twitter: @rolygate

The Public Health Guide To Control

An insider guide to Public Health's methods for controlling the funding and work feedback loop, removing the opposition, and the vital job-creation schemes that keep us in employment - very well-paid employment. We are the world champions of high-pay/zero-result jobs: no one beats us on that score.
 

The Public Health Playbook: how we own health

  1. Rule #1 is the most important of all considerations in our work - all other factors are subordinate:

                First, remove the primary stakeholders

    - that's the people affected, and who may even be killed by our actions.*
    By any and all means possible, remove their right to complain about the way they are being treated. Lies, propaganda, personal attacks and political manoeuvring are all first-line methods, but anything that works is allowable - no matter how far we have to go, the people affected by our policies must have their right to complain about it removed.
    * We kill 70,000 EU citizens a year with our Snus ban (at least 10% of the total EU smoking death toll is due to our successful prohibition of reduced-harm alternatives, in order to assist our commercial friends' revenues; this is our greatest success so far, and something we are very proud of - the accumulated revenues resulting from our actions are of immense size).
  2. Absolutely refuse to deal with or even acknowledge any consumer association (see #1). Don't even admit they exist. If we admit they exist then we will have to deal with them, and this contradicts the prime rule, #1. Negotiating with the stakeholders is absolutely prohibited in our rulebook.
        In the EU this is especially well recognised, fortunately: consumers and their associations are cleverly barred from any meaningful representation in Brussels.
  3. Next, remove the secondary stakeholders: the businesses who service the consumers we are going to legislate against. Again, all methods can be used, though we must stay within legal limits.
  4. However, if the businesses we will destroy are still nascent, unorganised, and lacking in funds to defend themselves, we can go well beyond legal limits - we can successfully libel them egregiously and even go as far as criminal fraud to try and injure them.*
    * This was the tactic used by LACORS in the UK before the ecig industry was big enough to defend itself. It was a masterstroke, executed at just the right time: they claimed e-liquids had 10 times the actual nicotine content, were dangerously toxic, and were poisoning children. Unfortunately LACORS was subsequently dissolved and this was a severe blow to us in PH - we lost a true friend and great ally.
  5. We can admit to the existence of the secondary stakeholders as we will be assigning them much of the blame. This means we can admit to the existence of trade associations. They are to be referred to as the axis of evil. We can use them to explain to the media that the problem may be caused by profit-hungry corporations, which again allows us to disenfranchise the primary stakeholders (they have been addicted by the evil, profit-hungry pizza corporations or whoever our target is currently). But remember: removing the voice of the primary stakeholders is Rule #1 and this must always be kept in mind.
  6. If we can refer to the corporations as 'transnational', this is even better: in the media this can be made to look like an international plot, even better a plot to corrupt our youth (think of the children). Imaginary dangers work better than almost anything, and imaginary dangers to our children are the best of all. Of course we must never allow it to be pointed out that we are the strongest transnational organisation of all in this area; after all hypocrisy is not a fault for us, it's a useful tool: we can use accusations as an ad hominem and deflect them.
  7. Make sure the media see our point of view: the debate must be skewed at any cost. If it's in the papers it must be true - so make sure they see it our way.
  8. If it's in the media it becomes true: it can even become a self-fulfilling prophecy, because it is more convincing than arguments presented by Fred next door; we can modify behaviour with it; and then it becomes true. "People are giving up ecigs because they are poisonous", in the media, becomes people giving up ecigs.
  9. Use stockholdings and the threat of advertising revenue withdrawal to make sure editors understand our point of view clearly.
  10. If we don't have stockholdings ourselves, our friends certainly will. Our friends are very well aware that they need voting stock in media to use as a lever.
  11. Our friends also have an extensive advertising spend and will assist in that area: threat of ad revenue withdrawal is the most powerful of all levers on the media currently.
  12. Where the media has left-wing cadres (such as the BBC), put pressure on them via party affiliations to ensure that the socialist view predominates - never let the true picture emerge. All socialists understand that the population need iron control for their own good, and so that the right people gain control of revenue.
  13. Make sure to use press releases at all times and in all cases; it doesn't matter if the results of the study or the resource touted are opposite to our goal: make the press release sound as if it supports our argument. No one will ever read the actual study anyway. Outright lies are permitted here because we can always later claim the PR was opinion not fact.
  14. One of the best propaganda weapons is the threat of unknown future dangers - use it well.
  15. Use paid-for junk science and fraudulent research to paint a picture of danger - threats of future dangers are the benchmark here as they cannot be disproved.
  16. Always cherrypick research and quote only those sources that emphasise putative dangers - ignore all other resources even if they outnumber the junk science. Never publicise any contrary opinion, and work hard to destroy its credibility.
  17. Science is likely to be an enemy, so it must be discredited. The best way to do this is normally to discredit the scientist/s responsible, since the facts are likely to be unfavourable.
  18. A good way to do this is to discredit the funding sources. We must never allow the fact we are partly or wholly-funded by even worse offenders to become a topic for discussion. Make sure our hypocrisy is used as a weapon: mentions of it can be made ad hominems and discredited.
  19. Never acknowledge inconvenient facts, research or statistics. Keep a blackout on these and make sure we are all aware of it.
  20. If the science can be perverted to our cause, so much the better. It gives a stamp of approval to our claims.
  21. The next best propaganda tool is a threat to the children. In the end, this may be the only tool left, when all other attacks have been discredited. Work it to the max, and make sure everyone is singing from the same hymnsheet. Luckily, it is hard to counter, as it is a threatened danger that cannot be proved or disproved; it's gold in our hands.
  22. Infiltrate government as far as possible. Because health policy is in reality mostly controlled by our friends, the job has already been done.
  23. Use front groups to push our propaganda. Our friends already have that covered, so we have a ready-made channel for distribution of our materials. We can use the most respected 'health charities' to promote our point of view, because they are wholly-owned by our friends.
  24. Given enough funds, we can control the global equivalents - or at least those departments that affect our goals. Our friends already have that covered and own the WHO. No one can stand against the power of the funds our friends dispense - in the end, everyone everywhere is owned by the funders when such immense sums are available. The WHO does what we tell it to (in our areas of interest), and our lies are their lies.
  25. Find doctors' groups who can be suborned to promote our materials - professional liars are so much more effective than amateur liars.
  26. Use universities to greenwash funds for our sock-puppets. Our friends will foot the bill. We can pay the unis such immense sums that, like heroin addicts, eventually they simply cannot exist without us. At that point we own them. Our lies become their lies.
  27. Use the power of our friends' funds to build a catalogue of fraudulent research that supports our aims. Our aims usually coincide with those of our friends, in any case. Greenwash toxic funds through the universities we own.
  28. Always attempt to discredit the opposition. Although we are always going to be far more guilty of anything we accuse them of, this doesn't matter - we shout loudest as we have the most money, and the loudest shouter wins. The media will ensure we win.
  29. Certain people in the most powerful positions of all must be bought, and the price is high for such assets. This isn't a problem for our friends, who probably own them already. They will allow us to use their assets since our goals are often mutually beneficial.
  30. Use proven methods for destabilisation where possible: the 3-D Divert-Degrade-Destroy method is one example. Using our friends' puppet government agencies is of great benefit here.
    - Divert (or Distract): move the battle to an area where they will lose but don't realise it until too late. For example, into the regulation arena. Have our agency, for example the MHRA, tell the ecig manufacturers that ecigs might be licensed cheaply and easily - this causes them to divert effort and funds into regulatory compliance.
    - Degrade the opposition's capability by draining its financial resources and vitality: keep dangling the medical license carrot in front of their face. Every now and then, move the goalposts - but tell them it can be fixed, by spending a bit more money. Encourage them to do more research and spend more. Refresh their efforts occasionally by providing false new intiatives that will cause them to spend even more and waste yet more time and resources. Soon they are in so deep they have to keep going or write off huge sums.
    - Destroy: after several years of high expenditure in an effort to comply, finally tell them that no ecig can be licensed. Their business will have been significantly harmed and even partly destroyed by the effort to comply with our increasingly-tough requirements, which were entirely fraudulent from the beginning.
        The extended process of encouraging lies followed by disappointments, more lies causing renewal of effort, and finally outright refusal, will break them, with luck: so much money is required to comply with our proposals that the business may have to be sold to a tobacco company in order to survive. Then we can say that we won't deal with tobacco companies. This is the perfect solution for a troublesome firm who want to license an ecig: degrade them to a state of partial or complete incapacity. It also provides the useful function of removing any spare cash they may have had for legal challenges. It's a winner.
  31. Use the Echo Chamber Principle to create a body of opinion that we can refer to as true, evidence-based, factual, and beyond reproach, even though it is none of these. It is the opposite, of course: because the bigger the lie, the more successful.
    a) Create work that states our opinion
    b) Have others create more of the same
    c) Discuss the resulting 'evidence' widely
    d) Create research that is agenda-led, based on the opinions
    e) Bury any opposing opinion under a tidal wave of fabricated opinion, biased research, and endless papers published in such volume that nothing else can be seen
    f) The goal is to create the perception that only our opinion has any weight, due to its sheer volume
       This is the echo chamber. It displaces all other opinion, and facts, by means of sheer volume.
  32. Remember: the bigger the lie, the better, as it is implicitly believed because no one can even conceive that we would lie on this scale. The 2nd and 3rd homes and the Jaguar don't pay for themselves by magic: we need expertise in lying on an epic scale to get those bills paid by our commercial partners. Always go for a big lie in preference to a small one: it just works better. And then amplify it with the echo chamber.
  33. Use the Ashton Principle to make ad hominem a weapon that can be turned against opponents:
    Use social media trolling and obscenities to generate a storm of protest, then remove our original provocation to make it look as if we are being attacked.
    a) First, post ridiculous and extreme opinions in the social media, promoting proposed policy ideas that would result in millions of unnecessary deaths
    b) When opponents politely point out the fundemental flaws in such policies, immediately abuse them viciously, using foul language and personal attacks, trolling deliberately for a strong reaction from those who do not realise they are being gamed; use obscenities to ensure a reaction
    c) Rejoice in the strong reaction to our obscenities and attacks - and goad them even more, making sure they post personal comments and even attacks in reply; this is expert use of trolling
    d) Then, delete all our original obscene and abusive replies, and any previous policy-related posts that may look a little OTT, leaving only the opponents' strong reaction
    e) Make a huge issue about unwarranted attacks on PH staff by rude members of the public; claim the attacks (which in reality are simply rather mild replies to the original obscenities we posted) orchestrated by persons or even industries unknown; claim complete innocence and unjustified victimisation
    f) Have colleagues bemoan the fact they have to work in such circumstances and that they can no longer use the social media due to personal attacks on them
    g) Have a quick enquiry made, which comes to the conclusion that (since all our vile materials were conveniently deleted) we were unjustifiably attacked, and reiterates that we are all saints working under pressure from astroturfers. Of course, we are the biggest astroturfers in the world, but that is very cleverly hidden from public view.
  34. Learn from our leaders, the masters of the propaganda game. Use the Glantz Principle to beat opponents who only have science and evidence to work with:
    Use logical fallacy, rhetorical fallacy and misrepresentation as the basis for all argument; and make sure that funding gives value for money to our commercial partners.
    a) Never admit any evidence contradicts our position: lie about it carefully by smearing opponents and discrediting them, ignoring any contrary research, and misrepresenting any remotely useful research.
    b) If possible entrap opponents with a public debate: our opponents are scientists and therefore unlikely to be able to beat skilled liars in a debate.
    c) Use the vast funds we have at our disposal wisely. In particular, make sure that our funding is leveraged to ensure the debate is one-sided. We have hundreds of millions at our disposal, and they have nothing except evidence: so make sure that money beats science. We are the specialists in this and our emerging and upcoming staff need to learn from our leaders.
    d) If a university that our commercial partners owns receives $10 million for propaganda, it's $10 million more than our opponents get, and we need to make it count. Connect the university to the regional legislature and make sure they see it our way.
    e) Our job is to provide the propaganda base and win the debate, our partners will help to grease the wheels as required.
  35. The laws are pre-purchased by our friends. Our job is to provide the public climate of perception that justifies the new and profitable laws. We must leave no stone unturned in our struggle to own all non-cllinical health and all associated revenue channels; to grow the non-clinical health sphere to epic proportions; to promote a world view where ultra-extended (and ultra-profitable) life is the goal, at any cost.
  36. Public Health knows best. We are the unchallengeable, ultimate authority.


It's all completely based on lies from the word go, of course - but that's the basis of our entire operation in any case. It's how we get paid. And we do get paid very well indeed - so keep that in mind, and when times get tough - i.e. when someone complains about the number of people being killed off by our highly-profitable policies, or if they moan about the only joy in a pitiable low-paid existence being removed. Remember why we do what we do: the two million pound mortgage* and the new Jaguar and Range Rover in the double garage, of course.

* Last year it was 1 million, but there has been some inflation.

 

 

 


created 2014-09-30
update 2015-02-25