Spinwatch: the agenda, how is it pushed, who makes the prevailing wisdom

Zhou has a thread on propaganda and maybe this should be stuck onto it but .... there's much more than propaganda propagating out there there ....

Shane Ross just on Morning Ireland for example is saying the release of the PWC report on the banks is Government propaganda - it's a tiny fraction of the report as most of it is edited so it will give a particular view on it. He used the word "propaganda".

Dermot Ahern was on earlier immediately after a recording of Enda Kenny spinning his own rumours and innuendo and the interviewer said to Ahern "leaving aside the politics for a moment, what is the legal status of the 10 investors ..." [paraphrase]

And Ahern replied immediately "the Fine Gael party has had many fine leaders and statesmen but Enda Kenny ...."

Kenny is going to come in for a muppetting whupping by the FF media machine over the next while it seems for cooking up hysteria ... He mightn't be wrong ...


On a different but related matter Pat Kenny yesterday had two women on his show and they were all talking up the economy because there's "too much doom around...." - we could see a wholesale effort at DoomMonger-bashing now just this morning for example on the Pin

I'm guessing we're going to see a lot of anti-doom-mongering now and I don't deny that it could be unhealthy to pursue a spiral of doom downwards but then again there is denial over the reality ...

Great post Auditor#9. It says it all.

I'm aware that this thread itself or at least the OP sounds like anti-anti-doom-mongering but if there's something that takes my attention on either side I'll note it



If I want to

Ulick McEvaddy, of Libertas fame:

Quote :

ANGLO's 'golden circle' should be "proud of what they did" and have no reason to hide their identities, businessman Ulick McEvaddy said yesterday.The
aviation tycoon also claimed he would have "absolutely" gotten involved
if he'd been offered the chance to be a part of the €300m controversial
deal. The comments come as the Government faces mounting
pressure to name the 10 people who secured funding from Anglo to scoop
up 10pc of the bank's own shares last summer. Addressing accountants' body the ACCA yesterday, Mr McEvaddy also mounted a spirited defence of Ireland's
banks and bankers, warning Ireland would "go down the tubes" if the
country didn't stop "vilifying" the bankers who were "the architects of
the Celtic Tiger". Mr McEvaddy lamented the fact that he "didn't get
the phone call" to "support the bank" and join Anglo's golden circle. "Anglo is a great bank and I make no hesitation in saying I would have supported it in a heartbeat," he told the Irish Independent after his lecture. "If I had, I'd put my hand up in a heartbeat and say 'yes, I supported Anglo'.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/aviation-tycoon-says-golden-circle-should-be-proud-of-their-anglo-deal-1646885.html

Ulick McEvaddy eh ? I think some of these people have cooked up the new media genre of DoomBanking themselves or BankMongering or Shockonomics (remember Cowen just before the last election saying FG would blow the Pension Fund ) and when they see the seeds sprouting into the horror vegetation which is the effet that it obviously has - some old people I know who invested in the banks are peppering with utter fear that if a bank fails or collapses unless it gets nationalised that they'll die of starvation - when they see the effects it has we're then told to cop ourselves on ....

So what do we do - panic or not ?????

johnfás wrote:

Ulick McEvaddy, of Libertas fame:

Quote :

ANGLO's 'golden circle' should be "proud of what they did" and have no reason to hide their identities, businessman Ulick McEvaddy said yesterday.The
aviation tycoon also claimed he would have "absolutely" gotten involved
if he'd been offered the chance to be a part of the €300m controversial
deal. The comments come as the Government faces mounting
pressure to name the 10 people who secured funding from Anglo to scoop
up 10pc of the bank's own shares last summer. Addressing accountants' body the ACCA yesterday, Mr McEvaddy also mounted a spirited defence of Ireland's
banks and bankers, warning Ireland would "go down the tubes" if the
country didn't stop "vilifying" the bankers who were "the architects of
the Celtic Tiger". Mr McEvaddy lamented the fact that he "didn't get
the phone call" to "support the bank" and join Anglo's golden circle. "Anglo is a great bank and I make no hesitation in saying I would have supported it in a heartbeat," he told the Irish Independent after his lecture. "If I had, I'd put my hand up in a heartbeat and say 'yes, I supported Anglo'.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/aviation-tycoon-says-golden-circle-should-be-proud-of-their-anglo-deal-1646885.html

I posted yesterday that the people doing it probably thought they were doing a great thing ( and handy capital gains benefits on the side). Well, this all helps to clarify Libertas's anti elitist credentials, sure it does.

I think you should make the last bit in LARGE rather than small font .

Is there a law against poaching clients ? Say, I'm an accountant working for a firm and I start my own practice. So I nick a bunch of clients and start up. Can the company I worked for sue me for that ?

Not a law as such but most people would be subject to a restraint of trade clause in their contract of employment which has the effect of contractually obliging you not to poach clients. The courts tend not to like these contractual terms but recognise them as a fact of business. Consequently, so long as they are properly drafted and not unreasonably onerous either in scope or duration they will be upheld by the courts.

So the answer is yes an employer can stop an employee doing that but it depends very much on the nature of the business and the terms of the contractual agreement. It is not a legal thing as such in that it is not a statutory thing but rather something one's contract of employment. In the absence of such terms in a contract of employment there is nothing the previous employer can do.

Thanks for that johnfás. Similar to what I suspected myself. So if it's not addressed in the original employment contract then it is commercially and legally acceptable ?

Apologies, I posted this question in the wrong thread.

Correct, there is a Common Law protection for companies regarding disclosure and use of confidential information and trade secrets. However, that would be a difficult enough thing for a company to rely upon except in certain circumstances.

Where there is a restraint of trade clause within an employment contract the test usually employed by the courts in determining its application is (i) Whether there is a reasonable interest to be upheld and (ii) Whether the restriction is reasonable between the parties. Thus if there is no reasonable interest to be upheld the clause does not apply but even where there is a reasonable interest the covenant cannot be unduly restrictive. For instance, if you worked in a small firm in Dublin and the restraint of trade clause said something like you could not work in any firm in all of Dublin that would not be reaosnable between the parties.

I would imagine the contract in question is whatever contract the employee is currently labouring under, that could be an amended or updated contract rather than the original contract of employment.

I'm talking hypothetically here about the general law of course. You would want to get legal advice on any particular situation.

Not that we don't need hope but depends on what flavour you're having. The Pin people are whingeboxing a bit on the subject of the ideascampaign.ie site and also on a new book which has come out now urging people to get on the property ladder. Beartrap? BS from the Pin ? Bluster ? Boll0x?

foot on the ladder
http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=19570


ideascampaign.ie
http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=19526