Why the dinosaur propaganda system can't use social media effectively

Lately I have been swinging my sights on to Ethical Oil's latest mouthpiece Kathryn Marshall. Of course I am not a radical environmentalist; what angers me about Ethical Oil is how insulting their campaign is. Their campaign is propaganda designed to fool Canadians, not other countries.

The Ethical Oil campaign is the face of fascism. Their campaign is nationalist in nature (Canadian interests against foreign interests). Their campaign is a collaboration of government and industry. It is text-book fascism, and fascism never falls on the side of truth.

Luckily for us that live in the era of social media; fascist propaganda is a lot harder to get away with. Take for example Marshall's viral embarrasment from a few weeks ago. All 3 organizations featured boasted this interview on their social media feeds; each expecting to have positive feedback as a result. Of course since Marshall's performance was so poor the Ethical Oil organization didn't get the feedback they were probably desiring, and instead received a big 'ROFL' from the Twitter universe. This brings us to today's topic, which is why the old dinosaur propaganda outlets just can't master the art of social media; specifically Twitter.

The first thing to notice about social media is that your audience is very aware if you are "real". Almost every politician has a Twitter account, but not all of them actually man it. Many (such as http://www.twitter.com/PMHarper) simply treat it as another arm of their PR spin, putting out "tweets" like they put out news releases. It's impersonal and a failed use of social media for PR. It's rare that you will get a reply if you message these sorts of "manned" accounts and it's so obvious that it's a PR team answering your message even if they do reply that these accounts should really be named @[Politician]sCampaign.

Another form of "news release style" social media practices are those used by the @Ethical_Oil account and @KVMarshall. They do take an interactive approach, but they do so in the same form of a relationship that say a blogger and their readers/commentors have. Bloggers often moderate (censor) comments coming from their readers and as a result most blogs usually end up with a "cherry-picked" feeling; where all of the comments strangely seem to be of the same view as the blog they are published on (For the record I do not modify, moderate, or delete comments posted on this blog). Of course, what Ethical_Oil and Kathryn Marshall seem to not realize is: that Twitter isn't a blog and you can't cherry pick your public presence on it (even though it might appear that you can).

For the next few days after her embarrassing interview, Kathryn Marshall went on a Twitter banning spree. Anyone who disagreed with her was banned and blocked from following her on Twitter and thus she no longer can see these user's mentions either. She justified this mass blocking beating some sort of sexist drum and retweeting the few who did make sexist comments to make it appear as though everyone she was blocking was being sexist. Of course most in fact were questioning her absurd statements about Enbridge funding being a "conspiracy theory". What Kathryn Marshall doesn't seem to understand though, is that a Twitter search still returns all "mention" tweets even by user's she herself has blocked. Since she's blocked all those user's who oppose her (Enbridge's) position she has inadvertently created a virtual "social reality" in which everyone she sees agrees with her which reinforces her belief that most of Canada must be on her side.

The result of this is quite amusing, looking at her feed you will see statements such as "I'm so glad I have so many fans, etc" - and looking at her twitter in which she retweets anything even remotely positive about her or Ethical Oil it would indeed appear that is the case, however.. the picture changes starkly if you search her twitter handle. Under the tweets mentioning her handle (or @Ethical_Oil), you will find the majority of them are quite negative. Most are calling out Ethical Oil for being funded by Enbridge. Many are laughing at Marshall herself for seemingly being so oblivious about how stupid she has made Ethical Oil look - and are there any replies or rebuttals to any of these statements? No. Why not? Well it's hard to reply and make your point about your PR spin if you block everyone who disagrees, this might work on a blog but when it comes to social media - sorry - all of those "blocked" comments are all still available for everyone except the blocker. Not exactly smart when the point of launching such a campaign is to convince those who would disagree with you that you are correct. By blocking everyone who disagrees they are simply revealing how disingenuous they are. What's really sad is I think that this point is actually beyond Ethical_Oil and Kathryn Marshall, either that or this campaign is designed "for the ethical oil choir". I mean honestly, the only people they are "convincing" is those who already agreed with the concept of "ethical oil" or those who are so brainwashed they think giving our oil to China isn't "foreign special interests" - but these people all thought this way before Ezra's pathetic blog.

So this is why the dinosaur propaganda outlets will never make good use of the social media platform (however hard they may try). The reason is that social media (unlike traditional media) is an interactive two-way street. Propaganda depends on a one-way, information-out only - where critical thinking is deflected with straw-man arguments about nothing at all. Such as "is our oil ethical?". This is why the ethical oil argument can't stand up in any interactive forum, it's propaganda at it's purest - a 100% straw-man argument - that when analyzed or questioned even a little: falls apart like a house of cards.

The rules of engagement

In my last post I talked about how the Occupy movement is dead, but I also said the revolution had just begun. Of course this is a global revolution I'm talking about, and no Canada isn't really ready to join or even understand -- yet.

The difference between places that are currently in such a state where revolution is becoming inevitable have become more intense since this "crackdown" on occupiers began. Places like Edmonton have noticed their public support drop significantly. While Edmonton took part in the initial movement, there is no revolution here. This is not to say however that one isn't on the way.

I've noted several times in past posts that during this global economic collapse, Canada and particularly Alberta are closer to the bottom of the list rather than the top. At some point in the near future a tipping point will be reached where the primary debtor nations we rely on to import large portions of product will simply no longer afford this product. In July I noted that our U.S. oil market is stagnating. This is not to say that it will dry up completely, it is to say that growth will not be sufficient. Of course "Harper's bet" was obvious when you consider events such as this. The problem with relying on China though is that on top of energy shortages their economy is over-heated. Their export base is falling out from under them and "housing bubble" is an understatement.

Alberta may just find itself another stagnating economy by the time we can export to it. The other question of course is exactly how much oil can we supply to keep growth going to stop stagnation? It seems the "whole world" is all of a sudden on our doorsteps; but under ideal conditions we apparently will only be providing 3million barrels / day by 2020.

Oh by the way, if you are having trouble finding that information it is because it far down the page. Notice the structure of these articles. In the second paragraph:

Rivals Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) and China Petroleum & Chemical Corp. (386) each have bought a piece of Syncrude, one of the dozens of companies that are blasting, digging and steaming soil laden with 143 billion barrels of molasseslike crude called bitumen, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue. Only Saudi Arabia, with 264 billion barrels, and Venezuela, with 211 billion, enjoy greater proven reserves, a BP Plc energy reviewfound in June.

But it's not until the 23rd paragraph (albeit some is quoted one liners) that you actually get the important information:

Daily oil-sands output will double to 3 million barrels by 2020 and contribute 3 percent of world supply, up from 1.7 percent today, predicts energy researcher IHS CERA in Englewood, Colorado. Neftex’s Wells says he expects that daily output of traditional, non-OPEC crude will hold steady through 2020 and then drop 17 percent to 33 million barrels during the next decade, based on the firm’s worldwide geologic studies.

 This brings me back to the coming revolution, yes even here in good ol' Canada. What looks like a "great new oil boom" heading our way is actually an energy scramble amongst the large oil-consuming and stagnating economies. All of these countries at our doorstep need ever-increasing amounts of oil for "economic recovery". By dedicating everything we have to servicing these economies we are tying ourselves to many dying economies, it's the exact same issue as with the U.S.! It might prolong the pain for awhile, but not forever. It's not a solution to anything, and it doesn't address the core problems the global economy currently faces.

Many people who recently discovered they are not in the club, had no idea that was about to happen to them. Some are now joining the fledging Occupy revolution and I truly hope they are awake to what's becoming of our once great society and it is this awakening that government's or rather the system fears the most.

Recently I read a rebuttal by Erik Kain of Forbes (of whom I greatly respect as a journalist) against Naomi Wolf's recent article on Occupy. His argument against the idea of coordinated action against Occupy (in the form of some sort of conspiracy) was that different cities had been dealing with protestors in different ways. In this case however I have to agree with Wolf.

Coordinated action never implies the same action. It implies the same result. So what is the goal of a crackdown on Occupy? "Health and Safety" is a bogus cover, yet is appearing everywhere. Its such a weak argument to say these people are in danger in a park, but not elsewhere within the city. It's the sort of double-think we expect in the novel 1984. The idea of absolute control is also too simplistic; just because instructions come from the top doesn't mean everyone on the chain on the way down nessecarily respects or agrees with these decisions. Also I would like to direct Erik to the last 10 minutes of this radio broadcast a police officer calls in talking about "bogus evidence" they are getting from DHS. Naomi in this case is not joking when talking about a coming civil war as the tactics of war are already in use (I don't know if  even she knows how serious it actually is though).

Coordinated action has been occurring here in Canada, before the actual protest even began. The way our government dealt with Occupy was efficient, swift, and to this I have to give them some credit. Our government is a lot better at managing information than the U.S. intelligence is. To the CSIS agents inevitably reading this post, congratulations. You really have stomped out the revolution in the form of Occupy before it even began. Their strategy was simple in hindsight. They advertised the movement weeks in advance, this ensures that professional activists that your average joe has been trying to ignore for years get the heads up. This also provided a comfort to the people learning about it at home, in that they can trust the media to report on it because they heard about it from the media. Essentially they kick started this movement before people were ready but when enough Canadians had shown interest. Their goal? to preempt support for this movement (revolution) in the future.

Now in the future, when the need truly does arise for us Canadians to join the fight against international bankers the tainted brandname of occupy (and everything it stood for) will no longer be an option.

My advice to Occupy Edmonton would be to get out of the spotlight, now. Plan for spring, as during this winter it's likely Canada will be taking several severe economic hits. By next spring I believe people will be ready and will need the Occupy movement. Most people here do not yet understand why it's happening and until they do, until they see it in their backyards and their pocket books it will not make any sense. "Necessity is the mother of invention", and I would also add innovation and that includes innovation in your own frame of mind.

Reflections on Occupy / My experience with Occupy Edmonton

"We Will Lead Every Revolution Against Us" -- Theodor Herzl

It's unfortunate I have to write this post as I have been an avid supporter of the Occupy Wall Street movement before it even began in the United States. During the first week there was a media blackout at which point I told many people that "there is an occupation of Wall Street going on right now". "Yea right", they said "I would have heard about it on the news.". Before Occupy Wall Street even started I have been writing about it abstractly. So before you assume I am an Occupy hater, realize that to me this movement isn't a prime time fad.

Sure enough, a few days after this embarrassing act by the NYPD, Occupy gained internet fame:

At this point mainstream media had no choice but to report on the growing protests and in the U.S. a new symbol of hope for America's youth has risen to create a uniting front against corruption and fraud. Most of what you see on TV regarding the movement is heavily doctored to sway your opinion regarding it. Following the original livestreams is the only true way to know you are not being lied to during this trying time.

In the U.S. the media made a fatal mistake, they attempted to ignore the message instead of control it in hopes that the movement would get bored and go home. In the week the media was ignoring the protests, hundreds of thousands found out about it and instantly lost all trust in anything media was telling them. Control is essential in public relations. This failure has ensured the U.S. movement became a success.

In Canada, it seems media and government learned from the mistakes of the U.S. We decided to control the message right away, taking this power away from Occupy itself and giving a heads up to any "activists" who always seem to end up where the cameras are. Articles like this showed up 10 days in advance. In fact on October 2nd I made a note of it on Twitter:

 

 From this point on I decided to be cautious until I could confirm it's legitimacy as it was obvious that parts of this movement were not naturally occurring as they were in the U.S. In the U.S. the people did not need the mainstream media to tell them about the event to make it successful and here they were practically promoting it. This is a red flag.

Sure enough when I discovered that there would be an Occupy Edmonton, Mike Hudema's name (the Greenpeace mouthpiece) showed up as one of the organizers. About a year ago I contacted Mike Hudema about a possible interview regarding his views on peak oil, he never did respond. Suffice to say, I don't think he has any interest in representing this:

It looks more like he's interested in stuff like this. Greenpeace stuff, it looks like. I'd like to direct your attention to this article put out by CSIS. Does that sound like a government that wants to promote Anti-Globalization to you? How much have you heard about Anti-Globalization and banking fraud in relation to Occupy Edmonton? I'm not talking about "Ending Capitalism" here. I'm talking about addressing events like this:

Some of the world’s strongest banks have profited from an emergency credit facility set up by the US Federal Reserve to shore up confidence in the global financial system, according to a Financial Times analysis of data released by the Fed..

Rabobank of the Netherlands and Toronto-Dominion of Canada, two of the only banks in the world with triple A credit ratings, used more than $20 billion in cumulative Taf loans.

Ed Clark, TD chief executive, said that using Taf was logical even though his bank never had a liquidity problem. “That wasn’t how we made a lot of money. But you make a dollar here, you make a dollar there. What’s the spread you make on a billion dollars?” he said.

My bet would be little or none. 

I don't know much about the other two media moguls of Occupy Edmonton. Mike Thomas (who blogs at adhdcanuck.ca) seems to be your run-of-the-mill environment activist. I know even less about Chelsea Taylor. I don't watch TV, so I haven't really been keeping up with interviews.

On Tuesday, I went down during the day, while taking a moment from work (If you don't get it yet, Occupy isn't about hippies who don't want to work contrary to the opinions of the likes of Michael Moore, and the other camera whores that pretend to be "alternative". Hey Michael, if you love socialism so much why are your documentaries *pay only* unlike pressfortruth.ca which is pro-capitalism and puts theirs out for free?) and during my time there some Greenpeace activists were across the street from the Occupy camp. With my megaphone I told them they should come over and join us, in response they smiled but decided to stay across the street. I made a mental note that this was fairly strange considering the Greenpeace spokes-person on oilsands was just across the street. Red flag number 2.

I also happened to witness a certain conversation between Mike Thomas and another participant at Occupy Edmonton. I will not release this persons name on this blog as he is not recognizable via media. Mr. Thomas was worried about some routine security problems and required a "chief of security". He assigned this position to the participant I was having a conversation with and told him he could gather volunteers. I offered to be a volunteer but due to my schedule I never actually ended up participating in any "security services". He went on to mention that it would be confirmed at the general assembly that night and consensus on the new position would be taken, but that in the midterm the position was required until then. I could not remain at Occupy long enough to witness the General Assembly myself, so I cannot say if that happened or not. For the moment I thought nothing of it and continued enjoying the protest until I left.

Throughout history revolutions have happened a lot, and yet they usually end up in tragedy. Take Egypt for instance. Often a desperate population will latch on to anything that even resembles a leader in the hopes it will bring freedom, even if they don't have their best interests at heart. Hitler, the Russian revolution, the list goes on and on. A disenfranchised population combined with demoralization and copious amounts of propaganda can easily be manipulated into following a Napoleon into their own battle of Waterloo, and that is exactly what I feel is happening to Occupy Edmonton.

By the time I got home Tuesday, I had a direct message waiting for me on Twitter from one of my followers asking if I knew what was going on with some incident involving a chief of security banning representatives from kikkiplanet.com. This was the first I had heard of it, and I had only passing familiarity with the Kikki Planet blog. I replied that I would look into it further.

Now one thing Occupy has been doing (for the most part) is taking the moral high ground. It's why they are winning. It's why the LAPD has a twitter account dedicated to supporting Occupy. Truth and honesty always win, and since this movement revolves around corruption it is ever more important. While the system puts out failures, the people stand united and outraged yet courteous and honest. New York avoided eviction by cleaning the park better than the company hired to clean it had. That's how you win against these assholes. That's how you avoid public relations nightmares. While media and big business plays friendly towards Occupy, they are just waiting for that big PR fuck up that will make their day!

I put on my sleuthing hat and away we went. First I had to catch up on the situation, reading Twitter, Facebook, comments on articles. I then decided to contact KikkiPlanet and see if I could get more details. At this point I was simply interested in avoiding a PR disaster. Occupy has enough trouble gaining support in Edmonton it certainly didn't need this. After conversing with Kikkiplanet.com and determining I had enough background on the situation, I decided to write a letter to act as a Proposal for the Occupy Edmonton General Assembly by proxy. I had too much work to do to make it down in person so I left the delivery to someone I felt I could trust regarding the subject matter. Kikkiplanet.com had positively confirmed to me that the "security chief" in question was the participant I met earlier.

Here is the proposal I wrote:

Good Evening Occupy YEG,

  This is a proposal by proxy and thank you to the one reading it.

  It's come to my attention that there has been a somewhat hostile exchange
between Occupy and the blog Kikkiplanet.com. While I was not directly involved
in any of the exchange I decided of my own accord to try and mediate a peace.

Occupy is very important for myself, and all of it's participants. We will
face many struggles and proper representation of what we are, and what our
opinion is very important. I think we can all agree that no one opinion
represents this movement. I think we can also recognize that with no leaders
we all are responsible for the movement's actions.

I therefore propose to the GA that a formal apology is constructed by the
group for the ill-will Kikkiplanet.com has received. I'd ask our participants
to hold no ill-will towards any media, as I am confident that when they see
what we are really about they will be fair.

I believe in our movement, and that the GA can properly address this issue,
and all parties can move on and focus on the important problems in society.

Kikkiplanet.com has requested to me to relay that they wish to publish an
unedited version of tonight's GA baseline minutes. Please oblige.

@RichardFantin

I waited for word of the result.

A few hours later the person I had asked to deliver my proposal returned. They told me that they had delivered my proposal to someone named 'Rob' and he promised it would be read. During their time at Occupy Edmonton they had a chance to talk with Mike Thomas. They asked him about the exchange between Occupy Edmonton and KikkiPlanet. His reply was that the security chief position has never existed and that Occupy is being set up. I then confirmed this response with KikkiPlanet who had been told the same thing by Occupy Edmonton even though she sent them emails from the "security chief" in question which proclaim her to be banned. I have been forwarded all correspondence, it is authentic.

So there is now a cover-up underway. Occupy Edmonton was facing a small bump in terms of PR stemming from a negative blog post from Kikkiplanet.com seemingly based on misunderstanding. They are now facing failure. The person I sent down to Occupy told me they were shocked how many times Mike Thomas said "I'm in charge".

Charging into Waterloo.

*ADDENDUM*

I hope OccupyYeg can work past this issue and truly respect the spirit of Occupy. Here's a hint about what that spirit stands for (we're better than politicians, aren't we?):

Oh and this has nothing to do with my post, but here is a true hero: