Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rodney]

The problem with not allowing scientists to speak freely about their findings is that it means others who are not scientists familiar with the limitations of the science or who have a personal agenda to pursue are left to interpret the significance of the findings to the media and the public. Harper and company don't seem to understand this. People drawing a link to fish farms was inevitable. I thought the Tyee did a nice balanced article:
 
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/06/30/SockeyeVirus/

lol... That didn't really answer my question. I'm not so interested in politics and theories that mainstream media like to stir up, so won't bother expending much time to comment on that. Anyway, guppy on flybc spent the time and wrote up most of what I would want to say.

http://forum.flybc.ca/index.php?s=&showtopic=32295&view=findpost&p=37730

It takes some skill to turn Miller's response "Unfortunately, I am not given permission to speak with anyone affiliated with the media until after I testify at the Cohen Commission." to a cover-up. That's probably why I'm not fit to be a journalist.

[StillAqua]

If my memory serves me correctly, wasn't it the PMO's office that voluntarily called the Cohen commission inquiry?  And now you are theorizing that he is trying to scuttle the inquiry by "censoring the media"?   

Justice Cohen can call and compel any witness he wants, so I don't follow how denying public servants from talking to the media or controlling media access to information would "scuttle" the inquiry?
Personally, I wait for the testimony transcripts to come out before taking what the media or others report too seriously.

[StillAqua]

lol... That didn't really answer my question. I'm not so interested in politics and theories that mainstream media like to stir up, so won't bother expending much time to comment on that. Anyway, guppy on flybc spent the time and wrote up most of what I would want to say.

http://forum.flybc.ca/index.php?s=&showtopic=32295&view=findpost&p=37730

It takes some skill to turn Miller's response "Unfortunately, I am not given permission to speak with anyone affiliated with the media until after I testify at the Cohen Commission." to a cover-up. That's probably why I'm not fit to be a journalist.

My too subtle tongue-in-cheek point I guess, was that in an information vacuum, speculation and conspiracy theories spontaneously generate.

If Dr Miller had talked to the media, she might have tempered the media and bloggers speculations and links of what is really a very preliminary study.

[troutbreath]

You just have to sit back and watch all the fish die before you start making assumptions. Scientific or not. Why get everyone upset with some crasy media hype. Chicken little stuff really. Don't bother putting it out there so maybe someone else who might have a peace of the puzzlle, can see what other people are looking at. I work for the government and the mushroom style is prevalent there. keep em in the dark and feed the sh1t.

[Dave]

Anyway, guppy on flybc spent the time and wrote up most of what I would want to say.
http://forum.flybc.ca/index.php?s=&showtopic=32295&view=findpost&p=37730

Guppy knows his stuff.  All forums are fortunate that his Pacific supervisors are allowing and perhaps even encouraging his comments.  Hope Ottawa isn't reading this

[troutbreath]

He's not saying anything that's going to toast his rear end. At any rate as long as you can back up what your saying with some unbiased fact even government muzzle restraint can't get you fired. Only blacklisted. Speaking personally of course. Let them eat cucumber sandwiches.

[Sandman]

If my memory serves me correctly, wasn't it the PMO's office that voluntarily called the Cohen commission inquiry?  And now you are theorizing that he is trying to scuttle the inquiry by "censoring the media"?   

Yes.

[skaha]

He's not saying anything that's going to toast his rear end. At any rate as long as you can back up what your saying with some unbiased fact even government muzzle restraint can't get you fired. Only blacklisted. Speaking personally of course. Let them eat cucumber sandwiches.

--insubordination... is one of the things you can get disciplined for and with a few strikes get fired for.
--thus if you are told not to speak directly with reporters and you do you will be charged with insubordination.

--the order is usually much more sleazy... you will be told you can talk to reporters only if the questions and answers are pre-approved by your supervisor or that you can speak to reporters if given sufficient notice (unless writing a book no reporter wants to wait 30 days for an answer) .. thus they can claim that you are free to speak with reporters when in fact you are not.
--this then puts the pressure on the person rather than the or department as reporters then claim that you are not being cooperative or that you are being evasive, as your supervisor or department will claim when asked that you are allowed to talk to reporters, but they will neglect to indicate the conditions imposed upon you.

[StillAqua]

--the order is usually much more sleazy... you will be told you can talk to reporters only if the questions and answers are pre-approved by your supervisor or that you can speak to reporters if given sufficient notice (unless writing a book no reporter wants to wait 30 days for an answer) .. thus they can claim that you are free to speak with reporters when in fact you are not.
--this then puts the pressure on the person rather than the or department as reporters then claim that you are not being cooperative or that you are being evasive, as your supervisor or department will claim when asked that you are allowed to talk to reporters, but they will neglect to indicate the conditions imposed upon you.

Bang on Skaha...that's the way it was when I worked for the Feds 15 years ago and it hasn't changed according to my friends still with the government. There are lots of examples on dedicated people being fired, sidelined or pushed out for pointing out problems with government policies.