Smoke gets in your eyes, Carrick?

Tonight TV3 broadcast an Inside New Zealand documentary: Dying for a Smoke, highlighting some of the health issues and the political debate around suggested moves to increase controls on the sale of tobacco products —  and even suggestions to eliminate tobacco products from the country by 2020 … which strikes me as a pipe dream, if you’ll forgive the pun.

The documentary is available to view online for the next 15 days — surrounded by Quitline ads! — at TV3 on demand.

A few points I picked up: According to the programme, NZ Maori suffer the worst lung cancer rate in the world, a lot of them having become addicted at a young age. Tobacco, used in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, is killing a lot of them.

The guy ‘fronting’ for the tobacco industry at the recent Maori Affairs Select Committee inquiry was asked, ‘Do you smoke yourself?’
His answer: ‘No, I don’t. Because it’s harmful and I don’t like it.’

Spokesman on behalf of the tobacco industry admits he doesn't smoke 'Because it's harmful and I don't like it.' That doesn't stop him seeking to protect the interests of those selling the deadly addictive toxin as a consumer item.

Another industry spokesman predicted a future for tobacco as a consumer product and trotted out the justification:

‘Tobacco is a legal product for which there is a legitimate demand.’
Q: Is it ethical?
Awkward pause (dodge the question) then: ‘Let’s not forget it’s a legal product.’ [Comment: FAIL]

I wondered what my ex Twitter follower, tobacco industry apologist and Mark Hotchin’s spin doctor Carrick Graham might be making of it. Well! I should’ve guessed. Demonstrating his (pro?am?) fixation … and busier than a one-armed paperhanger, by the look of his tweet stream during the programme (below) … live-blogging as if he was at an iPhone launch! Continue reading →

Head on a spike

20110706-023802.jpg

So Alasdair Thompson’s words, taken by so many to reveal an anachronistic misogynist attitude, have cost him his job.

Even more intriguing is this line from the NZ Herald‘s ‘breaking news’ story:

His conduct sparked an angry outcry on micro-blogging site Twitter and saw the Council of Trade Unions call for him to be fired.

Crikey. As if an ‘angry outcry on Twitter’ justifies anything …

'Twitter 'controversy = a lazy journalist's version of the already worthless 'man in the street' vox pops'... Manufactured filler.

Update: I spotted this at the library …

Fate sealed?

Murdoch Phone hacking – a visceral jolt

At the risk of being perceived as a mere echo chamber, I really recommend you read these articles. (click)

Wow, read this piece after my own heart:  Rupert Murdoch Meets His Ahab by Jack Shafer in Slate. Brilliant. First words:

If Rupert Murdoch could be slain by a mere scandal, he would have been embalmed and entombed long ago. The genocidal tyrant has successfully swept away every scandal—major and minor—he has ever faced because of his special skill at normalizing his malefactions. …

And do follow his link to 3 minutes audio of Hugh Grant on BBC radio … describing the past editors of News of the World as “the worst editors in the history of journalism—or liars.”

Seriously, read Shafer’s article.

And here’s ‘Ahab’ Nick Davies’ latest exposé about the loathsome phone hacking.

– P

On a collision course

I briefly mentioned in passing the small c ‘controversy’ generated by blogger Martyn ‘Bomber’ Bradbury loudly expressing his opinion about whether or not blogger Cactus Kate (Cathy Odgers) was suitable ACT MP candidate material.

‘Hell no’ Bradbury says (or words to that effect) because he says she’s a ‘far right hate merchant’ who has previously expressed what he says are outrageous hateful statements about the poor. Despite her ‘fierce intelligence’ she should not even be selected as a candidate, he says.

Blogger Cameron Slater, as a panel guest on Bradbury’s online TV show, echoed the dead obvious question:

What business is it of Martyn Bradbury’s who ACT chooses as its candidates? None, is the answer, but he is perfectly entitled to express an opinion. Aren’t we all?

Cathy/Kate can certainly hold her own, judging by this for instance.

A white supremacist in the woodpile?

Fast forward a few days and the same Martyn Bradbury declares as ‘breaking news2005 (six years old) emails linking a founding member (whatever that is) of the newly-formed anti-MMP lobby group and knitting circle ‘Vote for Change’ to an Australian white supremacist group. (I am resisting the temptation to indulge in Aussie jokes. Re-sist-ing.)

Again, on the basis of outrageous hateful statements he showed this Alex Fogerty character apparently wrote (at 19?) and his past membership of that political witches coven, Bradbury seeks not just to embarrass Fogerty and the Vote for Change macramé group but, in a similar fashion to his voluble campaign against the very idea of Catctus Kate’s candidacy for ACT, seeks to disenfranchise Fogerty and his ilk.

You think I’m making that up?
Look:

Some animals are more equal than others ...

“…screw white supremacists being involved in any NZ political debate!” Oh dear.

That shut them out suggestion, as I said to Bradbury on Twitter (see conversation above right) is a step too far — even accepting Alex Fogerty did espouse white supremacist views … views that most Kiwis would shun. Sorry, Bomber, that qualifies as an outrageous hateful statementContinue reading →

George Orwell nails journalism? … Maybe.

Writer George Orwell poses in this undated photo at an unknown location. Orwell was born Eric Arthur Blair in Motihari, India in 1903 and died in 1950. (AP Photo)

I had cause to think about public discourse, propaganda and Public Relations recently …

Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.
— George Orwell

Is the English press honest or dishonest? At normal times it is deeply dishonest. All the papers that matter live off their advertisements, and the advertisers exercise an indirect censorship over news. Yet I do not suppose there is one paper in England that can be straightforwardly bribed with hard cash. In the France of the Third Republic all but a very few of the newspapers could notoriously be bought over the counter like so many pounds of cheese.  — George Orwell – The Lion and the Unicorn (1941)

The road not taken — copyright is a complicated playground

image: jblivetour.blogspot.com (click)

Sometimes we’re caught by the law of unintended consequences … and sometimes we’re saved by it.

Righthaven is a law firm widely portrayed as copyright trolls trying to shake down bloggers and commenters for reproducing  news stories published by Stephens Media.  According to David Kravets in WIRED 20 June, ‘copyright litigation factory’ Righthaven has sued more than 200 websites, bloggers and commenters for copyright infringement. More than 100 have settled out of court.

Righthaven’s fortunes faced a big setback earlier this month when a US federal  judge found that publishing an entire article without the rights holder’s authorization was a ‘fair use’ of the work.

Wow. I’ve had a little bit to do with copyright infringement litigation, pursuing some plagiarists for appropriating (i.e. reproducing and claiming as their own) material from several of my authors, one of my books and articles.  The plagiarists’ ‘mistake’ was four-fold: (1) extensive word for word copying (2) total lack of attribution (3) bad choice of ‘victim’ and (4) badly mis-handling our request to them to put things right … thinking they could bully/brazen it out.

In their anguish/urgency to find some dirt — anything they could fling back as a ‘counter-suit’ — the defendants in our case  first latched on a hare-brained ‘Contempt of Court’ allegation — even petitioning the Attorney General to intervene (desperate, huh?). That move provoked laughter in law offices in Auckland and Wellington (and more ka-ching! for the lawyers on all sides). Of course the AG declined to become involved.

Then, when reality set in and our case was settled (briefly discussed here in ‘Mr Phil Jones: re-heating cold horseshit’) the fabled fantasist tried to manufacture a ‘copyright infringement’ scandal of his own, alleging that some fully-attributed, acknowledged extracts/references to another author’s work in a book I published amounted to the very same ‘sin’ of which I’d accused Richmastery. (The creaky old ‘Peter is such a hypocrite!’ defence.)

Again, desperate, huh? The attributed inclusion was ‘fair use’ for the purposes of criticism and review, the author in question and his publishers apparently felt, which totally made sense — it consisted of less than 300 words … 22 of which were his name (eight times!), the book title, and the publisher’s firm, if I recall).

All that is background to my comments about today’s new development in Righthaven’s ‘copyright infringement’ case.

Don’t tell lies

The finding referred to above, about publishing an entire article in the context of promoting discussion on the web qualified as ‘fair use’ is huge. Further,  U.S. District Judge Philip Pro’s finding that  Righthaven did not produce any evidence that the market for the original article was ‘harmed’ by that non-commercial use (so ‘fair use’) is also significant. It’s not enough to prove attributed copying is copying, where’s the commercial ‘harm’? Continue reading →

It’s only ‘propaganda’ if you’re talking about the other side, right, Carrick?

A few days ago in the context of the public discourse around plain packaging legislation for tobacco products, No wonder tobacco co.s are SQUEALING … I briefly mentioned a PR flack who appears to be an advocate (paid or unpaid? Not clear) for Tobacco manufacturers.

Trust your (spin) doctor: 'Your throat protection against irritation against cough.' Riiight.

This spin doctor* Carrick Graham follows me on Twitter and vice versa, [UPDATE Mon 4 July: Oops, not any more see http://twitpic.com/5l0kzg.] so I’d noticed his tidbits invective stream of slanted argument towards the tobacco plain packaging legislation ramping up … and prior to that observed his baiting of anti-smoking groups like ASH. I reached a personal conclusion (not rocket science) that this guy seems to peddle Big Tobacco’s talking points.

Today he let his Tweetstream know that he’s quoted in the NZ Herald today as a ‘public relations spokesman’ for ex Hanover Finance partner Mark Hotchin, who I last referred to Defamation? Or law of consequences? and before that in Fallen hero? (click here for a full list of Hotchin/Hanover mentions here at ThePaepae.com).

It appears this flack has joined/taken over from Klaus Sorensen, who, when acting as a ‘spokesman’ for Mark Hotchin and addressing the controversial Paratai Drive mansion PR disaster was reported as uttering these immortal lines, belying his earlier description as ‘the NZSE’s number one spin-doctor‘:

We’re not saying why it’s being sold, we’re just simply saying that it’s going to be sold and people are just going to draw their own conclusions,” Mr Sorensen said. “I mean, the reasons are probably pretty obvious.” — NZ Herald 26/6/10

Today’s Hotchin spin doctor Carrick Graham wanted to let his Twitter followers know about the Herald story that reported someone (ahem) has set up a locked Twitter account for Mark Hotchin (ooooh, who?), and also a reputation damage control website to give ‘his responses to various issues that will no doubt be arising in the next few months’ and to help address repetitive ‘misinformation’ about Hotchin in the media.

The Herald said the website was launched ‘yesterday’ … but Deep Throat from Parnell told us all on Twitterthe site has been live for 5 months‘. (Oops. No one noticed? Perhaps it’s one of those special covert PR campaigns?)  Hanover Finance already runs an opinionated ‘news’ page on its website which tackles media injustice as it sees it — mainly by regurgitating agreeable blog comments (PDF 300 kb). Perhaps this is a new ‘strategy’?  Continue reading →

Richard Nixon’s dirty dirty tricks alive and well in 2011

I’m still reading Nixonland by Rick Perlstein, initially prompted by the mention of Fox News’s Roger Ailes‘s early work as a Nixon operative. Ailes is credited with teaching Nixon how to succeed in the world of television — by bending reality, faking news events and running highly staged ‘impromptu’ candidate meetings with ‘off the cuff’ Q&A sessions, rigging the game and so deeply controlling the slavering press — cynically mastering the medium.

Gee it’s a good book but the tale it tells is AWFUL … and the detail of the ‘dirty tricks’ goes so far beyond fair play it’s almost unbelievable! The cynicism, the criminality, the paranoia, the determination to crush ‘enemies’.

The description of the Republican/Nixon campaign’s machinations and dirty tricks (stealing campaign stationery and sending out smearing gossip, untrue rumours,misinformation, fake invitations, venue changes, phoney travel schedules, ordering cars and food to be delivered to opposing campaign HQ) and darker, malevolent tactics — tricks collectively called ‘ratfucks’ within the Nixon camp, and carried out by ‘ratfuckers’ — remind me of some of the stunts we see here in NZ politics.

George W Bush’s henchman Karl Rove makes an appearance as sleazy political saboteur. Gee, way back then, I thought. The die is cast.

All of which put attempts at de-stabilising personal abuse I’ve read in various right wing/National Party blogs (not just puerile put-downs of Auckland Mayor Len Brown by his instinctual political enemies) into a context.

Clearly, dirty tricks and devious lies are not an aspect of politics only limited to the right wing. Obama’s Chicago machine (and John F Kennedy’s before him) have been accused of all sorts of skulduggery. True? Dunno. Possible I guess.

I find myself again struck by the desperation of today’s Republican political campaign to do anything, say anything they can to discredit Barack Obama, or to build on negative prejudice against him (or Michelle, seen as a threat too). From Sarah Palin’s “death panels” campaign and the bare-faced lies propagated by opponents of the Democrats’ health care reform. Consider all the BS about the birth certificate and any other manufactured controversy. It’s a dirty, dirty game and some operators will lie crookedly for the slimmest of political advantage. And so we have Fox News.

Nixon 300w

But let’s be clear about one thing: in this partisan war the ‘issue at issue’ could be anything. The tribes don’t really care what they are fighting about … just that they are at war, and that ‘at war’ ness becomes inextricably bound up with their own sense of identity.

In my comments on the ‘Appeal to decency‘ post I quoted part of an article by Johann Hari: The Republican Party Is Turning Into A Cult which encapsulates a lot of my own thinking about these matters — chiefly, the trenchant misinformation and lies (let’s call a spade a spade) deliberate ignorance and misuse of ‘religious faith’ as a justification of near-hysteria based on lies and falsehoods.

Johann Hari puts his finger on something important:

Continue reading →

How I wish I had the talent to make a point like this so well

20110630-042532.jpg

“Men are idealized in comics, too.” Oh really? Like this? Megan Rosalarian Gedris makes her point. With panache. (click)

Via Tim Carmody’s Snarkmarket blog, this awesome argument with illustrations demonstrates the sexist double-standard operating in (sigh) comics … merely a microcosm/reflection of wider society.

It’s an argument (discussion, really) that’s been running for a while … and is worth following if you care. But my point is the way Megan Rosalarian Gedris has pretty much aced her proposition that the “idealisation” of men in comics is in no way equivalent to the ‘treatment’ women are given. Her illustrations and the use of parody (men in tights) are undeniable… a tour de force which only the most hardened could resist.

Bravo!

-P

Google’s ‘circles’ model for social networks

Google’s ‘plus’ (Google+) although only in trial, has two things right: (1) not all social media ‘friends’ are created equal, and (2) Facebook makes it too hard to filter your FB connections to deal with that reality. So, in another effort to leverage/operate in the social media ‘space’, they’re pushing Google+ …

+Circles: share what matters, with the people who matter most
Not all relationships are created equal. So in life we share one thing with college buddies, another with parents, and almost nothing with our boss. The problem is that today’s online services turn friendship into fast food—wrapping everyone in “friend” paper—and sharing really suffers:

  • It’s sloppy. We only want to connect with certain people at certain times, but online we hear from everyone all the time.
  • It’s scary. Every online conversation (with over 100 “friends”) is a public performance, so we often share less because of stage fright.
  • It’s insensitive. We all define “friend” and “family” differently—in our own way, on our own terms—but we lose this nuance online.

In light of these shortcomings we asked ourselves, “What do people actually do?” And we didn’t have to search far for the answer. People in fact share selectively all the time—with their circles.

Google +: recognising things you want to share aren't relevant to every one of your social media network 'connections' (click to watch 2 minute intro video)

Watch their ‘quick look’ video (below the fold), and (tuning out the schmaltzy, deep-and-meaningful, ‘inspiring’ dialogue) they show how their project is going to make it way easier to filter your ‘friends’… if enough of them join in …
Continue reading →

No wonder tobacco co.s are SQUEALING …

I follow a guy on Twitter who seems to be an apologist or spin doctor (paid or unpaid, I don’t know) for tobacco interests. This self-described ‘Public Affairs and Issues Management Specialist’ has been salting his tweets with messages baiting anti smoking groups like ASH (are they listening? Dunno) and filling the echo chamber with this-is-the-end-of-civilisation-as-we-know-it type fear and loathing or oh-my-god-don’t you-understand-this-is-about-freedom? alarm messages* — all, it seems, prompted by the ‘plain packaging’ legislation being slowly introduced in Australia. We already have similar laws in New Zealand (since 2008) although still with some manufacturer branding. See images below.

New Zealand cigarette packet warnings. Yuk.

I read today that Philip Morris has filed a lawsuit seeking to block the Australian ‘plain packaging’ legislation. They claim a move to ban cigarette makers from printing their logos, promotional text or colorful images on cigarette packs, and instead feature large health warnings and full-color images of the possible ill-health consequences of smoking violates their intellectual property! Pfah! Huffington Post:

Hong Kong-based Philip Morris Asia Limited, which owns the Australian affiliate Philip Morris Limited, filed a notice of claim on Monday arguing the legislation violates a bilateral investment treaty between Australia and Hong Kong.
The tobacco company says the treaty protects companies’ property, including intellectual property such as trademarks. The plain packaging proposal severely diminishes the value of the company’s trademark, Edwards said.
“Our brands are really one of the absolute key valuable assets that we have as a company – it’s what helps us compete, it’s what enables us to distinguish our products,” Edwards said. “This move … would essentially amount to confiscation of our brand in Australia.”

Ew. What an Australian packet could look like. The Tobacco companies say they're outraged their LOGO & colourful BRANDING isn't allowed on the packet. Diddums. (Photo: AP)

Oh dear. Let’s face it: Tobacco consumption kills and maims people. Is there really any doubt about that in 2011?  Faced with the bill for the ill-health and destruction the distribution of tobacco products cause, the Australian government wants to reduce that harm, and (like the NZ government) has progressively banned smoking inside public bars, theatres etc. and reduced the marketing avenues for this special-case death-inducing product — this legal (for now) addictive toxin — the end of sports sponsorships, billboards, role-model advertising or attractive healthy young skinny people in ads …

It seems the tobacco industry will clutch at every last straw* as it drowns inch by inch in the first world, while at the same time, apparently, setting out to conquer fresh green pastures in the third world where it can peddle its poisons untrammelled.

Get rid of them.

– P

* Like this: “If passed, this law threatens free market principles and amounts to a government seizure of what is often a company’s most valuable asset – its trademark,” said ALEC’s International Relations Task Force Director Karla Jones. “The law is alarming because it is inconsistent with Australia’s obligations in several international agreements to which Australia is a signatory.  ALEC fervently hopes that Australia will re-evaluate this misguided policy before it spreads.” — American Legislative Exchange Council.  Good grief.

Disclosure: I have had several close relatives who have died from the effects of cigarette smoking — notwithstanding generations of obfuscation and denial by tobacco companies and their crooked professionally one-eyed researchers and marketers. Theirs is a simply unethical business, in my view, akin to drug-pushing. When used in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions, the product causes death. (Why is that even legal?)

Juxtaposition

What is this advertising? Any idea?

20110626-062207.jpg

Harawira: Fortune favours the brave

What do we take from ‘rebel’ MP Hone Harawira winning his by-election? … Even with a ‘slashed’ majority — from 6,000 to 867.

Wait and see. Let the punditry begin.

It must certainly be a victory sweetened by the decision by the Electoral Commission to register his new party, meaning he will be a ‘leader’ of his one MP party in Parliament, and more significantly, mean he can claim more taxpayer funding “as the leader of a party than as an independent MP.”

Oh boy.

 

Black hat techniques

Dilbert.com

Reminded me of Review: An odious little volume

– P

Totally worth reading article on writing. (Refs Autism/Asperger)

Here’s a very worthwhile article with valuable tips on writing (check the comments stream for more!) It’s by Steve Silberman who wrote The Geek Syndrome for Wired magazine, which we discussed in passing in 2009. Anyway…

… I’m finally writing a book of my own.
The subject of my book is autism, the variety of human cognitive styles, and the rise of the neurodiversity movement. The seed of the project was an article I wrote for Wired in 2001 called “The Geek Syndrome” about autism and Asperger syndrome in high-tech communities like Silicon Valley. I’m happy and humbled to say that it was an influential article, and I still get email about it from the families of kids on the spectrum and from autistic people themselves, though it was published more than a decade ago. — Steve Silberman

Man, I’ll read his book! In the meantime, read his article,  Practical Tips on Writing a Book from 23 Brilliant Authors if you care…

Steve Silberman shares secrets. Really.

I recently sent email to the authors in my social network and asked them, “What do you wish you’d known about the process of writing a book that you didn’t know before you did it?”….

…A few things became clear as soon as their replies came in. First of all, I’ll have to throttle back my use of Twitter and Facebook to get this writing done (and I may never rev up my idle Quora account after all.) Secondly, scheduling intervals of regular exercise and renewal amid the hours of writing will be essential. And thirdly, I’ll certainly be buying and downloading a software program called Scrivener, which is a powerful word processor specifically designed for writing books and keeping vast amounts of related data in good order.

Amen to Scrivener. Brilliant tool. I can’t recommend it highly enough for long form writing and projects that are growing and evolving. (And they’ve got a Windows beta out now — which is a development since we last discussed Scrivener.) DEVONThink gets a plug in the comments.

– P