Gisborne district councillors say they experience mainly positive interactions out in their community, but social media is creating more division online.
A trend of abuse towards elected members is rising nationally, but councillors in Gisborne say most people they encounter in the region are friendly.
According to recent Local Government New Zealand statistics, two-thirds of elected members who responded said they faced abuse online.
Andy Cranston, a Gisborne district councillor for more than 20 years, says he has noticed a change in behaviour since the rise of social media, where now they can be “challenged by anyone with a device”.
“In the early days I could spend considerable time in direct conversations, which gave the opportunity for open conversations and offered a more detailed perspective on the issues, that is, both sides of the story.
“This does not seem to happen in the seemingly preferred social media space.
“Often the social media information flow seems less informed of the entirety of an issue and seemingly more willing to pick a side — no matter what.”
Cranston said councillors went into the role knowing they would need broad shoulders but it could be frustrating to see the “rabbit holes” that developed in the community.
“Our work is detailed and complex and to give the issues the full detail via the likes of Facebook posts etc, and maintain an ongoing conversation which this would lead to, is an impractical and inefficient modus operandi.”
Councils were often faced with issues with contrary views and they worked hard to get to fair amicable solutions, but sometimes that could be incredibly challenging.
“In the early days of direct conversations we would be engaged with the relevant affected parties and could endeavour to get to best outcomes, whereas now we seem to be challenged by anyone with a device.
“Because of the reach of social media I believe the generated ‘mood’ or ‘belief’ of the failings of council is then transferred out into the community, and from that there has been public ridicule and even abuse of councillors and council staff, which makes the roles a challenge.”
Cranston said abuse was common but mostly directed towards the organisation.
“It seems to be a rare day when you don’t see or hear a comment of just how dumb, stupid, brainless etc etc the council is.”
First-term councillor Collin Alder said he had not received abuse but noticed negative comments about the council as a whole.
“I have had criticism aimed at what the council has done or not done but lots of praise and thanks for the efforts of councillors,” he said.
First-term Māori ward councillor Aubrey Ria said she had not received any abuse in person, or on social media, but had been subjected to online trolls who opposed Māori wards.
In her community, every interaction had been respectful, she said.
“Tairāwhiti whānau engage with me at kids’ sports, marae hui, tangihanga, Kiwa Pools, rugby league and kapa haka events.”
Long-time councillor Larry Foster said he had not experienced any abuse and had only had positive experiences with his community.
He previously served as a councillor from 1989 to 1992, retired, and then was re-elected in 2013.
“Elected members are facing an increasing level of intimidation and abuse,” Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) chief executive Susan Freeman-Greene said.
Of LGNZ’s members polled, 39% said they had experienced abuse at community events, and one-third experienced it during everyday activities like shopping or picking up their children from school.
According to the LGNZ statistics, 53% of their members reported that abuse towards elected members was worse than it was a year ago.
LGNZ said there was a difference in the level of support between local and central government.
“Ministers and MPs have security resources available to them through parliamentary security, which includes a full security assessment of their homes and funded upgrades to their security systems,” Freeman-Greene said.
Local government mayors and councillors needed better support, she said.
“Mayors and councillors are out and about in their communities all the time. They are often much more visible and accessible than the local MP.”
LGNZ has successfully advocated for the removal of local candidates’ home addresses from election advertising in 2022.
Freeman-Greene said LGNZ had also brought together its members for special sessions with police and NetSafe to better support them with this rise in intimidation and abuse.
5 comments
So, let me get this right. If I understand our mayor, she would rather people didn't engage with social media because it's “toxic” and “un-policed” and she “avoids it”.
In that case, why do the council use social media to “get the message out”?
Didn’t GDC CEO, Nedine Thatcher Swann, post on the council’s Facebook page that a “council car was stopped and protestors were yelling abuse and banging their protest signs on the vehicle”. (Gisborne Herald story August 8, 2024)
This in spite of videos available to prove no such abuse occurred by the peaceful protestors.
So, when the mayor refers to social media as “such a toxic, unpoliced space”, is she including Mrs Thatcher Swann’s post as such an example?
Doesn’t accusing peaceful protestors of a behaviour they never engaged in, fit well with the mayor’s description of “absolutely unacceptable comments you would never make to someone’s face”?
Has she advised her CEO that “Rather than going on social media”, drop by the protest (every Wed at Grey St.) and meet wonderful members of our community and hear their concerns or just read TGH opinion pages, full of letters, columns, comments on the subject?
A public apology via TGH or council Facebook page would be welcomed by the protestors and residents alike.
Also, surely mayor and Cr. Cranston must be aware of the degree of the public’s frustration and concerns about Grey St, the unsustainable increase in rates and the council’s debt, council’s poor performance in core business, yet expenditure in Woke projects, etc.
People want Grey St to be returned to its former safe and functional street. Their pleas are being ignored by the present council.
People feel council is abusing its position by imposing on them projects like Grey St and having no regard for their financial ability.
Maybe Cr. Cranston noticing “a difference in community behaviour” is due to the present council getting off the track of doing the basics and instead giving us Grey St, potholes and increased rates!
Yes, social media allows people to air their concerns, so does the Gisborne Herald. What is next? Blaming TGH?
It is quite astounding that Cr. Cranston is complaining about being “challenged by anyone with a device”.
I am sorry Cr Cranston, but people have every right to challenge you, other councillors and GDC.
You say “In the early days I could spend considerable time in direct conversations, which gave the opportunity for open conversations and offered a more detailed perspective on the issues, that is, both sides of the story.”
No one has stopped you to drop by the Grey St protestors or Grey St businesses and have those conversations. Cr Alder did and he was thanked by people for doing so. Also feel free to reply to myriads of TGH correspondents on Grey St and other council affairs.
And finally, Cr Cranston, people don’t need to go down the “rabbit holes”. Driving through the Grey St obstacle course or seeing their new rates is enough to show how out of touch their council has become.
You talk about “fair amicable solutions” - where is such a solution for Grey St businesses losing their customers? Or for the pensioner who gets a $2400 rate increase, or the potholes in our streets?
These are real problems, not “generated ‘mood’ or ‘belief’ of the failings of council”.
Instead of blaming the people airing their views on social media, do what PM Luxon suggested, i.e. getting the basics done. If the Grey St project is “dumb, stupid, brainless”, restore it back to how it was and see the flow of praise coming your way.
JOIN THE CONVERSATION
Read and post comments with a
Newsroom Pro subscription.
Subscribe now to start a free
28-day trial.