general and i think it's good advice for somebody as they go out the door and they think about those things like what if my legacy becomes in conflict with where

Corey 51:04

where i want the party to be in six months you

Corey 51:06

know what which one am i going to prioritize as rachel dotley as i start to make these decisions and so you

Corey 51:12

you know there is there's no shortage of right ways to leave a political party leadership and there's no shortage of wrong ways. And at the end of the day, you want to be mindful about what you're trying to accomplish at that particular moment. So many people leave the leadership of a political party, not on their own two feet, like they're just, it's dictated to them, either they're ousted or they don't really have a choice. They've lost their caucus. Rachel Notley has this really amazing opportunity in that she, leaders

Corey 51:40

leaders don't usually get to leave this way, you know, with the strength that

Corey 51:44

has right now and the authority in the party she has right now. And Significantly, even in the past six months, and it's only going to continue to do so. But at this moment, she just has so much ability to shape her next chapter, as Zane put it, and the next chapter for her party and the next chapter for the province and so on and so on. So it's gonna be really interesting to see what she does with it.

Corey 52:07

Not fucking surprising she didn't decide to slink out the back door on a Friday afternoon in

Zain 52:11

in December. yeah i mean that move is reserved for like tim duncan yeah

SPEAKER_00 52:16

a tim duncan what about see you later

Zain 52:18

later at old navy timing

SPEAKER_00 52:19

timing goals all that one thing but

SPEAKER_00 52:24

what about um what about the actual like the actual announcement is is the only way to do it to to you know call a press conference have your bank media advisory everyone knows

Zain 52:35

knows are like it's a video to

SPEAKER_00 52:37

yeah talk to me me about how especially in core you pointed out like unique circumstances very respected it's not like you have to quietly walk away on a friday in december like how how do you go about making that announcement of and and building that legacy piece i

Zain 52:55

i have two thoughts number one it's either one video that is a here's the decision of my announcement and then a retrospective or it's one that here's a very short uh announcement and a companion video that is like a thank you you, Rachel, sort of like celebrating the past, starting to solidify what this government has done, what this leader has done. It's there for both starting right away to start solidifying the memories, the validation, the accomplishments, the history, all that sort of stuff, tightly packaged, emotional, emotive, that sort of stuff. I'd start that stuff right away, because people will want to move on to the speculation of who's next, what's next, what are the rules like that's just the nature of this sort of thing so as soon as you announce you want to also bake in a built of like you're now going on your own track and you're like announcing a bit of this this um uh down memory lane uh compilation in some way shape or form as well i think the press conference to me is is not the way to do it i think it's not controlled i don't think it has the emotional sort of uplift that you need it doesn't give you the the reach one One would argue you could even pay for some of this additional stuff if you need to, depending on what you do and how you do it with these other creative pieces. But for me, it's a video. That is kind of like this. That's the first comms product or marketing product that I would look at.

Corey 54:17

Yeah. So I think I disagree. Let me tell you why I think there's a reason politicians tend to default to the news conference. And it's actually the benefit is the thing that Zane just described as a drawback, which is it's not controlled. and and not controlled as a benefit for a leader on the way out for a couple of reasons first is

Corey 54:36

think about that video oh fuck that's tricky i mean obviously family can be in it uh you go beyond family to just random people on the street there's the chance that this video has leaked in a big way that's tough to pull together and keep it still even partially a secret you put the caucus in you're not going to put

Corey 54:51

members of the caucus

Corey 54:52

in so you've got to suddenly pick who's in and who's not in it what the prominence is you're going to piss somebody off depending on somebody's clip being longer or shorter. Corey's

Zain 55:01

Corey's just assuming what video I'm making here. He's just making such broad assumptions. Well, he's just poking so many holes. Fair enough, keep going. You

Corey 55:09

there. You're making a good point,

Corey 55:12

then, and so sometimes it's just easier to just have all of your caucus there, and they can all clap, and they can all look rueful and smile and say, thank you, Rachel, and if they do a moment, it's a moment, and it wasn't controlled, and it's not your fault, and

Corey 55:22

and you can't really help it if Sarah Hoffman immediately grabbed the microphone and talked about what a great day it's going to be for the future of the Alberta NDP. You can't really help it if, you know, Racky Pacholi then immediately is starting to hand out placards in the crowd.

Zain 55:35

crowd. But most importantly, you can't help it if Samir Kayande rolls up with several dozen Zaid for Leader posters and starts

Zain 55:41

starts handing them out to the media. You won't be able to help it, okay?

Corey 55:45

So you can just, like, you don't have to worry about the politics of your crafted exit, that not controlled can be a benefit for caucus management, right? And the second one is not controlled because there will be a motion on display. And if you produce a video and it's a produced video and it's Rachel at certain points looking misty eyed in the distance, that's going to feel very canned and forced as opposed to her starting to talk at a press conference and losing her composure and talking about how much she loves the province and how much she's loved the NDP team and how wonderful it's been to be just a part of the story of this place. And she's just so proud of what they've accomplished together. And, you know, that, that

Corey 56:22

that is a moment. It's not canned. And that not controlled element all of a sudden becomes a benefit. Did he persuade

SPEAKER_00 56:28

persuade you again? No,

Zain 56:30

he didn't. Here's why he's wrong. Because the question is, do you want to see Rachel feel something or do you yourself want to feel something? And

Zain 56:37

And I'd say the video format allows you to feel something. It's tightly produced, you can manipulate emotion, you can effectively get to a point where in this canned, produced, like contained, and I think this is really important, right? We talked about long format working, but you're not going to get a moment in a 30, 15-minute, 8-minute press conference. You're going to get a clip. Most people who see it, Corey, are not going to see the buildup and the emotion. I'd rather have a contained set piece that allows me to feel something about someone rather than see someone feel something and see like a 14-second, like they applauded, she's gone, next news story, who the fuck is next?

SPEAKER_00 57:19

Zane wants control, but Zane, under your plan, is there like a follow-up press conference? like when does she answer media questions fuck

Zain 57:25

fuck press conferences no there isn't so it's just a video and

Zain 57:29

out she has an availability after depends depends once again uh depends on her goals as cory would say um default

Corey 57:36

but it does oh

Zain 57:37

oh my god it does no i think her goals are her legacy and i want her legacy to be contained rinse repeat reach frequency which is she does i'm kind of going i'm going from my strategic lens though right which is like this is about preserving and telling that broader story, I think that is best served through something contained, something emotive, something emotional. And it is done through video. She does go to media. So your question is, I think she does one-on-ones. I think she may do a press availability, whatever she needs to. But I don't think that's the primary instrument of how people find out.

Corey 58:07

Okay. But here's the challenge with that. I'm going to throw one more challenge on here. That video is produced by Rachel Notley in celebration of Rachel Notley, right? It's so so much better to have the announcement and then have a video come a little bit later made by other

Zain 58:23

other people, made by the party. I agree with the challenge. I

Zain 58:26

I get it. Like, you want the party, you want validators, you want a bunch of people she's impacted, you want all that sort of stuff. Yeah, you can do that at the final $1,900 ticket gala.

Corey 58:36

Okay, Corey, you can do that

Zain 58:36

that then. It's put on completely, it's going to be held at Government House, okay? That's where it's held, right? We don't care. We're getting a free rental at Government House on the government dime. No, but Corey, you make a good point, right? You are fundamentally limiting the scope of that video. It's going to be a lot of voiceover, B-roll, memory lane, news clips potentially around what she's been able to do. It's tougher. You're not going to get like that. But still, I would still go for that above and beyond the news conference, just because of the fundamental limitations of the news conference. I like the impromptu. I'm all about the impromptu. I like the emotive. I like the human wall. I hate it. But for this particular sort of circumstance, I like a lot of what you're saying. But I just think that as it relates to the primary goal of reach, frequency, and legacy, it does not help as much as a contained video.

Corey 59:25

I disagree. I don't super strongly disagree, Zane, but I disagree. I think that you just sort of have more of an opportunity to create a moment. Like, I think a video like that is going to be like out there for a day. You know, it'll be shared with the diehards for a week. And the press conference

Zain 59:40

conference is out there for what? Yeah,

Corey 59:42

Yeah, okay. Well, like, look, and we can think about examples of when videos have really worked, taking my talents to South Beach, right? And we can think of examples where press conferences have really worked, where people start to talk about this is the end of their career, and this is the end of their legacy. Both can potentially work. But I think that the consequences of kind of flubbing a video, like,

Corey 1:00:02

like, why do that? You know, you get so much more charity and grace when it's live as well. So here's the last point I'll make. Like

Zain 1:00:09

you get a ton more charity and grace. I think that's a very true point,

Zain 1:00:14

any other art form, like the movie's got to be a lot better than the improv show because, oh my God, they're making it up on the spot. Can you believe it? Yeah,

Zain 1:00:21

not very good, but I can believe it.

Zain 1:00:24

very good, but it's funny and

Zain 1:00:25

it's amazing because they didn't- Well, we're conditioned. We're conditioned. Here's

Zain 1:00:26

thing I'll tell you. Stephen

Corey 1:00:29

Harper, when he was prime minister, and then there was this coalition that was going to be created of Stéphane Dion and the liberals and the NDP, and

Corey 1:00:36

and it was going to be propped up by the bloc. We'll all remember this particular period.

Corey 1:00:40

And Stéphane Dion released this video that looked like it was shot in a cave under gunpoint, right? And it was just a very bad video because you couldn't help but watch it and say, that was the best take. And this is the person who's going to be prime minister. if he had given the exact same performance at a lectern outside of the house of commons i believe stefan dion would be prime minister or

Corey 1:01:01

or would have been prime minister right but the problem is the minute that you've kind of put this like this is the official seal on it you've raised kind of the requirements for the video so significantly and i think given the handcuffs you have producing a video like that if you want to keep it under wraps if you want to keep peace in the caucus if you you want to if you want to if you want to all the way through i just think it's really challenging to do that video right and you've just got look maybe the upside is comparable or even higher video if you really fucking nail it but i think the downside is higher too and i think you just have no real downside if you do the press conference it's

SPEAKER_00 1:01:35

it's got to be a good video zane is what i'm hearing yeah

Corey 1:01:38

you better really get on that video if that's yeah

Corey 1:01:41

if that's in your Oh,

Corey 1:01:41

Oh, no, no, no. I'm just going to get the

Zain 1:01:42

the government to do it for me.

SPEAKER_00 1:01:46

Guys, let's leave that one there and move on to our lightning round.

SPEAKER_00 1:01:51

First question in the lightning round. Speaker of the House of Commons apologized this morning. This is, we don't super need to get into it.

SPEAKER_00 1:02:01

Video, whether he should have made it, he should have not, his impartiality, et cetera, et cetera. So

Corey 1:02:07

So he made a video to the greeting to the Ontario Liberal outgoing interim leader that was shown up there. Yeah,

SPEAKER_00 1:02:13

Yeah, wearing in his office, wearing his robes. He says it was a longtime friend. He also said, despite assurances to the contrary, the video was like it was not supposed to be shown at this public partisan gathering.

SPEAKER_00 1:02:28

gathering. But now he's saying in hindsight, he never should have recorded it. Going

SPEAKER_00 1:02:32

Going forward, the clerk of the House of Commons will be consulted every time he's got a request for speaking. Anyways, lots of kind of insider stuff has been dragging on for a few days. Today, he apologized. He said he will regain the trust of the House if

SPEAKER_00 1:02:46

if MPs give him a chance, but he'll resign if they request it. Question for you, lightning round. Should he resign, Corey Hogan? him no

Corey 1:02:56

no i think for a couple of reasons one is he um he is given i think a pretty sensible explanation that this was not supposed to have been used in that particular venue and unless there were evidence that came forward that strongly you know that suggested that was not the case i i think you should sort of accept that this was a semi-private video that went a little bit too far and you can easily understand how that happens it seemed good let's put it out on on the convention floor, it'll be a hit, right? And let's do that. So that's one. It doesn't entirely erase the judgment lapse that resulted in this. You shouldn't have done it in speaker rope, shouldn't have done it in the speaker's office, you know, for sure. But you can kind of understand how it happened. Doesn't mean you need to accept it. The second is, I really don't like that we would churn through speakers at such a rate. And let's be clear, it's not like the conservatives were particularly in love with the speaker from day one, right? And somewhat tied to this let's call it 2a 2b like he's canada's first black speaker you're gonna get rid of him in like two months like let's be let's be clear about the signal that that sends to you know black youth who want to be speakers someday and all

Corey 1:04:04

that and you can say to me those things don't matter those things matter right

Corey 1:04:07

right and people see how people get treated and i think you've just got to give them a bit of a shake i would expect any speaker to be given a shake i think particularly given the stakes of this you got to give them a give them a shot like a fair shot here to be the speaker we need him to be zane

SPEAKER_00 1:04:21

zane should he resign no

Zain 1:04:24

cory's made a lot of good points including yeah i want to pick bring up the fact that he's the first black man to hold this role one of the most

Zain 1:04:31

most important things of his apology was his apology to like youth and racialized youth in particular like he almost has this burden which a lot of people of color racialized people do to be like i'm sorry like i'm the first one of us and i kind of fucked up and i'm really like i would would never see a white person make that apology to be totally and i think it like explains a lot of the psyche of like racialized people we're like if they're the first to get there and even if they're not they're one of the few to get there it's like you are carrying so much more weight than you realize you're actually like your own person but you're also not and i think one of the things we need to realize is when we hear phrases and i'm not sure if i've talked to you guys about this but like every time like the pep talk that we all of us get right and this is kind kind of a cliche is that like, you got to be 10% better because non-fireable offenses for you become fireable offenses, right? Like, because regular scheduled program is only a heartbeat away, right? And by regular scheduled program, a white man generally in this case. So there's something incredibly important about that, that like the ambassadorial sort of role and like how what would not be a fireable offense for most can often be fireable offenses for a lot of racialized people or be thought into. Now, here's the game I think the conservatives are playing, which is the classic game of resignation. We were talking about the resignation of someone who's popular. When someone finds themselves in sort of hot water, the resignation game that you want to play is you want them to ultimately not resign, but ask for their resignation so they are weakened. Usually want someone weakened to hang around. And so the conservatives here should be careful, and I hope they're playing that game, which is the game we have seen so many times, which is someone who should definitely not be fired. You ask to fire them so they seem weakened so that if you ever need to go back to it, remember this is that same speaker that we asked to resign and shouldn't even have a job in the first place, but you actually don't want them to leave. Let's just hope that's the game the conservatives are playing because if they're playing the other game, which is the linear, let's kick this shit can this guy, I think that's a terrible mistake for all the things that Corey's mentioned.

Zain 1:06:34

Yeah, well put, Zane.

SPEAKER_00 1:06:35

Well said, Zane. Let's leave it there, guys. That is a wrap on episode 1273 of The Strategist. my name is Annalise Klingbeil and with you as always Zane Beljean and Corey Hogan

Transcript