Examining the Alternative Media Ecosystem using Twitter

Kate Starbird, University of Washington, HCDE, excerpt from the Abstract for Examining the Alternative Media Ecosystem through the Production of Alternative Narratives of Mass Shooting Events on Twitter:

In the aftermath of major political disruptions in 2016—in Britain with the Brexit vote and in the United States with the election of Donald Trump to the presidency—there has been widespread attention to and theorizing about the problem of “fake news”. But this term is both amorphous and contested. One perspective locates the problem within the emerging ecosystem of alternative media, where the term has been applied to refer to “clickbait” content that uses tabloid-style headlines to attract viewers for financial reasons (Silverman & Alexander 2016) and to describe political propaganda intentionally planted and propagated through online spaces (Timberg 2016). Challenging these definitions, alternative media outlets have appropriated the term to attack “mainstream” media for its perceived economic and political biases and for hosting inaccurate or under-sourced content (e.g. Rappoport 2016). Beneath this rhetoric, we are seeing traditional new providers and emergent alternative media battle not only for economic viability, but over accepted methods of how information is shared and consumed, and, more profoundly, for how narratives around that information are shaped and by whom.

This research seeks to provide a systematic lens for exploring the production of a certain type of “fake news”— alternative narratives of man-made crisis events. For three years, our research group has examined online rumoring during crises. Over that time, we noted the presence of very similar rumors across many man-made crisis events— including the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings, the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, and several mass shooting events including those at Umpqua Community College in Oregon (October, 2015). For each event, rumors claimed the event had been perpetrated by someone other than the official suspects—that it was instead either a staged event performed by “crisis actors” or a “false flag” orchestrated by someone else. Both explanations claimed that a powerful individual or group was pulling the strings for political reasons. Interestingly, though the arguments and evidence used to support these alternative narratives were somewhat consistent across events, the motives cited were often very different—e.g. from the U.S. government trying to support gun control to coordinated global actors staging violence to motivate military intervention.

For this paper, we utilize this type of conspiracy theory or alternative narrative rumor as an entry point for understanding the ecosystem of alternative media. We examine the production of these narratives through Twitter and across the external websites that Twitter users reference as they engage in these narratives. We propose and demonstrate that this lens—Twitter data from mass shooting events and our method for utilizing that data to reveal and explore connections across web domains—provides a systematic approach for shedding light on the emerging phenomena of alternative media and “fake news”.

Our contributions include an increased understanding of the underlying nature of this subsection of alternative media—which hosts conspiratorial content and conducts various anti-globalist political agendas. Noting thematic convergence across domains, we theorize about how alternative media may contribute to conspiratorial thinking by creating a false perception of information diversity……

We collected tweets related to shooting events for more than ten months in 2016. This time period included several high profile shooting events, including mass shootings with civilian casualties at an Orlando, FL nightclub on June 12, in a shopping district in Munich, Germany on July 22, and at a mall in Burlington, WA on September 23. Each of these events catalyzed considerable discussion online and elsewhere about the details and motives of the attack— including claims of the attack being a “false flag”.

More than half of our alternative narrative collection (30,361 tweets) relates to the Orlando event, including:

@ActivistPost: "Was Orlando Shooting A False Flag? Shooter Has Ties To FBI, Regular At Club, Did Not Act Alone? "

This tweet is typical of an alternative narrative tweet, leveraging uncertainty in the form of a leading question (Starbird et al. 2016) to present its theory. The linked-to article—whose title is the content of this tweet—presents evidence to support the theory, including facts about the case (such as previous contact between the FBI and the shooter) and perceived connections to past events that are similarly claimed to be false flags. The underlying theme here is that the U.S. government perpetrated the shooting with the intention of blaming it on Islamic terrorism. This tweet’s author, the ActivistPost, is associated with one of the central nodes in our network graph (see Figures 1-3), referenced in 191 tweets by 153 users and connected (by user activity) to a relatively high number of other domains.

The following tweet, by an account associated with a domain that has a strong edge tie with ActivistPost, forwards a similarly themed alternative narrative:

@veteranstoday: Orlando nightclub shooting: Yet another false flag? - looks like another PR extravaganza

This article was linked-to 147 times in our data. The tweet and the article feature an image with the title, “Omar Mateen: Patsy or MK Mind-Control Slave”. The term patsy is often used to label an accused perpetrator who has been framed for the incident by government or other powerful groups. MK Mind-Control refers to a CIA project that experimented with mind control in the 1950s. This speculative tweet and related article therefore present two potential explanations of the Orlando shooting event, both building off alternative narratives used in previous events. The underlying claim here is that the named suspect was not responsible for the Orlando shootings, but that the U.S. government was. This claim is extended in the article to apply to other violent acts attributed to Muslim terrorists.

Alternative narratives around the Munich shooting had a similar theme, though blame was pushed onto international geo-political actors: Desperate Zionists Commit Another Fraud with Munich Shooting Hoax - NODISINFO

The above tweet links to an article (tweeted 54 times) within the nodisinfo.com domain, one of the most highly tweeted and highly connected domains in our data. Citing photographic evidence from the scene, the article claims that the shooting was a drill, staged by crisis actors. All of these terms echo other alternative narratives of other events. Diverging from the Orlando narratives, which blame the U.S. government, in this case the accused “real” perpetrators are Zionists—echoing long-active narratives about covert power wielded by Jewish bankers and others. The article offers no evidence to support that connection other than reference to other “staged” events.

The Cascade Mall Shooting in Burlington, Washington referenced a third kind of alternative narrative that has appeared after many U.S.-based shootings, including the Sandy Hook School shooting in 2012 and the Umpqua School shooting in 2015. This narrative claims that these mass shooting events are again staged using crisis actors, but in this case by the left-leaning U.S. government to provide a political basis for reducing gun rights.

Absence Of Footage Of Wounded/Deceased Victims. Media Were Told Victims Remained In The Mall #Cascade #FalseFlag

This tweet suggests that there were no actual victims of the event. It links to an article on the memoryholeblog.com domain, which also has a relatively high degree in our network graph and was tweeted 125 times. The linked-to article assembles evidence to make a case for the event being a drill and describes an outlook that connects several events to this narrative: “Such events are reported on by major news media uncritically, thus supporting the call for strengthened gun control measures. […]”

Interestingly, the second most highly referenced event in our alternative narrative collection from 2016 (at 5,914 tweets) is the Sandy Hook shootings, which occurred in 2012. Though a large portion of those tweets contest or deny that alternative narrative, several utilize Sandy Hook “evidence” to support alternative narratives around more recent events. For example:

Orlando shooting was a hoax. Just like Sandy Hook, Boston Bombing, and San Bernandino. Keep believing Rothschild Zionist news companies. More Orlando shooting Hoax – proof - same actors in Sandy hook & Boston Marathon Fake bombing - gun take away agenda.

These two tweets both connect the Orlando Shooting to claims that Sandy Hook was a hoax. In the first, the author refers to the “Rothschild Zionist news companies”, a reference to anti-globalist and anti-media viewpoints that appear as major themes across many alternative news sites. The second tweet connects Orlando to Sandy Hook (and paradoxically the Boston Marathon bombings) as part of an ongoing agenda to reduce gun rights in the U.S.

Taken together, these examples describe a few of what turns out to be a collection of distinct alternative narratives that share several common features. As the above tweets highlight at the micro-level, at the macro-level our domain data demonstrate that different alternative narratives are connected across users and sites—e.g. some users reference both memoryholeblog.com (which assigns blame to U.S. government officials trying to take away gun rights) and veteranstoday.com and/or nodisinfo.com (which theorize that international conspirators set up these events to further their political agendas by falsely blaming Muslim terrorists). Our tweet and domain data suggest that the production of these narratives is a distributed activity where “successful” elements (e.g. drills, crisis actors, Zionist conspirators) of one narrative are combined with others in a mutually reinforcing manner……

Shorter Acting Commonwealth Ombudsman Richard Glenn: yes, it was a #CentrelinkFAIL

Commonwealth Ombudsman, media release, 10 April 2017:

Ombudsman publishes report on Centrelink’s automated debt system

Acting Commonwealth Ombudsman Richard Glenn today released a report into the Department of Human Services – Centrelink’s (DHS) implementation of the automated debt system known as the Online Compliance Intervention (OCI).

‘We found there were issues with the usability and transparency of the system. There were deficiencies in DHS’ service delivery and communication to customers and staff when implementing the system. These issues affected the quality of decisions made by the OCI. Many of these problems could have been reduced through better project planning, system testing and risk management,’ Mr Glenn said.

Since the Ombudsman’s office began its investigation in January 2017, DHS has made positive changes to the system, in response to the office’s feedback.

‘However more improvements are needed to ensure the system reflects good public administration,’ Mr Glenn said.

The Ombudsman’s office made recommendations in the report about clearer letters and system messaging to customers, more help for customers when gathering income information, improving service delivery and communication, more assistance and support for vulnerable customers and reviewing automated recovery fee decisions.

DHS and the Department of Social Services (DSS), which is responsible for the relevant legislation and policy, responded positively to the Ombudsman’s investigation, agreeing to all recommendations.

Mr Glenn said the Ombudsman’s office would continue to work closely with DHS and DSS to monitor the implementation of the recommendations in this report. He also acknowledged DHS’ assistance during the investigation.

The Ombudsman will make no further comment on the report.

Excerpts from the 110 page report illustrating just some of the shortcomings in Centrelink’s automated debt recovery program:

We asked DHS whether it had done modelling on how many debts were likely to be over-calculated as opposed to undercalculated. DHS advised no such modelling was done.16 In our view the absence of modelling means DHS cannot say how many debts may be under-calculated or overcalculated and by what margin.

The risk of over-recovering debts from social security recipients and the potential impact this may have on this relatively vulnerable group of people, warrants further consideration by DHS. We suggest DHS test a sizeable sample of debts raised by the OCI. The samples should include people who did not respond to the initial letter, as well as people who went online and people who contacted DHS via other channels. We also suggest DHS re-evaluate where the risk for debts calculated on incomplete information should properly lie and investigate whether there are ways to mitigate this risk……

In the OCI, the automatic application of the ten per cent recovery fee occurs when there is no contact from the customer, or the customer specifically indicates they did not have personal factors which affected their ability to accurately declare their income. 3.8 This raised concerns for customers who may not have had an adequate opportunity to provide a reasonable excuse, for example if they did not receive the initial letter, or did not understand the connection between reasonable excuse and the recovery fee.

In the initial letters used from July 2016, customers were warned a recovery fee may be applied, however there was no information in the letter about the ‘reasonable excuse’ exception. DHS advises that an explanation of ‘reasonable excuse’ was added from August 2016. However, reminder letters and debt notification letters did not include this information. A copy of these letters can be found at Appendix D.

In response to concerns raised by our office, DHS will no longer apply the fee automatically where there is no contact from the customer, or the customer responds that they had personal factors which affected their ability to accurately declare their income. DHS has taken steps to ensure that customers receive the initial letter, including the use of registered post……

Our investigation revealed the letters DHS sent to customers before 20 January 2017 to alert them about the income discrepancy were unclear and deficient in many respects. The letter did not include the 1800 telephone number for the compliance helpline. It did not explain that a person could ask for an extension of time or be assisted by a compliance officer if they had problems. It asked the person to ‘confirm’ their income information, possibly giving the impression that, if the figure was the correct annual figure, merely confirming the information would suffice. The letter did not provide a clear explanation that applying ATO income to the person’s record may negatively affect the amount of any debt. Copies of these letters are at Appendix D……

We received other complaints where people were told by DHS staff that payslips were the only acceptable form of evidence and bank statements would not be accepted. In our view, DHS should have more clearly communicated to customers the evidence they needed to provide, and what they could do if they had problems obtaining this evidence. In particular, DHS should have given customers a clearer and more consistent message that it would accept alternative forms of evidence, such as bank statements, where a customer was having difficulty gathering payslips or other evidence directly from the employer. As illustrated by Ms H’s complaint, in some cases, DHS can consult its own records for employment information it may have previously verified.

DHS has always accepted bank statements as reasonable evidence of historical income where other evidence is unavailable. As customers do not have the same information gathering powers as DHS, it is critical for DHS to give some customers additional support and assistance to obtain this evidence when they have made genuine and reasonable attempts and other available information is not sufficient. The accuracy of debts relies on the customer’s ability to obtain and input historical income information into the OCI. DHS should take into account the potential cost to customers to obtain bank statements. We suggest that where a customer cannot obtain the information despite genuine and reasonable attempts, DHS should use its information gathering powers to request the information directly from the employer or the financial institution. We suggest the Department of Social Services should include guidelines about the process for obtaining employment income evidence in the Guide to Social Security Law…..

Poor service delivery was a recurring theme in many of the complaints made to our office about the OCI system. Key problems customers experienced were:

* the compliance helpline number was excluded from letters and hard to find within the OCI system itself, meaning customers called the general customer service lines resulting in longer wait times than the compliance line

* not getting a clear explanation about the debt decision and the reasoning behind it

* being required to go online to resolve their situation when they had already indicated they were having difficulties

* instances where there should have been a more thorough manual intervention by a compliance officer but the customer was still referred back online

* difficulties getting information and assistance from service centre staff, either on the phone or in person, or when they tried to go online to use the system

* staff not having sufficient knowledge about how the OCI system works.

The far-right Turnbull Government's response to the Commonwealth Ombudman's report reeks of a defensive inability to face the consequences of its ongoing ideological class war.

The Guardian, 10 April 2017:

In a statement, Tudge repeatedly noted the parts of the report that defended the automated system and said the government was already making improvements that, in some cases, went further than what was suggested by the ombudsman.

“The unfortunate reality is that while most welfare recipients do the right thing, some deliberately defraud the system while others inadvertently fail to accurately declare their income and consequently receive an overpayment,” he said.

“We want to be fair and reasonable to welfare recipient but also fair to the taxpayer who pays for the welfare payments.”

The shadow human services minister, Linda Burney, said the report raised “serious questions about Alan Tudge’s oversight of his department”.

“While some changes have been made to Tudge’s robo-debt system, the ombudsman is clear they don’t go far enough,” she said. “The minister has no one to blame but himself. According to the ombudsman, all of these issues could have been avoided with proper planning and consultation.”

The shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, said Labor maintained the system should be suspended for a review.

The American Resistance has many faces and these are just two of them (6)

“In the absence of a federal framework, we will continue to work with US states and cities who are demonstrating clear leadership through the Under2 Coalition, and businesses who see that the future will be about clean energy.” [The Climate Group, 1 April 2017]

On 28 March 2017 U.S. President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order titled PROMOTING ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH.

This order commences the process to roll back climate change mitigation, environmental, public health and safety regulations governing the energy and mining sectors in the USA.

Resistance was immediate……………………..

Statement from The Climate Group in response to the Energy Independence Executive Order, 28 March 2017:

US President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order on March 28, aimed at making dramatic changes to the US approach on climate action. Commenting on the order, Helen Clarkson, Chief Executive, The Climate Group, said: “In the absence of a federal framework, we will continue to work with US states and cities who are demonstrating clear leadership through the Under2 Coalition, and businesses who see that the future will be about clean energy.”

Today (28 March 2017), US President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order aimed at making dramatic changes to the US approach on climate action. 

   

Commenting on the order, Helen Clarkson, Chief Executive, The Climate Group said:

“Today’s decision to end the Climate Action Plan and review the Clean Power Plan is a major step backwards for the US.

“National policies to reduce US emissions and boost clean energy to date have helped create jobs for nearly 800,000 Americans, with another 2.2 million Americans working on energy efficiency. With the clean energy sector growing globally, and with the EU and emerging economies such as India and China all embarking on clean energy transition policies, the US should be doubling down on its current efforts, not turning back.

“This also runs counter to the leadership we’ve seen from US businesses, states and cities who are setting ambitious climate and clean energy goals, and are more committed than ever to achieving them. Just today, we have seen the world’s largest brewer, AB InBev, join our RE100 campaign, committing to 100% renewable electricity across its global operations.

“Federal action to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions helps safeguard the prosperity of American citizens and future generations. In the absence of a federal framework, we will continue to work with US states and cities who are demonstrating clear leadership through the Under2 Coalition, and businesses who see that the future will be about clean energy.”

UNDER2 COALITION GOVERNORS AND MAYORS ISSUE STATEMENT ON EXECUTIVE ORDER TO REVIEW THE CLEAN POWER PLAN, 28 March 2017:

The governors of California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Washington, and mayors of New York City, Oakland, Portland, Sacramento, and Seattle, issued the following statement on behalf of the Under2 Coalition in response to the recent Executive Order to review the Clean Power Plan: 

“As United States governors and mayors, we speak with one voice against the decision to review the Clean Power Plan. As members of the Under2 Coalition, we know that the climate crisis demands global action at every level. As Washington, D.C. delays, the work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in our cities and states continues. Our commitment to limiting global average temperature increase to well below 2 degrees Celsius remains. We will not waver. And we will continue to enlist like-minded cities, states, regions and countries around the world to join this fight.”

The Under2 Coalition is a global pact of 167 cities, states and countries representing more than one billion people and US$25.9 trillion in combined GDP – more than one-third of the global economy. Coalition members commit to limit greenhouse gas emissions to 2 tons per capita or 80-95% below 1990 levels by 2050. The Under2 MOU was formed in 2015 by the states of California and Baden-Württemberg, Germany to mobilize and galvanize bold climate action from like-minded city, state and regional governments around the globe.

The Climate Group acts as Secretariat to the Under2 Coalition and works directly with government signatories and partners of the Under2 MOU to drive net-zero ambition and action.

U.S. Natural Resources Defense Council, 23 March 2017: 

No More Bumbling—Bee Cleared for Endangered Species Listing

Daniel Raichel

There are times—even today—when law and science triumph over politics.

Hard to believe, I know, but that’s exactly what happened this week when the Trump Administration backed away from its “freeze” on listing the rusty patched bumble bee as an endangered species.

The rusty patched bumble bee is the first bumble bee to receive endangered species protections, and for good reason.  Although common across the Midwest and the East Coast as recently as the mid-90s, since then, the bee’s population has plummeted by about 90%. After studying the bee for years, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service came out with a report last summer, finding it was likely to disappear from most of its remaining habitat within five years, and go completely extinct within thirty.

That’s one small step for a bee, one giant leap for common sense.

Recognizing there was no time to waste, the agency finalized a rule to list the bee as an endangered species in January. The rule was set to take effect in thirty days, but then Donald Trump was inaugurated as President of the United States.

On day one, the Trump Administration issued an order to “freeze” or delay the effective dates of all final rules, including the rusty patched bumble bee listing. The Fish and Wildlife Service then issued a notice—just one day before the bee was scheduled to be added to the list—claiming to delay the effective date of the listing until March 21.

That’s when we sued. Because as any good government attorney knows, agencies can’t simply discard or delay final rules years in the making at the whim of the president. They must instead follow the procedure required by law, which includes fair warning of a change in policy and an opportunity for interested members of the public to weigh in. The process can sometimes be slow, but it’s designed to stop rash, baseless, or purely political decision making—like, say, suddenly stopping the listing of a critically imperilled species supported by years of scientific study and review.

Given the Trump Administration’s questionable track record on appropriate legal process, we had anticipated a fight. But then, something incredible happened—the Administration backed down and allowed the rusty patched bumble bee to get the federal endangered species protection it so desperately needs.

While it’s hard to know whether this victory for common sense will be repeated elsewhere, it’s unquestionably a win for bees everywhere—especially for the 4,000 species of native bees here in the U.S.  While native bees like the rusty patched don’t always get the same attention as honey bees, they are just as important to our food and our environment, and many are just as in trouble.  That’s why we’re hopeful that the protections the rusty patched bumble bee now enjoys will begin to help other bees too, chipping away at the larger bee crisis before it’s too late.

The devil, of course, is always in the details, so we’ll be watching closely as the Trump Administration starts to implement those protections.  Whatever happens, one thing’s for sure—if they step out of line again, we’ll “bee” there.

Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse comes to an end after three and a half years of hearings

The long journey was harrowing for the victims, heartbreaking for their families and friends. It shocked and appalled a nation which up to that point had never turned to face the true scale of child sexual abuse within religious and state institutions.

With 57 case studies completed, an est. 5,000 alleged perpetrators revealed in previously reported/unreported claims of child sexual abuse, more than 6,500 victims or their representatives interviewed and 1,950 referrals to authorities (including police), this journey has completed its first stage.

What comes next will depend in some measure on the resolve of ordinary Australians to continue to publicly hold federal and state governments as well as religious administrations to the undertakings they have given to the Royal Commission, to completely eradicate child sexual abuse within their institutions and cease protecting the criminals in their ranks who perpetrate such abuse.

CLOSING REMARKS

Case Study 57

The Hon Justice Peter McClellan AM

Chair, Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse

Today brings the last of our case study hearings to an end. There is an unfinished matter which has been delayed because a trial is listed in April. We will consider the future course of that matter at a directions hearing at a later date.

As I indicated on Monday we have been conducting public hearings since September 2013. The hearings have heard from many survivors and have allowed the intensive scrutiny of the actions of individuals within institutions. We have also looked at how institutions were managed at the time of the abuse and how, once the abuse became known, the institution responded. We have been told by many people that the public hearings have had a profound effect on the community’s understanding of the nature and impact of the sexual abuse of children in Australia. This is primarily due to the courage and determination of the survivors who have given evidence. Although a relatively small number they have given voice to the suffering of the tens of thousands who have been abused in an institutional context in Australia.

There are many people who must be acknowledged for their contribution to our program of public hearings. The starting point for a public hearing is the

work undertaken by the Commission’s legal and investigation teams. They have worked with great dedication, and often under great stress and for long days to bring together witnesses and documents for the hearing. We thank each of them for their efforts on the many case studies. We have also valued the contribution from our policy staff who, of course, have a fundamental role in the preparation of our final report.

The technical expertise required to ensure our hearings are available to the internet has been complex. Without question this process has contributed greatly to the community’s knowledge of the work we have been doing. Going forward I suggest the usual position should be for the live streaming of the hearings of any public inquiry. Our thanks go to the team of technicians and operators who have made this possible.

The Royal Commission has travelled across the entire country to conduct public hearings. This has been a challenging and, at times, complex logistical task. The Commissioners are grateful to the staff who have contributed to the smooth running of our public hearing program.

We owe a special debt to the dedicated team of stenographers who have produced our transcripts. A real time transcript is a valuable tool for a Royal Commission but we appreciate it imposes considerable burdens on those who prepare it. We greatly appreciate their efforts. They have our thanks.

The Commissioners thanks are also due to the many people in institutions who have assisted by producing documents, identifying witnesses, and in almost all cases, participating in our public hearings with the purpose of assisting the Commissioners to understand the story from their institution.

For the care and support that our counselling team and community engagement staff have given to witnesses appearing before the Commission, especially survivors, the Commissioners express our gratitude. Their task has been complex but of fundamental importance to ensure that a survivor’s engagement is both positive, but more importantly, safe. These teams have the admiration of all the Commissioners for the skill and care they give to their task.

We also express today our gratitude to the media for the comprehensive and effective reporting of our work. Television has provided live coverage of the opening of many hearings. I appreciate the limits of column space and the demands of deadlines. But within these limits many media outlets have given prime news or current affairs space to our work. Both the Commissioners and, I am sure, the entire community are grateful for their efforts.

Our thanks also go to all counsel, both those who have assisted the Commission and those who have appeared for survivors and institutions. But above all our thanks are due to Gail Furness. She came to us with the insight gained from an inquiry in the child protection area. She has long ago mastered the inquiry process and the management of a public hearing. But beyond those matters Gail has remarkable abilities of forensic analysis and advocacy. Few people would appreciate the enormous burdens she has carried throughout the hearings. Scrupulously fair, without Gail’s efforts we simply could not have completed our task.

Finally we extend both our recognition and thanks to survivors who gave evidence. Without them our public hearings would be a hollow attempt to tell their story. Without them the realities of child sexual abuse and the extent of institutional failure could not be recognised. Given with difficulty but great courage the telling of each of your personal stories has enabled the Commission and the general community to gain a real understanding of your suffering. It will assist the Royal Commission in the preparation of recommendations in our final report to which we now must turn.

Moggy Musings: Archived material from Boy The Wonder Cat

A 5am mayoral musing: At 4pm today, 27 September 2016 Clarence Valley Council chooses its mayor for the first two years of the new council term. With neither Richie Williamson or Andrew Baker (both re-elected councillors) able to convince a majority of their fellow councillors to endorse them for the top job, it now looks likely that Jim Simmons of Maclean will be the next mayor, with Jason Kingsley as his deputy. However, nothing is set in stone so tune in to the live broadcast of the vote at http://www.clarence.nsw.gov.au/page.asp?c=535.

An for avid council watchers musing: Those local government watchers in the valley may find these names familiar, in Gary Wilson Bax v Kevin Graeme Wilson (District Court 2016/00048884). After all the origin of this defamation action was the subject of a Clarence Valley Council meeting item and was reported in local media at the time. After mediation this matter was removed from the District Court calendar on 21 September 2016 and I rather suspect that right now Clarence Valley Council administration is scrambling to find out what happened. Knowing management’s batting record with regard to certain aspects of local government law, I’m willing to bet it now has a very generous amount of egg on its face which it may have to eventually explain to the incoming councillors.

A just can’t look away musing: the disintegration of The Clarence Forum since candidate nominations closed for the 2016 Clarence Valley local government elections has had the gruesome fascination of an oncoming train wreck. Bloody derailment finally occurred on Facebook between 28 August and 5 September with accusations of hate speech, partisanship, plots, blocking, banning, slander, lying, flying through the air as posts/comments were alleged to be appearing and disappearing.A local government election musing: there is talk around town that a former editor of The Daily Examiner may be flirting with the idea of standing at the next Clarence Valley Council election.

A get me outta here! musing: It is being said that a certain local government senior executive on the NSW North Coast is desperate to relocate anywhere but the Clarence Valley – perhaps there is no more room it in the office filing cabinet for all those rumoured industrial relations, discrimination, budgetary and conduct complaint issues and he feels the need for pastures new or perhaps he would prefer a workplace where his personal life is not the subject of so much staff gossip.

A laughing until my sides hurt musing: The look on my human’s face was priceless when she received this unexpected email from Nationals MP Kevin Hogan which began “It's been a pleasure working with you over the last three years. Together we are making meaningful, measurable progress toward ensuring we get the share of funding we deserve for things like roads, schools, hospitals, and other services.” However, I confess I grew alarmed at the purple hue of that same face when she opened a second email concerning Andrew Bolt which said “You are invited to join Andrew, Senator Cory Bernardi and John Roskam from the Institute of Public Affairs for two hours of networking with fellow conservatives at CLF House.”

An enterprising musing: An industrial dispute has been registered with the NSW Industrial Relations Commission between the NSW Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Airlines & Utilities Union and Clarence Valley Council. A compulsory conference is being held on 23 March 2016.

A fiery musing: One sharp-eyed little dog living over at Iluka noticed something rather strange the other day on a wooded block of land that had recently been found to be home to a small forest of endangered coastal trees – a rather ‘convenient’ little fire has started on this lot which just happens to be the subject of a development application, which if it went ahead would see most of the land clear-felled and all those endangered trees removed. Luckily someone called the firies and the flames were doused.

Boy the Wonder Cat

ps. a shout out to my doggie mates Hector, Molly & Coco

Hanson & Ashby now think they are an elected duo?

It would appear that Pauline Hanson is loathe to fulfill her extremely light parliamentary commitments and James Hunter Ashby eager to acquire a level of political power he was never granted by the Australian electorate......

https://www.buzzfeed.com/aliceworkman/no-nbn-commitment/

The New Yorker notices.......

“Broken Windows,” by Barry Blitt