Yes it was about time this was highlighted. Several Anti Live Export folk have made a number of comments which are false, misleading and that's either through deliberate act of deceit or innocent ignorance. I suspect these misleading statements are aimed at potential or actual Animal Rights Activists...but who knows.
What we do know is there have not yet been 30 ESCAS Breaches yet as some have and are claiming.
Let me be clear and repeat that, there have not been 30 confirmed ESCAS breaches...no matter what anyone tells you.
Be alert and watch closely how things are portrayed.
There have however been 30 reports lodged with the federal Department of Agriculture (at the time of typing this (14/05/2014).
That's REPORTS LODGED not 30 INVESTIGATIONS nor 30 BREACHES.
So how many investigations were there actually?
Well first lets understand what happens. A person or persons lodge a complaint with the Department and the complaint goes firstly through an "assessment" which we assume is to weed out any vexatious complainants or poor and sloppy reporting. If it passes the Assessment phase then an Investigation is launched.
So that being the case, how many report are there currently before the department as I type?
Well out of 30 reports there are 4 Investigations in Progress so it'd be unwise and untidy to speculate on their outcome at this point let alone prejudice. There are 3 reports that are Under Assessment so again whilst those lines of enquiry are being pursued no speculation is good advice.
That leaves 23 reports to look at. 2 more reports didn't get past assessment ( i.e. were never investigations) that leaves 21 actual investigations.
Of the 21 actual investigations one was classed as not being found "non-compliant", so we're down to 20 now.
4 of those investigations, I think the first 4 on record, were unable to make a conclusion as there was insufficient information.
That leaves us with 30 actual reports lodged and only 16 actual findings so far. Now when people claim 30 breaches, 7 reports are still pending a judgement. Why are they not ruled out let alone the other 7 where for a number of reasons including insufficient evidence no finding could be made???
Now, we're gone a bit deeper, tried to be more precise with the ACTUAL FULL FACTS.
Now AA comes out with a pie chart which is misleading to those who do not research the full facts and assess them, as a whole, in context. Their pie chart shows zero reporting from Live Exporters.
Now there real facts are, out of the 16 actual breaches so far, 4 of them were Self Reports by exporters. The AA pie chart isn't completely false, out of the 4 specifically and specially selected breaches, none were 'self reports' by live exporters. If you know all the facts its not such a big deal, its actually a pretty poor out of context stat to flog. (click on the pie charts below to enlarge)
So we figured well only thing to do is make a deliberately deceptive pie chart of our own, one that's not actually false or anything, but it is deliberately deceptive, the breaches are narrow and specially selected to give the opposite impression of the AA pie chart. Somehow had we done this first, hopefully no one would have found the opposing pie chart below worthwhile of any notice.
So who was fooled?
Hopefully not you, but got to say, the AA one has been hotly defended. I'm pro LE but anti cruelty. I'm also anti BS so I'd kinda hope both sides can refrain from Ad Hominem straw man fallacy arguments as well as deceptive facts.
Remember when anyone talks about 30 breaches, there have not been 30 proven breaches yet.
Only 16 confirmed breaches.
Again there are some genuine folk amongst the ARA's and some shape shifters who've shown deceit and falsehood to beguile some of their legitimate followers who haven't tested claims properly.
Look closely, be vigilant.
Just goes to show you can twist anything into a farrago of lis and mistruths with smoke and mirrors. And none of it fools the Australian community, because the cameras do not lie.
ReplyDeleteHello Suzanne, thank you for taking the time to post a comment. I agree wholeheartedly with your comments (I think, in part at least).
ReplyDeleteFirstly - "Just goes to show you can twist anything into a farrago of lis and mistruths with smoke and mirrors." (I'll assumes "lis" is lies - that would make the most sense).
A farrago is a confusion of truth and myth or a confusing mix of truth & lies.
The original graph had no lies in it all. Its the clever and deceptive presentation and the careful selection of chosen incidents that give the impression that Exporters have not reported any breaches at all. All the data is correct and verifiable on the DAFF website.
The second graph had no lies in it all. Its the clever and deceptive presentation and the careful selection of chosen incidents that give the impression that AA hasn't reported any breaches at all. All the data is correct and verifiable on the DAFF website. The main difference is the second as a parody of the first and was not used to fool people. The data is correct and factual in both graphs, it was presented to portray a lie.
A farrago is a mix of truth and myth. The original graph had not even the trace of a farrago tag applicable. It was truth presented in a deliberately deceptive fashion to give a false understanding. It clearly would give the unwary the false idea the exporters have had no part in reporting breaches, when to date they've actually been responsible for reporting 25% of the confirmed breaches. If we were to be cute, we can say 100% of industry self reports were breaches, unlike AA & RSPCA which have lower percentages. Make from that what you will, worth mentioning, not worth sheep stations most likely.
When I pointed out (the main point of this post) that there have not been 30 ESCAS Breaches on an anti LE site I was told that its ok they had their "finger on the pulse" - I didn't agree and reinstated there have not been 30 ESCAS breaches only 30 reports and of them (to that date) only been 16 actual confirm breaches. I was then told that (and I paraphrase for now, exact quote coming) "We have never said there were 30 breaches ever"
I disagreed with that point as well and suggested they scroll up just 6 comments where they themselves posted "We take ESCAS breaches seriously. All 30 ESCAS breaches"
As a result of that being pointed out, all the posts were deleted except 3 which expressed shock and horror at the exporters. Those posts predated mine significantly. And all this came under the very misleading graph post.I was banned because I was honest and they were not. No biggie, no grudge, but still the deceit continues
(Had to split the reply - apologises)
ReplyDeleteLook its their page, its Farcebook so of course people can and do have agendas, but here's where I disagree with you "none of it fools the Australian community" - well debatable, seems some folk are giving it a red hot go and keeping the deceptive graph and removing the proper corrections.
You're last bit "because the cameras do not lie" well again debatable, the graphs are all based on correct verifiable data. The conclusion that narrow specifically selected data gives is a lie.
If we're to address images of cruelty, many of us have said before, the only reason to keep splash the media and mediums with grotesque images of vile cruelty is not to report new offences, its to maintain the rage. We have not dates, time and location on these images. Nor do we know if those images are representation of regular practice. Nor are we told how old the photos are and more importantly than anything, whether those potentially old photos are representative of practices and protocols in place at the exact same facilities right now.
There is a deliberate failure to flesh out this more current and relevant information in the haste to keep the shock wave flowing.
Also notable absent, photos and images of slaughter that is actually acceptable to the allegedly more extreme AW groups, perhaps all AW groups. If there is no such thing as acceptable slaughter practices, then perhaps its time for all opponents to be more honest and say they want all animal based food production ceased if that's what they want.
How long before we see what is acceptable from AW groups instead of what's unacceptable.
At present some AW groups find it quite acceptable to deceive their followers, potential followers and the wider public of fence sitters with clearly deliberate deceptive graphs and raging against the machine about the lie of 30 ESCAS breaches.
Again I say "Look Closely - Be Vigilant" - for very good reason. :-)