Tag: lies

Categories
Mediawatch Values

The Truth when Lies are Paid for

Way back in 2005 I chose the slogan “the truth, if I lie” (la vérité si je mens) for this blog. The truth is an important aspect whether we are talking about reporting or opinion forming. Facts and the truth should be the basis of assessment in a normal democracy. We all know by now that in this age of post-truth this has changed:

“We have entered a new phase of political and intellectual combat, in which democratic orthodoxies and institutions are being shaken to their foundations by a wave of ugly populism. Rationality is threatened by emotion, diversity by nativism, liberty by a drift towards autocracy. More than ever, the practice of politics is perceived as a zero-sum game, rather than a contest between ideas. […] At the heart of this global trend is a crash in the value of truth, comparable to the collapse of a currency or a stock.” (Matthew D’Ancona, Post Truth, The new war on truth and how to fight back).

One manifestation of the manipulation of truth is the increasing use of space on mainstream media for paid propagation of information. Large chunks of public money are used to buy space on media to sell statements in an effort to turn them into universally accepted truths. More often than not the use of “statistics” is facilitated by the virtual disappearance of any proper watchdog and by the building of walls of silence that laugh in the face of the transparency that should be reinforcing the veracity of such statements.

Take the “record unemployment” figures that this government loves to flaunt. Behind such figures lie so many half-truths buried in statistical convolutions such as the reformed unemployment scheme that ensures that people vanish off the lists much before they enter gainful employment, such as the obvious reliance on a bloated civil service to take on more “jobs for the boys”. That same record unemployment was behind the use of the power of incumbency in the last election where famously Gozitan entrepreneurs and SME’s and employers in the entertainment industry found themselves short of staff simply because the government did the magic absorbing trick of vanishing their employees away into the civil service.

But there is another equally worrying trend. The government has found ways to buy “authenticity” by purchasing its way onto spaces in the media that could deceivingly be passed away as independent reporting. In the beginning it was close collaboration with houses like The Economist hosting talks in Malta packed full of government spokespersons and ministers. The Economist would be happy to lend its name to a national government paying its way into its discussion space. Two “The World in XXX” events plus one “Mediterranean Leadership Summit” were thus organised by the Economist in Malta at the Hilton Portomaso. The Mediterranean Leadership Summit, held in 2016, included Henley and Partners as its Gold Sponsor (we all know who these are), the Libyan Investment Authority as its Silver Sponsor (notwithstanding the fact that the LIA had had its assets frozen by the UN since 2011), and Finance Malta and Maltco lotteries as contributors.

It is not just events though. Articles can now be bought. Yes, you read that right. Articles on major international news portals can actually be “paid content”. Thus, the CNN article doing the rounds about Malta being one of the Top 15 country destinations for Christmas was apparently yet another paid article. Here are Andrew and Paul Caruana Galizia calling out another paid report, this time one that appeared on the Guardian:

Do not underestimate the government use of paid social media ads and posts (such as facebook campaigns). As time goes by, the Facebook algorithms are fine tuned to push to the top of your screens any paid information. While you scroll through the online papers and you see repeat adverts also paid for by government to promote its spin remember that. The campaign to disinform is much stronger than you think. The solution is to be vigilant and call out whenever you can.

Finally do not let the irony escape you that these lies and half-truths are funded by YOUR money. You are actually paying taxes that are then used to sell you untruths.

It’s a liars’ world out there. The truth, if I lie.

Categories
Constitutional Development Politics

Silvio Schembri, Lies & 1984

Silvio Schembri – a member of Joseph Muscat’s government – was born in 1985. He could not remember 1984 , the year, and quite frankly I doubt whether he read the book. If he has, then I doubt he learnt any lessons from Orwell. While going through facebook last night I came across a post by Silvio Schembri. He was reacting to David Casa’s expose’ of recent events and more particularly to what he obviously perceives as the “threat” of EU scrutiny.

In his verve to shoot down whatever Casa said, the Honourable Schembri stated “Hon. Casa, you can ask the PN during whose tenure (in government) Pilatus Bank was given a license to operate.” Interesting I thought. Only it is not correct. This is a clear case of whitewashing of facts and a simple check would show that Pilatus’ license was issued on the 3rd of January 2014 – in full Joseph Muscat swing. I decided to gently point this out to the Rght. Hon. Member of Joseph’s government. “LIAR” I commented. I used block caps because that was what the fawning acolytes were using at that instance. I used the word “LIAR” because it was the right word to use as an objective assessment of the facts at hand. Schembri was wilfully stating a wrong fact – that in my books is a LIE.

I saved the screenshot for safety. For safety and for the simple reason that I knew that it would not be long before Silvio Schembri would do what members of our political community are so good at when faced with incontrovertible facts that they have been caught LYING. Sure enough Silvio Schembri removed my comment and my pic which included definite incontrovertible proof that he was LYING.

Schembri’s LIE is still on facebook. It is not just fake news. It is a LIE.

When challenged by others on the same thread Schembri came up with this explanation:

1984. Because we can.

Categories
Watermarks

Watermarks: The Definition of Forgery

forgery_akkuza

We have moved from “misrepresentation” to “outright lie”. Minister Konrad Mizzi has become a specialist in libel law. It is a standard in the Maltese game of politics and carries with it the public assumption that “since X has resorted to the courts then X must be right”. It is not how it should be, it is not what the institutes of libel and slander were set up to protect but hey, no Maltese politician in recent history has shied away from abusing of the law in this manner so why should Mr. Konrad?

“Mr. Konrad”, now there is a curious way of referring to a Minister – or anyone for that matter unless you are a slave on a cotton plantation in pre-emancipation US. Yet that is how Karl Cini of Nexia BT refers to the Unportfoglioed Minister in his correspondence to Mossack Fonseca. Cini is speaking to Mossack Fonseca about Mizzi’s PEP status and is also endeavouring to explain the “How many?” and the “Wherefrom? of the funds that will be eventually subject to movements to companies that are set up by Mossack Fonseca.

It is here that Mr. Konrad’s speech of “outright lies” finds a huge banana skin on which to slip and fall. Without playing the special investigator one can see why Konrad Mizzi finds himself in an immense schizophrenic conundrum. Why? Well over the same period of time there had to be two Konrad Mizzi’s:

The first Konrad Mizzi is the one who delegates Cini to contact Mossack Fonseca and set up a structure that requires a considerable amount of funds in order to justify its continued existence. That Konrad Mizzi has an interest to explain that he has quite a considerable amount of personal funds and also has an interest to downplay his role as a PEP. That is why Karl Cini stresses that “our legislation openly allows PEPs to hold shareholdings in other businesses”. So whether he is lying or saying the truth to Mossack Fonseca, Mizzi (through his agents at Nexia) would like the truth to seem that he is loaded with money coming from ventures that are legal notwithstanding his status as a PEP.

The second Konrad Mizzi is the one who was made Minister by Joseph Muscat. That Konrad Mizzi was at first supposed to be a wunderkind who earned loads-a-money while abroad (fuelled by the myth that “studja barra u hadem barra ergo qed jimpala l-liri“) and owned property/properties abroad and has an international family. That was the early story to explain why he needed an international structure involving a tax haven even though his overall worth amounted to a pittance (by multimillionaire tax haven standards). The second Mizzi wanted us to believe that the whole set up cost a couple of tens of euros (was it 90?) and that it was all about family planning.

You can begin to see the dilemma facing Konrad Mizzi. The documentation that is trickling out of the ICIJ Panamaleaks is slowly but surely pointing towards the Konrad Mizzi that one would expect to exist – one who either has or claims to have the kind of funds that justify such operations. The second Mizzi – Minister Mizzi – can give us as facts his Ministerial declarations of worth that obviously clash with declarations done in his own name by the first Konrad Mizzi.

So you see. Speaking about “outright lies” is dangerous in these circumstances. In the not so halcyon days of studying criminal law I still remember now Chief Justice Camilleri lecturing us about fraud and forgery. A forged document is one that “tells a lie about itself”, he would tell us. I wonder what kind of fraud or forgery would be one that yells that it’s an “outright lie”.

Watermarks

Categories
Mediawatch

The truth, if he lies

turhtjospeh_akkuza

La vérité, si je mens (The truth if I lie). We’ve carried that movie motto on this blog as from the start back in 2005.  I was reminded of this motto when I read Dr Muscat’s interview on the Times today. It’s the truth, if I lie – it’s a nonsensical phrase actually that can be substituted by “I promise” or as we were used to hearing on the streets of Malta when we were young “Promise to Jesus”. Whatever your choice of phrase is, Muscat’s assertion really needed this kind of appendage at the end. Here’s what he was reported to have said:

“As for the dwindling number of arrivals to Malta, Dr Muscat denied suggestions made by his predecessor, Lawrence Gonzi, that this was the result of some form of agreement with Italy, insisting this was only due to better collaboration with the neighbouring country.”

We can safely assume that Muscat was already squirming uncomfortably at this point since he had already had to pull out an enormous amount of somersault arguments to deal with the Michael Falzon hot potato. I’m sure in the back of his mind he was blaming the failure of Saviour Balzan and his name dropping stunt to distract attention from the myriad scandals that the Labour government is brooding upon.

But back to his statement. Muscat gave us a clear example of his Magritte Policy – the “what you see is not what you get” statement. In the very same sentence he tells us that there is no form of agreement with Italy but that ther is better collaboration with the neighbouring country. Come again? In what universe of CHOGM flop organising and nation paralysing nincompoops with a degree in management and economics is an agreement not a form of collaboration?

We are not talking about two friends meeting in a pjazza and deciding who will pay for the pastizzi and coffee at is-Serkin. Nor is this a “gentlemen’s agreement” to rent a flat that will only be put to paper should circumstances require and should pressure be too much. No. These are two sovereign nations dealing with each other at diplomatic level and reaching agreements that has repercussions on the operation of their administrative and military forces. Orders will be given as a result. Priorities will be set in an IF/THEN format such as: If migrants are rescued at sea THEN do not take them to Malta BUT proceed to ITALY no matter where they are found.

That sort of thing requires formulation, confirmation and agreement in the form of positive action usually in the form of signatories scribbling their names on very formal paper. More importantly, an agreement normally involves obligations on both sides. Now we can all see for ourselves that Italy is taking on the bulk of migrants (erm ALL recently found migrants) – Muscat himself has never denied this and we have questions being asked in Italy and the EP about it too. So we know what Italy’s side of the obligation consists of. What then is Malta giving back?

Muscat wants you and the kool-aid drinkers to believe strongly that this is the result of “better collaboration with the neighbouring country“. If this vague meaningless phrase can be put quickly in succession after a denial of anything the dastardly Gonzi said then it will add muchly to its level of credibility. What Muscat does not and will not answer is what Italy are getting in return.

Maybe Dr Gonzi is right, maybe he is wrong. That is not the point. The point is that Muscat will only say the truth if he lies. He will not tell you what he promised Renzi and Italy because, as we know by now, he is above accountability.

And for the next two weeks he will be more than that. He will be busy having tea with what he sees as the selfie-imposing VIP while you are confined to your house and (if you are a businessman) losing money due to the national paralyis that is needed by the party that couldn’t be trusted to organise a piss-up in a brewery.

The truth, if I lie.

 

Categories
Mediawatch

Or words to that effect

words_akkuza

Was it Michael Falzon who insisted that we do not call an amnesty an amnesty? You know that measure being touted by the Taghna Lkoll government whereby any environmental and planning injustices can be righted by the payment of a proportionally small fine? Well he wants us to call it a fine or something like that – but not an amnesty. Because words have effects – and Labour bloody well knows that.

Which is why Prime Minister Muscat, a master of obfuscation, has thrown this pile of peppered bull about hospitals, investments and Queens Mary (sic) into our face in a brilliant mish-mash that would make Lewis Carroll proud. It did not take an investigative genius to see through the intentional misdirections this time round. The moment I heard the news I googled Barts (and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry). There, on their web pages I came across the information that the school was moving to a magnificent new hospital after 40 years.

Located in London, the school had cost a stunning 100 million pounds sterling – and it had taken them forty years to raise that amount of cash and make that move. Why then would Barts (or QMUL) be suddenly spending close to 200 million euros to open a school in Gozo?

Well it isn’t. The two pieces of news are separate. The first, an agreement to set up a medical school in Malta, had been signed a year ago by Godfrey Farrugia before he was hounded out of his ministry to be replaced by Konrad of the Many Promises and of the Wife On Public Payroll. Yesterday was the moment that agreement came to fruition.

The second is an attempt to get the private sector to invest 200 million euros to upgrade the Gozo (Craig) Hospital and Saint Luke’s Hospital. Muscat’s government once again shows a non-socialist approach to the management of public assets. Nothing wrong there – attracting private investment while still guaranteeing free public services is laudable. Of course the private sector will want their moneys’ worth so expect the use of such extensions for private purposes (two-tier public/private services). Also expect possible abuses if left to their own devices.

Another suprising element about this move is that Labour is replicating a move suggested by the PN government a good while back – when Mater Dei was still in the pipeline as San Raffaele and there was a public-private proposal that was gunned down by heavy Labour opposition.

Back to the word games though. Muscat deliberately plays on confusion – and is hoping this stunt about “investment in Gozo” will return the right dividends come the local elections on April 11th. You can bet your last dollar that any criticism such as this one regarding the deliberate confusion will be shot down with “mhux xorta investiment?” which is definitely not the point.

Our Prime Minister continues to prove himself to be a master of deceit and manipulation. Will the public go along once again?

#maltaottimista #maltamazzuna

Categories
Mediawatch

The truth, when they lie

lie_akkuzaThe World Wide Web turns 25 today. As Sir Tim Berners Lee makes a move to try to keep the “web we want”, the current state of affairs is such that the social media revolution is still the main motor behind the spread of the web worldwide. The availability of immediate information as well as the empowerment of citizens has gained momentum to the extent that the amount of data being exchanged about immediate events has increased exponentially.

Ellen De Generes’ selfie at the last Oscar Award ceremony threatened the whole infrastructure of twitter – an information superload. It’s not just the pink news that is doing it. Breaking world wide news is now seasoned with the input from literally millions of netizens – all giving their slant or take on what is going on. We are used to seeing major news sites asking for “on the ground” information – cue the BBC’s now standard box on a news item asking whether “you are on site” and whether you can provide immediate information.

The social media have also been at the core of the revolutions that swept across the Arab world and more recently in the Ukraine. Whether it is a natural disaster such as a tsunami or earthquake, or a human tragedy – a shootout, a crash – the social media is on the front-line. There is a problem though, and it is becoming more and more dangerous.

The lack of control over what is and is not published when it comes to netizen input means that a rumour or a conjecture can rapidly spread across the net and be treated as a truth. We are already familiar with fake deaths of stars that quickly go viral and before you know it the news is taken as being true. The problem is exacerbated when it comes to news from trouble zones such as we have recently seen in Syria or Ukraine and is with regard to crucial information such as the presence of snipers or attackers.

This problem is now being studied by researchers at five different European universities who are trying to develop an algorithm that filters online rumours and chooses the true (or potentially true) from the false.

Five European universities are working on a social media lie detector in an attempt to verify online rumors. The technology developed in the wake of the London riots is set to help not only journalists and the private sector, but also governments.

Researchers, led by Sheffield University in England, are cooperating on the system, which could automatically ascertain if a rumor can be verified and whether it originates from a reliable source. It will attempt to filter reliable factual information from social media sites like Twitter and Facebook.

The project called PHEME is being funded by the European Union and has already been in development for three years. It is named after the Greek mythological character of Pheme, who was famed for spreading rumors. [REUTERS]

The filter will try to label information as being either speculation, controversy, disinformation or misinformation. The system will try and use three different factors to establish the accuracy of a nugget of information. It will examine the information itself (lexical, syntactic and semantic), and then cross-reference the information with a trust worthy data source and the dissemination of information.

In other words, PHEME promises to be the first frontier at combating online fraud and misconceptions although it will not entirely replace human judgement. The ultimate arbiter of what can or cannot be considered as potentially true will remain the gatekeepers at the newsdesks. What PHEME does is simplify their task – particularly as the new is live when it would be more time-consuming to follow leads – and provide a probability.ù

Mark Twain, Winston Churchill and Pratchett are all attributed different versions of the quote “A lie can travel half way around the world before the truth can put its shoes/pants/boots on.” With PHEME’s help the time gap might be shorter…

The truth, if I lie.

L’Express on PHEME

)