Scout, you wrote: "go for the lies by all means Graham." This prompts me to misquote Minsc: "Go for the lies, Boo, go for the lies!"

(I hope that there's someone on the board who connects with this! Just trying to inject a lighter note.)

Hi Graham

You seem to be very thin-skinned, for one who wrote with such certainty about your own position.

I am disappointed with the way you dimissed David L - not going to waste time... That does not become you as Chief
Editor of a professedly even-handed OLO.

And what is you evidence for saying that the Japanese were the truthful party? Without that evidence it could be seen as spin on your part. That would be a shame.

Cheers

Chek

Two issues here - Spin and whaling. Conservatives banned whaling in Australian water years ago. We have an unrecognised claim on Antarctic water. Whaling is banned in waters that are indisputably ours. Does the IPA has a problem with this?

With regard spin, the Australia Institutes Sept 2005 newsletter carries a most interesting article - http://www.tai.org.au/ (side bar, “news letters”)

"Activists: How to beat them at their own game”

“This was the title of a half-day workshop sponsored by the Institute of Public Affairs and the Public Relations Institute of Australia held in Melbourne in April. Leading the workshop was Canadian PR consultant Ross Irvine, well known for his hostility to community groups and NGOs. Katherine Wilson went along to hear what he had to say.”

Some quotes -:

“Public Relations is war”, announces Irvine. He seems to suggest that the words ‘activist’ ‘terrorist’, ‘criminal’,‘guerilla’ and ‘security threat’ can be used interchangeably.

“My (the author’s) group is charged with ‘empowering others’ to support our cause. Our cause is the Port of Melbourne channel deepening.

(David) “Hawkins (supplier to Vic Gov, PR and other services, co-organiser of the event and supremo of the PRIA’s Vic Division – my insertion) suggests marginalising the environmental argument. This could be done with what Bush flacks call ‘the fire hose method’ — bombarding the media with issues, information and press conferences so they don’t have the resources to interview alternative sources.”

“To my (the author’s)suggestion that the case for channel-deepening should be the voice of reason, Hawkins says, “No, no, let’s be the voice of unreason. Let’s call them fruitcakes. Let’s call them nut—nutters.”

You know, let’s say they’re…” “Environmental radicals”, suggests the Darebin PR.

“Exactly. You know… say they represent 0.1 per cent but they dominate, you know, let’s absolutely go for them.”

An old saying - “be careful what you wish for.” Irvine and Hawker should be thanked for the heads up. Hypothetically, if I’m to be a personal target, at what point should my strategic deliberation contemplate making the issues manager the issue in Irvine’s war?

JK.

Faustino

Are you suggesting that Graham is a hamster? ;-)

Back to thread -

1. If Greenpeace lied - bad but not as bad as SIEV X

2. We know for sure Japan has lied - "scientific purposes"

3. Media should report accurately - no s**t - when?

4. Use of possibly biased information - Marohasy - has yet to write open unbiased articles eg, Genetic Engineering - totally in favour of multinational control; hardly presents balanced view. Would prefer "proof" of Greenpeace transgression from other source.

5. Recent whoppers more have greater impact on our well-being - James Hardy for example.

And finally a little weblink to Crikey

>>Should John Howard sue for defamation over an anonymous website devoted to calling him a liar? Web publisher Graham Young thinks so. See how the debate unfolded in the Crikey subscriber only emails here:

http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2004/07/02-0003.html

Scout

Hi Scout,

Thank you for your last post.

It might have shed some light on why my second and third submissions to OLO got rejected, especially when my first one, on Corby, got 150 comments. The rejected ones were both critical of John Howard's leadership - triggered by current events. The last one was the state memorial service he offered for the tax avoider Packer.

By the way I could not open the links to the Crikey website.

cheers.

Chek

David, sorry mate but must disagree on the support issue. Either I missed something there or you relinquished your own position.
What do you think that 'subsidise' means exactly? Any way you wish to examine it, the word 'support'would feature in its explanation.