Transparent bias in IRC Lisbon guide

Moriarty

Has Dan Brown signed the book deal already?

Let me guess.. the hidden meanings lead you to the anti-christ this time too?

Rb

Moriarty wrote: »

Has Dan Brown signed the book deal already?

Let me guess.. the hidden meanings lead you to the anti-christ this time too?

D-

ei.sdraob

Oh dear god

the no side must be running out of muck to throw

so they are moving onto Da Vinci code conspiracies

ha!

SkepticOne

Compared with last years graphic, there's definitely a pro-lisbon message given off by the image. To see why, consider an image where, instead of hands we have a foot, and instead of the words being raised up, we have the foot pressing down on them. I think most people would agree that there would be bias there.

Is it a conspiracy? I don't think so. A design agency used to producing images that sell will have an in-built bias towards positive imagery and this is probably what is happening here.

The most I would say is that it is a bit sloppy on the part of the referendum commission. They should have gone with a more neutral image like last year.

I don't think it will influence the vote too much though. People are more sophisticated now than they used to be and can tell when they are being manipulated.

K-9

SkepticOne wrote: »

I don't think it will influence the vote too much though. People are more sophisticated now than they used to be and can tell when they are being manipulated.

Grand, do you think the same of COIR Posters?

assetmadman

Listen, the important thing to say about a thief who happens to be wearing the jersey of a team you support is that the person is a thief.

SkepticOne

K-9 wrote: »

Grand, do you think the same of COIR Posters?

I'm not sure COIR or their posters are particularly influential in the current debate.

ei.sdraob

SkepticOne wrote: »

I'm not sure COIR or their posters are particularly influential in the current debate.

everyone is talking about them NO?

meglome

SkepticOne wrote: »

I'm not sure COIR or their posters are particularly influential in the current debate.

If this was a 'typical' fringe organisation who were able to muster the amount of support based on the number of people that actually support them, fine. However Cóir seem to have access to large sums of money from somewhere and it's highly unlikely this is from their rank and file supporters. Certainly the rumour is this money is coming from outside the country. These Cóir posters are all over my area and are full of lies and misrepresentations, not to mention they were put up before they should have been. Given that I'm hearing those same lies repeated I'd have to disagree with you.

PopeBuckfastXVI

What's the legal situation with blatant lies on posters, out of curiosity? Can ASA do anything?

ei.sdraob

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

What's the legal situation with blatant lies on posters, out of curiosity? Can ASA do anything?

i dont know thats an interesting one

if you lie about a product in advertising you end up in deep hot boiling **** pan

if you lie about politics? i dont know

Stark

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

What's the legal situation with blatant lies on posters, out of curiosity? Can ASA do anything?

The ASAI? Nope. They can only do something if someone is advertising a product (I was told this after I complained about those RSA "men are killers" ads).

The BCC might be able to do something in cases where the lies are broadcast through radio and television, but I don't think there's anyone who can do anything about the bull**** on the posters.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Stark wrote: »

The ASAI? Nope. They can only do something if someone is advertising a product (I was told this after I complained about those RSA "men are killers" ads).

The BCC might be able to do something in cases where the lies are broadcast through radio and television, but I don't think there's anyone who can do anything about the bull**** on the posters.

Could a concerned citizen remove them and destroy them, legally, I wonder?

ei.sdraob

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Could a concerned citizen remove them and destroy them, legally, I wonder?

"accidentally" drive a JCB into a pole

meglome

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Could a concerned citizen remove them and destroy them, legally, I wonder?

I passed two guys putting up Yes posters yesterday evening and I wondered the same thing out loud to them

Captain Furball

oscarBravo wrote: »

Occam's razor tells me that this is the only sane explanation for what you've described here.

Are you aware people go to college to study this area for use in the real world?

Scofflaw

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Could a concerned citizen remove them and destroy them, legally, I wonder?

Only if they're forming some kind of obstruction (obscuring traffic lights, for example). Otherwise, I'm afraid not.

cordially,
Scofflaw

meglome

Scofflaw wrote: »

Only if they're forming some kind of obstruction (obscuring traffic lights, for example). Otherwise, I'm afraid not.

cordially,
Scofflaw

What if they're blocking my view of the truth?

Scofflaw

meglome wrote: »

What if they're blocking my view of the truth?

Change your point of view, I suppose.

cordially,
Scofflaw

assetmadman

[FONT=&quot]Nothing more eloquently expresses the fact that this country is in a state of drift than that the wretched IRC TV ads are being shown. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As to what’s going on right now behind the political and judicial scenes, I have no idea. I’m not a connected person. But it’s always worth remembering there are plenty of good people in Ireland.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]My first look at the TV ad was last night during the Vincent Brown Show on TV3. I thought I’d be able to view it on the IRC site, but it’s not available there. Anyway, I videoed it during this evening’s RTÉ news. So what’s it up to? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]First, you must recall the young man with the shirt that comes with its own light show at whose feet the rolled up plans lay. If you only look at the pdf version of the Extended Guide you mightn’t realise that page 15 is the centrefold of the actual booklet, the page at which it naturally opens. The TV ad is primarily directed at people who identify with this young man. So (but not expressing my attitudes):[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Clothes imagery leads you past a woman you can do better than, another you don’t want to look at, to a woman who holds rolled up plans against her body. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]One could give a more amusing description. Simple fact is it’s not funny.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

oscarBravo

Captain Furball wrote: »

Are you aware people go to college to study this area for use in the real world?

I'm aware people study techniques for influencing other people in specific directions, yes.

I'm not aware that such studies qualify them to give categorical and definitive interpretations of whether other people have employed such techniques, let alone the motivations of those people.

assetmadman

[FONT=&quot]Further to my post of last evening. (Considering the whole country’s gone mental ingeniously interpreting everything, many may have worked this out already.) Here’s what the plan was (is):[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]To target male students and swing them from No voters to Yes voters. The Extended Guides would have been delivered in large numbers to colleges around the country. I know from the college I work in that free newspapers tend to be left lying around everywhere, lecture theatres and communal areas. The Lisbon guide, however, as an official document, would have had a longer shelf-life, since cleaners wouldn’t have been so quick to throw them out. Hence male students would have been surrounded by these guides, and any left open would have been showing the centrefold image of the young man in the shirt next to the rolled up plans. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The research of the people behind this told them that for male students the theme that links both what they are worried about and what they consider when thinking longer term is ‘getting women pregnant’. In the TV ad the first woman we pause on, whom the ad is down on, is meant to evoke the idea of an unwanted pregnancy (‘bun in the oven’) – the No vote in Lisbon 1. The ad moves the male student on from this, magically through the office water cooler, to the woman, not a secretary, with the striking figure carrying the rolled up plans. She’s a woman the student might want to get pregnant in the future. So at another pause point, she holds the rolled up plans pointing at her womb. This wanted pregnancy can be kept open as a possibility by voting Yes in Lisbon 2.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

ei.sdraob

assetmadman wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]Further to my post of last evening. (Considering the whole country’s gone mental ingeniously interpreting everything, many may have worked this out already.) Here’s what the plan was (is):[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]To target male students and swing them from No voters to Yes voters. The Extended Guides would have been delivered in large numbers to colleges around the country. I know from the college I work in that free newspapers tend to be left lying around everywhere, lecture theatres and communal areas. The Lisbon guide, however, as an official document, would have had a longer shelf-life, since cleaners wouldn’t have been so quick to throw them out. Hence male students would have been surrounded by these guides, and any left open would have been showing the centrefold image of the young man in the shirt next to the rolled up plans. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The research of the people behind this told them that for male students the theme that links both what they are worried about and what they consider when thinking longer term is ‘getting women pregnant’. In the TV ad the first woman we pause on, whom the ad is down on, is meant to evoke the idea of an unwanted pregnancy (‘bun in the oven’) – the No vote in Lisbon 1. The ad moves the male student on from this, magically through the office water cooler, to the woman, not a secretary, with the striking figure carrying the rolled up plans. She’s a woman the student might want to get pregnant in the future. So at another pause point, she holds the rolled up plans pointing at her womb. This wanted pregnancy can be kept open as a possibility by voting Yes in Lisbon 2.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

oh dear god :eek:

SkepticOne

ei.sdraob wrote: »

everyone is talking about them [the COIR posters] NO?

Some people may be talking about them but I think they and their organisation have a fairly narrow appeal in today's Ireland.

PopeBuckfastXVI

assetmadman wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]Further to my post of last evening. (Considering the whole country’s gone mental ingeniously interpreting everything, many may have worked this out already.) Here’s what the plan was (is):[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]To target male students and swing them from No voters to Yes voters. The Extended Guides would have been delivered in large numbers to colleges around the country. I know from the college I work in that free newspapers tend to be left lying around everywhere, lecture theatres and communal areas. The Lisbon guide, however, as an official document, would have had a longer shelf-life, since cleaners wouldn’t have been so quick to throw them out. Hence male students would have been surrounded by these guides, and any left open would have been showing the centrefold image of the young man in the shirt next to the rolled up plans. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The research of the people behind this told them that for male students the theme that links both what they are worried about and what they consider when thinking longer term is ‘getting women pregnant’. In the TV ad the first woman we pause on, whom the ad is down on, is meant to evoke the idea of an unwanted pregnancy (‘bun in the oven’) – the No vote in Lisbon 1. The ad moves the male student on from this, magically through the office water cooler, to the woman, not a secretary, with the striking figure carrying the rolled up plans. She’s a woman the student might want to get pregnant in the future. So at another pause point, she holds the rolled up plans pointing at her womb. This wanted pregnancy can be kept open as a possibility by voting Yes in Lisbon 2.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

CT is thataway -> http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

PopeBuckfastXVI

SkepticOne wrote: »

Some people may be talking about them but I think they and their organisation have a fairly narrow appeal in today's Ireland.

Fully agree, and they would be roundly dismissed if people actually knew what their organisation was all about, but unfortunately they don't.

SkepticOne

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Fully agree, and they would be roundly dismissed if people actually knew what their organisation was all about, but unfortunately they don't.

By all means expose them for what they are. I don't think they have much influence in the Lisbon issue but they stand in the way of reasoned debate. This talk about removing COIR posters by some on this thread probably plays into their hands.

oscarBravo

SkepticOne wrote: »

I don't think they have much influence in the Lisbon issue but they stand in the way of reasoned debate.

...which is precisely their agenda. Building on the "if you don't know, vote no" fallacy, they aim to muddy the waters as much as possible, in the hope of a no vote by whatever means necessary.

It's sneaky, devious, and dishonest, and utterly - utterly - counter to what the spirit of democracy should be.

K-9

SkepticOne wrote: »

Some people may be talking about them but I think they and their organisation have a fairly narrow appeal in today's Ireland.

Most People don't know who they are. The amount of times I've heard people use the minimum wage of €1.83 line, or post it!

It plays on immigration and recession fears with jobs being lost everywhere and wages/hours being cut. The posters aren't aimed at Catholic fundamentalists.

Spiritoftheseventies

Scofflaw wrote: »

They would probably agree that the hands were meant to inspire confidence, but might not agree that they were to inspire confidence in the Lisbon Treaty as opposed to the Referendum Commission. It's the latter conclusion that is tendentious.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Just let me get this straight. The irish public most of whom are probably too lazy to read treaty in some peoples opinions are going to read some transparent message in booklet instead?