Government and organisation HORSE****T / SPIN.

[xaphod]

Goebbels said that lies repeated often enough become truth

Now we are bombarded with various chunks of 'information' where organisations would like us to perceive things in a way than we otherwise might, ie they are trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

Now, you can't fool all the people all the time, but when you try to fool me, I just get very pissed, and start writing something like this piece.

Here's a couple of examples from the last few days.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Global warming has put more pressure on sea defences to prevent the flooding of low-lying land.

Our Government can't afford to spend anything reinforcing our defences (I suppose it is hiring too many politically correct do-gooders like 'outreach diversity facilitators'), so it is proposing to let some sea defences fall into disrepair and allow flooding.

This was called managed retreat

Due to this having unacceptable semantic overtones, the official phrase is now

managed re-alignment

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

South-West trains decided to remove 72 seats from their 4 carriage trains to 'boost train comfort'

This is actually horse****t for the fact that the trains are so overcrowded, that to squeeze extra passengers in, they are taking a lot of seats out .... one person standing takes less floorspace than one person sitting !

Xa

[Bubba136]

here in the USA it's called "political spin" or, as some reporters put it, spinning the facts in the direction that the special interests want to take you.

[mk4625]

The military manuals never use the word "retreat". This sort of maneuver is referred to as a "retrograde movement".

[hoverfly]

I was working for one company where that S$%t was used often. For instance they had a high turnover insted of saing they fired some one they use . left to pursue other career alteratives That company was so depressing to work for, I left to pursue other career alteratives.

[Bubba136]

That, perhaps, is the main reason that I am self employed.

[Anita C.]

George W., Tony Blair, Rush Limbaugh. All human. All flawed beings. All elected by a majority to act upon the peoples' behalf regardless of their personal feelings . . . I must admit I did laugh when Rush had his fall.

[Bubba136]

How hard did people laugh when you had your fall?

[Anita C.]

HA! We ALL laughed when I tripped, myself included. However, not nearly as many as are laughing at Mr. Limbaugh.

[Bubba136]

Then again, Limbaugh's audience is a whole lot larger than yours. If you were as well known you'd be -- at the least-- another FLeeBaily or Ella Fitzgerald. Then, your laughability would be greater.

[Dr. Shoe]

George W., Tony Blair, Rush Limbaugh.

All human. All flawed beings. All elected by a majority to act upon the peoples' behalf regardless of their personal feelings . . .

I must admit I did laugh when Rush had his fall.

Majority?

How many times were the Florida returns counted?

The last general election had the lowest turnout in the history of British democracy. Only 23% of the British electorate voted Labour but because overall turnout was only 40% Labour had a landslide. Nationwide, the conservatives actually polled more individual votes than Labour but because these were restricted to Tory strongholds they did nothing to bring about a change in government- thanks to our outmoded "first past the post" electoral system. moreover, if the unions hadn't put there block votes behind labour, we would be have William Hague as Prime minister or at least a coalition.

[Anita C.]

The majority as comprised of the folks who beileved that voting is still important.

If you didn't vote you don't have the right to whine. You didn't earn it.

Yeah-Yeah-Yeah . . . I've heard all the "woulda-coulda & shoulda's" about the last election.

If you voted and are unhappy-let's hear it! If you didn't vote for WHATEVER reason you haven't the right to say one damned thing.

VOTE! It MATTERS!

[hoverfly]

I know for one thing, like others I did not vote for Bushwacked. Another thing it's not the majority of people that determines the vote of the president it's the college electoral voting process. I my self is no expert but the simple way of understanding it is that each state determines who is the winner for each state. So it is the total number of states that determines who is the winner. Your vote does count, but not in a way where the majority will win all the time.

The majority as comprised of the folks who beileved that voting is still important.

If you didn't vote you don't have the right to whine. You didn't earn it.

Yeah-Yeah-Yeah . . . I've heard all the "woulda-coulda & shoulda's" about the last election.

If you voted and are unhappy-let's hear it! If you didn't vote for WHATEVER reason you haven't the right to say one damned thing.

VOTE! It MATTERS!

[coolshoes]

In brief, Gore had more votes from the people than did Bush, but Bush won the most electoral votes, which are not democratically awarded. In a democratic election, votes by the people, Gore won. Each state gets one vote for every Senator and every Representative, which means states with small populations have more votes than do the populous states in proportion to population. When was Rush elected to anything? I guess I missed that vote. His listeners are certainly not a majority of citizens of the U.S.

[coolshoes]

Ooops, forgot the actual topic of spin. The greatest change in American politics in the last few decades is the spin--especially, the naming of acts like the Patriot Act or No Child Left Behind. It's unpatriotic to resist the diminution of individual rights, and surely some children will be left behind no matter the legislation. Then there is corporate America--a huge problem is an opportunity is my favorite.

[Anita C.]

F. Lee Bailey or Ella . . . I'd prefer Ella. True, I am nowhere near their popularity, I am nonetheless quite happy with my level of local celebrity. I also know that the higher one rises - the harder one can fall - thus I avoid doing stupid things-like having my houskeeper procure controlled substances at my behest. I am proud of and thankful for my accomplishments and accept full responsibility for my shortcomings/bad decissions. I try not to judge because I do not like being judged. Ciao!

[Dr. Shoe]

The majority as comprised of the folks who beileved that voting is still important.

If you didn't vote you don't have the right to whine. You didn't earn it.

Yeah-Yeah-Yeah . . . I've heard all the "woulda-coulda & shoulda's" about the last election.

If you voted and are unhappy-let's hear it! If you didn't vote for WHATEVER reason you haven't the right to say one damned thing.

VOTE! It MATTERS!

Actually, I was teasing using official statistics (see the thread on statistics).

For the record though, I did vote, I always do even in the local elections and I have certain political aspirations myself (And tthey do not include any service to the Labour Party).

There is probably truth in the idea that if the 60% or so who didn't vote had done then the result would probably have been the same.

[xaphod]

Personally, I would have voted if the form had a place for the vote

'none of these lying cheating conniving b****ds'

Having done some canvassing for a political party in my time, I noted the number of people who said something along the lines 'I can't be bothered because, no matter who is in power, the public still get screwed'.

The last general election turnout in the UK was 59%, the lowest since WW1, indicating increasing apathy for politics (and politicians presumably).

It is to be noted that the turnout for the elections to the European Parliament in the UK was something like 25%.

Xa

[Bubba136]

Anetia C wrote:

I try not to judge because I do not like being judged.

I guess I must really learn to read because I thought, from what you'd wirtten, that's exactly what you were doing. Do you try all your cases by news reports, Anita? I try not to jump to conclusions on any controversial issue appearing in the news or take any single news report at face value -- and I'm not even a lawyer.

And, as a result of being "cautious," there is always more about the story than what is initially reported. As a "lawyer." I'm surprised you are prone to repeating "stories" that are -- at this point -- "hearsay," to say the least.

[genebujold]

That, perhaps, is the main reason that I am self employed.

It certainly does have its advantages! Although it was slim pickin's for a while getting started, and the last three years haven't been as exciting as I'd like...

[xaphod]

Here's another one from an insurance and 'financial advice' company which, for illustration, I will call Fred.co

Information you provide may be shared amongst Fred.co, Fred.co personal finance, and Fred.co Direct, to enhance their understanding of your total relationship with them.

..... in other words, they are likely to bombard you with all sorts of unwanted advertising crap, based on how much spare money their software thinks you have to spend.

Xa

[Bubba136]

gene wrote:

It certainly does have its advantages! Although it was slim pickin's for a while getting started, and the last three years haven't been as exciting as I'd like...

My experience was exactly the opposite. I move "south" from the Baltamore without the slightest idea of what kind of work I would find to do. However, through becoming involved in community affairs, I managed to fall into a nitch that has developed into a "more than I ever wanted" business --

[xaphod]

....War..............Pentagon-speak....................English

Vietnam..............Body bag..............................Body bag

Gulf 1991........Human remains pouch...........Body bag

Iraq..................Transfer tube.........................Coffin

Xa

[Bubba136]

And, your point is?

[xaphod]

I thought it's fairly self-evident ................ or should I call a spade a detritus manipulation implement. Xa

[Bubba136]

It's all a game anyway! Make up new words so no one knows what they're saying or doing.

[azraelle]

Sunday, April 18, 2004

Enough to make you sick

By Phil Lucas

Executive Editor

The stories we tell define the nation. Stories poorly told can destroy it.

It works the same with children. If you tell 10 stories a day to a lovely child and nine of them say she is weak, ugly and stupid, she will come to believe it. She may be pregnant by 15, a meth addict by 17, join a cult by 19, then elope with the family cat to get married in Massachusetts.

So it goes with the country. Consider our national storytellers: the media.

Ten days ago, American and coalition forces engaged Iraqi “insurgents,” as the national press politely calls them. Sane Americans know them as the enemy, gunmen of an Islamic religious leader. An American brigadier general gave a televised briefing on the battle for several cities. As he explained the fight for Fallujah and how we had taken three bridges at Kut, suddenly across the bottom of the screen appeared a Fox News Alert: EXPLOSION HEARD IN BAGHDAD!!!!!

Fox immediately switched to a camera shot of a Baghdad skyline. The voice of a reporter came on, urgently speculating about an explosion, perhaps caused by a car bomb or a mortar or an RPG (rocket propelled grenade, to the unwashed) or whatever else the reporter could think of. Then the camera zeroed in on a hole in some concrete, perhaps a parking lot or sidewalk. The hole appeared to be about the size of a wheelbarrow, the evident location of the EXPLOSION HEARD IN BAGHDAD!!!!!

They got an expert on the phone. The TV guys keep a herd of experts handy for just such an event. The reporter asked the expert what could have happened.

He said to her, and I paraphrase,“I’ll tell you what happened. This is a war of information. You were showing the general’s briefing, and they wanted you off it, so they set off a bomb in Baghdad.”

The reporter stammered, “Uh, oh . . .” and commenced to get the guy off the phone. He had more expertise than she expected.

A quick flick to CNN showed the same camera shot: a hole in concrete. On MSNBC: a hole in concrete.

No doubt the general continued his briefing, the subject of which was the most intense and costly fighting in a year.

A war of information. Of storytelling. Comically inept, you think? True. But this sort of reporting by the national press is not the exception. When the press reports about Iraq and virtually all other contested issues in the news, ineptitude is the rule. This is true of television and also of print reporting. We zero in on the worst thing that happens, time after time, day after day, the effect of which is to present the worst thing as the norm, even when it is only one-tenth of the whole story. For good measure, we throw in our personal opinions, arrogantly certain they are correct.

We have all noticed that the few stories we get from people who have served in or visited Iraq rarely match the sky-is-falling enthusiasm we get from our press.

Some call this biased reporting. I call it deceitful, or just plain lying.

Four weeks ago the Israelis killed Ahmed Yassin, the Islamic religious leader who founded Hamas, one of the purposes of which is to kill Israelis. Some news reports called him “revered spiritual leader.” Revered by whom? Israelis? Americans? Palestinians? Is there any doubt as to the reporters’ opinion?

Virtually all news reports said he was “assassinated,” which means murder, an illegal act. From the Israeli point of view, is it illegal to chop the head off a snake trying to strike you? Reporters could have written “executed,” a word loaded in the other direction, implying legality and favoring the Israelis. Or they could have just written “killed” and let readers and viewers decide what is right and what is wrong.

Here’s a line from an Associated Press story about the president’s press conference last week. “Bush sidestepped at least two opportunities to say he wanted to apologize or take personal responsibility.”

“Sidestepped?” “Opportunities?” Nobody sidesteps opportunities. You sidestep duck droppings on the sidewalk. Think this reporter has an opinion he wants to share? If he reveals this kind of blatant bias in any part of a news story, it casts a shadow over every word he writes.

USA Today wrote this: “Offered numerous chances to second-guess his approach to Iraq, he rejected them all.”

Nobody “rejects” any “chances” worth taking. It defies human nature. As for “second-guessing,” we don’t need to guess whose opinion that is. The reporters’ two names are in the byline. Assuming perhaps that their readers were too stupid to get it, the reporters used these words a few paragraphs down: “denied,” “argued” and “conceded.” All referred to Bush. These are words for the opinion pages, like the one you are on now, unless you draw no distinction between news and opinion, unless you believe your opinion is the news.

Press folly plumbs new depths when witnessed live, as in the televised press conference itself.

It was enough to raise old editors from the dead, their standards and self-discipline sorely missing from the modern newsroom. Others of us just squirmed with embarrassment, partly for the president, prone to trip over a syllable, but mostly for the profession. Reporter after reporter couched questions in the negative, assuming the worst was true, knowing the worst was true, looking for the kill. They used words like failure, defeat and mistake, time after time after time. That’s not reporting. That’s not seeking truth. That’s an agenda.

Smelling blood, the pack salivated for an apology from the president.

On this point I agree. An apology is in order.

So here it is.

I am sorry our storytellers have us by the neck. We are better than they picture us. We are better than they are.

As an editor, I apologize to Americans for the national disgrace of inept and self-indulgent journalists, who hound after the worst and ugliest to the exclusion of much else, who strut their opinions with conceit, and who spew it all forth upon the public and call it news.

[Dr. Shoe]

At last someone in the media talking sense and not just following the line of political leaders. The Israelis killed Ahmed Yassin. It is as simple as that, he was the leader of a group that would consider the assassination of any senior Israeli government minister a major triumph. If an American helicopter gunship had killed Osama Bin Liner, would that have been an "assassination" or a "murder" or an "execution". No doubt there would be major celebration on Capitol Hill the same as there probably was in the Knesset after Yassin was chopped. What would have happened if the Israelis had got Bin Laden instead? International comdemnation? I doubt it! They were both sponsors and protagonists of international terrorism and "on the same team" as it were! So why were the Israelis condemned for that when the "Coalition Forces" are conducting a similar campaign against the Fanatic Muslims in Fallujah and Najaf (Sp?) and considered to be the good guys? I'll tell you why, the media and fashion. It is no longer fashionable to say that the Israelis are pro-western and the only voice of order in the Middle East (apart from Egypt), instead it is now fashionable to say that the poor Palestinians have been down-trodden by the evil aggressive Jews who steal their land for settlements. What the consumers of this force fed empty-callory diet of pro-Islamic propaganda don't realise or don't even know or care is the fact that time and time again the Palestinians have been given every chance to govern themselves, but time and time again they have wanted more than the Israelis could ever give, more than their original demands.

[xaphod]

Anglian Water told us that they believed that the issues surrounding the disposal of sewage sludge to land "are as much about public perception as they are about scientific opinion".[337] Investigations they had commissioned showed "recycling to land is the best practicable environmental option" and they called upon the Government to help them promote the advantages to potential users and interest groups.[338] Public acceptance is not helped, they said, by using terms such as "sewage sludge" which have negative connotations of smell and dirt; using the technical term "biosolids" would go some way to allay public anxiety.

..... so I wonder what the politically correct word for 'horseshit' is ?

Xa

PS ....

The above was found during my searches for info regarding sewage disposal at the proposed Xaphod Mk4 residence. OK, you lot, if we have a heely weekend here, you can't create more than 2 m^3 of sewage per day, or the Environment Agency will take your heels away.