Denialism on the Radio
BBC Radio 4's You and Yours had a feature on 'denialism', the methods used by industry to head off the danger of consumer protection legislation. The academic and former lobbyist Chris Hoofnagle explained that companies used a 'predictable set of tactics' when faced with increased regulation by law. He uses a pack of cards to illustrate the point; the two of hearts is the 'bad apple' argument; abuses are not characteristic and so there is no need to regulate industry as a whole. The nine of hearts is 'muddy the waters', and so on.
The programme invited Patrick Barrow of the Public Relations Consultants on to discuss 'denialism'. He made frequent use of the two and nine of hearts. Interested readers can listen for themselves. I particularly liked the bit where he said that, unlike in the US, British consumers and media were too sophisticated to be taken in by PR trickery. If you believe that ...
Anyway, he gave one bad apple argument that ought to be challenged. On air he denied that the tobacco industry was representative of other businesses - 'I am not sure anyone would be using them as a model'.
Let's compare these two statements. the first is an internal document from Brown and Williamson, the tobacco company. It was written in 1969:
Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with a "body of fact" that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy. Within the business we recognize that a controversy exists. However, with the general public the consensus is that cigarettes are in some way harmful to health. If we are successful in establishing a controversy at the public level, then there is an opportunity to put across the real facts about smoking and health.
The second comes from the Republican strategist Fred Luntz. Speaking of global warming (or climate change, a term he prefers) Luntz noted that:
Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.
I think Mr Barrow underestimates the sophistication and historical awareness of his profession. Doubtless an innocent mistake.
The programme invited Patrick Barrow of the Public Relations Consultants on to discuss 'denialism'. He made frequent use of the two and nine of hearts. Interested readers can listen for themselves. I particularly liked the bit where he said that, unlike in the US, British consumers and media were too sophisticated to be taken in by PR trickery. If you believe that ...
Anyway, he gave one bad apple argument that ought to be challenged. On air he denied that the tobacco industry was representative of other businesses - 'I am not sure anyone would be using them as a model'.
Let's compare these two statements. the first is an internal document from Brown and Williamson, the tobacco company. It was written in 1969:
Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with a "body of fact" that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy. Within the business we recognize that a controversy exists. However, with the general public the consensus is that cigarettes are in some way harmful to health. If we are successful in establishing a controversy at the public level, then there is an opportunity to put across the real facts about smoking and health.
The second comes from the Republican strategist Fred Luntz. Speaking of global warming (or climate change, a term he prefers) Luntz noted that:
Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.
I think Mr Barrow underestimates the sophistication and historical awareness of his profession. Doubtless an innocent mistake.
posted by Dan Hind at 9:19 AM
2 Comments:
Nice coverage.
I was thinking along similar lines that their defense against the deck of cards was essentially along the lines of the deck of cards.
If your book is about the attack on reason and scientific fact you should keep in touch with us. We're interested in talking to authors about why people believe wacky stuff and generalized campaigns against science and discussing it on the blog.
As per the acknowledgment from my surrounding replica handbags uk maniacs, I surprisedly acquisition that even their position of Louis Vuitton Speedy diehard admirers cannot stop their heartful fizz apropos Speedy series’ curtailment of size. The appearance is so astonishing that I don’t anticipate any curl description is needed.
Post a Comment
<< Home