DEFENCE STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS the Official Journal of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

DEFENCE STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS the Official Journal of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence Volume 3 | Autumn 2017 DEFENCE STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS The official journal of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence Overwriting the City: Graffiti, Communication, and Urban Contestation in Athens Putting the Strategy Back into Strategic Communications Japanese Strategic Communication: Its Significance As a Political oolT ‘You Can Count On Us’: When Malian Diplomacy Stratcommed Uncle Sam Strategic Communications, Boko Haram, and Counter-Insurgency Fake News, Fake Wars, Fake Worlds Living Post-Truth Lives … But What Comes After? ‘We Have Met The Enemy And He Is Us’ Defence Strategic Communications | Volume 3 | Autumn 2017 1 ISSN 2500-9478 Defence Strategic Communications Editor-in-Chief Dr. Neville Bolt Managing Editor Linda Curika Editor Anna Reynolds Editorial Board Professor Mervyn Frost Professor Nicholas O’Shaughnessy Professor Žaneta Ozoliņa Professor J. Michael Waller Professor Natascha Zowislo-Grünewald Dr. Emma Louise Briant Dr. Nerijus Maliukevicius Dr. Agu Uudelepp Matt Armstrong Thomas Elkjer Nissen Defence Strategic Communications is an international peer-reviewed journal. The journal is a project of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (NATO StratCom COE). It is produced for scholars, policy makers and practitioners around the world. It does not represent the opinions or policies of NATO or the NATO StratCom COE. The views presented in the following articles are those of the authors alone. © All rights reserved by the NATO StratCom COE. These articles may not be copied, reproduced, distributed or publicly displayed without reference to the NATO StratCom COE and the academic journal Defence Strategic Communications. NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence Riga, Kalnciema iela 11b, Latvia LV1048 www.stratcomcoe.org Ph.: 0037167335463 [email protected] Living Post-Truth Lives … But What Comes After? 191 LIVING POST-TRUTH LIVES … BUT WHAT COMES AFTER? A review essay by Kevin Marsh Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back Matthew D’Ancona. Ebury Publishing, 2017 Post-Truth: How Bullshit Conquered the World James Ball. Biteback Publishing, 2017 Post Truth: Why We Have Reached Peak Bullshit Evan Davis. Hachette UK, 2017 The Retreat of Western Liberalism Edward Luce. Hachette UK, 2017 Keywords: post-truth, Brexit, Trump, spin, fake news, political communication, strategic communication, strategic communications About the author Kevin Marsh FRSA is a former BBC Executive Editor who now teaches and writes on journalism ethics and strategic communications in the UK and internationally. 192 Defence Strategic Communications | Volume 3 | Autumn 2017 On the walls of the Musée Anne-de-Beaujeu in Moulins, a small town in the Auvergne, hangs a striking painting. It’s called La Vérité or, more descriptively, ‘La Vérité sortant du puits armée de son martinet pour châtier l’humanité’—‘Truth emerging from the well armed with her whip to chastise mankind.’ Truth, in the painting, is naked; rendered almost photographically; and if her eyes and mouth, fixed in a barking rebuke, are anything to go by, she is angry. Very angry. The painter was the conservative academist of the Belle Époque, Jean-Léon Gérôme. He and his ‘realist’ contemporaries faced an artistic assault on two fronts; from Impressionists, who disdained the visual ‘truth’ of figurative painting, preferring emotional ‘truth’; and from photography, which by the 1890s captured visual ‘truth’ more precisely than any painter. For Gérôme, though, photography was scientific ‘proof ’ that therewas a tangible ‘truth’, an objective reality out there that he and his like, rather than the impressionists, were able to reproduce: ‘c’est grâce à elle’ he wrote, ‘que la vérité est enfin sortie de son puits’—‘it’s thanks to photography that Truth has finally left her well’. That became an icon for conservative artists and writers of Gérôme’s generation; French politics were chaotic, self-serving, and ineffectual; populism, nationalism, protectionism, clericalism, and anti-Semitism were the dominant ‘isms of the day. It was the time of the Dreyfus affair—an exercise in ‘fake news’ and ‘alternative facts’ if ever there was one—and as the 19th century wheeled over into the 20th, ‘Truth’ was wished out of her well again and again to whip the liars into honesty. Yearning for ‘Truth’—with or without a chastising whip—is one of those cyclical things. It comes at critical moments when we feel we’ve somehow lost the collective ability to distinguish truth from lies, fact from opinion. The year 2016 was one of those critical moments. Its signature events—Leave’s narrow victory in the EU referendum and Donald Trump’s electoral college win in the US—undermined our liberal conventional wisdoms about democracy and political communication. Both winning campaigns were founded on untruths, aggressively promoting divisive world views; both sought to overturn conventional economic or social thinking; both threatened cultural ruptures, or promised them, depending on your point of view. More than anything else, though, both appeared finally to have snapped the overstretched link between democratic politics and anything deserving the name ‘truth’. Together, they made ‘post-truth’ the word of the year and introduced ‘fake news’ and ‘alternative facts’ to a wider audience. Unsurprising, then, that in 2017, the cycle turned and politicians, political communicators, and journalists—especially, ironically, journalists—yearn for La Vérité to whip the offenders back to honesty. Living Post-Truth Lives … But What Comes After? 193 Matthew D’Ancona in Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back, for example—a short, sharp cry of anguish and frustration from a journalist of the centre- right, who … … would be betraying my trade if I stood by as its central value – accuracy – was degraded by hucksters and snake-oil salesmen. D’Ancona wishes La Vérité out of her well to confront … … the declining value of truth as society’s reserve currency, and the infectious spread of pernicious relativism disguised as legitimate scepticism. It’s unfortunate that he elides ‘truth’ which, if it’s anything, is a moral value and ‘accuracy’, a mere process. While we can approach ‘truth’ through ‘accuracy’, achieving ‘accuracy’ is no guarantee of ‘truth’—accurately reporting the words of a liar is a long way from ‘truth’. The idea of fighting the ‘post-truthers’ with classical, objective ‘truth’ is seductive—but it’s an epistemological nonsense. As nonsensical as Gérôme’s vision of La Vérité, based as that was on a mistranslation and misunderstanding of the pre-Socratic Thracian atomist Democritus: We are ignorant … … he is reported to have said … … since Truth has been submerged in an abyss, with everything in the grip of opinions and conventions.1 Democritus’ point—as well as Cicero’s in referencing him—was to underline a fundamental and very old idea in epistemology. If objective truth even exists, it’s beyond the reach of our perceptions; our senses are limited, our minds weak, and our lives short; ‘nihil veritati relinqui, deinceps omnia tenebris circumfusa esse’—‘nothing is left for truth and everything, in turn, is wrapped in darkness’. By the end of 2016, that felt less like a maxim of classical philosophy and more like a description of the state in which the political culture of the UK and US found itself. Nothing was ‘true’; ‘fact’ was indistinguishable from ‘opinion’, for every ‘fact’ there was an ‘alternative fact’; falsity flourished; scarcely credible conspiracy theories jostled with genuine inquiry; and mainstream media battled with the ‘bots’ spewing out ‘fake news’. Something had clearly gone wrong—but what? 1 Nothing of Democritus’ writing survives, however Cicero attributes the aphorism to Democritus in Book 1.44 of his study of scepticism, Academica. 194 Defence Strategic Communications | Volume 3 | Autumn 2017 D’Ancona, though a journalist of the centre-right, is no fan of Leave nor of Trump: … the expectations raised on both sides of the Atlantic, he writes, cannot possibly be satisfied. And he disdains the 45th President as a ‘political sociopath’. But, he insists, neither Trump nor Leave is or was the cause of post-truth politics and culture. They’re its consequences, the symptoms of that ‘pernicious relativism’ which is, in turn, the ‘rust on the metal of truth’ that started its corrosive growth on the Rive Gauche, nurtured by ‘the loose-knit school’ of post-modernist thinkers—the ‘Po-Mos’—who… … preferred to understand language and culture as ‘social constructs’ … rather than the abstract ideals of classical philosophy. And if everything is a ‘social construct’ then who is to say what is false? Thus, the election of Donald Trump: … unhindered by care for the truth, accelerated by the force of social media … in its way, the ultimate post-modern moment. It’s a misguided attribution of blame. The Po-Mos he chastises—Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard, and Baudrillard—in essence did little other than align a constructivist brand of epistemology as old as philosophy itself with 20th century communication … predicting, incidentally, a time when the quantity of communicable information (and the means of communicating it) would far exceed our capacity to give it meaning. And where the act of communicating was the socialising factor in our lives, not the sharing of meaning. Remind you of anything? D’Ancona partly concedes that the habitués of Les Deux Magots didn’t invent the relativism and socially constructed ‘truth’ he castigates. He mentions Protagoras but could have added Democritus—Gérôme’s inspiration—Plato, or Aristotle. He could even have added the Gospel of John or, from the modern era, the Italian philosopher- scientist Giambattista Vico, who wrote in 1710 that: ‘verum esse ipsum factum’—‘truth is itself a made thing’. Unsurprising, then, that D’Ancona’s fightback comprises counsel and perhaps even rules to ensure we scrutinise one another more skeptically and behave towards each other more honestly: we should all take less on trust and become our own information gatekeepers, ‘scrutinising editors’, for example.
Recommended publications
  • How the TV Debates Were Organised in #GE2015 and Their Impact: the Full Story
    How the TV debates were organised in #GE2015 and their impact: the full story blogs.lse.ac.uk/polis/2017/04/19/how-were-the-tv-debates-organised-in-ge2015-and-what-was-their-impact- the-full-story/ 2017-4-19 I wrote the chapter on broadcasting for the Cowley/Kavanagh Election 2015 book. Here is the section on the negotiations that led to the TV ‘debates’ and their impact – for the full chapter and the authoritative record of all aspects of that campaign, get the book here! By Charlie Beckett, Professor in the Department of Media and Communications, LSE and director of Polis, the LSE’s journalism think-tank. @CharlieBeckett In this election broadcasting tried to reflect a changing political landscape. Television in particular was challenged to adjust to the impact of the smaller parties such as the Greens, UKIP and the SNP. Editorially, broadcasters had to cover a diverse range of issues of varying degrees of scale, importance and relevance to different audiences. All journalists, but most obviously broadcasters, found themselves limited in scope by the unprecedented levels of party stage-management. There were the usual concerns about delivering impartiality and information but perhaps the hardest task for the broadcast journalists was to fulfil their key democratic functions at election time: to engage the public and to hold politicians to account. The strategic reluctance of the main parties to conduct more open campaigns meant that the desire for dramatic broadcasting to match the significance of the stakes was frustrated. Like all journalists, broadcasters were also misled by erroneous polling to construct a false narrative around the relative success of the two main parties.
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING PANDORA's BOX David Cameron's Referendum Gamble On
    OPENING PANDORA’S BOX David Cameron’s Referendum Gamble on EU Membership Credit: The Economist. By Christina Hull Yale University Department of Political Science Adviser: Jolyon Howorth April 21, 2014 Abstract This essay examines the driving factors behind UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to call a referendum if the Conservative Party is re-elected in 2015. It addresses the persistence of Euroskepticism in the United Kingdom and the tendency of Euroskeptics to generate intra-party conflict that often has dire consequences for Prime Ministers. Through an analysis of the relative impact of political strategy, the power of the media, and British public opinion, the essay argues that addressing party management and electoral concerns has been the primary influence on David Cameron’s decision and contends that Cameron has unwittingly unleashed a Pandora’s box that could pave the way for a British exit from the European Union. Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank the Bates Summer Research Fellowship, without which I would not have had the opportunity to complete my research in London. To Professor Peter Swenson and the members of The Senior Colloquium, Gabe Botelho, Josh Kalla, Gabe Levine, Mary Shi, and Joel Sircus, who provided excellent advice and criticism. To Professor David Cameron, without whom I never would have discovered my interest in European politics. To David Fayngor, who flew halfway across the world to keep me company during my summer research. To my mom for her unwavering support and my dad for his careful proofreading. And finally, to my adviser Professor Jolyon Howorth, who worked with me on this project for over a year and a half.
    [Show full text]
  • How US and UK Spy Agencies Defeat Internet Privacy and Security James Ball , Julian Borger and Glenn Greenwald Theguardian.Com
    Revealed: how US and UK spy agencies defeat internet privacy and security James Ball , Julian Borger and Glenn Greenwald theguardian.com US and British intelligence agencies have successfully cracked much of the online encryption relied upon by hundreds of millions of people to protect the privacy of their personal data, online transactions and emails, according to top-secret documents revealed by former contractor Edward Snowden. This story has been reported in partnership between the New Through covert partnerships with tech companies, the spy agencies have inserted secret vulnerabilities into encryption software. Photograph: Kacper York Times, the Guardian and Pempel/Reuters ProPublica based on documents obtained by the Guardian. For the Guardian: James Ball, Julian Borger, Glenn Greenwald 1. For the New York Times: Nicole Perlroth, Scott Shane For ProPublica: Jeff Larson Read the New York Times story here The files show that the National Security Agency and its UK counterpart GCHQ have broadly compromised the guarantees that internet companies have given consumers to reassure them that their communications, online banking and medical records would be indecipherable to criminals or governments. The agencies, the documents reveal, have adopted a battery of methods in their systematic and ongoing assault on what they see as one of the biggest threats to their ability to access huge swathes of internet traffic – "the use of ubiquitous encryption across the internet". Those methods include covert measures to ensure NSA control over setting of international encryption standards, the use of supercomputers to break encryption with "brute force", and – the most closely guarded secret of all – collaboration with technology companies and internet service providers themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • The Menagerie of a Lynton Crosby Campaign
    6/21/2016 Fattened pigs, dog whistles and dead cats: the menagerie of a Lynton Crosby campaign Fattened pigs, dog whistles and dead cats: the menagerie of a Lynton Crosby campaign June 16, 2016 1.40am BST Will Dinan Lecturer, Communications, Media and Culture, University of Stirling The Conversation’s partners The Conversation UK receives funding from Hefce, Hefcw, SAGE, SFC, RCUK, The Nuffield Foundation, The Ogden Trust, The Royal Society, The Wellcome Trust, Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and The Alliance for Useful Evidence, as well as sixty five university members. View the full list Campaign strategist Lynton Crosby has become something of a folk­devil for sections of the British and Australian media. Reuters/Stefan Wermuth Is Lynton Crosby, election guru and favoured strategist for right­wing political candidates from Wentworth to Witney, up to his old tricks again? As the Australian election race enters its final stages, and with many polls predicting a very tight finish, some parallels with the Conservative victory in the 2015 UK general election that Crosby masterminded can be seen – particularly in relation to the “risk” of a power­sharing government. Crosby has become something of a folk­devil for sections of the British and Australian media. He is the manipulator with the Midas touch, who has a reputation for tapping into https://theconversation.com/fattened­pigs­dog­whistles­and­dead­cats­the­menagerie­of­a­lynton­crosby­campaign­60695 1/4 6/21/2016 Fattened pigs, dog whistles and dead cats: the menagerie of a Lynton Crosby campaign those ideas and prejudices that coarsen public life but are seemingly widely held and a ballot­box boon.
    [Show full text]
  • The U.S. Surveillance State Part 1: Early Answers in Washington DC – Guest Contribution by Jim Farmer
    The U.S. Surveillance State Part 1: Early Answers in Washington DC – Guest Contribution by Jim Farmer (This is the first of three Guest Contributions by US-based Jim Farmer [biography, email jfx "AT" immagic "DOT" com]. Jim has contributed occasionally to Fortnightly Mailing over the years.) Several months after National Security Agency (NSA) documents were revealed by Edward Snowden, the impact on higher education remains unclear clear. Some differences between the explanations from the intelligence establishment and observations from the Washington “think tank” writers and scholars are emerging. On Friday, 6 September 2013 Guardian reporter James Ball and cryptology expert Bruce Schneier answered reader questions. Three questions are key to better understanding the extent of the public awareness of the intelligence community’s practices, and its likely impact. Here the responses of the Guardian are compared to those of the intelligence establishment and “think tank” scholars in recent Washington DC presentations. All presentations were scheduled before and held after Glenn Greenwald’s 5 June report about NSA’s collection of phone records. The answers provide some insight into the U.S. government’s position. The questions and answers Question 1. Reader SteppenHerring asked: How hard do you think it will be to get people to take security seriously when people are willing to type so much personal data into Facebook/Google+ etc? The Guardian’s James Ball answers: I think we need more awareness of privacy and security generally, and I think as generations grow up net-native (as today’s teens are), that’s taking care of itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Forecast Error: How to Predict an Election: Part 1: Polls
    FORECAST ERROR: HOW TO PREDICT AN ELECTION: PART 1: POLLS "Any attempt to predict the future depends on it resembling the past"[0423l] Cartoon from the Daily Mirror, May 27 1970, as reproduced in “The British General Election of 1970”, Butler and Pinto‐Duschinsky. 1971; ISBN: 978‐1‐349‐01095‐0 1. INTRODUCTION The "Forecast Error" series of articles started examining election predictors in 2015. Each article considered many predictors, but each article covered just one election. This article marks a new chapter in the "Forecast Error" series where we examine an individual class of predictor more closely across many elections. We begin with possibly the most prominent: opinion polls. A political opinion poll is a method of assessing a population’s opinion on the matters of the day by asking a sample of people. A subset is the voter intention poll, which asks each sampled person how they intend to vote in an election. Pollsters then turn their intention into votes by applying certain assumptions. Those assumptions may not be valid over the long term, or even from one election to the next. The problem faced when writing about opinion polls is not how to start writing, it's how to stop. It is entirely possible to write a full article about any given facet of opinion polling, and examples immediately spring to mind: whether one should still use "margin of error" for online panel polling, Nate Silver's insight regarding the borrowing of strength from polls in similar states, is it meaningful to speak of a polling threshold, and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Ignorance: on the Importance of Developing Psychoanalytic Sensibilities in Education
    TEACHING IGNORANCE: ON THE IMPORTANCE OF DEVELOPING PSYCHOANALYTIC SENSIBILITIES IN EDUCATION Jennifer Logue Southern Illinois University Edwardsville Lacan once remarked that there was “something quite ironic about Christ’s injunction to love thy neighbor as thyself because, actually, people hate themselves.”1 We might say, in observing the way people treat each other, perhaps they have always loved their neighbors as they’ve loved themselves: that is, “with a great deal of cruelty and disregard.”2 In his thorough engagement with Freud, Lacan theorizes that we are, at the core, ambivalent animals: wherever we love we hate, wherever we hate we love. Ambivalence does not, in the Freudian story (retold by Lacan, retold here by Adam Philips), mean mixed feelings, it means conflicting or contradictory feelings. Love and hate—too narrow concepts and so not quite accurate articulations—are the rudimentary sources, the most primary affects with which we try to make sense of our realities. They are mutually constituting in that you can’t have one without the other.3 Psychoanalytic inquiry encourages us to grapple with our often unrecognized yet structurally organizing ambivalences about anything and everything that matters to us, even as we carry on as if we are entirely rational, as if we are masters of our own house, so to speak. In other words, psychoanalytic insight informs us that we are often ignorant to our own affective (dis)investments. Can Lacan’s observation about our loving and hating our neighbors the way we love and hate ourselves
    [Show full text]
  • IN the EUROPEAN COURT of HUMAN RIGHTS App No. 24960/15 10 HUMAN RIGHTS
    IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS App No. 24960/15 10 HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHERS – v – THE UNITED KINGDOM THIRD PARTY INTERVENTION OF THE ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER Introduction 1. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (“EPIC”) welcomes the opportunity to submit these written comments pursuant to leave granted on February 26, 2016, by the President of the First Section under Rule 44 §3 of the Rules of the Court. These submissions do not address the facts or merits of the applicants’ case. 2. EPIC is a public interest, non-profit research and educational organization based in Washington, D.C. 1 EPIC was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues and to protect privacy, freedom of expression, and democratic values in the information age. EPIC routinely files amicus briefs in U.S. courts, pursues open government cases, defends consumer privacy, coordinates non- profit participation in international policy discussions, and advocates before legislative and judicial organizations about emerging privacy and civil liberties issues. EPIC is a leading privacy and freedom of information organization in the US with special expertise in government surveillance related legal matters. 3. The matter before the Court in 10 Human Rights Organizations and Others v. the United Kingdom impacts the human rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression of people around the world, which is reflected also by the variety of the applicants’ affiliations. The matter before the Court is an issue of broad international importance because it involves arrangements to transfer personal data between the United States and European countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding and Countering Climate Science Denial
    Journal & Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales, vol. 150, part 2, 2017, pp. 207–219. ISSN 0035-9173/17/020207-13 Understanding and countering climate science denial John Cook Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Email: [email protected] Abstract Science denial causes a range of damaging impacts on society. This is particularly the case with climate science denial, which has resulted in strong polarization around a non-controversial scientific issue, and prolific dissemination of climate misinformation. This in turn has had the effect of reducing public acceptance of climate change, and eroding support for policies to mitigate climate change. In order to develop effective responses to science denial, it is necessary to first understand the drivers of science denial, which leads to deeper understanding of the techniques employed to cast doubt on the reality of climate change. Analysis of denialist techniques can inform development of interventions that neutralize misinformation. Inoculation has been shown to be an effective way to preemptively reduce the influence of climate science denial. Two methods to practically implement inoculation are misconception-based learning (teaching science by addressing scientific misconceptions) and techno- cognition (an interdisciplinary approach that implements psychological principles in the design of technological solutions to misinformation). Interventions and procedures developed for the counter- ing of climate misinformation may also be applied to other scientific topics rife with misinformation, such as vaccination and evolution. Introduction damaging and significant impacts of misin- here is an overwhelming scientific con- formation. In 2014, the World Economic T sensus that humans are causing global Forum named online misinformation as one warming.
    [Show full text]
  • Ignorance Production and Corporate Science
    IGNORANCE PRODUCTION AND CORPORATE SCIENCE by Marilena Danelon A thesis submitted to the Department of Philosophy in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (September, 2015) Copyright ©Marilena Danelon, 2015 Abstract This thesis is a philosophical exploration of “agnotology”, the study of ignorance or non- knowledge, and focuses on the production of ignorance for private interests. In particular, I argue that corporate science often deliberately produces ignorance in an effort to promote corporate interests. My thesis is structured into five chapters. In Chapter 1, I introduce agnotology and outline Robert N. Proctor’s three categories thereof: ignorance as native state, ignorance as selective choice, and ignorance as active construct. In Chapter 2, I present a review of the agnotological literature on the basis of which I argue for two expanded categories of ignorance: ignorance from ideology, and ignorance from interest. In Chapter 3, I address the question of the normative assumptions underlying agnotology. As well, given agnotology’s task of unpacking the values laden in science, agnotology’s normative conception of science may stand in tension with a conception of science as objective, neutral inquiry. In the end, I argue that agnotologists need not deny science’s objectivity when they view science as value-laden. In Chapter 4, I present a case study. Through an agnotological analysis, I argue that some HPV vaccine legislation was passed via agnogenesis. I also argue that the silencing of vaccine skeptics is a form of agnogenesis. This case, interpreted in the light of the novel agnotological framework developed in Chapters 2 and 3, supports my main thesis that corporate science serves primarily corporate interests via agnogenesis.
    [Show full text]
  • On 26 September 2014, the NCP Asked Reprieve to Split Its Complaint
    Complaint to the UK National Contact Point under the Specific Instance Procedure of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: British Telecommunications plc 10 October 2014 Contents 1. Summary of Complaint 2. Introduction 3. BT Plays Key Role in Mass Surveillance by Intelligence Agencies 4. Mass Surveillance and Drone Strikes 5. Breaches of the OECD Guidelines 6. Objectives 7. Supporting documentation 1. Summary of Complaint 1.1. Reprieve submits that British Telecommunications plc (BT) has breached the OECD Guidelines by: • Facilitating the US drone programme by providing the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and the National Security Agency (NSA) with mass surveillance infrastructure. In exchange for tens of millions of pounds from these intelligence agencies, BT installs wiretaps on the United Kingdom’s telecommunication cables and operates compromised optical fibre networks to enable the mass surveillance of global internet and phone traffic. Intelligence agencies openly acknowledge they rely upon this type of data to choose targets for drone strikes. • Failing to provide evidence of due diligence mechanisms undertaken by the company to prevent the mass surveillance data from being used for targeting by unlawful US drone strikes in non-war zones. 1 2. Introduction 2.1. Reprieve is an international NGO that works to safeguard the human rights of people impacted by the counter-terrorism operations of the US and other governments. 2.2. BT is a major provider of global telecommunications networks and services in more than 170 countries. The company is headquartered at 81 Newgate Street, London EC1A 7AJ. 2.3. Reprieve brings this complaint on behalf of its clients Mohammed al-Qawli and Faisal bin Ali Jaber, who have both lost family members to drone strikes guided by analysis of mass surveillance data.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Summary of Findings from Report Commissioned by the Conservative
    Summary of Findings from Report Commissioned by the Conservative and Unionist Party from Clifford Chance into Allegations of Bullying, Harassment and Inappropriate Behaviour and into the Knowledge of and Response to those Allegations by Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) The Party, on 8 December 2015, commissioned Clifford Chance LLP (CC) to conduct an independent investigation and report to the Conservative Party Board. This document sets out the findings of that report (the Report). CC's investigative process has been certified by Lord Pannick QC, who is satisfied that the process followed to produce the Report was fair, objective, appropriate and comprehensive. At the time the Report was commissioned, the Party committed to publishing the Report’s findings. The Party respects the rights of confidentiality and privacy of those involved in the events which the Report has considered and therefore the findings are presented in a manner that ensures that, so far as possible, no complainant or witness (other than senior CCHQ staff) can be identified. In order to achieve this, it is necessary not only to omit any such person’s name but also to avoid referencing any other details (such as dates, locations and details of alleged incidents) that might allow such person to be identified. This summary of the Report’s findings focuses on allegations that were reported or were alleged to have been reported to CCHQ. It does not include any instances of allegations of bullying, harassment and other inappropriate behaviour that are not alleged to have been reported to CCHQ and evidence relating to the circumstances leading up to Mr.
    [Show full text]