r/KiwiPolitics • u/hadr0nc0llider • 12h ago
There’s a bit of kerfuffle over Opportunity’s Reddit presence. The volume of OPP content across NZ subs is intense. People have commented saying they’ve been accused of being OPP shills and banned from other subs and we’re seeing theories in other spaces about paid astroturfing campaigns. I don’t necessarily agree and maybe we need a place to talk about what people are experiencing. Edit - we don’t mind people sharing their experiences of other subs in comments but we don’t want callouts or intersub bashing, that’s not what this post is about. Please avoid mentioning other subs by name in comments.
Yes, this will be long, so I’ve added TLDRs under each section – what astroturfing looks like, content we’ve seen around Opportunity, and my personal theory on what’s going on. I’m not speaking on behalf of the KP mods and this is separate to my personal view of Opportunity as a voter, which is not supportive. Soz OPP.
TLDR – Inauthentic activity like political astroturfing is rife on Reddit but in NZ’s political subreddits is probably far less pervasive than people think. Of all the NZ subs, [r/nz](r/nz) is probably the one copping it because of its size. Polls we’ve done in KP tell us only 30% of the people who participate are regular contributors, which means a lot of users lurk. That doesn’t make their contributions inauthentic when they do pop out from behind their Reddit bushes.
We’ve previously posted defining astroturfing and KP’s mod approach. I’ll summarise inauthentic activity as users or content that is deceptive about its purpose, intent, or who/how it was generated. Astroturfing is co-ordinated activity for party-sympathetic messaging to influence people's opinions and behaviours. It’s usually done by ‘sockpuppet’ accounts which are generally run by real humans paid to post scripted or AI generated content. Bots are used less frequently for astroturfing than human sockpuppets. Bots are automated, some with good and useful intentions like bodza’s kiwipoliticsbot, but others are designed to mimic human activity or create malicious content.
Research suggests up to 50% of Reddit content is bot generated but that doesn’t apply to every community sitewide. Big communities see more bot activity because there’s plenty of traffic for them to blend in, farm karma, and legitimise before spreading themselves around Reddit. Subreddits under 10k seem to be less popular with bots, probably because they’re easier to spot amongst organic human content. For context, none of NZ’s ‘political’ subs are over about 15k members. [r/nz](r/nz) has almost 900k members.
As an example, the worst inauthentic activity I’ve experienced as a mod was in a sub of about 50k members being regularly attacked by swarms of unique bot accounts spraying hundreds of abusive comments over random posts. When the bots weren’t launching an assault, we were fighting off an endless stream of malicious sockpuppets pushing a particular ideological agenda. The sockpuppets used a lot of AI, were expertly co-ordinated, and didn’t always have the user profile you’d expect from inauthentic accounts because they’re run by real people with real behaviour.
Inauthentic content can be hard to pin down because it can be confused with genuine enthusiasm. For example, we have several long-term users in KP who are essentially ‘single issue’ posters. They only contribute when the topic is of personal interest and when they do, they’re extremely passionate. We might not see them for months then see them every day for a week talking only about their interest because it’s topical. We also have a few users who are strong advocates for their preferred party and only contribute content in support or defence of their ‘team’. The point is, someone who lurks most of the time, like 90% of users on Reddit, and only chimes in during election season doesn’t make them inauthentic, and someone who consistently posts in support of a party doesn’t automatically become a paid shill because an election is on. It's all very tricky to mod.
TLDR – In our brief experience with Q and Opportunity’s staffers we found them to be honest and genuine. As a small sub we aren’t bread and butter for astroturfers but we've seen suspicious activity which prompted us to create election content guidelines to minimise soapboxing. Even though OPP content here and in other subs sometimes seems shady, a deeper look at the accounts suggests the majority might be authentic.
We happened to be the first sub to host an AMA with Q back in March. In February, an article was posted about National’s fishing quotas that led Q to comment with her identifiable user account. Two other accounts we hadn’t seen in KP before also commented in support of OPP. It was actually what prompted us to write our election guidelines and we used one of their now deleted 'trojan horse' style comments as an example of what not to do. We replied to them openly in the sub with a warning about astroturfing and Q herself responded that she wasn’t familiar with Reddit, apologised for not following the rules, and the other users did the same. It wasn't co-ordinated, everyone just got a little overzealous, and we believe them because the conversations we had with Q and staffers around that incident and her AMA were open and honest. We haven’t observed any concerning activity with their accounts since.
That doesn’t mean we haven’t seen activity that could be astroturfing. Some of our users (me) might have scared off the most committed Opportunity supporters from regularly posting in the sub with their (my) extremely strong negative views of the party. But despite being a new and small sub we have nonetheless seen shady activity from OPP supporters. Some have copped to deliberately searching the sub for OPP content to comment on. Trojan horse content starting with critique of another party or issue before rounding into Opportunity support, almost as if it could be from a template, are commonly seen here in KP and other subs. The endless self posts about OPP on [r/nz](r/nz) are painful at this point. As a user, I’ve compared some people's commitment to Opportunity like being in a cult. But looking at the accounts involved I don’t believe most of these people are paid shills. Which brings me to my working theory of the phenomenon that is Opportunity’s Reddit campaign…
TLDR – As a party outside Parliament, we don't hear much from Opportunity outside elections which makes it more noticeable when we do. They seem to be activating people who were politically dormant and aren’t familiar with Reddit’s environment, creating scenarios where legitimate users are being perceived as inauthentic at a time when political subs are implementing measures to flag astroturfing. This is fertile ground for confirmation bias and conspiracy theories about malicious political influence.
We aren't used to hearing about Opportunity between election cycles so OPP content isn't part of our usual eco-system and seeing so much of it feels unusual. This election they seem to be resonating with people who’ve felt politically homeless or otherwise disenchanted/disengaged from politics. All of a sudden they’re activated and passionate. When I look at some of the user accounts for suspicious content in our sub, many actually seem to fit the lurker or single issue profile. Yes, some of them may in fact be sockpuppets, but based on what I’ve seen of malicious accounts previously modding communities up to a million members, most of these passionate Opportunity contributors in the political subreddits are probably real people who finally have something to say and they want to say it loudly. [r/nz](r/nz) is a much bigger sub and the volume of OPP content sometimes reaches plague proportions which TBH looks more like actual astroturfing.
I’ve also noticed Opportunity has a strong social media presence outside Reddit. They told us they promoted their AMA on their social media accounts and I recall a spike in traffic to the sub after they linked to it. Earlier in the election season I went down a rabbithole researching my local candidates and when looking into the Opportunity guy I found a whole bunch of private Facebook groups for supporters and branch members. Opportunity supporters might be drifting across from Meta platforms which are more conducive to ‘cheerleading’. Perhaps they’re being given tips from the party on how to engage online and support the party. Doesn’t mean everyone’s a sockpuppet.
All of this creates a perfect storm of supporter enthusiasm at a time of heightened awareness and moderator sensitivity across the political subs. We all tighten up our automod to filter accounts that ping red flags for inauthentic activity. When content gets flagged it naturally puts mods on alert. If you’re expecting to see inauthentic activity every day you begin to see bots and AI everywhere, even in genuine human users. If the same user’s content gets flagged often enough it inceptions them in your mind as a problematic user. Every time you see them flagged again it risks reinforcing a confirmation bias. Soon enough, you’re permabanning people based on remote parameters that don’t dig deeper than account age, karma, posting frequency, etc. When the users modmail to protest their ban it creates a kind of cognitive dissonance. Inauthentic accounts don't bother appealing their ban, they just activate another sockpuppet. So you look for the next most obvious reason to confirm your bias against the user/s. Enter conspiracy theories. Maybe another party is paying them to generate support that could be exploited later. But how likely is that really? I mean, really?
If you made it this far, I commend you. This is a polarised topic and I'm interested in people's thoughts on this but I want to stress we aren't here to bash other subs or their moderation style. It would be great to think about what we can all learn from this election to prepare us for better conversations next time.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/hadr0nc0llider • 1d ago
With election day almost upon us quite a few policy guides comparing parties' policies on key issues are popping up in mainstream media and other sources. Here in one place for all your electoral information needs and nerdy political enjoyment is a list of all the policy resources currently being updated from non-partisan sources:
Obviously every political party has a full policy statement on their website so I've linked their policy pages here for a deeper dive:
There are lots of other guides comparing parties' policies by unions and interest groups so if you have a particular viewpoint give your favourite organisation a google and see if they've put something together.
If you're aware of a policy guide I haven't listed here or you've found a resource others might appreciate please share it in the comments!
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Tyler_Durdan_ • 1h ago
To be honest - while I think Luxon would flub the debate, I just don’t care. These two having another debate in order to demonstrate how fucking uninspiring they both are just holds no appeal for me.
It’s like a milquetoast competition and they are in a dead heat.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/LonelyMarch878 • 6h ago
I read an article saying talking about Labour’s new policy proposal that they wanted to implement only just yesterday. The plan by Labour was to get Kiwi kids off their phones by banning under-16s from social media, enforcing stricter screen rules in classrooms, and giving eligible families up to $300 a year to help pay for after-school sports and gear instead
What do you guys think of said policy? Is it a waste of government money or is it simply a way to promote the Kiwi way of life upon our children? I don’t know whether or not OP’s can be politically biased on this subreddit (apologies mods lol) but I will not make my own comment on this otherwise this post would be removed lightning fast (as my opinions on this is very strong to say the absolute least). Please keep discussions friendly, lets keep this fun and civil!
UPDATE: I have just gotten word that I am state my own opinion! What is my opinion? I think that it is a bloody waste of money. Where are they going to get $300 from? Especially since in my opinion there are political headwinds especially regarding inflation coming up to 2029/2030 that will probably be akin to the 2022/23 inflation era. We do not need more government spending! Especially not for unnecessary things like this. We should reduce government spending where necessary, cut red tape (which I will begrudgingly give National some credit for doing this term but it was not super impressive), and use our money wisely with conditions that probably point toward political headwinds. End of rant, but yeah. Not a great idea.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Jamezzzzz69 • 8h ago
Hi there! I've made an independent forecast for the upcoming 2026 election, modelling electorate-by-electorate outcomes, as there have been many discussions about a potential National overhang, which I felt traditional pollsters and forecasters have been missing.
My model takes the 2023 election results, translates them onto the 2026 electorate boundaries, and uses these as a baseline for modelling electorate outcomes. It then accounts for two key factors:
The results are quite interesting, and diverge substantially from traditional forecasts and betting markets.
My current forecast:
This is mainly due to the massive National overhang on current figures, where my model forecasts a median of 5 above their proportional entitlement (39 electorates won vs 34 proportional entitlement).
I think for the strategic voters here, those wanting a continuation of the current coalition should electorate vote National, party vote ACT or NZF, whilst those on the left should vote TOP if they are close to falling below the threshold, or Labour if they are confident TOP will make it in and you take Q at her word in calling the party with the most seats first if she's kingmaker. There's basically zero chance of a left-wing government without TOP breaking in.
Note that AI assistance was used in writing the code, auditing and building the site, but all decisions, evaluations and interpretations were my own. I am not paid by, sponsored by, or affiliated with any news organisations, pollsters or political parties.
Happy to take any feedback or questions regarding my forecast, results or methodology!
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Skidzonthebanlist • 11h ago
Guess the "We aren't supporting them" variations don't hold water (never did) do they.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/NewZealanders4Love • 4h ago
Pretty green-eyed opinion.
Can/should anything be done about Billionaires, and what?
Seems like it's just part-and-parcel of living in a democratic society.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/maybeaddicted • 12h ago
Winston Peters wants to take away your right to vote in the elections and superannuation if you're a permanent resident.
I'm in that situation. The best solution I have is to vote him out. He's also been around far too long and you can see that his other proposals are mostly populist ideas that might not even reach the floor.
In my opinion- he just wants to stay in power. Not make New Zealand a better country.
How to get him out of a power position? Another party has to take the King Maker position instead of NZF?
r/KiwiPolitics • u/FairlyOddFairy333 • 1d ago
I was nervous last election but not as nervous as this one.
We need change so so so badly. This dual party situation is just not working and I’m sure many will disagree and that’s ok.
I’m not extreme left wing, I agree with more left ideologies than right but I do still have some NON-left beliefs. I want to vote greens because I believe they deserve a chance and that Chloe would be a good finance minister. Better than Nicola, imo. But at the same time, the greens lean very very left in some ways. Either way, I don’t believe either of the Christophers deserve my vote. Hair Christopher is a little more palatable than bald Christopher but they’re both sleazy.
It doesn’t matter to me who you’re voting for. Just looking to have a conversation about what the general consensus is about this election.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/hadr0nc0llider • 1d ago
In 2024, he used the database on his phone to look up information on his brother-in-law's ex-partner, such as the names of her current and past boyfriends and family members.
He then shared that knowledge with his brother-in-law.
Forget the speedy ride-along and looking up cars he wanted to buy, this piece of human dog shit looked up the details of a woman who was not known to him and gave the information to her ex as a social favour.
NZ Police - where misogyny is a core operating principle. Disgusting.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Tyler_Durdan_ • 17h ago
Weekly place for any foreign affairs or international news discussion.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Crunkfiction • 1d ago
Really good interview and includes some much needed optimism about how Kiwis frequently blow the whistle on things like this.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Tyler_Durdan_ • 1d ago
This article is missing what I consider a vital piece of info - there is nothing in here (unless I missed it) where Luxon gives the reasoning he had for WHY he's ignoring the advice given to him.
Its one thing to accuse labour of shitstirring for arcing up about this, but if you cant actually explain your reasoning for WHY you chose a more problematic date then actually you are just not being transparent.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Primary-Tuna-6530 • 1d ago
While not unprecedented in NZ law, it's still a huge infringement on civil liberties. But given what we've seen with kids being killed and no one held responsible, I'm not adverse to it.
This would carry a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison
All it'll do is change from 'I'm not talking' to 'I don't recall'.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/hadr0nc0llider • 1d ago
The school has failed its ERO audits two years in a row. The school is based in a closeted community with a history of abuse and which harbours convicted abusers. The state would be irresponsible to sanction a school that consistently underperforms to national standards in an environment that is permissive toward child abuse.
Get ya hand off it Gloriavale.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Crunkfiction • 2d ago
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Primary-Tuna-6530 • 2d ago
After Hipkins come Green co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick on 4.0 and Opportunity leader Qiulae Wong on 3.8, followed by NZ First leader Winston Peters on 3.7.
ACT leader David Seymour follows on 3.4 and Green co-leader Marama Davidson is on 3.3. Te Pāti Māori’s co-leaders have the lowest overall ratings, with Debbie Ngarewa-Packer on 2.1 and Rawiri Waititi on 1.9.
Hipkins somehow manages to win best Chris award, Dipkins is just lucky that Fuxon is such an unappealing ball bag.
Nothing really surprising, young people like Chlöe etc etc.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/YesterdayReal8905 • 2d ago
I've been working on NZ Votes, where you can compare published polls side by side and explore parliament seat estimates, latest news, find your electorate, review 2023 results on a map and more.
On election day the plan is to show the live poll count on the map.
It's a personal, non-commercial project with no party affiliation. The aim is to keep it neutral, with source links so people can check things themselves.
Looking to get some more eyes on it and get some feedback.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Murky-Association115 • 3d ago
I'm not phased either way but I've been absolutely floored this evening by some of the moderators behaviour in the r/nzpolitics subreddit - which I admit I typically align with (to some extent) politically - when kinda challenging some of the presumptions and assumptions of TOPs alternative motives/conflicts of interests - apparently quoting the Office of the Auditor General's documentation on managing conflicts of interest is both a bannable and mutable offence
r/KiwiPolitics • u/NewZealanders4Love • 3d ago
Greens at 15 is wild, but before their gang love-in blew up. IMO, hopefully that doesn't send some of their voters to TOP, who could have peaked at the wrong time.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/D491234 • 3d ago
r/KiwiPolitics • u/that-whistler • 3d ago
Over the last few months, Luxon has repeatedly and emphatically ruled out working with Opportunity, saying National won't "do business" with a party that wants to raise taxes. He explicitly ruled then out for like the 5th time in the debate this week. Qiulae Wong has kept the door open and in the past said she expects he'd change his tune if the alternative is opposition. More recently she seems to be coming around to the idea that perhaps it is a genuine position saying "it looks like we might be speaking to Labour".
I really don't understand the endgame here. Luxon has been so clear about this that I can't see how he'd have the political capital to reverse it in negotiations. Imagine National gets the most votes, Opportunity calls, and it's reported that Luxon declined to form a government, staying true to his word. Wouldn't their own voters be furious? Do National voters dislike Opportunity enough that they'd rather sit in opposition than see that coalition happen?
It feels like there is some strategic logic I'm missing. Obviously the play is that this position will stop National voters bleeding to Opportunity, but if it works out that they need them to form a government, I can't see how National aren't existentially cooked if they reverse that position.
Would Luxon step aside so National could do the deal? (I seriously doubt it, but how else does he save face?). If they did end up forming a government with Opportunity, what lines do you think they'd roll out to justify it?
The biggest about face I can think of regarding coilitions under MMP is when Winston went with National in 1996 after running an aggressive anti-National campaign. They were absolutely slaughtered in subsequent polls and the next election they didn't make the 5% threshold after dropping ~9%. Why do National believe they can avoid that sort of calamity?
r/KiwiPolitics • u/ethangchch • 3d ago
Kia ora everyone, my name is Ethan Gullery, and I'm the Alliance Party Health spokesperson and electoral candidate for Christchurch East. I'll be answering questions from 6pm today, 16th of October.
I look forward to answering!
EDIT: Thank you for the great questions. Seriously, amazing stuff. Enjoyed answering them.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/hadr0nc0llider • 3d ago
Great article collating each party's approach to food security with a very tidy infographic comparing their policies to the recommendations in the Public Health Advisory Committee's 2024 Rebalancing Our Food System report. From the article:
The Public Health Advisory Committee report was framed as an opportunity to address some of the challenges facing the national food system.
It was based on the premise that access to food is a basic human right and an equitable food system will see better health outcomes.
However, there is little political consensus on what a fair and healthy food system should actually look like. Party political ideologies variously favour market-driven, interventionist, preventative or reactive strategies.
With the election weeks away, voters have the opportunity to decide which aisle they’re standing in and which political brand they are buying.
Which political brand are you buying? On the table is a government-owned player 'KiwiMart', breaking up the existing duopoly, intervening in other ways like free school lunches, or doing nothing at all.
r/KiwiPolitics • u/Kiwi_bananas • 3d ago
Tāmaki is shaping up to be an interesting electorate to watch.
Historically held by Simon O'Connor of National. In 2023, Brooke Van Velden campaigned hard and took the seat off him, with the electorate likely to be punishing Simon for his extreme pro-life opinions. Now with BVV stepping down, its an open seat. The boundaries have been redrawn with an additional 2000 votes added to the electorate in Point England which has potential to be good news for Labour.
There are 3 strong candidates- Max Harris of Labour, Mahesh Muralidhar of National and James Christmas of ACT.
The 3 candidates did a good interview/debate at bFM this week, linked below. Interested to hear the sub's thoughts on this close race.
https://www.youtube.com/live/pEsP-IH58zo?t=977&si=8YYCgIRdAsj9UgGJ