Slashdot Mirror
Muzzled Canadian Scientists Can Now Speak Freely With Public (thestar.com)
Layzej writes: Over the last 10 years, policies were put in place to prevent Canadian scientists from freely discussing taxpayer-funded science with the public. "media relations contacts" were enlisted to monitor and record interactions with the press. Interviews and often the questions to be asked were vetted ahead of time, and responses given by scientists frequently monitored or prohibited. Nature, one of the world's top science journals, called the policy a "Byzantine approach to the press, prioritizing message control and showing little understanding of the importance of the free flow of scientific knowledge."
The new government in Canada is lifting these restrictions. Scientists at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans were told Thursday they can now speak to the media. In a statement on Friday afternoon, Navdeep Bains, Canada's new minister of innovation, science and economic development said "Our government values science and will treat scientists with respect. This is why government scientists and experts will be able to speak freely about their work to the media and the public."
The new government in Canada is lifting these restrictions. Scientists at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans were told Thursday they can now speak to the media. In a statement on Friday afternoon, Navdeep Bains, Canada's new minister of innovation, science and economic development said "Our government values science and will treat scientists with respect. This is why government scientists and experts will be able to speak freely about their work to the media and the public."
Here in the frozen Tundra was a real life example.
Scientists must really be on to something if they aren't allowed to talk about it.
Oh... Canada.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Not only were scientists muzzled, the media wasn't allowed to question the government either. Any kind of press was carefully preplanned, scripted and designed with the best interests of the Conservative party in mind.
I strongly disagree with the Conservative Party of Canada. Don't forget, these aren't the "Progressive Conservatives" that won votes on policy, these are the hard right Reformers who campaign on fear and divisiveness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
In related news, a flood of new scientific data was released on the subject of maple syrup.
This is more or less the main thing I voted against Harper over. Yes, he was terrible in many ways but this was the most blatantly anti-public-interest. Unfortunately according to former members of the NRC, rebuilding what Harper dismantled could take decades.
... it was long overdue. I'm not a fan of the Liberals but this is a good 1st step in the right direction.
Thank you must also be given to the voters who finally were able to rally and kick out the Conservatives.
Too often we do not feel our votes make a difference but it did make one here.
Now the only question to us is, how far will these changes go? We'll see over time.
"Government doesn't work - it CAN'T WORK!"
"What about all those countries where it mostly does and, um, all of human history, eh?"
"Oh really? Sheesh! Listen - I'll just do a little governing here, and governing there - and BAM - doesn't work anymore. See - governing ruins everything!"
"Doesn't that just mean YOU ruin everything?"
"Wait - wait - I'll prove it some more. Give me more time and I'll REALLY prove it!"
Whether or not muzzling information was good or not was muzzled...
This is an easy one. Muzzling information = always bad.
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
Where do you get the impression that "scientists" don't respect the public? Where do you get the idea that "scientists" are a monolithic entity with a shared viewpoint on the American public?
PS: As a non-scientist member of the American public, I have no respect for the American public. (As the saying goes, a person is smart... people are stupid).
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
Um, no it has nothing to do with this. Canadian scientists were muzzled by the Conservative government in large part because what they would've otherwise said would have gone against the political agenda of the Conservative party. Let's just say that the vast majority of their policies were grounded in idiotic convictions rather than analysis. Conservatives also seem to hate science as a general rule, because God's word is all you need.
This is just the start of the undoing of the dark ages. It'll take years to restore everything, assuming the Liberals actually do try to restore everything. This first move was by far the easiest and is universally approved.
A friend of my wife was personally effected by all of this. She researches epidemics and was going to present a paper [the details of which I will not specify]. However, all appearances at conferences for any reason had to be cleared by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO). As there was an election taking place, the PMO couldn't be bothered reviewing anything, they were too busy with important stuff (you know, not epidemics). So she didn't get to go.
I can't imagine a more dystopian fiction. At least in 1984 they had a reason to spy on everyone, it was part of their basic philosophy. But in this case, the only reason for any of this was Harper's deathly fear of bad press. So everyone had to follow the Party Line, including people who's only affiliation with the party was getting funding from the government.
And, in the end, *that* was what led to their downfall. The constant repression of information and dissent, especially within his own party, was eventually too much for anyone to take. The mechanism they put in place to protect the PM from the planet was ultimately the very device that destroyed them.
This is not a "conservative" problem. Conservatives have been excellent communicators overall. Hell, Churchill *lived* for the debate, and I strongly suspect he deliberately let people talk about anything just so he could off a clever quip in response. This was an anomaly. Let's hope it does not happen again.
As a Canadian born and raised, I'd have to agree.
Harper was clearly trying to align Canada with Christianity and from a nationalist standpoint the anglo-sphere end of things (i.e. his personal background rather than represent all Canadians). This is the same xenophobic nationalist racist BS that some Conservatives in the US push and now even some conservatives under Cameron in the UK. (while they simultaneously complain about Islamic extremists that try the same BS)
I'm not religious but my mom is. She's a Christian but she's not a fanatic that tries to muddle religion and state. She doesn't want to define Canada as a Christian only nation and crap like that. She supports tolerance for all religions and all peoples (including Blacks, Jews, Muslims, Indians, etc.l.... our neighbours and friends). She doesn't like homosexuality and gay marriage but even then it doesn't stop her for voting for parties that support gay marriage! In short, she tolerates even if she doesn't always agree.
I love my mom because she's my mom but I also love my mom because she's like this. We all have a vision of how the world should be. Things we don't like others. The difference between the fanatic and the good person, is the good person tolerates the quirks of other human beings. They don't oppress them. (with the caveat they also don't attempt to oppress other either)
Canada wasn't always tolerant. Natives Indians really suffered at the hands our intolerant forefathers. It took a long time before we learned to be tolerant. I was fortunate to be one of the first generations to grow up in a tolerant Canada. I want don't want our country to go back to persecuted minorities for nationalistic, racial, and religious reasons. There is enough of that going on in the world today.
While much of the rest of the world is closing its doors in, we should be a beacon of light and refuge to all by open our doors even further. Everyone should be welcome in Canada.
I have to wonder if the muzzling will begin again, once the scientists start disagreeing with a liberal party policy? If, for example, it turns out that gun control doesn't actually do anything to stop crime - and that enforcement of it, much like with drugs, is basically wasted money - will the liberal party go, "Oh... I guess we were wrong about that"?
It's all sunshine and roses right now, but the scientists aren't actually saying anything that goes against the liberal party ideology at the moment. The real test of them putting their money where their mouth is, would be when they continue to support open discourse and dialogue even when it disagrees with what the party believes.
Whoa up there Tex! Put your gun back in your holster you are talkin' to the sheriff 'a Rock Ridge.
Firstly gun control has nothing to do with crime prevention. What you are suggesting is in essence removing the all license plates from cars when you really think about what you are saying here. In Canada we simply require that a license to purchase firearms is required the same way a drivers license is required to drive cars. You commit a crime with a gun and you lose your license to carry them plain and simple. A common sense policy, something which the religious right wing dolts who are scared by the politically motivated NRA firearms industry lobby in the good 'ol US of A just don't seem to be able comprehend.
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
What information was muzzled during the last 10 years?
Here are a few examples:
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/when-science-goes-silent/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/federal-scientists-push-for-protection-from-political-interference/article24473222/
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.