It’s election time, the season of celebrities and worthies adding their names to open letters and political advertising. A range of them have put their names on an ad designed to pressure Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull to change his mind on Gunns’ Tasmanian pulp mill. And why wouldn’t they? When it comes to this kind of thing the Fairfax press especially is as starstruck as Who magazine’s celebrity-obsessed readers, with The Age giving their opinions prominent front page coverage this morning. According to The Age,
Among the signatories are film director Phillip Noyce, actors Bryan Brown and Rebecca Gibney, playwright David Williamson, celebrity chef Kylie Kwong, Fairfax Media deputy chairman Mark Burrows, Rowena Danziger, a member of the Publishing and Broadcasting board, and Leo Schofield, a former director of the Sydney Festival.
But why should we care what any of these people think about this issue, or indeed on anything else except on things related to their narrow area of achievement or expertise (and perhaps not even that)? Would-be serious papers like The Age should show far more scepticism than they do.
The only signed advertisement I have liked appeared in the SMH a month ago. It was a full-page memorial for Ken Dyers, leader of the wacky Kenja cult, who killed himself rather than face (yet more) charges of sexually assaulting under-age girls. No need for too many tears in this case, I expect. But the signatories were, I thought, unwittingly but amusingly subversive of the whole signed ad phenomenon. Take these examples: Simon Winn, qualified carpenter; Linda Beachley, receptionist; Stevana Geurreiro, Dip, Make-up Artistry; Shane Grant, baker; Chloe Pape, hair stylist; David Pilkington, refrigeration tech; Eoin McGettrick, locksmith. All good, if unintentional, satire on the idea that occupations confer authority on opinion.
Andrew Norton 
“But why should we care what any of these people think about this issue, or indeed on anything else except on things related to their narrow area of achievement or expertise”
Why are they celebrities? It’s not because of achievements – Fiona Stanley and Barry Marshall are known high achievers, but not celebrities – it’s because of the personas they’ve created in the electronic media. We’re interested in these people, we want to know about their lives and what they think and do. Their fans may quite likely be influenced by knowing what these celebrities think. Anything a celebrity touches becomes more valuable, anything they say is worth listening to.
I thought Richard Flannagan’s essay on Gunns in The Monthly was an excellent political essay – those rich signatories should pay to have it reprinted in the SMH and Age
LikeLike
“All good, if unintentional, satire on the idea that occupations confer authority on opinion.”
Hmm… does that also go for economists, PR companies and journalists for example opining on things such as education, climate science of public health?
LikeLike
It’d be fun to see what kinds of petitions one could get high-profile celebrities to sign on to. For example, Bryan Caplan argues that there are four systematic biases voters hold against good economic policy – antimarket bias, antiforeign bias, make-work bias, and pessimistic bias. One could easily imagine trying to see whether it was possible to get a plurality of celebrity opinion to support a petition on each theme.
LikeLike
Slim – Yes, when they don’t have any expertise in the relevant field.
Andrew – I think we had all four systematic biases when various celebrities were campaigning against the Australia-US FTA. More fun still would be an entirely hoax cause, like the Sokal nonsense article.
LikeLike
Speaking of starstruck former broadsheets:
check Guardian this monbiot article blaming all the world’s (and the USA’s) problems on the Mont Perelin society.
it does not mention the Lindsay or GMB or Jason “Bukak” Soon but it does mention Keynes. They should get on there and leave their mark on the comments field, it is almost as bad as catallaxy..
It does not mention Cairncross who was Keynes buddy at the victorious Cambridge team that triumphed over LSE Hayek 3-1 with Cairncross’ brother being sent off but being allowed to stay in the country unlike his mate Philby in his luxe apartment in Moscow.
Ultimately, my analysis is this, Monbiot is leaving the Greens and heading towards the statist left. The wearing out of roadbridges in the USA he mentions as a bad thing and blames on neoliberalism is actually a good thing if it brings carbon emissions and industry to a slow down. Like Garrett he is sick of yoga mats and wants a job. He should just resign from Oxford Brookes and get a mountain bike and go to the Slovak Tatra mountains (it always works for me ex-professorially). One cannot blame Lindsay for anything much beyond Hornsby.
The world has much greater problems than governments or those opposing their expanding Thornleyesque waistlines can imagine
parkos,
Cairncross House,
Glasgow / Wroclaw
LikeLike
The left are as bad as the right when it comes to lying and double truth..
Recently, the Guardian described half turkish, half nordic, American Boris Johnson as not the best London mayoral candidate to have in the era of multicultural Britain.
It almost as bad as the Age saying that Victoria has a great academic reputation. What they need is GMB endorsement on their advertisements.
LikeLike
“More fun still would be an entirely hoax cause, like the Sokal nonsense article”
I’m sorry, Andrew, but how could we distinguish between a hoax and virtually any one of these luvvie-a-thons?
LikeLike
I saw John Brumby talking about the synchrotron a few days ago, so it isn’t just celebreties that are talking about stuff they know nothing about.
LikeLike
Conrad – That’s not really the case – Brumby was the lead Victorian Minister behind the synchrotron so it was his job (and still is as Premier) to explain to the public why so much of its money has been spent on this project.
LikeLike
As ye live by celebrity, so shall ye die by celebrity.
–
Turnbull’s claim for preselection rested on his own celebrity, and on a whirl of exclusive parties with well-known people. The incumbent MP at the time could not match this and suffered electorally as a result. What these ads say to me is that Turnbull is, like, so yesterday.
LikeLike
Andrew Leigh says:
For example, Bryan Caplan argues that there are four systematic biases voters hold against good economic policy – antimarket bias, antiforeign bias, make-work bias, and pessimistic bias.
That’s right. It’s called the green party and it’s supporters.
LikeLike
JC – those four biases aren’t adequate for we Greens voters, howabout adding: anticoporate, antimonoculture, antiexploitative, antiwasteful ….
LikeLike
Thanks Russell
I would add anit-corporate to the list. Sure. I had to work with what i was handed though.
LikeLike
“Fairfax Media deputy chairman Mark Burrows”
Burrows is an investment banker. He is as qualified as anybody to comment
on whether the mill is likely to stack up financially.
LikeLike
How do you know he has looked at the figures and has the expertise to understand them, spiros.
Investment banking is a catch all phrase. A mining specialist would know SFA about timber mills for instance.
How do you know it is not simply personal perference?
he may know as much as Brain Brown does.
LikeLike
Here’s a job advertised on the web…. Note the specialization comment.
# Global Investment Bank
# Sydney and Melbourne based
# Industrials focused
This global Investment Bank has been ranked in the Top 5 Mergers and Acquisitions advisory companies in Australia for a number of years. Not only are they highly respected form their M&A capabilities but they are also highly regarded for their expertise in ECM and Equities Research.
They are currently expanding their corporate Finance capabilities and as a result and are recruiting additional Associates and VP’s for the M&A team, positions are based in both Sydney and Melbourne. Although they have vacancies in several specialized teams the immediate focus is on the appointment of Industrials specialists who have a strong track record of executing transactions in these sectors.
You will have qualifications in Business Management, Finance or Accounting and ideally you would have completed the CFA program. You must have excellent communication and presentation skills as these positions will require some origination work.
Appropriate six figure salary packages will be negotiated for the right candidates and will be complemented by attractive performance based incentive arrangements.
To submit your application, in strict confidence, please apply online using the appropriate link below. Alternatively, for a confidential discussion, please contact Mark Robinson on 0419979855
LikeLike
I don’t know what figures Burrows looked at. But since he is a managing director of Lazard, deputy chair of Brambles , a director of Burns Philp and a director of Carter Holt Harvey, I reckon he’s seen one or two proposals in his time for big investments like this one.
LikeLike
You can’t make the assumptions that:
1. He has looked at the financial details and
2. he would understand the numbers if it is not his area of expertise.
Investment banking requires specialization.
Fairfax wouldn’t exactly be placed on a list of th 50 best managed firms these days judging the stock performance and the circulation stats. It’s lucky to be alive.
Brambles look like it is takeoever play.
“I reckon he’s seen one or two proposals in his time for big investments like this one.”
And no, you can’t reckon that and be taken seriously.
LikeLike
He’s not even on the board of brambles, spiros.
LikeLike
Re Burrows, I presume the issue is not whether the mill stacks up financially, but whether it offends the Commonwealth’s environmental legislation.
LikeLike
Rajat
Spiros made the astonishing claim that because Mrak Burrows says the mill doesn’t stack it must be true. he ignores the fact that Gunns has probably gone through the numbers with a fine tooth comb and have a long , long history of that business.
I’m just questioning spiros’ understanding of the issue involved.
LikeLike
He used to be on the board of Brambles and I didn’t make the claim that “because Mrak Burrows says the mill doesn’t stack it must be true.”
I did make the claim that you can’t lump Mark Burrows in with Bryan Brown and Cate Blanchett as a celebrity know nothing, which is what Andrew did in his post. He is a successful investment banker for chrissakes.
LikeLike
“He used to be on the board of Brambles and I didn’t make the claim that “because Mrak Burrows says the mill doesn’t stack it must be true.” “
Well you did… in a way:
But since he is a managing director of Lazard, deputy chair of Brambles , a director of Burns Philp and a director of Carter Holt Harvey, I reckon he’s seen one or two proposals in his time for big investments like this one.
and here you go again:
He is a successful investment banker for chrissakes.
making the same insinuation in different words.
I did make the claim that you can’t lump Mark Burrows in with Bryan Brown and Cate Blanchett as a celebrity know nothing, which is what Andrew did in his post
Why not? If shows no understanding of the figures he ought to be lumped in with that no-nothing mob.
Let me ask you, Spiros, who do you believe about he likely probability that the mill will be profitable. Brian Brown, his wife, cate and Burrows or the Gunns management team?
Who Spiros? Who is most likely to know?
Burrows wouldn’t have the number int eh first place as I am sure not everything is in the paublic domain.
Who Spiros?
LikeLike
“I am sure not everything is in the paublic domain.”
Then find out before making assertions about people not knowing anything.
Let me say it again.
Andrew’s post was about “celebrities and worthies adding their names” to fashionable causes about which they know nothing. In this mix he included Mark Burrows, who is not a celebrity and who by way of his profession probably knows a lot about major projects (unlike Cate Blanchett, who knows a lot about acting).
This doesn’t mean that the pulp mill does not stack up. (Personally, by the way, I have no objection to pulp mills.)
But, for the final time, Burrows is clearly not a luvvie celebrity. He is a serious businessman.
LikeLike
JC, according to the documentation tabled in the Tasmanian Parliament the mill would be unprofitable without subsidies. Cut the subsidies and watch Gunns walk away. Never mind Burrows, it’s not like you to stand up for the taxeaters.
LikeLike
” Then find out before making assertions about people not knowing anything.”
But I am not the one making all these spurious claims. you are, Spiros. All I am doing is shooting a fish in a barrel
“But, for the final time, Burrows is clearly not a luvvie celebrity. He is a serious businessman.”
And here you go again proving one more time the claim you made
(and I didn’t make the claim that “because Mrak Burrows says the mill doesn’t stack it must be true.”)….
is patently false because you do think his background lends weight to the airheads.
And I will continue to make the claim that he would know as much about the mill etc. as the rest of the other airheads who put their name to a petition they have no expertise.
Moreover Burrows hasn’t seen the internal numbers the Gunns management worked on so he is just as big an airhead as the rest of them.
In fact I would be mightly concerned having this guy on any board other than Fairfax.
LikeLike
got a link, Andrew L?
I would like to see what these subsidies are and who tabled them. If it was the the Greens I would bet 100:1 it would be just more lies and distortions as they are simple minded trogs when it comes to even the msot basic understanding of economics.
LikeLike
“Never mind Burrows, it’s not like you to stand up for the taxeaters.”
Very true and I wouldn’t… ever. However it’s the first time I have ever heard of subsidies being thrown around so you really can’t accuse me of standing up for taxeaters.
LikeLike
Don’t be disingenous, AndrewL, these luvvies aren’t protesting because the mill needs subsidies, they’re protesting because they think those books they read and the toilet paper for wiping their arses appear from a spell cast by merlin the magician and all those lovely trees must be kept standing for people to admire them.
LikeLike
Perhaps Cate should invest some of her acting profits into buying some old growth forrests and protecting it herself if she loves it so much. Until these greenies start putting their money down and commiting their own resources to their beliefs, then it is a whole lot of hot air.
LikeLike
Jason – perhaps the luvvies aren’t so stupid as to think paper has to be made from old-growth forests.
Here’s a quote from Flanagan’s must-read essay in The Monthly:
“Between 1988 and the present, the Tasmanian forest industry has received a staggering total of $780 million in taxpayer handouts, $289 million of it since 2005, much of it being used to facilitate further old-growth logging. If an accounting were possible of the taxpayer-subsidised plantation schemes and added to this sum, the real subsidy paid by the Australian taxpayer to an industry that destroys the nation’s heritage would approach a billion dollars”
Brendan – do you know she/they haven’t done that?
LikeLike
Yes, the forrest that is going to get chopped down for this mill is still available on the market place to get turned into the Sydney Moaning Herald. Buy the damn thing and tell the Tasmanian Labor government, Brendan Nelson and all the evil capitalists to go to hell.
Offsetting your carbon emissions, buying organic produce, donating to the Green Party or Greenpeace is not the same as buying forrest and conserving it. If the state owns the land, then embrace private property and demand that the state divulge itself of its landholdings into the hands of people who value it. Nothing like freehold title to entitle you to tell someone to get off YOUR land.
LikeLike
Brendan – how do you decide who values it the most?
LikeLike
Russell
Can you provide a detailed breakdown/ links to the handouts as I would love to see what it is made up of.
thanks
LikeLike
JC – you wouldn’t trust a novelist? Sorry there are no footnotes or references, but the whole thing reads beautifully. Jennifer Marohasy has a link to the article on her blog.
LikeLike
Russell,
That is easy. Whoever is willing to pay the most. Seriously, do you really need to ask such a question? Price is really efficient at determining who values something the most.
LikeLike
How would that work with child custody disputes?
You don’t think capacity to pay has something to do with it?
LikeLike
russell
How do you get from valuing a forrest for wood to child custedy disputes.
I am interesting in seeing how the mental process of jumping from one to the other actually works.
LikeLike
Via Brendan’s claim that “Price is really efficient at determining who values something the most.”
How will price help us determine whether some aborigines value their land more than a developer who sees a chance to make a lot of money out of it?
LikeLike
Russell
aboriginal land is in aboriginal hands as far as I know. And what pray tell would a developer want to do with land slap bang in the middle of the country where there is no water or made roads? Put up a high rise?
LikeLike
Interesting proposal Russell. Last I heard I advocate libertarianism. What aspect of libertarianism do you think justifies selling children? I’d really like to know.
If Aboriginals had freehold title over their land rather than some made up native title, they could decide how much they value their land. If some developer or miner wanted the land, then the Aboriginal people could decide whether they valued their land or the biscuit they were offered.
LikeLike
Not any more, the state has resumed it. You can’t complain about Aborigines not embracing capitalism when meagre attempts are regularly snuffed out.
LikeLike
It’s perfectly fair to accuse you of being ill-informed and a useful tool of those who do.
LikeLike
The other real problem with discussing Aboriginal land like that is that there is no consensus as to what land should be Aboriginal (its mainly a government dictate). It isn’t therefore surprising that most of the land that had been handed over is crappy stuff in the middle of the desert, which JC notes isn’t exactly of great development potential. This of course is not where most Aboriginies lived before European settlement.
LikeLike
Elder
Do everyone a favor… don’t transfer grudges over from other blogs to here. If you can’t then stop posting.
Now I will have the evidence i asked for. Otherwise Soon is correct, you are disingenous and a lot more.
The evidence please.
LikeLike
“and a lot more” – if the word you’re looking for is ‘lazy’ then it’s a judgment I no longer pass on myself since I heard a more agreeable description on a Radio National program on the weekend. Apparently I’m a victim of motivational deficit disorder.
Let’s not open up a land rights debate, but citizens of Dullsville will recall the battle over whether the development of the old brewery (practically in the CBD) should go ahead because the local aborigines said it was, to them, sacred ground. Also the “crappy stuff in the middle of the desert” is of some interest to mining companies.
My point remains – Brendan’s assertion that ““Price is really efficient at determining who values something the most.” doesn’t make sense – who would equate price with value?
LikeLike
Russell
What other land claims do aboriginals have that fall under the High court 90’s decision they still haven’t claimed?
Can you name any?
LikeLike
JC – I don’t know – perhaps there are claims over all of WA now: it was certainly a surprise last year when the ‘single noongar’ claim succeeded in claiming the whole South-West of WA including Perth. My point was how we talk about ‘value’ – it’s a lot more complex than ‘price’.
LikeLike
So you’re saying Peith now belongs to aboriginals? Never knew that!
LikeLike