Send in the clowns

by admin on August 18, 2007

in General

Richard Murphy is on something of a media kick at the moment with appearances on Radio 4 and Radio 5 Live. As someone who likes to deal in hard facts, Richard gets mightily ticked off when faced with people who have little or no idea what they’re talking about.

We talked about this last Friday and I pointed out that what Richard possibly doesn’t realise is that broadcast media is about entertainment. They need folk like Richard who will rise to the bait as it has a certain comedic value. That doesn’t of course prevent Richard from thinking that:

In other words this person had no idea whatsoever what she was talking about and had the nerve to go on national radio and talk about it. I was furious. I fear it showed.

I didn’t catch the show but can well imagine.

Richard’s next scheduled appearance on radio is next Wednesday, 22nd August at 8pm. I can’t wait to see how he got on.

Technorati Tags: ,

Comments have been disabled for this post.
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Hi Duncan,

Sorry for the delay; I've been away on business.

I haven't answered your question directly but have, instead, put some thoughts on my own blog - inspired by your question

http://gendal.blogspot.com/2007/09/tax.html

thank you Richard for such a speedy response. I find this fascinating. The question of Richard Murphy's wrong conclusions and mistaken prior beliefs is an important one which deserves elaboration. Would you explain your position a little further? For instance, perhaps specifically, how does the research generate wrong conclusions, for example...; and how do mistaken prior beliefs play into this, for example... It would be great to hear your position in some detail. Of course, your time dependent!
thank you.

"I would be interested to hear which specific aspects of Richard’s research ‘is wrong’. Otherwise, there may be a danger that your comment is taken to reflect a prior position."

Duncan, if I gave the impression I thought his *research* was wrong then I apologise; that was not my intent. I have no way of knowing if his methods are sound but, if I were to check, I am confident I would find that they are.

Where I think he is "wrong" is in his conclusions and the prior beliefs through which he interprets his results.

Re Richard G Brown above: I would be interested to hear which specific aspects of Richard's research 'is wrong'. Otherwise, there may be a danger that your comment is taken to reflect a prior position.

thanks

"I admire the fact he remains passionate about justice. And not only tax justice."

I don't doubt his motives. It's just unfortunate that it is sometimes possible to be both well-meaning and wrong.

However, his efforts are important: it keeps everybody else on their toes.

@Richard Brown: that's where you and I differ. Richard's methods of expression may not be to everyone's taste but I admire the fact he remains passionate about justice. And not only tax justice.

Don't give him media advice! His arguments in print are quite sufficient to see the luncay of some* of his positions. Sometimes you need an animated visual performance for the wider population to realise it though!

(* not all, but many :-) )

Previous post:

Next post: