eu – Terence Eden’s Blog

Lies, damned lies, and political billboards

@edent — Sun, 29 May 2016 14:07:42 +0000

2024 Update. Some of the Tweets in this post have been deleted. You can see them on the archived version of this page.

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that any photograph which doesn't fit your political viewpoint must have been photoshopped.

A few weeks ago, as I was driving down the M40, I saw a giant "Vote Leave" poster with a fairly repulsive message on it.

I was immediately pounced on by people who thought I was making it up in order to discredit the Brexit side. So, the next time I passed it, my wife snapped a few photos.

The response was an endless cacophony of deluded shrieking.

It fell in to four main camps. Deny, delight, disparage, dumb.

Deny

"OMG! You FAKED this. I can tell by the pixels!"

Yes, apparently I am a master of photo editing. The number of people who have seen CSI one too many times and can apparently tell what a fake looks like is astounding. Here are two of my favourites.

Sorry, can't see any supports for poster and perspective looks wrong Simon Carswell

Of course, they mysteriously went silent when confronted with the video evidence:

Delight

Of course, there were those who thought the whole think was hilarious.

"Mate! It's just banter mate! Two World Wars One World Cup Doo-Dah! Can't you take a joke? Don't mention the war, eh! Do you get it? IT'S FUNNY!"

And the ever popular "it's a joke because it's true."

@edent 1. It's a joke, get a sense of humour. 2.EU is 3rd attempt at European Unity.Like 1914 & 1939, the impetus for it is German. #Brexit

Jon White (@Jon_White99) May 28, 2016

Let's ignore rising tensions, start antagonising our neighbours, and make ourselves look like idiots. Archbishop of Banterbury grade material right there...

Disparage

Then there are those who think that this is a hoax. That it, the poster is physically real, but it has been put in place by pro-Remain supporters. Or possibly a rogue faction of the Leave campaign.

Everyone knows it's a "false flag!"

Either way, it's just one poster. God! Stop being so...

...oh.

That second poster is in a different field - several miles away from the first. Interestingly, someone has obscured the word "German" in this one.

As well as the various fanatics who can't make a post on Twitter without #important #EUliars hashtags and links to poorly produced "documentaries" - were those who were so outraged at my temerity to question their politics that all semblance of spelling and grammar went out the window.

Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yes, it's like goldy and bronzy only it's made out of iron.

It's quite amazing how bad Twitter is for any form of discussion. It quickly degenerates into name-calling and attempted smears.

Mind you, USENET wasn't much better back in the day...

What's also interesting is how I didn't receive any threats - or gendered abuse. I see women posting less controversial comments who are then subject to a torrent of vile abuse. At worse I was called "naive" and a "lamb" - which is touchingly patronising.

I'm a reasonably tough bloke - but waking up to hundreds of angry messages is still intimidating. Mind you, it was counterbalanced by an outpouring of support.

Digital Daze

There's a serious point under all this. Our new digital world means it is easier than ever to manipulate photographs and videos.

Take a look at this - it is nothing short of terrifying!

It's extremely good to be sceptical. But I'm not sure that an army of amateur sleuths are best placed to determine the truth.

You are welcome to download the original photos if you'd like to look for evidence of manipulation.

Is This Illegal?

The reason I stopped on the hard shoulder was because I wanted to capture evidence of what I suspected was a crime. Surely stirring up this level of hatred must be against the law. Right?

The Advertising Standards Authority seem like the right people to complain to.

…we can’t look into complaints about political ads - they’re not subject to the Advertising Code. The best course of action for anyone with concerns about a political ad is to contact the party responsible and exercise your democratic right to tell them what you think.
…
We can’t, therefore, look into complaints that political ads are misleading, harmful or offensive.
ASA Statement on Political advertising - 21 July 2014

Brilliant. So you can basically lie as much as you want in a political advert. Perhaps the Electoral Commission can help?

We frequently receive complaints about political advertising or campaign material and the behaviour of candidates, especially in the period before an election. These are not within the scope of the complaints policy and will be referred to our Public Information Team.

While we have regulatory duties relating to campaign spending, including in relation to political advertising/election material, we have very few powers to deal with the content of material published by candidates and parties, or their general conduct. In most cases we will not be able to deal with such complaints, which should instead be made directly to the party or candidate responsible for the material.

If you feel that the content of the material may constitute a criminal offence, you should contact the police. Every police force has a dedicated Single Point of Contact officer (SPOC), who may be contacted about such allegations.

The Electoral Commission - Complains

So, is this offensive poster an offence?

@edent it looks like an offence under referendum rule 16.1.41

This should be reported to the police by dialling 101.

Phil Dunn - Lib Dem (@LibDemPhil) May 28, 2016

1.41 Under the Public Order Act 1986, it is an offence to publish or distribute threatening, abusive or insulting material that is intended to stir up racial hatred or which is likely to stir up racial hatred.

Campaigning dos and don’ts for EU Referendum campaigners

The Germans are not a specific race. So it's hard to say that this breaches that specific regulation.

…And with that, I'm at somewhat of a loss. Whoever has put of this poster it's not clear to me whether they are committing a crime, or are just relishing in offensiveness.

For now, I'm leaving it to the media to investigate - Buzzfeed generously paid for the photograph and have run a story on it, as did The Metro.

It has also been picked up by the Evening Standard, the Mirror, and Spiegel Online.

Of course, Vote Leave are denying that they are responsible. But that doesn't pass the Mandy Rice-Davies test.

Please - register to vote before it's too late.

Brexit Lies

@edent — Thu, 26 May 2016 11:11:49 +0000

At this point, I think it is a certainty that the UK will vote to leave the EU. The people who are anti-EU are passionate about their cause - every single one of them will be out to vote. For the rest of us, the EU doesn't occupy our every waking thought, we're happy to benefit from it but if the weather is rainy, we might not vote.

With all that said, I'd like to take a moment to point out some of the blatant lies being told by the Leave campaign. I think it is important to show people exactly how they are being mislead.

This is part of a leaflet which was shoved through my door last night.

Let's take the points one by one.

There is a £14 billion trade deal with China.
There is also a massive trade deal with India.
We do not have a separate trade deal with Australia. Although one is being negotiated with the EU. If we leave, those negotiations will have to start again - assuming Australia is interested.
The UK has not bailed out the Euro. We have a veto against doing so and refused to contribute to the IMF's bail out. Our latest negotiations mean we don't need have any "rows" about bailing out the Euro (€).
We already are a member of the WTO!
...and, as part of the WTO, the UK is part of a trade agreement with Australia!

Now, at this point I'd expect Vote Leave to point out that the trade deals with China and India aren't free trade deals - that is where both countries lower barriers to each other's goods & services.

But these concessions are not always symmetric. For example, the Switzerland-China trade deal gives China immediate access to Swiss markets but Switzerland has to wait 15 years for access to Chinese markets.

Similarly, the Chinese-Australian trade deal allows companies to bring in Chinese economic migrants, even when there is no labour shortage in Australia! That "deal" took 10 years to negotiate.

So, OK, we leave the EU and abandon all the trade deals signed with them. Then we spend years negotiating from a weakened position. Then, somehow, we end up with preferential trade deals.

Yeah, right.

We're the fifth largest economy in the world. But the EU is six times larger! If you're China, India, Australia - who do you prioritise in your trade negotiations? If you're in the EU, what concessions do you give the UK knowing that doing so could hasten the break-up of the Eurozone?

There may very well be valid arguments for leaving the EU - but the Leave Campaign seems content just to mislead voters.

If you want some impartial facts on the EU referendum, please visit Full Fact.

EU 112 Day Widget

@edent — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:00:47 +0000

Today is the European 112 Day! Because the date is 11/2 - just like the number - see!

112 is the European wide emergency services number. Wherever you are in the EU, dialling 112 will get you through to the local emergency services. In fact, most GSM networks outside of the EU will also route your call correctly.

This is an important day. Dialling 112 could save your life. Sadly, the UK isn't doing anything to promote it.

So, what better way to celebrate than by designing a JIL widget to allow you to quickly dial 112 in an emergency? (That's a rhetorical question...)

I've written before about the JIL SDK and my professional involvement with it.

The JIL SDK allows us access to the telephony subsystem. This allows us to directly place a call - usually via the native dialer application. It's a very simple call, all you do is pass it a string. It will take 0-9+#*. So, you can use it to call USSD commands. Annoyingly, you can't get information back from the commands - a problem also present in Android.

So, the code is simply

That's it.

Logo

The EU has a logo that they want people to use for 112 promotion.

Their licensing terms are very enlightened (for a government organisation)

Any organisation, institution, company or individual willing to inform citizens of the European emergency number can use the materials informing about the 112 and general logo of the 112 which are available on our website. Regardless of the size or the branch of economic/social/cultural activity, all the entities concerned with safety and emergency issues are welcomed to use these materials and ideas for their campaigns.

Download

~~Download and install the widget.~~

On the Vodafone H1, you may need to dial *#35767# to remove the H1’s security check.

If you’re interest in developing for this platform, there’s a €1,000,000 bounty up for grabs. There’s also a Dev Camp at Mobile World Congress this year.

I work for Vodafone – this is my personal blog, I don’t to speak for them. All opinions, claims and mistakes are my own.

Amendment 138

@edent — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:27:59 +0000

Update 27/10/2009 - I've received several replies - scroll down to read.

After reading EU Parliament's credibility undermined by back track on citizens' rights on the Open Rights Group blog, I was moved to write to my MEPs.

FOR THE ATTENTION OF: Sharon Bowles MEP Nirj Deva MEP Nigel Farage MEP Caroline Lucas MEP Marta Andreasen MEP Catherine Bearder MEP Peter Skinner MEP Dear Nigel Farage, Marta Andreasen, Caroline Lucas, Sharon Bowles, Nirj Deva, Peter Skinner and Catherine Bearder, Regarding Amendment 138. I understand that the lead negotiator, Catherine Trautmann, has reversed the decision of the Parliament. I confess I have little understanding in how the EU works in this regard. But I strongly urge all of you to use your considerable influence to protect the rights of all EU citizens to a free and open Internet. The Internet is our generation's printing press. It must not be allowed to become restricted or corrupted by private interest - it must stay free of state interference. Otherwise we run the risk of entering a digital dark ages - where only "official" information is sanctioned and our every move is monitored and recorded. Please, contact Catherine Trautmann and tell her that the citizens of Europe expect her to respect the Parliament and to fight for the rights of citizens. Further information on the subject is at http://www.laquadrature.net/en/amendment-138-the-parliament-betrayed-by-its-negotiators Yours sincerely,

I've had a mixed response when writing to my MEPs. The Anti-European ones are usually very quick at replying - but their replies often take the tone "Everything the EU does is bad - vote for us and we'll stop it". The Greens usually give a detailed response. I rarely hear back from the other parties.

Let's hope this email gets through to enough of them.

UPDATE 19/10/2009

Lib Dem MEP Sharon Bowles is the first to reply to me with this very well considered email.

Dear Mr Eden, Thank you for writing to me regarding the Telecoms Package. I agree with you that net neutrality is a fundamental freedom. As a Liberal Democrat I am fundamentally unable to support such restrictions as you have outlined. In particular motions to grant quasi-judicial authority to ISPs are a dangerous and illiberal step and an open door to abuses. For some in industry and in the political sphere the internet poses a threat to the protection of intellectual property. While I understand that the internet poses new challenges, it is my firm opinion that those who see the answer to those challenges in repressive restrictions are profoundly mistaken. It is clear to me that concern for the short-term bottom line has blinded the entertainment industry to the need to adapt to the age of file-sharing. I should mention that despite these serious issues, the overall Telecoms package is a good one that is mainly concerned with providing a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services. It is designed to facilitate access to spectrum for operators, foster innovation and make European rules on telecommunications more consistent. It will also enhance competition in the communications sector and thereby ensure that all market players have sufficient incentives to invest in infrastructure and customer services. These are necessary reforms given the advances in the technology and changes in the market over the past decade, so I regret that the legislative process has been hijacked to include proposals of this sort after heavy lobbying by industry. We are currently at the third and final stage of a legislative process that has continued now for two years. The European Parliament has consistently voted by large majorities to ensure that no restrictions are imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of internet users without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities. The European Council has consistently rejected these amendments. Both Parliament and Council must give their assent if any legislation of this type is to pass. The strong consensus remains in Parliament that such restrictions are not acceptable. It is important that the Council must accept Parliament's amendments to remove all potential restrictions on internet access and allow the good aspects of the telecoms package to pass. I have urged those who have written to me in the past on this issue to petition the British government to change its position on the Council to support net neutrality and accept Parliament's amendments. I would urge you to do the same. At present it appears that the government is listening more to those interested parties who would benefit from further restrictions on internet use, than it is listening to the concerns of ordinary internet users who would be affected by such restrictions. There remains the possibility that, should no agreement be found, Parliament may reject the proposal in its entirety. This would be highly unfortunate for the good economic measures that this package contains within it. Thank you once again for contacting me on this issue. Yours sincerely, Sharon Bowles MEP

Hope I get some feedback from the others...

Update 2 21/10/2009 - the Green Party replies

Dear Terence, Thank you for your recent email about the EU’s Telecom Package. Caroline has asked me to respond on her behalf. The "telecom package" is in reality a set of 5 Directives. The legislative proposals are designed to protect the rights of the consumers with regard to telecommunication services. During the Telecom Package’s First Reading a number of important provisions won support from MEPs, including access to more flexible contracts, better emergency services and improved information about prices and tariffs for telephone users. However, there was less agreement on the critical issues of data protection and ‘unlawful’ use of the internet. You might know that an initial compromise between the EU's 3 institutions was reached ahead of the First Reading vote, but that the issue of net neutrality remained controversial. The text that MEPs were asked to vote on was open to interpretation and could be used to advocate a "three strikes and you are out" approach against anyone eg downloading music in breach of copyright laws. Greens strongly disagree with the three strikes model or any other similar attempts to restrict internet access. Caroline recognises that important questions are posed by the proliferation of new media, particularly in relation to copyright. However, these must be answered in ways that protect important freedoms and do not curtail the emergence of internet based cultural activity or free access to the internet. Green MEPs from the Internal Market Committee said: "Unrestricted access to the internet is an essential right for a functioning information society, which should not be curbed simply at the whim of large media firms. For this reason, the Greens will re-table an amendment (originally amendment 138) to protect citizens' rights and prevent the arbitrary restriction of internet access." Caroline was delighted that the main "Citizen amendment" was then carried in plenary; this was proposed originally by, among others, the leader of the Greens in the Parliament, and guarantees that an internet user’s connection will not be cut without a prior ruling by a judge. This is a victory for citizen's rights. Unfortunately, in the other chapter of this telecom package, the Harbour report, the definition of net neutrality is not good enough to ensure that traffic Management Policies cannot be used for anti-competitive purposes. Greens will keep working on these issues during this legislature in order to guarantee protection for net neutrality. It is also critical that you lobby your MP as national governments, via the Council of Europe, are in favour of significant restrictions and of giving internet service providers and businesses greater powers to eg control information flow or monitor individual usage of the net. Parliament has formulated its conciliation team, who are responsible for negotiating with the Council and seeking agreement on the final text of the legislation. The EU's telecoms ministers have already indicated that the Council would not approve the Citizen’s Amendment so these negotiations will be lengthy. No Green MEPs are part of the conciliation team but Caroline is hopeful that members will fairly represent the view of the Parliament on net neutrality. She shares your concern about any attempt to reverse the decision of the Parliament on amendment 138 and will be working to keep up pressure on the negotiating team to ensure that the MEP’s position is properly reflected in any agreement. Thank you for taking the time to write to Caroline and please be assured of her commitment to protecting the rights and freedoms of internet users. If you need any further information do not hesitate to get back in touch and you can read more about Caroline’s work at www.carolinelucasmep.org.uk Kind regards,

UPDATE 19/10/2009 - The Labour Party replies

Dear Mr Eden, Thank you for contacting me about the ongoing negotiations concerning Article 138 of what is known as "the telecoms package". Please forgive my delay in replying to you. On 6 May the European Parliament adopted its second reading on the proposals that constitute the package and we are now still in discussions with the European Council to reach an agreement on a final law. Labour Euro MPs are committed to achieving an overall package that delivers real benefits for consumers by opening up competition in the telecoms market, while strengthening consumers' rights and the protection of their privacy. We have listened carefully to citizens' concerns about the protection of their fundamental rights in the online environment. I agree with you that the internet is an important tool for education, civil society and freedom of speech and that needs to be fostered and protected. This is why Euro MPs inserted amendments making clear that all laws affecting the internet must respect the fundamental rights of citizens. Legal opinions issued by the legal services of the European Institutions make clear that, under the Treaties that establish the EU's powers, European legislation cannot go beyond this, for example by requiring Member States to follow a specific legal procedure. As such these issues remain a matter for national law. The conclusion of the package is important to deliver many priorities that Labour Euro MPs have campaigned for, including limits on contract length in order to prevent consumers being 'locked in' to a bad deal, the ability to switch your mobile number to a new network within 24 hours and a guarantee of equal access for disabled people to communication services. The final proposal also adopted amendments I put forward that will ensure the 116 000 missing child hotline, a crucial plank in developing an EU rapid child abduction alert, will be set up in every country of the European Union. Labour Euro MPs will work towards a final agreement on this legislation that maintains these benefits and upholds citizens' rights. Yours sincerely, Peter Skinner MEP MEP for South East England www.peterskinnermep.eu