PHM-Exch> Exposing think tanks' deception campaigns

[Sam Lanfranco]

Claudio Schuftan is absolutely right about the strategy of the loosely
aligned global network of conservative (reactionary) think tanks.

For almost two decades their strategy has been very simple and direct.
It has several parts. One is a complete lack of transparency with
regard to who they are and who funds them. The try to fly on the
"Brand" of the wording of their name. A second is to avoid
evidence-based analysis and avoid entering into an evidence-based
dialogue with any of the research community, the policy community, or
the stakeholders being victimized by their agenda.

What they do try to achieve is the "framing" of the issues in terms
that predispose any discussion to take place in a context defined by
them. That context is ideologically and self-interest driven, immune
to evidence-based analysis, and generally uses appeals to gut level
emotions rather that reasoned analysis.

Any strategy to return issues of social policy to a sound grounding
will require efforts at several levels. One, as Claudio notes, is to
unmask such institutes for what they are in terms of who funds them
and their core agendas. In parallel, progressive pro-social policy
institutes should be called on to do the same - as a best practice
and in the name of full transparency.

Another important part of a social policy strategy is to go beyond
building evidence to refute the claims of reactionary self-serving
think tanks and institutes and work doubly hard to re-frame the
issues in a way that re-captures the context in which discussion
takes place.

This is more that just trying to outplay such organizations at their
own game. Since in reality they do not seek social equality, economic
equity, and social justice, progressive forces should build a context
on those three pillars. From within that frame of reverence the
evidence based analysis can then be deployed.

When such organizations have been denied the unconstrained freedom to
frame the issues, they will have to face evidence-based analysis and
be at a disadvantage because of their aversion to serious peer
reviewed evidence based analysis.

The challenge to informing the hearts and minds of the citizens starts
with capturing the process of framing the issues. Without that
evidence and reason have a hard time finding a foothold.

Sam Lanfranco
Distributed Knowledge Project

**********************************************
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus) Econ, York U.
Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
email: Lanfran at Yorku.ca   Skype: slanfranco
blog:  http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
Phone: 613 476-0429 cell: 416-816-2852
**********************************************