Sunday
Mar182012
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Theatrical works
Mar 18, 2012 Ethics This story is not climate-related, but is somehow very resonant with the issues we return to again and again here at BH. Josh points me to this retraction of many of the most scandalous details about Apple's Chinese subcontractor, FoxConn. It appears that the source of the disinformation, Mike Daisey, was a well-meaning chap who just wanted to make people care.
Sound familiar?
Daisey says he stands by his story "as a theatrical work".
Reader Comments (54)
Yes, he sounds like that shock doco jock, whatshisname, who made Gasland.
Another Hari moment! oh well nowt will happen to him except sympathy and tea and just like Hari his group think mates will rehabilitate him !
This story is getting a lot of attention in USA on main stream media (media), blogs, etc. From the articles I've read, there is a lot of shock, surprise, and admonishment (which perhaps is self-serving).
Scott Berkun takes a different take at http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2012/on-truth-daisy-and-this-american-life/.
"This is a convenient and useless response. It dodges the tough, sloppy truth about truth lurking in this story about stories."
Worth a read.
It doesn't matter what you do, as long as it's for The Cause. And bashing Western corporates by making them out to be cruel despotic and greedy, definitely qualifies for The Cause.
Twenty Left/Liberal brownie points for Daisey.
He lied because 'he wanted people to care'.
Eerily reminiscent of
'If we want good environmental policy in future, we'll have to have a disaster' (Houghton. 1997)
Textbook "progressive" thinking.
I wonder if the IPCC will take a similar line...
Well worth the time to read it.
For me, the money quote is:
Rob Schmitz: So you lied about that. That wasn’t what you saw.
Mike Daisey: I wouldn’t express it that way.
Rob Schmitz: How would you express it?
Mike Daisey: I would say that I wanted to tell a story that captured the totality of my trip.
To have told the truth wouldn't have given him a show to tour. Another opportunistic watermelon who makes things up to make things more dramatic. America has it's own Johan Hari. Get used to them, they live under rocks and exploits people's caring side.
Why does everyone think that it is their duty to insult China and its people ?
Prof Niall Ferguson's - 'China, Triumph & Turmoil' was packed with distortion and childish innuendo, just as bad as the silly pisstake by Gok Wan and every other comedian who goes there.
Of course I know the answer: neither the lying BBC nor any other channel wants you to know that China has more to offer than smog and corruption.
My dear Lord Bishop,
You may care to assure your regular readers that you have no intention of allowing yourself to be persuaded to assume the post of Archbishop of Canterbury.
dearieme
'You may care to assure your regular readers that you have no intention of allowing yourself to be persuaded to assume the post of Archbishop of Canterbury'
As long as it doesn't interfere with his important duties here, I think many regular readers - of all religions and none - would agree that His Grace would be a considerable improvement on the current incumbent of that once august offce.
I've written a lot about this at Forbes....first pointing out that the allegations of foul treatment at the Apple/Foxconn factories doesn't hold up, about Daisey's misunderstandings and then finally about this particular "scandal".
And the thing is, Daisey's absolutely correct that as a piece of theatre he's done nothing wrong at all. For that's what theatre is, a manipulation of the facts in order to tell a story, manipulate emotions.
The line that was crossed was presenting his theatrical manipulations as journalism. And the Americans get very much more uptight about that than we do.
Don't forget, he's not invented things out of thin air, as Hari did (that kiddies cuting the heads off their parents thing for example). For example, it's generally agreed that one of the factories did use n-hexane, that this did result in injuries. Daisey claimed that he actually met some of them, which he didn't. In the context of a theatrical monologue that sort of manipulation is just fine. In a piece of supposedly factual journalism it isn't.
I still think he's a self-aggrandising buffoon*, deeply wrong about the actual conditions and the causes of them in those Chinese factories. But the particular sin he's being accused of isn't actually a sin in theatre: but it is in journalism.
*For example, when I attacked the NYT reporting of factory conditions Daisey attacked me for, well, essentially for ignoring the opinions of Mike Daisey. He never did answer the email I sent him asking why an Englishman living in Portugal should ever have heard of an off-Broadway monologist or respond to or even consider his opinions.
This story is similar to the nonsense about Himalayan glacier rapid melting. One of the IPCC people later admitted they wanted to make policymakers take action. It was just theatrical - no problem. :)
Here is a link to the story about Himalayan glaciers. The co-ordinating lead author of the chapter on Asia admitted the claim of melting by 2035 was not supported by the scientific literature, but he wanted to put pressure on world leaders.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html
When the broadcaster asked Daisey for information on his interpreter in China, Daisey replied that he’d no way to reach her.
Chinese contacts no longer available, so no way on checking on the veracity of Chinese data - now where have we heard that before?
Bish
Great post.
Of course in the climate change field this cuts both ways. Quite a lot of what some (but not all) "sceptics" appear to have accepted as fact is simply not true (eg: about climate scientists as a group working to a political agenda, or getting it all wrong, etc etc). Like with what this retraction about the Apple accusations, yes there probably are instances where the line is crossed or mistakes are made, but the scale of this has been wildly exaggerated. You only hear the bad stuff because it suits others to propagate it and build on it.
Most (admittedly not all) of the political stuff or misunderstandings of the science come from people outside of the science area (NGOs etc) but because their statements are often partly (but not wholly) backed up by the science then the science gets the blame.
Of course, scientists have to some extent let this happen by not being forthright enough in challenging misinterpretations of the science by such people, and also by not engaging with folks like yourselves in rational discussion in order to show that we are willing to talk through all the uncertainties etc.
So, I repeat, great post Bish and thanks for doing it - but everyone please remember that the analogy applies both ways.....!
Cheers
Richard
Why do Americans insist on imposing their labour standards on China?
In the US, a large proportion of the unemployment is due to the un-affordability of labour (for instance, healthcare costs).
There is no group of scientists working to a political agenda? Or Richard Betts is not in it? That there is no massive secret conspiracy is a defensible position. Only a few sceptics see it that way. That there appears to be a coincidence of interests with some scientists, some politicians, some NGOs and campaigners is..well, if I don't say evident, may I say hypothetically possible?
Otherwise, why do they need to cheat?
"Chinese contacts no longer available, so no way on checking on the veracity of Chinese data - now where have we heard that before?"
LOL.
Richard,
You are basically asking for some smartness and common-sense in interpreting given wisdom. This applies more to climate stories in the media - about the infalliability of scientists, and the direness of the climate 'emergencies' than anything else. All I take away from the story above is that people tend to exaggerate a story for a cause that is weak to stand on its own legs. I doubt the sceptics have a cause that is weak enough.
Richard the scientists (most of them) are not working to a political agenda..
But a lot of politicians and rent seeking business are..
There are many notions which readily produce deep, heartfelt emotions. Harsh treatment of the weak by the powerful is one of them. A severe threat to the environment is another. Theatre is in part there to create simple models of the world which may help sharpen up our insights into reality. The writers and players seek to catch our attention, and if they have a burning cause to pursue, they may feel they have even more licence to invent and exaggerate for effect. No intrinsic harm there, just as there is no intrinsic harm in a group of people creating computer models of the climate system and publishing their results. The harm comes when there is confusion between the fiction and the reality, and in particular when the fiction is treated as if it were the reality and ought to be responded to as such. That we are vulnerable to this is a reason for the continued popularity and power of theatre, and of the attraction of computer modelling for such as the Club of Rome, and other campaigners for the destruction of industrial progress.
The ‘Limits to Growth’ foolishness had a remarkable impact, thanks in part to the impact of ‘the computer says’ on those without sufficient insight into our limitations as modellers of complex systems. And today we see in such lunacies as the UK’s Climate Change Act, evidence of the more recent campaigning on climate and CO2. A campaign not driven primarily by scientists, but some of them gave it explicit or implicit support. Here are the words of one who didn’t:
Although society is undoubtedly aware of the imperfections of science, it has rarely encountered a situation such as the current global warming hysteria where institutional science has so thoroughly committed itself to policies which call for massive sacrifices in well being world wide. Past scientific errors did not lead the public to discard the view that science on the whole was a valuable effort. However, the extraordinarily shallow basis for the commitment to climate catastrophe, and the widespread tendency of scientists to use unscientific means to arouse the public’s concerns, is becoming increasingly evident, and the result could be a reversal of the trust that arose from the triumphs of science and technology during the World War II period. Further, the reliance by the scientific community on fear as a basis for support, may, indeed, have severely degraded the ability of science to usefully address problems that need addressing.
Richard Lindzen (http://arxiv.org/abs/0809.3762) in 2008.
Let me pull out one phrase : ‘the widespread tendency of scientists to use unscientific means to arouse the public’s concerns’
He is not talking about all scientists, nor is he talking about all climate scientists, but he is talking about some scientists and about some climate scientists. David Hume (http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hume/david/h92pm/chapter9.html) had their number quite a while ago:
‘Inward peace of mind, consciousness of integrity, a satisfactory review of our own conduct; these are circumstances, very requisite to happiness, and will be cherished and cultivated by every honest man, who feels the importance of them. Such a one has, besides, the frequent satisfaction of seeing knaves, with all their pretended cunning and abilities, betrayed by their own maxims; and while they purpose to cheat with moderation and secrecy, a tempting incident occurs, nature is frail, and they give into the snare; whence they can never extricate themselves, without a total loss of reputation.’
The sorry case of Peter Gleick is an illustration of giving in to the snare. Mike Daisey is another. Knaves both.
Deploy Daisey cutter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8uHYTwrFsQ
Mar 18, 2012 at 12:06 PM | Rhoda
Yes, some, but a minority.
Because they are idiots.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/tv-film-news/bbc-forced-to-aplogise-to-primark-for-faked-135457
Anyone ever see that PANORAMA documentary about the Indian kids sewing on buttons for the Shirts and Blouses for PRIMARK
Turned out to be all staged for the cameras
All the stuff is made in a factory
Someone should send a link to this story to Brendan O Neill at Spiked On Line
Spiked love all these patronising stories about forced labour in China and the developing world gettting proved wrong
Protectionism instincts of the left causing them to lie for the cause (yet again)?
I am sure the same applies to Jason Russell, the maker of the Kony 2012 video, but in his case it has ended in tears.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/17/kony-2012-meltdown-stress-wife?newsfeed=true
Gleick and Daisey should get together and write a "theatrical" work about how uncaring capitalists are exploiting the masses by forcing them to breath excessive levels of CO2.
They could even make a musical out of it.
An intersting tale, Bish. I admire the journalistic integrity of the correction. Something many environmental journalists should study.
In all of these issues, I'm struck by the lack of either understanding or wish to falsify hypotheses. If the hypothesis is that Apple either allows or turns a blind eye to undesirable work practises in China thensurely the way to find the hypothesis credible is to seek to falsify the hypothesis.
Similarly, in climate science, if the hypothesis is that human CO2 emissions are causing a problematic increase in global temperature, then all funding should be directed at falsifying that hypothesis. Weight should not be given to any study which finds, for example, that rainfall has changed over some arbitary timeframe, as "evidence" that the hypothesis is true.
The correct scientific approach is not to look at rainfall (since I chose this as my example) but consider global temperature as one's mean of falsification - since that is what the hypothesis is. Hence, the correct falsifying criterion should be: Has there been a change in either global temperature or the rate of change of global temperature over some specified interval which is inconsistent with the historical change in global temperature or rate of change of global temperatue, given that an addtional x amount of CO2 has been emitted during that interval?
As we can all see from every global temperatue record (except possiby GISS and the hockeystick - where we suspect the results are biased), current changes and rates of change are within the normal limits of those in the directly measured historical record. QED currently the CO2 driven AGW hypothesis must be considered false.
I'm constantly amazed at how these science priciples get overlooked by many in the climate science community. If they were looking at and trading a financial index using their current approach, they'd be bust pretty soon. Looking at rainfall or coral bleaching or migration patterns as evidence for changes in climate is rather like looking at company staff retention rates to gauge the profitabilty of a company. There will be an association - but it will only become a useful predictor if the company can't hold onto the majority of its middle and upper management. Until this happens the company balance sheet and P/E ratio will give a better investment indicator, particularly when compared previous results.
"Otherwise, why do they need to cheat?
Because they are idiots."
There are a host of *systemic factors* that operate in societies that are well described and studied in the social sciences literature on moral panics and scares. AGW/CAGW is a classical example. (not in the eyes of its advocates, of course). The occurrences of such exaggerations is predictable if one studies the relevant literature, and there is hardly any reason to resort to 'stupidity', malice, or conspiracy to account for them.
For eg., see 'moral entrepreneurs' Link here: http://bitbucket.icaap.org/dict.pl?term=MORAL%20ENTREPRENEURS
Richard Betts
You sound frantic -- not that you shouldn't.
I have very mixed feelings about this story. Clearly the gentleman shouldn't have lied; if nothing else, it does his cause no good as it simply discredits him as a witness. His claim that there are armed guards at the entrance is just rubbish. They are uniformed, but then so is G4S in this country, and they are there to prevent theft.
As part of my job (I work in the electronics assembly industry) I have had to visit Foxconn in Shenzhen many times. In the local Chinese context they are a good employer; people do not work in a toxic environment, they do not get fiddled out of their pay, no one beats them up for transgressions or sends them off to so-called "black" prisons for agitating for better conditions, all of which is quite common in Chinese factories, particularly state or PLA-owned ones, but by western standards Foxconn are very bad. People are forced to work very long hours for low pay; most of them get 2 days off a month and they generally spend 16 hours/day+ on the production lines. It isn't a happy place to work, which is why they had an outbreak of employees chucking themselves off the roof. China has no welfare state at all - if you don't work, you don't eat - so people take what work they can. After the spate of suicides in Foxconn Shenzhen the factory management increased worker benefits/pay and gave them more time off. Guess what happened? The cost went up slightly, so Apple gave a load of the business to Pegatron - who were cheaper. I can't wait for the NGOs and so on to catch up with that story.
Don't kid yourselves - conditions are dreadful in these Chinese factories, and this behaviour is absolutely driven by the greedy western corporates pushing for the lowest cost. Think about that the next time you shell out £500 for an iPad for which the Chinese workers get about $0.10 for assembling.
Perry you ever seen this one
The upgraded Vetnam Daisey Cutter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMSfD4roMxY
Sebastian Weetabix’s post (Mar 18, 2012 at 2:36 PM) should give some of the more enthusiastic defenders of capitalism who comment here pause for thought.
Once upon a time, if you voiced any mild criticism of our economic system, you’d be told to “go back to China/Russia”.
Don’t hear that so much nowadays.
Richard Betts’ comment that only a minority of environmentalists lie and cheat doean’t really answer Rhoda’s point.
One reason I don’t get up on stage and lie about some subject dear to my heart is that there’s not the slightest chance of anyone paying to listen to me.
The fact that the Daiseys and Hariris have made a living out of this stuff is because of the emotional climate surrounding the question of change in the physical climate. Responsibility for the creation of this emotional climate is spread very widely, and it doesn’t stop at the door of the Met Office.
Climate Change post Cold War New Millenia
The Left ( Water Mellons Green on the outside Red on the Inside )
So they aint got Old Clause 4 or the Berlin Wall
The Prolerteriate in China march to the Factories to make Playstations singing nationalistic party song instead of to the Paddy fields ( some even drive )
So what have the Left got left to hit us with CONSUMER GUILT
So wanted people to care
About poor working conditions in china
So if you lived in China would you rather slogg your guts out in a clean warm safe factory making Iphones or Ipads today
Or in a muddy Paddy field trying to grow rice during with Chairman Mao and the Cultural revouloution
( the chinese year zero the blue print for the Kamur Rouge in Cambodia ) and still starve in famine at the end of it with 20 million other Chinese
If this is a faked story about Poor working condition in modern China
The worst jobs in the world my mates Derek and Clive had that
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SentQjMIioY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afYk1MFy1NE
Once i caught this late night Subtitled Arty Foriegn film on Channel Four
I was bored and just browing this film
It was one the Saddest but yet one of the most uplifting and moving film ive ever seen
It was about this young girl in a romote poor village in the mountains in modern day China
And she worked really hard and eventually gets a job as a prositute to buy the people of her village
a 40 Inch Flatscreen LCD Television
She hitch hikes on some old truck to Shanghigh to what she thinks is a really posh shopping centre
The is full of Starbucks McDonalds Next Gap and loads of Department Stores
All stuff we in the west take for granted
Im tring to watch Columbo on my 32 inch Samsung keep getting interupted by too many advert breaks on mine
And she eventually get this Flatscreen telly back to her village and she sets it up in the only house that has Electricity
The entire village Mums Dads kids Grannys Grandads Goats all pile in to watch this one Television
And they end up watching American dubbed Softcore porn
And she falls Asleep at the back of this crowded room
The point is there are 7 billion people on this planet with plenty of rescource to go round
Theres Oil Shale Gas Uranium for 10 000 years
And the C02 will feed the crops to feed the peoples of the world
And every single one us 7 billion deserves a decent standard of living
And we cant let Politicians who cant get votes or smug Enviromentalist who dont get noticed or Preoffesional Scientices who dont get Funding or Nobel Prizes Hold Back Humanity from Moving Forward
slightly O/T
Peter Gleick’s Amnesty lecture at Oxford University on April 24th is apparently still on. Tickets are £8 and £5
And how many of the Apple/Foxconn alarmists are happily using iPods/Pads/Phones?
Either they don't believe their own alarmism or they're stupendously hypocritical.
Geoffchqmbers. Not sure about Sebastians credentials, I too have spent years in and around Shenzhen, and while it could be a lot better in terms of what we expect in the West, it is way beyond what the Chinese expect. They are being dragged out of abysmal poverty, poverty you cannot imagine, it's easy to say things should be better, just go and ask the Chinese whether they want the capitalists to go. Sure things could be better in terms of Western standards, but don't be fooled by Sebastian the Chinese in Guanjzou have never had it so good.
Are we all going down to Oxford to See Gleick and heckle him like Roy Chubby Brown
See if anyone can get him with a custard pie
geronimo
I believe you when you say that poor Chinese peasants are glad to work for Western capitalists, or at least, prefer that to starvation. I also believe Sebastian’s description. My point was simply that one minor advantage of China joining the capitalist world is that we lefties no longer get accused of being in favour of Chinese or Soviet dictatorship, presumably because Western CEOs are even more in favour.
To toad, who earlier noted the anti-Chinese bias of western media, try chinadialogue.net, a member of the Guardian Environment Network. If you comment there, they translate your comment into Chinese.
Jamspid
Just don’t squirt bottled water at him. He may melt away like the Wicked Witch of the West.
Re: jamspid
> Are we all going down to Oxford to See Gleick and heckle him like Roy Chubby Brown See if anyone can get him with a custard pie
Please don’t give anybody an excuse to make him out to be the victim.
In the Q & A section simply ask him if he wrote the memo.
This is for Richard Betts: I'm a grizzled engineer with a PhD in Applied Physics and Lots of experience including practical heat transfer and when I saw the most fundamental mistakes in climate science, I was appalled and set out to correct them.This is the 'back radiation' as measured by pyrgeometers:
A pyrgeometer does not measure 'DWLR'. It measures the downward IR minus the upward IR from the black body reference source via a thermistor between the two plates and a calibration curve, to which net flux is added the theoretical IR flux from the black body reference.
If there is no temperature gradient, that measurement is ‘Prevost Exchange Energy’, normally exactly offset by the same energy in the opposite direction, a measure of temperature and emissivity. In a normal temperature gradient, the thermopile signal is negative so you still measure Prevost Exchange Energy, but it is smaller by the net upward flux.
So the DWLR exists but can do no thermodynamic work. There is no AGW information to be had. It is wasted money. The claimed net atmospheric heating according to Trenberth and Kiehl 2009 is exaggerated 15.5 times. This is alchemy, not science. No climate model can predict climate.
geoffchambers
Thanks for the interesting link,typical Grauniad green unfortunately.
Every so often a genuinely informative series about China slips through the MSM net, but most reporting is dire, with the Telegraph being among the worst offenders. Peter Foster started badly and got worse. Fortunately he's moved on.
Being pragmatists, the Chinese tend to pay lip service to Western blustering, with the odd sop to green 'sensitivities', but then do exactly what suits their needs.
We really do have to ditch the 'Greenest Government Ever' and do what's best to keep OUR lights on.
geoffchambers.
As JD has just said in a new DT blog - 'The extent to which the Chinese believe in a low carbon economy rests entirely on their ability to exploit Western credulity'.
GeoffChambers: I've said this before, on Judith's blog, but I'll repeat it here, the doomsday scenarios being laid before the UN by the IPCC, aren't worse than people in rural China and large numbers of the world's population are suffering today, so there isn't any reason for them to cut back on CO2 emissions, it couldn't be worse. That's what the eco-warriors, cushioned by decades of western industrial civilisation success, fail to understand. Oldies, like myself, can remember rationing and dire poverty, here in the UK and know why it went away. It went away because democracy and capitalism, those still following the socialist dream stayed in poverty until the socialists were ousted from power.
These people who lie and fake results for the better cause are very weak minded. They do not have fundamental intellectual skills like self awareness and observation. Do they really believe that Hitler didn't feel as strongly as they do about his cause being right and good and just? They can rationalize that Hitler was insane or evil, but what separates them from being the same way? The cures for AGW are somehow religiously, scientifically ordained as pure good? They sincerely believe in their feeble minded way that their beliefs are superior to any other conflicting beliefs, that anyone whose beliefs are different is wrong or stupid or evil. Castro, Pol Pot, Stalin, hell every lunatic madman that comes down the pike truly and sincerely believes that their fantastic hallucinated beliefs are real and good. Serial killers often believe that they are killing the devil. These lying cheaters are fools, or worse. They are crippled by the inability to see their own dangerous fanaticism and how destructive these fantasies can become. Without honesty, they are the dangerous fools.
Hi Richard:
"Of course in the climate change field this cuts both ways. Quite a lot of what some (but not all) "sceptics" appear to have accepted as fact is simply not true (eg: about climate scientists as a group working to a political agenda, or getting it all wrong, etc etc)."
The can be forgiven for this, in fact my interest in the Global Warming meme arose solely from reading in the South China Morning Post that 2500 scientists had affirmed that there was global warming and that it was mostly due to human emissions. (I knew from experience that if 2500 scientists agreed on anything it must be a vast source of funding.) It wasn't sceptics that laid the ground for conspiracy theories it was the IPCC