Showing posts with label spin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spin. Show all posts

21 December 2016

Spin, illustrated #nlpoli

Spin is a bit more than a mere biased interpretation or a clever reframing of an idea.  In other words, there's more to it than saying the glass is half full rather than describing it as half empty.

Spin is deliberately deceptive.

On Wednesday,  the folks at Nalcor announced they had a new contract with Astaldi valued at more than $1.8 billion.  Nalcor boss Stan Marshall told reporters and they all dutifully repeated the comment that the new contract would add "$270 million" more to the $11.4 billion estimated cost of Muskrat
Falls.

The original contract with Astaldi had a value of  CDN$1.0 billion.  Astaldi actually booked the contract at about CDN$1.24 billion.  That was 2014. In its online account of the latest twist in the tale, CBC actually inflates the announced price of the original contract to the number Astaldi claimed in 2014.  Make no mistake:  Nalcor pegged the cost of the contract at $1.0 billion. Period.

By late 2016,  after Nalcor disclosed that the company had completely screwed up the contract, Nalcor folks started to describe the original value of the contract as $1.1 billion and allowed that a "bridging agreement" meant Astaldi could earn up to another $150 million by meeting performance milestones on construction of the powerhouse.

So now we have a new contract that increases the original contract by $830 million,  not the $270 figure Nalcor used to describe the increase in their most recent estimated cost of the whole project.

Why against $11.4 billion,  $270 million sounds like nothing at all and it is precisely that deceptive comparison  - dutifully repeated by every reporter on Wednesday  - that Nalcor is relying on to mask the real magnitude of Nalcor's shag-up with the Astaldi contract. In truth,  the new Astaldi contract is responsible for an 83% cost overrun on the contract price of the powerhouse and we are not done yet.

The original estimated cost of the dam and line to Newfoundland was supposed to be $5.0 billion.  We are now more than double that figure and well on the way to tripling it.

-srbp-

20 September 2011

Ceeb spins story for Tories #nlpoli

Rather than correct a mistaken early report on the cost of the Liberal party’s pension proposal the CBC online decided to torque the story against the Liberals.

In a story on the Liberal election pledge to give retired public servants a 2.5% increase followed by 2.0% per year, the CBC included a claim from the province’s finance department:

Meanwhile, the Department of Finance told CBC News that the Liberals' plan would add $1.2 billion in additional liabilities to the pension plan.

That’s not accurate and the CBC didn’t explain what the finance officials meant.

The follow-on CBC story looked like this.

dundertorque

After a couple of paragraphs of Tory talking points, the Ceeb story didn’t deliver any facts to back up Dunderdale’s claim or explain the finance department’s assessment.

Instead, CBC included more detail on Aylward’s announcement.

And right at the end – where news stories stick the least important information – you get the Liberal’s accounting of costs.

Aylward said increasing payments to a long-neglected group will cost more than $13 million in the first year, and about $10 million extra for each additional year.

Even those readers who trudged on to the end would have already been told repeatedly that this promise is foolhardy and expensive.

And the combined effect of both stories sets readers up to be skeptical of the Liberal explanation before they even got to it.

- srbp -

12 October 2010

Air Canada, the Maple Leafs and sucking

Air Canada sucks.

The Toronto Maple Leafs also suck.

Both suck for the same, basic reason.

They have fanatics who will suffer any indignity, pay any price, endure any privation and bear any humiliation to support them.

One could find evidence of this on the morning after Thanksgiving at St. John’s International Airport. A line up of Air Canada fans  - most of whom had used the online or kiosk check-in system – stood silently in a queue for upwards of an hour in order to check their bags for one of four flights leaving Capital City at ungodly hours bound for destinations on the mainland.

This is proof - in an instant -  of both the stunnedness of the economist's “Rational Actor” model of economic behaviour and proof that the markets work. You see, Air Canada continues to suck because people continue to fly with them despite the inconvenience, cost, indignity, humiliation, privation and apparent indifference of the airline to its customers. 

The airline bosses know the cattle will still line up.

No matter what.

So where is the incentive to change?

Ditto the Maple Leafs. 

Compare the Leafs to the Canadiens.  If the Habs lose three games in a row, the stands look like a Quebec provincial Conservative Party conference.  The team then has to change or face some pretty serious financial consequences.  Bums in seats pay the bills.  Empty seats cause problems.

Politics is a bit like that as well.  In Ottawa, where the three mainstream parties each continue to suck in their own unique way, the voters have rewarded their collective  - and continuing - suckiness with a political pox on all the houses. The parties are each struggling to find the magic solution that will put more votes in their column.  Votes are the key to electoral success and when voters are stingy with their love, the parties have to come courting.

Meanwhile in St. John’s voters prove that politics within the province is pretty much down to perceived popularity.

Tim Powers proves the point in spades the day after Thanksgiving with a little homage to the fellow who created the state-owned energy company that Tim’s been know to lobby for in Ottawa.

Danny Williams is amazing, as we are supposed to believe, because he has decided, in all his magnificence, not to kick the living political shit out of a woman who – as we speak – is battling breast cancer.  “Doses of humanity can pay real political dividends…”.

That’s the sort of sentence that should make the blood run cold. Few politicians could be quite so brazen as to make political hay out of someone else’s personal tragedy.  Fewer still could make such a point so crassly by putting the political ahead of the human:  the rest of that sentence reads “never mind that it [ – humanity – ] is the right thing to do.”

Never mind, indeed.

Tim, it seems, is made of sterner stuff than the rest of us. Either that or he is waging a campaign to have politicos replace lawyers in the old joke about barristers and lab rats.

Powers does note, rightly, that Yvonne Jones wished the Premier well when the Old Man scurried off last winter to get his heart fixed up by an American surgeon.  Tim  does not mention, though, that no one wrote a column or a blog on how wonderful Yvonne was for not kicking Danny in the balls. 

And that’s really the difference in the two situations and the difference between Danny Williams and his Reform-based Conservative Party and all other parties.

Tim likes Danny Williams and his Reform-based Conservative Party just as he likes the Ottawa version of the Reform-based Conservative Party.  Both are characterised by an over-weaning emphasis on central control and secrecy.

Unlike Danny Williams, Stephen Harper lacks a gang of ruthless fans who will go anywhere and say anything to perpetuate the illusion surrounding their guy.  From Open Line shows to Policy Options to the Globe – the Newfoundland nationalist’s newspaper of record – they are there to keep the myth alive. When it comes to polishing their own guy’s knob or pettiness and viciousness in attacking enemies, Stephen Harper and any of his communications directors are toddlers compared to Williams and his fanboys. 

Air Canada, the Maple Leafs and Danny Williams are successful business ventures, each in different fields.

The reasons for their success are not necessarily what is advertised.

- srbp -

08 August 2010

Telly Torques Tourism: one story, two headlines

Submitted for your approval:  the same story with two headlines. 

“Northern peninsula needs to spark interest: group” as the Telegram put it.

Ho hum.

But what about ‘Tourism association looking for ways to battle drop in visitors” as you find it in Western Star?

This is a good an example as one will find of an editor sticking a headline on a story that doesn’t match the story underneath. Sometimes it is the result of unadulterated stunnedness.  Sometimes, it is deliberate.

The telegram headline makes it sound like the Viking Trail Association just needs to pull up its socks and do better.  But the actual story includes this comment from Barbara Genge of the Viking Trail Tourism Association:

The Northern Peninsula falls under the umbrella of the Western Destination Marketing Organization, which is a setup Genge says has expectedly seen a drop in marketing funds specifically to the region. Since they are one piece of the whole western region, she says they are competing with other areas for what is available.

In order words, the Viking association is losing out to other more populous areas or ones led by people with more clout.  A UNESCO World Heritage site may be getting short-shrift.

The Telegram headline covers up a far more intriguing and complex tale. The Western Star – where the story originated – actually got it right.

And the story actually includes a balancing view from the umbrella tourism association.  Mike* Clewer, executive director of  WDMO told the Star:

“We have limited resources, both financially and in human terms, and we try and do the best we can, which is to work with groups like that who are trying to help themselves,” Clewer said.

But none of this is as devoid of flavour as the Telegram would have you believe.  It’s almost like they were trying to make you skip over it.

- srbp -

* Mike, not Mark.

30 July 2010

Sins of omission

“Five key bridges in the western portion of the T’Railway Provincial Park that closed in 2008 are now re-opened to park users. … [The five bridges are being ] replaced as a result of a $3.6 million allocation in Budget 2010: The Right Investments – For Our Children and Our Future.”

That’s part of the first paragraph of a happy-news release from the province’s environment.  It’s one of dozens issued every week in July as part of the happy-news offensive mounted by the provincial government in the run up to August’s scheduled polling by the provincial government pollster.

The release leaves out much relevant detail.

Not surprisingly, that detail is embarrassing to the provincial government and especially to the ever-embarrassing minister, Charlene Johnson.

For starters, the bridges in questions were all former railway bridges inherited by the provincial government in 1988 when the railway closed.  The provincial government took responsibility for the bridges but until 2008 – apparently  - did nothing with them.

No maintenance.

No repairs.

No inspections either, apparently.

At all.

That is until the federal government inspected a few that crossed over federally-monitored waterways.  They found a raft of them in what appeared to be perilous states of disrepair. 

In one case, one of the bridges had vanished entirely.  When inspectors showed up to take a lookee-look, they couldn’t find anything except the footings on either shore.

So basically this splendiferous investment of more than three and a half millions could have been avoided or at least spread out over time if someone – anyone – at any point along the way had decided to do some regular maintenance on the bridges.

Or even taken a peek at them once in a while.

Even an auditor general’s report in 2003 on inadequate inspection of road bridges seems to have prompted any action on the former railway bridges, the ones now used by pedestrians, snowmobilers and ATV operators.

None of this, by the by, stopped Johnson from claiming that her department prized public safety. As your humble e-scribbler noted at the time:

We understand the inconvenience of the closure of these structures; however, public safety has to be our number one priority," said Minister Johnson.

But...

Environment Minister Charlene Johnson said today the province does not conduct routine safety assessments of structures on the T’Railway, which is a provincial park.

There’s no regular inspections, no,” Johnson said in response to questions from reporters.

That sort of bumbling is why some people find it odd that Charlene has adopted a tone of haughty arrogance when dealing with issues like the Abitibi expropriation fiasco or offshore oil.

That sort of bumbling is also likely why Charlene’s publicists decided to torque this release without any reference  whatsoever - an omission in other words - to the mess that started it all.

But all of it doesn’t explain the real sin of omission here:  namely the explanation of why the Premier keeps this minister in a job for which she is clearly unqualified and at which she has clearly been a disaster of BP proportions.

- srbp -

24 July 2010

Inaccurately accurate university enrolment trends

This past week, CBC Radio’s Morning Show interviewed Reeta Tremblay, Memorial University vice president (academic) about a Statistics Canada report on university enrolment for the period 2005-06 to 2008-09.

They did the interview – as host Jeff Gilhooley said in the introduction – based on CBC’s belief that enrolment was  going up.

Now where they got that idea is a mystery since the Statistics Canada figures – taken directly from enrolment figures at the province’s only university – have shown the trending consistently in every annual report they’ve delivered for the past three or four years. The trend is unmistakeable:  enrolment at Memorial University declined in the period.

In fact, the trending was so clear and undeniable that some of us wondered how the two foreign experts who delivered the report on Grenfell autonomy could have possible come up with their bullshit ideas about increasing enrolment when the trends (and the potential student population) were headed downward).

Turns out, those of us who questioned their report were right since even the Old Man himself had to abandon his 2007 election commitment in light of the facts.

But that’s another story.

The crowd at CBC must have been a bit surprised that Reeta Tremblay didn’t actually dispute the Statistics Canada numbers.  The CBC web story has a lede saying Tremblay contradicted Statistics Canada but the fact is she didn’t.  Tremblay just said that the more recent figure for 2009/10 would show a small increase in enrolment.

What Tremblay did do, though, is give credit to aggressive recruiting both at the graduate and undergraduate level for the change in direction. Where to begin untangling that foolishness?

Well, firstly, Tremblay might want to credit the recession with the uptick.  Once the rest of us see the full set of numbers, it might confirm a usual trend, namely that some people who get laid off go back to school. If there is an uptick in Memorial’s enrolment, the recession might have helped a wee bit.

Secondly, and more importantly, that increase in graduate enrolment actually is a mess in and of itself, as Reeta well knows.

Bond Papers readers will recall the sorry tale last March of grad studies dean Noreen Golfman trying desperately to paint lipstick on the pig of a problem she has with fellowships for her academic charges.

Beginning in the fall of 2010 – a period neither Reeta nor the crowd at Stats Can yet has figures for – new grad students won’t be getting any financial help from the university in the form of fellowships valued at $12,000 to $15,000.

The won’t be getting the cash because the senior administration at the university  - including coughreetacough – were forced to freeze the budget on financial assistance to masters and doctoral students in order to cope with a $2.0 million shortfall in the budget for that financial aid.

The budget is short because someone or some group of someones allowed grad school enrolment to balloon by 60% in a single year.  Interestingly that balloon came in the year Reeta cited as one that shows the university enrolment is up. 

But anyway, as your humble e-scribbler put it in March,

Freezing spending is not, as Golfman claimed, “sending the right signal about being fiscally responsible.” Rather it sends a signal that someone or some group of someones was so utterly incompetent that they let the situation develop in the first place. The university administration had to freeze the thing in place or face catastrophe.

Now this isn’t a big issue because you read it here.  It’s a big issue.  It’s such a big issue that…well… let’s let the head of the university professors association tell you, as he told people back in March:

"It means that it will be very difficult to attract graduate students to the university this coming year because when you're a graduate student you apply to different universities and see who is going to offer you the best package," [faculty association president Ross] Klein says. "It affects the stature of the university because the graduate programs are one of the things that raise the stature."

So while the issue about enrolment trends at the province’s only university may show an uptick in 2009/10, we do know that one of the causes for that increase produced a corresponding freeze in financial support for graduate students.

That is a much bigger story than the one CBC had.

And, in case, you missed it, the deeper story is a tale of managerial incompetence, not the rosy yarn of super-effective recruiting that the academic vice-president offered up to Jeff Gilhooley one morning last week.

- srbp -

20 August 2008

"counter-spinning negativity"

Now, by any logical process, in order for there to be counter-spin, there has to be spin first.

This is not a chicken and egg thing;  very simply put, nothing can be counteracted unless it exists.

And you will likely recall that spin is another word for hype, bullshit and lies.

So if we take this phrase  - uttered by the Premier back in April - based on the meaning of the words, counter-spin would be a positive action in that it is intended to dispel hype, bullshit, lies, half-truths and other forms of misrepresentation and even outright deception contained in whatever spin existed in the first place.

Yet the positive action of dispelling falsehood is somehow negative?

What an odd notion.

And what a truly queer idea:  that a government so overwhelmingly popular might be somehow deflected from its mighty accomplishments by concerns for what must surely be  - given the almighty popularity of the government  - entirely without any impact at all.

-srbp-

01 February 2008

Gov Comm 101: How to manage crisis spin

1. Write a news release which deliberately buries the real news so far down the page that reporters are likely to miss it.

2. Omit key information from the news release, like the fact that the information in a security breach was exposed to the Internet from December 30 until at least January 22.

3. Hold a newser to discuss the security breach later on the same day when the Auditor General releases a scathing report into government operations. (Since you have the AG report months in advance in order to prepare replies and since you know in advance the day, time and place the thing will be released, then deliberately scheduling the newser you want to bury is very easy. Experience tells you that newsrooms will be so consumed with the AG report they won't have the resources - people or time - to dig through your presentation for the news you buried.)

4. Send the number two person in the Communications and Consultation branch to supervise the execution of the spin plan. (That's a clue as to how much concern there is in government about ensuring the story is highly torqued.)

-srbp-