FFS: Near Defamation (Is That a Thing?)

This is the blogosphere. I geddit. I can dish it out and and I can take it.

But there are some things that cannot be allowed to stand. Two comments on the Focus on the Family Astroturf Blog (FFAB) fall into this category.

Background first.

Yesterday, I blogged about the Christian Medical and Dental (?) Society's quest to be exempted from new rules requiring physicians (eat your inferiority-complected hearts out, DDSs) to refer patients for treatments that CMDS members find objectionable.

I had what I thought was a simple solution, first voiced on Twitter…

@fernhilldammit I'm sorry but I'm not at liberty to divulge the names of our members.
— CMDS Canada (@CMDSCanada) March 26, 2015

… then again in the blogpost.

Tell us who you are so we can run a mile from you.

As reported yesterday, FFAB called me a hypocrite for asking for names and promising to publish them when I use a pseudonym.

The illogic of that didn't bother me. Neither did the snide remarks about my personality, writing skills, and psychology, both in the blogpost and gleefully added by commenters. (Comments haven't yet descended into speculations about my body hair and weight; they are admirably restraining themselves.)

One commenter though, John Baglow, wondered what the problem was when the intent is clearly to inform potential patients of probable mis-matches between their needs and the medicos' moral capacities.

Two commenters took it upon themselves to respond.

Here's what can't stand -- implications that I intended some kind of harm to come to anti-choice MDs.

Melissa said:

I don’t suppose that naming doctors would be such a bad thing if there weren’t a group of pro-choicers who were dead set on taking them down. But when you have a small group of people (ie the Radical Handmaids) who are committed to taking these doctors down, to bullying these doctors in a media that is quite receptive to the pro-choice cause and quite hostile to the pro-life one. Nobody wants to get caught in one of those smear campaigns, which understandably makes them reluctant to make their names known publicly.

Mary Deutscher said:

If only Fern Hill were naming physicians to help patients avoid them! The fear here is that physicians are being named to be targeted and reprimanded for refusing to harm their patients.

"Dead set on taking them down." "Bullying." "Hostile." "Smear campaigns [!!]". "Fear." "Targeted."

FFS.

I know, I know, I know. It's just typical fetus fetishist self-pity and martyr-card deployment.

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure those comments wouldn't qualify as defamation either.

But they are on the path to defamation and I call on FFAB's Andrea Mrozek to disavow herself and her blog from them.

Deletion of them and an apology would be nice but I'm not holding my breath.

I intend to leave a link to this post in a comment at the blog.

UPDATE: As of noon, Saturday, March 28, Andrea Mrozek has not responded. My comment with a link to this post was published though.

UPPITY-DATIER: I woke on Sunday to the comment from Joel Kropf (below) urging me to meet Mrozek and this from her at the Astroturf blog:
"Fern, I’m happy to address anything with you, in person. Invitation for coffee still stands.
PS Since so much is misinterpreted over text/twitter/email, I’ll add this is not a sarcastic comment."

Is it just me or is this getting creepy?

No. I have no interest in meeting Mrozek in person. I want her to address the implication that I intended harm ONLINE. The implication was made ONLINE and needs to be addressed -- if at all -- ONLINE.

Mrozek, you created the opportunity for stupidity to occur. It is your obligation to fix it.

Or not.

My physical presence is not required.

BAT signal ON!

“We can't stop here, this is bat country!” 

― Hunter S. Thompson, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"

Word is out that JJ may be (soonish, DJ! hopes) posting at her blog.  In anticipation of this, as well as the tentative arrival of springtime in Ontario  ―possibly in Manitoba and Yurp as well― this seemed relevant. 

In 1985, responding to an influx of mailers promoting insurance company interests in his district, Senator Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas) reportedly said, “A fellow from Texas can tell the difference between grassroots and AstroTurf.” He was referring to the difference between an actual, organic uprising among constituents and a manufactured movement often paid for by corporate or other interests to simulate the real thing. The name stuck, and since that time, the term “astroturf” has been used to describe these contrived public campaigns.

The Tea Party may be a movement that blossomed as a result of this kind of corporate astroturfing. A study by the National Cancer Institute found the tobacco industry paid millions to fund free-market oriented “grassroots” groups that were aligned with their interests against cigarette taxes, the Clinton health care plan and the EPA’s findings regarding the dangers of second-hand smoke. Many key players in the Tobacco-funded groups Citizens for a Sound Economy and FreedomWorks went on to play a major role in the formation of the contemporary Tea Party. Likewise, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and CSE are funded by the notorious billionaire Koch brothers, who have poured their wealth into causes such as abolishing social security, welfare and public schools.

Fortunately for astroturfers, costly forms of the practice, such as the building of physical crowds, are less necessary today now that so much of the public sphere has moved online. As a result, other forms of message control are blooming. Wikipedia is targeted by politicians, corporations and SEO advertisers desperate to improve their images on a neutral but participatory platform. The regularity of these editing campaigns can even be used to predict political appointments or running mates.

From here. Our emphasis.

It reminds us of the MASSIVE blogging fun we've shared, writing about the many failed efforts by the religious right-wing to appear significant to the majority of Canadians.

We're hoping for a scathing follow up to Marci McDonald's "The Armageddon Factor" or better still, an exposé by investigative journalists Glen McGregor and Stephen Maher on the complex range of CPC astroturf tactics, who directs them, how they're funded and if they're connected to Harper ReformaTories' electoral fraud and voter suppression strategy.


Grand merci to Námo Mandos whose hilarious post at the other place brought Gittlitz' piece to my attention.

Astroturf on the Cheap

So, now that the Ontario election campaign is up and nasty running, what's that anti-union, pro-Hudork astroturf gang up to?

Not much, seemingly. Its webpage has not changed (teehee) since I last visited on August 19.

Its YouTube channel now sports three, count 'em, three videos.

The latest, posted on September 8, at least attacks Dalton McGuinty. The other two attack pro-union Working Families.

I'm embedding the vid because the voice is driving me crazy. Reminds me of some doofus character -- maybe from Red Green? -- on telly. In any case, it's an odd choice. As is the guitar-pickin' music.

As is the message. It confirms that McGuinty did not raise taxes, but then lists various other fees and premiums introduced by the Liberals. The annoying voice keeps repeating: 'technically speaking' McGuinty has a pretty good record.

Odd.

Have a listen.



Who is that?

PFBO's frontman, Dominionist nutbar and former spokesthingy for tax-doging Con candidate Randy Hillier, Tristan Emmanuel seems pretty quiet too.

His company, Brazen Communications, has no web presence that I could find, though there is a Brazen Communications in Singapore.

Tristan seems to limit his brazenness to Twitter and Facebook. The last comment on the FB wall is August 17, but he had a flurry of activity on September 8 on Twitter with three tweets: one directing people to the new vid above and two directing people to a peppy newsletter with an odd domain name: us2.campaign-archive2.com.

Which takes you here, something called 'Mail Chimp'.

Hi there.

You probably found this page because one of our subscribers used MailChimp to send you an email campaign, and you traced a link in the email back here to investigate. MailChimp is an email-marketing service that serves more than 900,000 companies of all shapes and sizes, from all over the world. We send more than 40 million emails every day, and we help our customers comply with spam laws and best practices so they can get their campaigns into their subscribers' inboxes.

(Aside: And a laff riot to boot. There's a link to 'Our Practical Jokes' which takes you to the hahahaha [^NOT] story of how the company's mascot -- yep, a mailbag carrying chimp -- was built.)

Zow. It looks like Tristan is hooked up with a professional spamming outfit.

Makes sense, I guess. Astroturf group and spammer.

That's yer Con astroturf grassroots for ya: cheap and cheesy.