Micheal, it is really hard to deal with someone who takes such a lopsided, extremist point of view that Sea World has no negative impact,. as you have, with the knowledge that you must have of the deaths to humans and harm to marine mammals that have taken place at Sea World over the years. I dont imagine those in charge of Sea World would be that one-sided as to, incorrectly, brag that they are almost perfect. Furthermore, your insulting charge that those who are supportive of giving these marine mammals some surfeit from their present-day existence at places like Sea World should be characterized as KOOKS, seems to make you appear to be a bit absurd, as well as unfair. You have even gone so far as to say that, These irrational, radical, animal rights activists are nuts. Well, my friend, thirty eight members of the U.S. House of Representatives cant all be Kooks, can they Michael, when they call upn the Secretary of Agriculture to ask for a revision and updating of the 1995 USDA regulations of marine mammal handling by organizations like Sea World. Moreover, I would not label as kooks all of those people who have learned about the death of one of Sea Worlds trainers and other problems that they have had there over the years, and so they are concerned about these marine mammals and would like some honest actions to improve the way these marine mammals are treated. You seem to think that they are wasting your precious time, and keeping you and the people at Sea World from protecting the environment.You must understand that these matters are not mutually exclusive. You can be interested in caring for marine mammals and in protecting the environment, too. If you think all of these defenders of marine mammals are kooks, I would ask you to read the current issue of the very reputable magazine, National Geographic, for an interview with John Rocanelli in re to the consideration of marine mammal sanctuaries. He happens to be the CEO of the National Aquarium in Baltimore, MD., hardly someone who you would label a Kook. I, also, would like to know who you think you are to come on my fb timeline to lecture me on protecting the environment? Thats something that I have been doing for most of my long life. For example, back in 1993 when 20 people from San Diego flew down to Rio de Janeiro for the First Earth Summit on Protecting the Environment, I would like to have gone, too, but was not able to. The main reason was that our Tijuana, Mexico-San Diego, CA Environmental Committee chose to have a Mini-Summit in Tijuana with top governmental officials and leaders of environmental groups in this region present. Cory Kjos, who headed our group for several years took severely ill and could no longer head up this event. It took two of us, someone from the other side of the border and myself, to replace Cory in carrying out this responsibility. Furthermore, it was there that Professor Keith Pezzolli, head of the Urban Studies Program at UCSD (then), recruited me to teach the first course in Environmental Careers in Business and Public Service in the UCSD Extension Certificate Program related to the environment. This was before there was any major or minor in environmental studies at UCSD. It got me back into teaching after being a Chief Development Officer at places like UCLAs College of Fine Arts, and a Development Management Consultant for institutions like The Salvation Army. I really appreciated the fact that they allowed me to add nonprofit organizational careers to those in business and public service to the six week course as that was a major interest of mine. You have gone so far as to charge me with thinking that, If you equate all money and enterprise with corruption, then you should stop working as a consultant for corporations. I really do not think that you have any business telling me who I should work for. However, for your information, I do not believe that all of those who own and operate Sea World are evil or corrupt; they may be a little misguided in not catching up with the latest research on the care and treatment of marine mammals, but they are not the worst examples of the behavior of a large corporation. Nor do I believe that the Hubbs -Sea World Research Institute (HSWRI) is anything but a fine scientific research organization. As a matter of fact, some ten years ago, I had a very good experience with some of the executives at Sea World when we were trying to effect a space bridge to one of our sister cities, Vladivostok, Russia. We were allowed to hold our end of the spacebridge at Sea World, with equipment donated by UCSD, and major donations from Alaska Airlines and Anheuser Busch (the then owners of Sea World). Moreover, I have taken my own children to Sea World, albeit it was over 35 years ago when they were much younger. Moreover, who are you to spend a page of our time pulling something from an unnamed source to lecture us about propaganda, as you pretend to be some kind of authority on the subject. I happened to have written a paper in a graduate pol. sci. course in my Masters Program on Rumor and Stereotype as they related to Propaganda back in the 60s, probably before you were born, and I made sure to cite my sources, too, which you, like Sen. Rand Paul, have chosen not to do! This was long before I was privileged to have taught subject matter like this at places like the University of Nebraska, UCSD, and SDSU. Michael, I think you need to get off your high horse and start talking sense with some of the people who are willing to discuss this important matter with you, albeit without all of the name-calling and pretentiousness that you seem to have been demonstrating! John P. Falchi. _____________________________________________________________________ Michael Russell -Sea World has no negative impacts. Almost everything they do is productive and helps educate the public about environmental issues, they provide jobs both directly and indirectly for the tourism industry, they support our democratic candidates who keep the republicans at bay and lobby for increased height limits on city structures which will help increase population density and limit the damage humans have on the environment. They pay their fair share of sales taxes and lease their land from the city for tens-of-millions, paying what we require for infrastructure and creating unionized city jobs. When ethical productive enterprise is creating wealth, like Sea World, then we should praise their good work and help expand their business. If you equate all money and enterprise with corruption, then you should stop working as a consultant for corporations. You can not exploit animals, anymore than you can enslave your dog. Animals can be abused, eaten, or killed, but thats not going on at Sea World. These irrational, radical, animal rights activists are nuts. The distraction of their emotional anthropomorphic psychological projection is wasting time. We should be working on real problems and dealing with real environmental issues, not harming those good and well educated scientists, naturalists, and environmentalists that are working to change the future. Sea World is a great organization, and they deserve better. Sea Worlds web presence is sincere, Its not propaganda John Falchi - it is Public Relations but it is balanced and fair. The Blackfish video is proper propaganda by definition: 1. Propagandist must have access to intelligence concerning events and public opinion. 2. Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority. a. It must issue all the propaganda directives. b. It must explain propaganda directives to important officials and maintain their morale. c. It must oversee other agencies activities which have propaganda consequences 3. The propaganda consequences of an action must be considered in planning that action. 4. Propaganda must affect the enemys policy and action. a. By suppressing propagandistically desirable material which can provide the enemy with useful intelligence b. By openly disseminating propaganda whose content or tone causes the enemy to draw the desired conclusions c. By goading the enemy into revealing vital information about himself d. By making no reference to a desired enemy activity when any reference would discredit that activity 5. Declassified, operational information must be available to implement a propaganda campaign 6. To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium. 7. Credibility alone must determine whether propaganda output should be true or false. 8. The purpose, content and effectiveness of enemy propaganda; the strength and effects of an expose; and the nature of current propaganda campaigns determine whether enemy propaganda should be ignored or refuted. 9. Credibility, intelligence, and the possible effects of communicating determine whether propaganda materials should be censored. 10. Material from enemy propaganda may be utilized in operations when it helps diminish that enemys prestige or lends support to the propagandists own objective. 11. Black rather than white propaganda may be employed when the latter is less credible or produces undesirable effects. 12. Propaganda may be facilitated by leaders with prestige. 13. Propaganda must be carefully timed. a. The communication must reach the audience ahead of competing propaganda. b. A propaganda campaign must begin at the optimum moment c. A propaganda theme must be repeated, but not beyond some point of diminishing effectiveness 14. Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans. a. They must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses b. They must be capable of being easily learned c. They must be utilized again and again, but only in appropriate situations d. They must be boomerang-proof 15. Propaganda to the home front must prevent the raising of false hopes which can be blasted by future events. 16. Propaganda to the home front must create an optimum anxiety level. a. Propaganda must reinforce anxiety concerning the consequences of defeat b. Propaganda must diminish anxiety (other than concerning the consequences of defeat) which is too high and which cannot be reduced by people themselves 17. Propaganda to the home front must diminish the impact of frustration. a. Inevitable frustrations must be anticipated b. Inevitable frustrations must be placed in perspective 18. Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred. 19. Propaganda cannot immediately affect strong counter-tendencies; instead it must offer some form of action or diversion, or both.
Posted on: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 09:03:49 +0000