Post note: this is the blog site of the "Jo Nova" Monckton mentions in the GetUp video.
Hi John,p.s. you might search up on how the Gunns timber mills of old growth forest in Tasmania were eventually defeated by public focus on the banks who were funding them. e.g. http://tapvision.info/node/261
Nice to hear you are still at the front line, just across the pond, so to speak.
"Reputation Management" and "enter their space" sounds very S5'ish.
I think the old saying goes "There are none so blind as those that use their will not to see" -- or words to that effect.
The ancient Greeks spent 10 years and a lot of energy trying to break the walls of Troy.
The trick seems to be to embed the message within an object of their own desire (emotive values).
But how that translates into the modern era?
I'm no longer in that working environment (well, I was only ever in the government end of it).
From my experience 'risk' is the only universal language for these domains: risk to profit; access (license to operate); life/safety; reputation (stakeholder); etc... Risk and opportunity being the two operative key words.
It surely comes under corporate social responsibility (reputation mgt) but I have no secret passwords I'm afraid.
I was once told by an old insider (now since passed on) with many years in the mining industry that at the core they are totally ruthless with only a single bottom-line: $$$
They are driven by the shareholders in NY and London etc.
If you are taking on 7,000 in one space then you'll need Divine intervention imo.
But if you are just after the journalist corps then I guess the smell of a good story might be the honey. But then again, my comments on propaganda apply -- are their eyes on a balanced story (S5'ish) or the advertising revenue that surrounds it on the page?
Odysseus would probably set up a table with a sign something like: "Is this type of Community Response a Risk to Your Bottom-line?" But of course, that is strategy, and depending on your intent, the message would probably fall on stony ground.
Unfortunately the other 'golden rule' applies -- those with the gold rule!
However, this group have made some progress recently. http://www.noongar.org.au/
They seem to have settled a claim for $1b -- although the devil is in the detail I'm sure.http://www.smh.com.au/wa-news/1bn-native-title-deal-to-settle-perth-claims-20120204-1qymo.html
Barnett (current Premier) is a strange one -- conservative and the one who oversaw as a previous Minister the destruction of thousands of Burrup rock art that dates back to 20-30,000 .... makes good road base it seems! Still, it shows how risk of future uncertainty can impact current actions (sounds like the S4-S3 dynamic).
btw: saw your comment on Max-Neef ... I read his old stuff on human scale etc but not the one you mention. I'll look out for it.
Not sure where it is today but this is a recent item -- http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2012/01/31/296761_tasmania-news.html
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 6:25 PM, John G I Clarke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Your alert is hugely ironic.
I am in Cape Town at present wearing my journalist hat to cover the African Mining "Indaba" which is an annual gathering of the mining industry. The event managers "Vuma Reputation Management" are most pleased with a record enrollment of 7000. But there is an alternative mining indaba also taking place of representatives of mining affected communities across South Africa. Their narrative on the costs and benefits of mining is the complete opposite to the self assessment of the 7000 delegates at the Industry event.
I innocently took some invitations with me to give to my media colleagues for an event tomorrow (see www.cer.org.za, ). The invites were confiscated by the CEO of "Reputation Management" Janine Hill who said it was a disrespectful violation of protocol for "anti mining activists" to enter their space.
I argued that the free flow of information was as much in the interests of her delegates as the communities. The latter have information to share that may not flatter the former but if the are serious about managing their reputation they will ignore it at their peril.
Any ideas on how to get an algedonic signal through to a system that appears willfully structured not to receive such?
John Clarke.Social Worker and WriterFrom: russell_c <[log in to unmask]>Sender: Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford Beer <[log in to unmask]>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 15:52:55 +0800To: <[log in to unmask]>ReplyTo: Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford Beer <[log in to unmask]>Subject: Monckton, Mining & Media~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I've been somewhat preoccupied of late but I've had time to be distracted by this recent GetUp! release. (see * below)The short 'insider' video mentioned is worth viewing imo .... Monckton lets the cat out of the bag about media management strategy (re climate change denial). (so what's news in that?)Just to provide some distraction from the emerging WW3 on the 'Plains of Syria', the reference to Gina Rinehart (nee Hanckock) relates to our local $10b (and rising fast) obese Ozzie bush queen who is now making a takeover for yet another Ozzie media sector.She is also embroiled in a family scrap (and from insider sources is 100% control freak) -- all but one of her kids are currently taking her to court to wrestle control of the family trust from her.http://www.news.com.au/national/rineharts-clans-secret-lives-of-luxury-exposed/story-e6frfkvr-1226262387994Mainstream media is increasingly unable to provide requisite variety of views and opinions to support critical thinking in the observer. It is largely just propaganda representing the top 1% perspective.The original T-Fords came in all colours as long as they were black -- governance systems are emerging in all flavors as long as they are controlled by the trans-national 1%.As technological variety and penetration increases, the content's variety seems to qualitatively decrease: Is there a 'law' that covers this?
BTW: increasingly I find what the media provides here, apart from local issues etc, is simply what is found on the mainstream Internet with about a 1-2 day delay.Russell(*)Dear xxxxx,Check out the video the mining industry never expected you to see:You simply have to see this video to believe it.This week mining billionaire Gina Rinehart became the largest shareholder in Fairfax, having already bought a stake in Channel Ten. But this new video reveals this move is bigger than one woman’s ambition – it’s part of a coordinated and very deliberate strategy, with climate skeptic ‘Lord’ Monkton seen here advising a room full of mining executives on how the industry must gain control of Australia’s media.Can you help share this video so all Australians understand what's really going on in the mining industry?We've seen what happened in the USA when coordinated, super-wealthy corporate interests set about deliberately reshaping the media landscape to suit their agendas. It's bad news for democracy and it's bad news for the issues we care about. And while this most recent purchase was a brazen move, it's hardly the first time a mining industry executive has used their vast wealth to push an agenda.Last year, Rinehart helped set up a new lobby group calling for a special ‘Northern Economic Zone’ demanding lower tax, government concessions and cheap migrant labor from Asia. She helped bankroll the campaign against Government efforts to ask the mining industry to pay their fair share of tax through the Mining Super Profits tax and she's been actively sponsoring prominent climate skeptics like Monckton, Ian Plimer and Andrew Bolt, who got his own TV show weeks after she invested in Channel Ten.