The truth behind the lies

Lately, the clamor in social networking sites for the truth behind the Sarin chemical attacks in Syria, the illegal slush fund of the Partido Popular in Spain, and the pork barrel scam in the Philippines has led me to ponder the question of truth in world events.

A quick, even superficial, read of history's greatest events will reveal that major, life altering political actions were, at best, undertaken on the bases of half truths, confabulated facts, and selective amnesia. And these are just the justifications for taking such actions; the hidden agendas leading to these actions are even more nefarious and convoluted. Certain events immediately come to mind. Off the top of my head: the Crusades, the Inquisition, the creation of the Church of England, Napoleon Bonaparte, Hitler's lebensraum and the Final Solution, the military-industrial complex, the Six Day War of 1967, the oil crisis of 1973, Black Monday 1987, the Iraq War of 2003.

The truth of the matter is, since the appearance (or creation) of man, the world has operated and progressed on the basis of lies, not truths. The truth only serves to muddle "the facts;" it is the refuge of those whose lies have no meaningful socio-political effect. In other words, the rest of us. And for the rest of us, an explanation of the lies perpetuated upon us is mandatory because we cannot conceive that our lies are any less important or impacting.

The truth is non-negotiable
There's a reason why lies have been used to shape the history of mankind - because they work. The truth leaves no room for negotiation, you're stuck with it. And once it's out there, you don't have much of a choice other than to right the wrongs. Truth kills your freedom of choice.

Lies, on the other hand, are much more creative and original. They provide obfuscation,  misinterpretation, misinformation, and deception. They afford the liar plausible deniability and ways out of a sticky situation. Consider any mafia movie where a "rat" is caught. Once the rat spills the beans and tells the truth, he no longer serves any purpose and is swiftly put to death. Conversely, lies leave room for doubt providing an extension of life with which he can plot his survival. He who fights and runs away, can come back to fight another day.  But he who in battle is slain, will never fight another day. The same is true of lies and truth.

And the reason lies work is because they allow us to speculate on the truth and bet on the outcome. It's how wealth is created. You don't believe me? Just go to your nearest stock exchange. Stocks rise on doubt and uncertainty; they decline on fact and truth.

This is why lies will continue to be the paradigm through which progress is measured, whether we like it or not. The truth, or what we think is the truth, is always sugar coated with deceit. And there's a very good reason for that - from the beginning of time, all animal species have relied on deception for survival; it's hard wired into our DNA, which is why we find it easier to believe a lie than the truth. The truth is often more insidious.

As Col. Nathan Jessup said in A Few Good Men, "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!"

The future of journalism is not based on truth

With all the technological tools available today, anyone can instantly become a journalist. The problem arises when the news is a series of half-truths or outright lies and is then disseminated as fact.

One of the things that really bothers me is when I see stories being passed around like fact simply because it happens to coincide with the beliefs of the person spreading the story. It gets even worse when licensed journalists, some of whom I know, start spreading these stories without first checking the facts.

As a journalist myself, I try to take an impartial view of everything I read although that is not always easy to do. Still, I always attempt to confirm the veracity of a story before I post it on social networking sites. And for someone with limited resources, checking a story is as simple as googling it to see if major news media are reporting it.

Yesterday, for example, someone I know posted a story that claims the new Penal Code will penalize any journalist reporting on government corruption. Naturally, this immediately raised flags as I am indirectly affected, so I checked the story. This Google search shows the results. The first 13 results display the exact same story verbatim. But guess what? All these websites are blogs or forums, and no major digital newspaper or TV news site carried the story. Doesn't it stand to reason that this news item would appear on ALL news media sites if this piece of legislation has the ability to affect the livelihood of news reporters? Wouldn't there have been a public outrage at the mere suggestion of a gag on press freedom? Well none of these things happened, and that led me to believe the story was a fabrication by someone trying to discredit the current administration for his or her own personal gain, or simply because it suited his or her own political agenda.

Today, another story appeared on how Amina, a Tunisian member of FEMEN, the Ukrainian feminist organization known for their topless protests, had been condemned to lashings and death by stoning for posing topless on Facebook as a protest against the second class status of women in Tunisia. The news site, Vanguardia, appears to be a legitimate Mexican news site. Personally, I have little to no knowledge of Mexican news media sites to determine its trustworthiness.

To be fair, the death sentence was not issued by the government or any of its judicial institutions. It was a Fatwa issued by Adel Amni, cleric and president of the Moderate Association for Awareness and Reform, a conservative, back-to-basics Islamic organization; nothing moderate there. Again, I don't know much about Tunisian politics other than Sharia law was supposed to have been abolished in 1956. However, that said, it is also true that since the Arab Spring, Tunisia has been trying to find a balance between democracy and traditional Islamic values.

The question, then, becomes one of legality versus perceived legality. Is the Fatwa (religious edict) legally binding? Not under current Tunisian law. Is it seen to be morally binding by a minority group, and thus, perceived as legal? To the conservatives it might be even though it has no legal executive standing. That does not mean that this edict does not represent a real threat to Amina's life.

What I object to in this instance is the way the Vanguardia article was worded. The reader is led to believe that this death sentence is a done deal, that Amina's sentence was tacitly approved by the government and that it will be carried out in short order. We don't know that; no government spokesperson has confirmed (or denied) the sentence. We only know that a fundamentalist cleric has issued a fatwa.

In the first case, I find it reprehensible and irresponsible to disseminate stories based on hearsay with no facts to back up the claim. The mere fact that it conforms to one's political beliefs is not sufficient reason to spread falsities. Isn't there a law against prevarication and defamation? Shouldn't journalists be held to the same standard?

In the second case, the issue is subtler but just as misleading. Should we condemn what's happening to Amina? Absolutely. But we must also get the facts straight. Her death sentence was issued by an Islamic fundamentalist cleric who believes we live in the 7th century. The Tunisian government, as far as we know, is not party to this verdict in any way, shape or form. That has to be made clear unless the contrary is proven.

The Internet is inundated with all kinds of stories and factoids, some of them true, others ironic, sarcastic or just plain humorous meant to entertain. Due to the ease with which we are able to disseminate news stories, now more than ever, we should take extra care to verify the facts we purport to uphold as truth.

This is not to say that all journalists are liars; on the contrary, most are conscientious reporters that seek only to shed light on the truth. And it is precisely for these journalists that it behooves us to uphold the integrity of the profession rather than besmirch it with amateurism.


  

  

  

A funny thing happened on the way to the forum

One year on and Europe is no closer to feeling the economic rebound it so sorely needs. Austerity was sold as the only way forward, but now, it seems, the medicine is too harsh a pill to swallow and the people just won't put up with it anymore.

A funny thing happened...
The Euro. On paper it sounded great: a single, pan-European monetary unit that would foster unification and simplify financial transactions across borders. Powered by Germany's economic juggernaut and under the control of the European Central Bank, prosperity and economic parity were promised to all members big and small. And so it was. Since its launch in 2002, the Euro zone has prospered and grown despite some mismanagement and cultural differences.

But that's the great thing, or not, about prosperity - all the fine print goes unnoticed and is left unread as long as pockets have money and there's plenty of food on the table. However, the true test of a good administration is not how well things are run during a period of growth, but rather how astutely it can pull itself out of a severe economic downturn, the operative word being astutely. And that's the funny part because you just know that, sooner or later, the fine print that was left unread...it's going to come back and bite someone in the ass - you!

On the way...
The Euro bus on the road to economic nirvana hit a major speed bump festooned with spike chains and bollards. That was in 2008 and the economic world went topsy-turvy. Certain European countries found themselves overextended and insolvent. In order to stave off the breakup of the Union and its currency, the bigwigs stepped in with edicts on how Club Med had to handle the situation. Every solution to this economic crisis has relied on the ages old maxim that cutting cost directly affects the bottom line. At the same time, in order to improve the country's financial position, revenues would have to be increased by raising taxes. The implementation of these two measures would hasten recovery. At least, that was the theory. But really, Germany and the ECB were not too concerned with the fate of Southern Europe; they just wanted to get paid so that they could continue vacationing on Club Med's beaches!

As a business major, I'll be the first one to attest that this model is faultless; it's time tested and proven when conditions permit these kinds of measures. However, as it turned out, legislators and financial managers of creditor nations were not paying close attention to conditions on the ground. Their dictates were made behind closed door meetings while sipping Louis XIII and smoking Cohibas very far removed from the trenches. They simply told debtor nations that these measures had to be implemented if they had any hope of obtaining additional financing. And like constipated little puppies, the Med set were made to swallow a foul tasting laxative.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times - you cannot implement extreme austerity measures when a country is running at 25% unemployment, especially in Europe which is highly socialized and subsidized. It simply won't work. It gets even worse in Southern Europe because unlike their northern industrialized cousins, Mediterranean nations are essentially agricultural based, meaning the corporate fabric of these countries is largely made up of small businesses. In other words, these businesses - hairdressers, pharmacies, butchers, cafes, green grocers, bookstores and such - have been passed on from one generation to the next and are marginal at best. So, if on top of a declining market, taxes are raised, many of these mom and pop stores will have no option but to layoff their employees in order to survive. And in Europe that's a double-edged sword. Not only does the government lose the worker's social security contribution as a result of the layoff, it now has to pay unemployment benefits to that worker. It's a snowball effect - workers are laid off decreasing consumer demand, which forces production to layoff more workers to minimize over supply.

Social security revenue is everything in Europe. It pays for health care, pensions and unemployment. It is the tripod that holds the system together; it is the one government institution that cannot fail. However, in Spain at least, it has to a certain extent. Universal health is no longer guaranteed, pensions have been cut despite inflationary pressures and unemployment benefits have been reduced.

To the forum
Elections. After a year of extreme austerity measures, Italians went to the polls last week. It was a foregone conclusion that Mario Monti would be elected to the highest post to continue the reforms he had started. Besides, he was the candidate of choice and obedient pet dog of the Euro bigwigs. Status quo maintained. At least, that was the script. But surprise, surprise! Not only did Monti not win, he didn't even place or show. He came in dead last with only marginal support. And the Oscar goes to (drum roll, please)...Beppe Grillo, an antiestablishment comedian. He has assailed Italian politics and European meddling with quick one-liners. The established European powers see him as a joke, one they might have to deal with however distasteful they find it. And right now they don't know what to make of it. But the Italian people have spoken and their voice is loud and clear: We're not gonna take it. No, we ain't gonna take it, we're not gonna take it anymore. Thank you, Twisted Sister!

Given the reality that the EU may actually have to deal with Grillo, who could very well tell the Germans and the ECB to stick austerity up their assterity, the IMF is now bactracking, hinting they may have been wrong in their assessment. Now they're backtracking? Is this what's known as being proactive?  Aren't the head honchos over at the IMF and ECB supposed to be the best economic minds in the world?

I'm not an economist. In fact, I'm pretty much useless when it comes to finances - I can't even balance my checkbook. But even I had better sense than the Idiots Musing Follow-through strategies. I said it here several months back. Even then I said austerity measures would produce the opposite results of those expected. When there's so much unemployment, there's only one way out: create employment, even if it means eschewing all the tenets you were made to believe, ingest and digest. If you were always taught to raise taxes, do the opposite, decrease taxes. Make the country attractive to foreign and local investment that can generate jobs. Do away with bureaucratic red tape and make it easy to set up shop. If you were always taught to cut costs, fine. Cut costs but don't cut spending. Sounds contradictory? Not really. You can cut costs by eliminating administrative redundancies and increasing production efficiency. Continue advertising. Remember this, when all your competitors are reducing advertising and promotions because that's how it's always been done, the market will be wide open to those companies who can maintain brand awareness among customers.

I realize that all this is easier said than done and that many more factors are involved in macro managing a country. The point is this: policy makers who do not come out of their comfort zone can never be proactive.  

A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum is a 1966 comedy movie starring Zero Mostel, Phil Silvers and Buster Keaton based on the Broadway musical.

The Dance of Lance

After his remorseless, matter of fact confession on Oprah Winfrey's show, Lance Armstrong has not redeemed himself in the eyes of the world. So why do we care if he repents or not? Should we even care?

Okay, Lance is a cad; we all know that. His so-called confession coupled with his body language on Oprah's show reminds us that, even now, Lance feels more victim than transgressor. It clearly demonstrates the state of delusion in someone who connived and orchestrated the biggest sports doping scandal in recent memory.

So now that we know the truth we have to ask ourselves, so what?

Remorse
Let's assume for a moment that Lance showed true remorse during his confession, which he didn't. So what? Would that simple act absolve him of his crimes? Would it make him a better, more likeable person? Of course not! Lance's the man, man! He's the pope of dope, the treat of cheat, in the zone with cortisone and stoned on testosterone. He doesn't care what people think of him because if he did, he wouldn't have doped in the first place. Well, that's simpler said than done. The truth is he never thought he would ever get caught. The machinery behind his cheating was so intricate, it took a team member to rat out the conspiracy.

Of his confession, Armstrong's only concern was that of making a good impression on the USADA and other sports governing bodies so as to gain a pass for future triathlon competitions and possibly stave off having to pay millions in fraud settlements, although that last part is definitely a wet dream. Hey Mr. tally man, tally me a lawsuit.

Hell, no! My man isn't going to show remorse because as he himself said, he was just leveling the playing field. Besides, no self respecting, arrogant SOB ever displays remorse. That's for little people.

Concern
When you get right down to it, Lance's only crime is having been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. We don't care that he cheated; everybody cheats. We care that he got caught because that's a warning to all of us. A warning that the easy way out is not always the easiest way out. And if it's fame and fortune you're after, there are other easier ways to achieve the same goals of money, notoriety and hero worship. In fact, some of these other avenues even condone drug abuse.

And that's the real disturbing aspect of all this.

With dwindling natural resources and an increasing population, the chasm between the haves and have nots is pushing the world ever closer to a post apocalyptic setting. The result of this general feeling of hopelessness in the future is manifest in two ways: the need to accumulate wealth by whatever means in the shortest time possible, and the need for heroes.

Hero is a sandwich
Our need for heroes is bordering on the ridiculous; we make heroes out of anyone. More often than not, these are public figures or celebrities and they run the gamut from obscure to asinine. Such is our need for role models that we've even made heroes of cartoon characters. Here's the best part. People actually believe these superheroes exist and they live in the good ol' U.S. of A. I love coming out of a Batman or Spiderman movie and watching the kids beat their chests with pride shouting, "U.S.A, U.S.A.!" We praise policemen for serving and protecting even though that's exactly what it says on their cruisers. It's their job! Just today a woman fell onto the subway tracks and was saved by a policeman before being run over by the train. That's not being a hero, that's doing one's job. Will we now start calling our children heroes for going to school? What's that, we already do? No wonder they're such wimps.

But expectations are fraught with disappointment and in recent years few, if any, have lived up to the standard. The level of disappointment is so high we've even taken to searching out heroes in our preschools. We no longer allow our children to compete for fear it will mess up their self esteem, so we bestow medals on every child just for the mere fact of participating in some event. That way there are no winners, no losers. Just wait until they have to face the real world.

Fact is, the only hero that won't let you down is a sandwich. And it only costs $5.00.

Fame and shame
Money. We want it now and we don't want to work for it. This is today's mantra and people in power have been showing us the dog-eat-dog way. Financial scandals and political largesse are the biggest source of legalized fraud.

Why slave your life away when acting the fool or overhauling your body can make you more money than you ever imagined? We've all heard of the woman who became a man so that she could get pregnant and claim that "coveted" title of being the first man to give birth. Well, she may be a man in the eyes of the law but she has all the plumbing of a woman, except for a fake prosthetic penis. I wonder how she gets it up. Maybe she had a pump implanted as well. I'm sure he, she has made millions from selling his, her story. And all it took was a transgender operation and hormone shots.

This has been the norm lately. Make an ass of yourself but do it in a big way so that you get noticed and the money will start to roll in. And if in the process you have to get breast implants, a face lift, vaginal rejuvenation surgery, liposuction, asshole bleaching, buttocks padding, botox shots, hair coloring and skin whitening, do it. You'll feel like a new and improved person and you'll make your money back, and more, in no time at all; never mind that you have to act the fool or sell your dignity to achieve it. Just ask the guys at Jackass or Kim Kardashian.

The common denominator
So what do heroes and reality stars have in common? Instant gratification. This is what we're selling. You no longer have to go to the gym to achieve that coke bottle figure, pay for it. Need money? Steal it. Want instant fame? Sex it.

Fact is, hard work, dignity, restraint, honesty, humility and integrity, all those factors that give a person character and depth, are now pointless and irrelevant. You can have it all and you can have it now. Values are for losers.

No wonder we look for heroes in all the wrong places.    








 







   

Think About It

The importance of the international 5-day weather forecast

During the last presidential elections between PNoy and GMA, some friends asked me whom I would support.

"Well," I said, "I'll support the candidate who can guarantee to consistently put Manila on CNN's and BBC's 5-day weather forecast. I'll even settle for a mention on the daily regional weather forecast."

Needless to say the topic never even came up in any of the campaign speeches of either candidate. And my friends all thought I was batty. Nobody seemed to understand my oblique powers of deduction.

But think about it. Why do these channels provide weather forecasts? After all, local TV channels provide more intensive coverage. So why would you watch a BBC or CNN weather forecast? Well, you wouldn't...unless you were traveling. And who are the most frequent travelers? Businessmen. And to where do they travel? To the region's business centers. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the same cities always seem to hog the weather forecasts: Singapore, Hong Kong, Seoul, Taipei, Kuala Lumpur.

And that speaks volumes about Manila. The Philippines, which was poised to become an emerging tiger economy in the early 90s, has fallen so far behind its neighbors that it now ranks below Vietnam as a business destination. In fact, it doesn't even appear on this Wall Street Journal (SE Asian Edition) list of Asia's most attractive cities. It gets worse. This CNBC list of the World's Ten Worst Countries for Business has the Philippines down as the fourth worst country in the world to do business. Although I suppose a lot of it has to do with the welcoming committee. CNNgo.com has NAIA listed as the 5th worst airport in the world.

So next time you watch CNN or BBC, note the weather forecast. Now you know why those cities always appear, because they're business centers.

On the next presidential elections, ask your candidate if he or she can guarantee putting Manila on the weather forecast map. If the candidate says "yes", it means that person has a plan to get the economy back on its feet. It means he or she has a plan to end corruption. It means there's still hope.