Walter's Blog |
|
Reflections on recent events, plus the occasional fact
free rant unfiltered by rational argument. |
|
27/6/2021 3 Comments The Modern Witch Hunters "Sorry, there is no evidence that ET is here, has been here or is likely to be here soon" When as a species we started to realise our immense loneliness in a vast universe, a deep unsettling fear took hold. Today we know that our planet is circling an unremarkable star — on the edge of the Milky Way — our position daunting and precarious against the vastness of time and space. Consider that, on average, most species last four million years. No wonder we went running for the protection of Gods in any form.
Likewise, some folks amongst us want to believe that aliens will arrive with an advanced culture and technology to save us. Hence, they hope our kind may survive into the long future by journeying out to the stars with the help of our new intergalactic friends. But, on that note, a word of caution. History tells us that when an advanced civilisation encounters a less well-developed society, the latter soon collapses. Remember the Aztecs? That’s why Captain Kirk had to follow the ‘Prime Directive'. Thus, in recent weeks, anticipation built, awaiting the US government's report on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). Besides the usual collection of UFO fanboys, normally rational types engaged in wild speculation. Would we finally get to see the alien cadavers from Roswell? Talk of captured flying saucers and other out of this world treasures summoned up images from Independence Day. Then, as the report dropped, the sense of disappointment was palpable. No alien bodies, no flying saucers. Nothing that rational types hadn't already concluded. Sorry, there is no evidence that ET is here, has been here or is likely to be here soon. The report produced by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence focused on 144 reports of UAP. While the investigation sought to explain events from a national security perspective, it touched upon the alien UFO thing by default. Mike West gives a detailed breakdown of the report here. He can be satisfied that the findings confirm many of his judgments. In a previous blog, I covered West's work on the famous 'Gimbal' and 'Gofast' clips. In the 144 reports considered, a good number are single observer events without any corroborating evidence—no radar footage nor video to support the claims of human witnesses. And, of course, we already know how unreliable witnesses can be, given our inability to judge distances and motion. Likewise, in instances that the detection system did spot something, anomalies and system limitations caused misinterpretations. Again, as West demonstrates, this was almost certainly the case with the 'Gimbal' clip. West faced considerable resentment when he questioned the reports of naval aviators. How dare he challenge these highly trained 'Top Guns’? Well, in truth, West was correct because even ‘Maverick’ is operating with a Mark-One eyeball and a human brain, both of which are fallible. Moreover, organs developed for hunting on the African savanna aren't well-adapted to discerning objects at vast distances moving laterally, especially when the observer is also moving at speed. Airborne clutter, such as blown litter and wayward balloons, accounted for some sightings. On occasions, because only one system tracked these objects, it proved impossible to get triangulation to measure actual speed and direction. A high percentage of these UAP/UFO reports came from the Navy, and the vicinity of military bases. These incidents raised the specter of foreign powers spying. Yet, collection bias means that such locations are more likely to spot stuff because they are looking for it. After all, guards and sensor systems are operating for that specific purpose. So, in summary, the US government is going away to do more study. But, cutting through all the jargon, it's clear they've found nothing alien or that exciting. In an established pattern, the true believers and conspiracy nut jobs will dismiss the report as another cover-up. Not for them rational analysis dwelling on hard evidence, with the crunching of data. Instead, with a zealots fever, they'll press on looking for ET in every wind-blown plastic bag or temperature inversion. These folks are the latter-day witch hunters.
3 Comments
22/6/2021 0 Comments Legacy Media - is the end near? "No one under 35 regularly purchases a hard copy newspaper" As The Apple Daily hangs on by a thread here in Hong Kong, the media scene is evolving rapidly. Some of the trends mirror those seen worldwide; other changes arise from the period of civil unrest and fall-out from Covid-19. A perfect storm in many ways. Across the globe, newspapers continue their relentless decline in circulation as the Internet eats away at their customer base. In the UK, former titans of circulation wars are looking battered and worn out. For example, The Sun once had a daily print run of four million copies with weekly profits of £4- million. Today, the paper prints 500,000 with losses mounting towards £200 million. Owner Rupert Murdoch has declared the paper worthless in part due to payouts for phone hacking and other criminality. Some pundits believe that once Samantha Fox declared herself a lesbian, The Sun was doomed. The Apple Daily had a circulation of around 400,000 in 1997 and is now down at 70,000. That decline was well underway before its current troubles. Likewise, The South China Morning Post, at one time the most profitable newspaper in the world, saw its profit decline since peaking in 1997 at HK$805 million. It is now adopting a paywall approach for the online version. And the future for many legacy news outlets is looking bleak unless they adapt with business models that appeal to the young. How exactly you do that is not clear. All this brings home a stark point made by a journalist friend; newspapers are there to make money. If you don’t make money, you fail. TV news channels are seeing similar impacts as the young aren't tuning in. As one commentator observed, "Broadcast TV is so dead that young people don't even recognise the corpse." The same applies to print media because no one under 35 regularly purchases a hard-copy newspaper. For many legacy media organisations such as the BBC, The Guardian, The New York Times, and the rest of the corporate entities, is the writing is on the wall? In a recent debate, these organisations attracted the remark 'zombies walking towards to their demise'. That's a tad overblown but indicative of the challenges they face. The Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 provides a comprehensive and thought-provoking insight into the seismic shifts jolting the news media world. The changes identified are profound. Until Covid-19 arrived, people proved unwilling to pay for online news. An uptick in subscriptions occurred in 2020, although it is unclear if this is sustainable. There is evidence that subscription fatigue soon creeps in, with people dropping out after a period. That, in turn, can drive online news outlets to adopt click-bait tactics. These involve increasingly sensational headlines that bear no resemblance to the facts. Also, people are spending less time on Facebook, opting for Apps with high levels of privacy. WhatsApp is an example. Concern about misinformation and disinformation remains high despite efforts by platforms and publishers to build public confidence. In the UK, trust in the media has fallen 20% since 2015 and shows no signs of levelling out. While in Hong Kong in 2019 alone, confidence in the press fell by 16%. Undoubtedly coverage of the protests was a factor as all sides questioned the validity of stories presented. Here, Now TV news enjoys the top spot for trust, followed by RTHK news. It's interesting to note that while the Apple Daily enjoys wide circulation, the public rates it low on trustworthiness. Although, it did hold officials feet to the fire most of the time — something that’s needed — it also went overboard with inflated stories. Meanwhile, worldwide only 38% of people trust the news outlets most of the time. The Reuters study makes a couple of things clear. First, the use of the smartphone to access news continues to grow in importance. Some 66% of people now use the device to follow the news. Plus, there exists a distinct preference for visual messages rather than the written word. Hence, video podcasts and audio are gaining in popularity. For me, political debates on legacy TV channels such as CNN, Fox, the BBC and Channel 4 have become unedifying exercises in point-scoring without exploring issues. These debates are staged, with some aimed at ambushing one party or another. Activist journalists as moderators often attempt to score points instead of listening and examining the issues. Without a doubt, the best example is the Cathy Newman interview of Professor Jordan Peterson in 2018. Newman suffered cognitive dissonance because she wasn't listening to Peterson's sensible moderate replies to her loaded questions. Instead, she ploughed on with her agenda. Newman soon found herself confronted with truths that exposed her worldview's falsehood. She then stalled and struggled to recover. Seen over 30 million times on YouTube, the interview generated many memes, my favourite being above. Hence, you can see why the quality of debate has been eroded when activist journalists brings their bias to the game. On a more positive note, what the Internet taketh away, it giveth back. Because the legacy media outlets no longer have a monopoly or much control over the message, other people fill the niche. In particular, the internet-based, long-form interviews that allow participants to explore issues and develop ideas while debating in a non-judgmental way prove popular. Joe Rogan has made a great success of this format. Other examples are Triggernometry and the work done by Jordan Peterson. There are many such channels. It suggests that a market exists for honest and open debate, although it is not clear that the legacy media can meet that demand given inherent bias. The Reuters research also found that more people say they actively avoid the news. In the UK that figure has risen 32% in the past two years ago. Data suggests that boredom, anger and sadness over Brexit drove that avoidance. Besides, people say they avoid the news because it harms their mood or they feel powerless to change events. That's a sentiment many of us recognise. Except, as Jordan Peterson and Marian Tupy discuss here, things as far from the pending apocalypse portrayed in the mainstream media. In truth, in the long term, we are doing pretty well on most fronts. Listen and learn. (Addendum: The Apple Daily ran its last print on 24 June 2021. It shut down all it’s Hong Kong operations.) 16/6/2021 1 Comment Justice Denied "Watching the BBC executives, what struck me was the condescending tone in all replies to questions about their responsibilities." This week, two strands of inquiry came together on Tuesday, exposing the arrogance and contempt for justice that resides in Britain's institutions.
In the first instance, MPs grilled past and present BBC executives over the Bashir affair. They focused on the use of forged documents to groom Princess Diana into giving that infamous interview. Second, the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel delivered a report slamming the Metropolitan Police. Morgan, a private detective, died in a south London car park with an axe to the head in March 1987. At the time, he was investigating links between corrupt police and gangland figures. Five investigations by the Metropolitan Police failed to find his killers. It's now becoming clear why. Watching the BBC executives, what struck me was the condescending tone in all replies to questions about their responsibilities. They refused to accept any criticism for what happened around Bashir. Nor would they apologise to the whistle-blower who they ruined. Instead, when cornered, their response was "I can't remember", "I don’t know", "We can't find the documentation," and "You don't understand how things work". I came away with the impression that 'things work' without any checks and balances at the BBC. And how dare anyone question them? After all, as self-appointed arbiters of all the news, they are above reproach. Meanwhile, according to the BBC narrative, Bashir was a lone rogue reporter who deceived the entire editorial team and senior management. Yet, even when they knew Bashir had lied, they rehired him as their chief religious affairs correspondent. Praise the Lord! The trashing of the Metropolitan Police also noted a haughty attitude and dismissal of people. The Panel observed how the victim's family faced sneers and rebuttals by Met officers as they pursued a three-decade campaign for justice. I suppose if members of the Royal Family struggle to get the truth, what chance do ordinary people have? Thus, it's a testament to Morgan's family that their tenacity achieved so much against officials intent on protecting reputations. The Panel, led by Lady O'Loan, found evidence of bent coppers scuppering the murder investigation. Inappropriate links between the media, police and organised crime abounded. Brown envelopes stuffed with payoffs are reminiscent of the corruption Hong Kong experienced in the 1970s. In London, detectives sold confidential information to the underworld and the media. In the years after the murder, various Met leaders, including the current Commissioner, Cressida Dick, stand accused of hindering investigations. Lady O'Loan finishes by asserting the Met is 'institutionally corrupt'. Note the present tense. They can add that to their 'institutionally racist' tag. This broad-brush epithet is odd because elsewhere in the report, it’s stated that the vast majority of police officers in the Met are honest. So why tar everyone with the same brush? No doubt Commissioner Dick will hang on. Because, having participated in the execution of an innocent man in 2005 and survived that, this is but a minor blot on her record. This incident joins a litany of pratfalls that would have seen any other official go. Yet, for reasons unknown, Commissioner Dick retains her job. Doubtless, Commissioner Dick will be facing further questions in the coming days and months over the failure of her officers to investigate the activities in the UK of convicted paedophile Jeffery Epstein. As this Channel 4 documentary makes clear, there are issues worthy of further study. Only a deeply suspicious person would suggest that any of these events are linked. Even so, what does it say about public life in Britain that Commissioner Dick continues as the top cop? Meanwhile, at the same time, the BBC is again dodging accountability. Nothing to see here, move on. Does it seem time for the UK to consider a Hong Kong-style independent commission against corruption? Because the evidence is mounting that the UK police are incapable of addressing the issue of in-house corruption. The ICAC had a painful birth and bumpy ride at times, but Hong Kong is a less corrupt place as a result. Whether the UK has the political will to tackle these issues is another question.  "How about tackling poverty, housing issues and providing a decent pension scheme instead of relying on the rip off MPF?" Be under no illusions. While the national security law has dampened the ardour of the opposition voices in Hong Kong, it has not driven them away. Besides, as a Covid lid presses down on protest activities, disaffection simmers below the surface.
So unless Carrie Lam can dissipate the underlying sentiment of restlessness, pressure may build again. Could that lead to a return of unrest? Hard to say. Last Friday, the annual June 4th remembrance passed with muted activities in various districts. Covid restrictions played a part in preventing large gatherings. In the past, the violent radicals used the cover of peaceful crowds to mount their attacks. On this occasion, a pro-active police presence sought to deter groups, which undoubtedly inhibited the radicals. Whatever happened in Beijing, June 1989, and accounts vary, people did die, including soldiers, students and citizens. However, a confusion of reporting feeds disputed versions of the exact circumstances. Overlooked by most commentators is the larger violent clashes between the army and workers away from the square. Yet, in the Hong Kong context, discussing such details is relatively futile because Tiananmen is pivotal to the political zeitgeist. Moreover, it has a totemic quality highlighted by the annual vigil. Accordingly, only one narrative prevails. Furthermore, it is all too easy to dismiss the youngsters who mark the event as naive, as most were born well after 1989. Yet, a bit of self-reflection will bring out the truth that we all celebrate anniversaries for events before our birth. Each year the gathering in Victoria Park proves a huge money earner for the opposition. With stalls selling items and collecting donations, the vigil helps swell their coffers. The gathering is so crucial that when the police changed the crowd flow into the park for public safety reasons, an uproar erupted because the route bypassed a valued donation point. With media reports suggesting the oppositions funds are drying up, you can see why they'd be keen to organise any money-raising event. But, cut off from donations, overseas funds and fighting many legal actions, most commentators agree their influence is waning. A lack of funds may become critical for them in the forthcoming LegCo elections scheduled for November. In preparation for that, the opposition first needs to decide if they will run; then mount a campaign within the new perimeters. That needs money. One group, the League of Social Democrats, has already indicated it will not take part. Others may opt to do the same. For Carrie Lam, this removes any excuses for failing to put in place policies that serve the best interests of Hong Kong people. She can no longer hide behind claims that the opposition hinders progress. Because, in truth, she has no functioning opposition. How about tackling poverty, housing issues and providing a decent pension scheme instead of relying on the rip off MPF? Through such actions Carrie may demonstrate she has the best interests of Hong Kong people at heart. Come on, Carrie, the ball is your court. |
AuthorWalter De Havilland was one of the last of the colonial coppers. He served 35 years in the Royal Hong Kong Police and Hong Kong Police Force. He's long retired. Archives
October 2021
|
RSS Feed