Controversy Manual Controversy Climate change, psychiatric drugs, genetically modified organisms, nuclear power, fluoridation, stem cell research — these are just a few of the hundreds of issues involving science and technology that are Controversy Manual vigorously debated. If you care about an issue, how can you be more effective in arguing for your viewpoint Brian Martin and campaigning in support of it? The Controversy Manual offers practical advice for campaigners as well as plenty of information for people who want to better understand what’s happening and to be able to discuss the issues with friends. The Controversy Manual provides information for understanding controversies, arguing against opponents, getting your message out, and defending Brian Martin against attack. Whether experts are on your side or mostly on the side of opponents, you’ll find advice for being more effective. While not taking sides on individual controversies, the emphasis is on fostering fair and open debate and opposing those who use power and manipulation to get their way. The author Brian Martin is professor of social sciences at the University of Wollongong, Australia. He has been involved in and studied scientific and technological controversies since the 1970s, and is the author of numerous publications addressing controversy dynamics. IRENE PUBLISHING ISBN 978-1-291-67241-1 90000 9 781291 672411 Ω Irene Publishing The controversy manual Brian Martin Published 2014 by Irene Publishing Sparsnäs, Sweden http://www.irenepublishing.com/ [email protected] ISBN 978–1–291–67241–1 CONTENTS BRIEF VERSION 1. Introduction 15 2. Understanding controversies 21 3. Arguing 153 4. Communicating 261 5. Working together 301 6. Taking action 335 7. Defending 377 8. Being principled 419 Appendices 443 Index 460 4 The controversy manual Controversy summaries Climate change 18 Fluoridation 150 Genetically modified organisms 258 Nuclear power 298 Smoking 332 Vaccination 374 Note about images All the images used in the controversy summaries were found by searching on the web. None of them indicated a credit to a photographer or artist. When an image was on the site of a commercial or professional organisation, I wrote asking permission to use the image, but received no replies. In scientific controversies, many campaigners seem to feel free to use whatever resources are available, with little concern for giving credit to creators. The result is that images circulate widely and it becomes difficult to trace the original source. On some controversies, I found it a challenge to find suitable images for both sides. For example, there are vast numbers of graphics available on the hazards of GMOs, and relatively few on the benefits. Even when using search terms like “benefits of GMOs” or “safety of GMOs,” a majority of the images that come up are opposed to GMOs. This might reflect the relative ease of symbolising danger compared to safety or economic gains, or perhaps the enthusiasm of citizen campaigners for using pictures to get their message across. Contents 5 CONTENTS DETAILED VERSION Acknowledgements 14 1. Introduction 15 2. Understanding controversies 21 • 2.1 What is a scientific controversy? 21 Science and technology 22 What are people arguing about? 23 • 2.2 Coherent viewpoints 26 Paradigms 29 • 2.3 Evidence 31 Statistics 33 • 2.4 Undone science 42 • 2.5 Hidden research 46 • 2.6 Bias in research 47 Technical assumptions 50 Selective use of evidence 52 Selective use of uncertainties 53 6 The controversy manual Selective use of results 56 Referring to alternative arguments 58 Mood of a paper 60 Summary; table on how to foster bias 61 • 2.7 The onus of proof 65 Shifting the onus of proof 68 • 2.8 Truth 70 • 2.9 Who is involved? 71 • 2.10 Scientists 74 Arrogance and the myth of talent 81 Political naiveté 85 Career situation 89 • 2.11 Interests 90 Conflicts of interest 94 Left, right, conservative, radical 96 • 2.12 Entrenched technology 100 • 2.13 How controversies proceed 103 Active and inactive periods 103 Local and global dimensions 105 Why controversies continue 108 Resolving controversies 112 Contents 7 • 2.14 Why people get involved 116 • 2.15 Commitment 121 • 2.16 The media 122 • 2.17 Understanding commentaries 130 Advocacy 131 Play-by-play 131 Wrong belief 132 Ideological 135 Symmetrical 137 What to look for 139 • 2.18 Learning about an issue 140 Reading 140 Discussing 144 Writing 148 3. Arguing 153 • 3.1 Arguing: factors to consider 156 Key issues 156 What works? 157 The standard agenda 157 Links to values 158 8 The controversy manual Robustness 158 Ease of explanation 159 Who speaks? 160 Putting it all together 161 The experimental approach 161 Pathologies of arguing 162 • 3.2 Framing 164 • 3.3 Responding 170 Know the context 172 Responding to an article 176 • 3.4 Deconstruction 179 What’s missing? 180 What’s wrong? 181 What’s misleading? 182 Are there double standards? 184 What assumptions are made? 185 What value judgements are involved? 188 What is unquestioned? 189 3.5 Countering deconstruction 190 Some background on deconstruction 190 Conspiracy theories 195 Contents 9 Debunking 201 • 3.6 Claiming scientific status 204 • 3.7 Dealing with experts 208 When experts are on the other side 208 When experts are on your side 219 • 3.8 Endorsements 224 Obtain counter-endorsements 227 Deconstruct endorsements 228 Discredit endorsements 230 Discredit authority in general 231 Promote citizen participation 232 Dealing with endorsements: how? 233 Unwelcome endorsements 234 • 3.9 Inoculation? 236 • 3.10 Values 240 • 3.11 Emotions 243 • 3.12 Lying 249 Aspects of lying 250 Lying in controversies: the role of paradigms 252 Confirmation bias 254 Lying by omission 254 10 The controversy manual Cynical operators and true believers 255 Dealing with deception 256 4. Communicating 261 • 4.1 Scientific papers 262 • 4.2 Advertisements 265 • 4.3 Talks 268 • 4.4 Mass media coverage 270 News values 270 Balance 272 Vested interests 275 Defamation 277 • 4.5 Online 278 Websites 278 Website conflicts 280 Social media 281 Open online forums 283 • 4.6 The opponents’ communication 285 Monckton and free speech 286 Censorship backfire 287 Replying to Lomborg 291 Contents 11 • 4.7 To debate or not to debate? 293 5. Working together 301 • 5.1 Set up a group? 301 • 5.2 Groups versus networks 302 • 5.3 Organisational functioning 309 • 5.4 Decision-making 314 • 5.5 Names 317 • 5.6 Core operations 318 • 5.7 Front groups and captured groups 319 • 5.8 An ideal group? 321 • 5.9 Core members and newcomers 323 • 5.10 Task and maintenance functions 325 • 5.11 Shaming 326 • 5.12 Going solo 329 6. Taking action 335 • 6.1 Lobbying 335 • 6.2 Petitions 342 • 6.3 Electoral politics 345 • 6.4 Rallies 349 12 The controversy manual • 6.5 Strikes, bans and boycotts 353 • 6.6 Sabotage 357 • 6.7 Organising 358 • 6.8 Personal contacts 363 The relationship 365 The approach 365 Openness 367 Winning the argument 369 • 6.9 The long haul 372 7. Defending 377 • 7.1 Attacks 377 • 7.2 Attacks on scientists 379 • 7.3 Responding to attack 384 • 7.4 Outrage management 394 Expose the action 398 Validate the target 401 Interpret the events as an injustice 403 Avoid or discredit official channels. Instead, mobilise support 405 Resist intimidation and rewards 407 Contents 13 • 7.5 Physical violence 408 • 7.6 Radical flanks 412 • 7.7 Surveillance and infiltrators 416 8. Being principled 419 • 8.1 Being honest 420 • 8.2 Supporting free speech 426 • 8.3 Being open 429 • 8.4 Being courteous 431 • 8.5 Fostering deliberation 432 • 8.6 Seeking solutions 438 Appendices Appendix 1. My background 443 Appendix 2. Scholarly studies of controversies 449 Appendix 3. Are you projecting? 454 Index 460 14 The controversy manual Acknowledgements I wrote this book in a slow-but-steady fashion using the approach of Robert Boice and Tara Gray, which made it much easier than it might otherwise have been.1 As part of the process, over several years I presented extracts of text to members of the high-output writing group in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Wollongong. For helpful textual comments, I thank Paula Arvela, Zoë Barker, Anu Bissoonauth-Bedford, Trent Brown, Scott Burrows, Narelle Campbell, Kathy Flynn, Xiaoping Gao, Frank Huang, Anneleis Humphries, Cecilia Leong-Salobir, Nicola Marks, Michael Matteson, Anne Melano, Ben Morris, Julia Najjar, Terumi Narushima, Hung Nguyen, Swati Parashar, Florencia Peña, Jenn Phillips, Kirsti Rawstron, Frances Steel, Min Tao, Sue Turnbull, Rowena Ward and Tshering Yangden. Many individuals provided feedback on chapters, sections or case studies, verified the accuracy of citations to their work, or discussed issues with me. Thanks to Liisa Antilla, Chris Barker, Sharon Beder, Joel Best, Dave Blatt, Sharon Callaghan, Lyn Carson, Simon Chapman, Mark Fenster, Richard Gosden, Jim Green, Ned Groth, Richard Halvorsen, Elizabeth Hart, Jim Jasper, Daniel Kleinman, Melissa Raven, Jerry Ravetz, Richard Somerville and Wendy Varney. Some others are acknowledged at specific places in the text. Thanks especially to Mark Diesendorf and Adrienne Samuels for extensive valuable comments. Finally, I have learned an incredible amount from activists, colleagues, correspondents, researchers and writers over many decades. 1 Robert Boice, Advice for New Faculty Members: Nihil Nimus (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2000); Tara Gray, Publish & Flourish: Become a Prolific Scholar (New Mexico: Teaching Academy, New Mexico State University, 2005). 1 Introduction The Controversy Manual is designed for participants in scientific controversies — climate change, nuclear power, genetic engineering, vaccination, or whatever. The book is intended to be practical, offering ideas for engaging in debate. Others, including citizens, journalists and students, may also find it useful for understanding what goes on in controversies.