{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreieamqge4ynp3imr2safji44hcuskbitdyqls27ihvkemuss6rklbi",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:sl2hrcwo6voaorzsr26d3bo2/app.bsky.feed.post/3mhyirfy4ve32"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreigtu4teufpt4gc6hsz425nzdehlfqv3l7m4rfuiq3lijdvoolqabu"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/png",
    "size": 1975915
  },
  "description": "10 News Stories They Chose Not to Tell You",
  "path": "/your-daily-ten-10-2026-054/",
  "publishedAt": "2026-03-26T21:00:59.000Z",
  "site": "https://goodoil.news",
  "tags": [
    "Read More",
    "Subscribe now"
  ],
  "textContent": "**This is edition 2026/054 of the _Ten@10_ newsletter.**\n\nHi all,\n\nThis is the Ten@10, where I collate and summarise ten news items you generally won't see in the mainstream media.\n\nEnjoy!\n\n* * *\n\n## 1. The truth about TOP\n\nAni O'Brien\n\n  * 🔁 Opportunity (TOP) re-emerges every election cycle with new branding, leadership, and media hype despite consistently polling below 1% and lacking electoral success\n  * 📰 Media coverage tends to portray TOP as a “sensible alternative,” suggesting voters might finally embrace its supposedly rational, evidence-based politics\n  * 🧠 The claim of being “evidence-based” and beyond Left–Right politics is criticised as a rhetorical device, since all political decisions inherently involve ideology and value judgments\n  * ⚖️ TOP’s policies and priorities—climate action, inequality, co-governance, and structural reform—align closely with modern Left-wing ideology, despite attempts to appear neutral\n  * 🎭 The party’s differentiation lies more in presentation (measured, technocratic tone) than substance, effectively offering “Left-wing politics with a polished, non-activist aesthetic”\n  * 👥 Candidate backgrounds—including leader Qiulae Wong and others—reflect strong ties to progressive causes like sustainability, Indigenous rights, and social impact frameworks\n  * 🌱 The broader candidate and leadership pool is dominated by professionals from public policy, environmental, and NGO sectors, with little representation of Centre-Right perspectives\n  * ⚠️ The party is accused of misleading voters by implying it could work with Right-leaning parties, when its ideology and personnel suggest alignment with Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori\n  * 📊 TOP’s funding model relies on many small donors, typical of minor parties, with occasional large contributions boosting its finances\n  * 🟢 A strategic opportunity exists as the Green Party’s perceived drift into identity politics and economic radicalism leaves some environmentally focused voters seeking alternatives\n  * 🎯 TOP could fill this gap by offering a more disciplined, less controversial version of traditional Green priorities, appealing to disenchanted Green and Labour voters\n  * 📋 Despite managerial branding, TOP’s policies involve significant state intervention: land value tax, universal basic income, expanded regulation, co-governance, and public investment\n  * 🏛️ The platform reflects a coherent Centre-Left worldview prioritising redistribution, environmental limits, and structural reform, rather than political neutrality\n  * ⚡ The idea of TOP as a centrist “kingmaker” is challenged as unrealistic, with claims that this perception could mislead voters in New Zealand’s MMP system\n  * 🔮 The party’s best chance of success lies in embracing its Left alignment and targeting dissatisfied Left-leaning voters rather than positioning itself as ideologically flexible\n\n\n\nRead More\n\n### This post is for subscribers only\n\nBecome a member to get access to all content\n\nSubscribe now",
  "title": "Your Daily Ten@10 - 2026/054",
  "updatedAt": "2026-03-26T21:00:58.704Z"
}