Tobacco Tactics - what do you think of it so far?
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 14:53 I haven't written about the Tobacco Tactics website, managed by the University of Bath, until now.
I sort of agreed with those who thought we shouldn't give it publicity because any increase in traffic will only improve its search ranking.
Then again, some of the entries were so random and the quality of research so erratic that it seemed more of an own goal than a serious campaign tool for the tobacco control industry.
Now that I've had a chance to revisit it I see that two sections are devoted to Forest – Forest and History of Forest.
Other Forest campaigns - The Free Society, Save Our Pubs and Clubs and Hands Off Our Packs - get a further page each.
They have even devoted a page to me, stating: "Clark is an active blogger." Well, I do my best, although I can think of better epitaphs.
Nevertheless, I am broadly delighted. In future, if anyone asks "What does Forest actually do?" I will refer them to Tobacco Tactics.
I am particularly chuffed by the section on The Free Society (TFS). Forest's sister campaign had a slow and rather tortuous birth and it is still, metaphorically speaking, in nappies and barely crawling, yet a search of Tobacco Tactics reveals numerous results. I am very grateful.
In keeping with its McCarthyite template, TT names a list of contributors to The Free Society, some of whom have never written about tobacco.
It also names organisations that have co-hosted TFS events, ignoring the fact that many of them were on non-tobacco related issues and the word 'smoking' was never mentioned by the majority of speakers (who have been listed nevertheless).
Clearly, any association with Forest (even indirectly via The Free Society) is considered worthy of a mention.
I wonder what former Conservative party chairman David Davis MP, Matt Grist (senior researcher at Demos), Professor Terence Kealey (vice-chancellor at the University of Buckingham) and Toby Young (associate editor of The Spectator) will think of that.
When they agreed to take part in a discussion called 'Freedom, Education and the State' hosted by The Free Society and the Adam Smith Institute, I bet they weren't expecting their names to appear, a year or two later, on a state-financed website called Tobacco Tactics!
An example of how random the entries are is the page devoted to the Henry Jackson Society:
The Henry Jackson Society describes itself as "a cross-partisan, British-based think-tank". It says that its founders and supporters "are united by a common interest in fostering a strong British and European commitment towards freedom, liberty, constitutional democracy, human rights, governmental and institutional reform and a robust foreign, security and defence policy and transatlantic alliance"
It was founded in Cambridge on 11 March 2005, and launched in the Houses of Parliament on 22 November 2005.
On 1 April 2011, it merged with the Centre for Social Cohesion. The CSC's website says: "We are pleased to announce that the CSC has combined together with the London-based think tank The Henry Jackson Society, who share the same philosophy as the CSC in addition to their broader mission statement."
We then get a section on the Centre for Social Cohesion:
The Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) describes itself as "a non-partisan independent organisation specialising in studying radicalisation and extremism within Britain". Its director is Douglas Murray.
On 1 April 2011, the CSC merged with the Henry Jackson Society. CSC's website says: "We are pleased to announce that the CSC has combined together with the London-based think tank The Henry Jackson Society, who share the same philosophy as the CSC in addition to their broader mission statement."
The CSC has been criticised in The Guardian for alleged "relentless Islamophobia" which has "spread poison and whipped up anti-Muslim paranoia at every turn".
Can anyone tell me why, on that evidence, the HJS and the CSC have been listed on a website that purports to "provide up-to-date information on the Tobacco Industry [sic], its allies or those promoting a pro-tobacco agenda".
As the institution responsible for this rubbish the University of Bath should be charged under the Trades Descriptions Act!
Finally, apologies to Patrick Basham of the Democracy Institute whose reputation lies in tatters thanks to this entry:
Simon Clark, the director of Forest, describes Basham as an "old friend".
Could it get more ridiculous?
For the record I have known Patrick for three (four?) years. I have 'known' Deborah Arnott, CEO of ASH, in much the same way for twice as long (seven or eight years), hence my occasional description of her as "my friend".
Sorry, Deborah, but if everyone I light-heartedly call a 'friend' is listed on Tobacco Tactics it is only a matter of time before you too are categorised as a not so secret agent of Big Tobacco.
PS. I am amazed that the spoof TT Twitter account is still going strong. Hat-tip to whoever is doing it. Visit @tobacco_tactics. Oh, and enjoy this disclaimer on the Tobacco Tactics website:
The Twitter-account named @tobacco_tactics is not ours!
A few days after the launch of TobaccoTactics.org, a twitter account was set up to impersonate the wiki, and the editors of the site.
Using the TobaccoTactics logo and URL, those who set up this account violate Twitter policies. Twitter has been notified.
Ten out the 15 first followers are names featuring on TobaccoTactics, for instance as libertarians or pro-smoking bloggers.
I admit it. @Forest_Smoking is following @tobacco_tactics. We're also following @PlainPacks and @ASH_LDN and @ASHScotland and @ASHWalesCymru and @SmokefreeSW.
OMG.
Reader Comments (8)
I'm rather insulted I didn't make the naughty list. It does mean, however, that I have tobacco control industry blessing that everything I say as a non tobacco industry aligned adult consumer must be believed.
What I say is that they are lying and manipulating evidence for ideological gain and they are causing both social and economic damage. They are wasting precious tax payer cash in a recession when people are suffering, and when their stooges like Simon Chapman denigrate me as a tobacco stooge or industry troll then they are illegally defaming me.
The TT Bath Uni wiki includes others who are obviously no more than political enemies in a laughable attempt to denigrate them but they have done our work for us in educating us on just how wide the common sense and fair approach to tobacco regulation and consumption has support among well balanced and non-hysteric main stream players.
The tobacco control industry and Bath Uni is run and designed by obsessive healthist extremists and that is demonstrated by the wiki.
Govt should be backing away slowly, very slowly, before it gets dragged into this lunacy further to the detriment of the country.
you should follow the mick taking twitter feed. #tobacco_tactics
The real lot were too dim witted to grab the twitter name first. As any business knows, before you launch a new product or thing, you check out all the domain names and buy up all the relevant addresses. Basic stuff really.
See my PS!
Agent Arnott ?1? Lord help us ...
ASH et al.
Their clowns, surely.
Maybe that's their real Achilles heal.
No genuinely intelligent person would ever work for them.
Hence the comedy sound bites.
Tee hee likewise I got www.alcoholhealthalliance.org
Just in case you were not aware the Tobacco Tactics website is hosted in The Netherlands by a Dutch private detective agency Buro Jansen and Janssen, named after the bungling detectives in TinTin.
I have put in an FOI request to Smoke Free South West and we the taxpayer are contributing £135,000 over 2 years to keep the project and website running.
More here.
https://daveatherton.wordpress.com/2012/07/04/smokefree-south-west-do-us-or-another-135000/
A very good thing about the website is its page of links to "pro tobacco bloggers". They are all in one place. Anyone visiting the site who clicks on the links will find them not to be pro tobacco and also interesting reads on a variety of issues.The libellous description as "pro tobacco" is more than compensated by the free publicity.