Support this AA petition against media misrepresentation

1
The link below leads to the AA?s new petition calling for the BBC to redress recent misrepresentative and condemnatory comments against astrology. Please follow the link to support this petition and pass on the news to all the astrologers you know. It only takes 1-click to go there and add your name and email address, and that?s it. No risk of spam or follow ups; just a few seconds now to show your support of the AA?s complaint against misrepresentation in the media.

http://www.astrologicalassociation.com/ ... submit.php


If you have a website:

Please consider adding this button to your website with a link to the AA page (above) to help spread word of this petition to other astrologers.
Image
Last edited by Deb on Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

3
Hi Curtis

Its brilliant that you?ve added the button to your site. I can see on Facebook that others are doing that too, which is really encouraging.

I just wanted to add that the AA now have a downloadable word document on their petition page, which can be used as a template for anyone wishing to submit a letter of complaint to the BBC. This is really useful, because the BBC are obliged to keep tallies of the number of complaints that any program receives, and to make responses to those who ask for a response. It?s also possible to telephone a complaint or to submit a complaint online ? all the details are given here on the BBC complaints page - http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/homepage/

Just a quick complaint helps to get those figures up, but I?ve just finished writing a 5-page letter of complaint outlining a number of reasons why their comments were unfair and misrepresentative, so it will be interesting to see what they come back with.

Another point to note is that the AA have a dedicated ?blog page? for discussion of this issue at http://astrologicalassociation.blogspot ... l#comments

It?s useful for them to receive comments on what astrologers think of this issue, so they are keen to encourage participation. From what I can see the AA council are all working hard on this, so any token of support they get will help to keep them ?energised? :)

4
Hello

It's very important that people don't send a template letter to complain. Any hint of standardisation will put the complaint into the 'easy to ignore' pile.

The same goes for any hint of an organised campaign or lobby. They always ignore lobbying from vested interests (except lobbying from the powers that be, naturally enough). If people's submissions look like they've been sent in because astrologers influenced them to, they'll be ignored.

I know it sounds stupid, and it is stupid, but that's how they operate. They're well-practised at ignoring complaints based on stupid technicalities and all sorts of spurious grounds.

An intelligently-written, rational, substantial, legalistic and most importantly unique letter of complaint is worth far more than a thousand signatures on a petition or a slightly-altered template letter/email.

H.

5
Hi Handn, that sounds important - maybe you should post that to the AA blog so that they can reflect on that.

I think the best idea would be just to have the address pre-filled, because it is easier to have a document with some details pre-filled)

I can tell you my letter wasn't standardised, since I spent most of the day thinking about what to put. Must get to work on site updates now (blast, why doesn't the Sun stand still once in a while?)

6
As my day is to be filled with sweet things today, I?ll have to keep this brief.

The AA?s volunteer webmistress, Frances Clyne, has suffered tremendous hate-mail abuse, and has had to spent an enormous amount of time sorting out the genuine entries from the ridiculing ones over the weekend, when one of the presenters of the program being complained about, Dara O?Brain encouraged the 300, 000 followers of his Twitter page to disrupt the poll. Because of this prejudice and bias, his Twitter chum, Guardian news ?science editor? Martin Robbins, has just published a highly misleading account of the cause for complaint (not really picking up any of the main issues, but merely snipping from my article at a place where none of the underlying issues can be seen) ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-l ... 1/jan/24/1

The comments are a shocking demonstration of how far media misrepresentation extends.

Astrology?s need for protection is actually against really poor-quality, sensationalist reporting such as this, where a so called ?science editor? sources his facts only from the depths of Twitter, backed up by a quick glimpse to one internet story, to give a totally misrepresentative case of what the argument is really all about.

BTW, the AA comments blog is here:

http://astrologicalassociation.blogspot ... l#comments

Well worth a read if you haven?t seen it for a few days.

7
Robbin's article is hardly informed or intelligent.

However to be fair sun sign columists, predictive astrologers and those who claim astrology to be a science are demonstrating, to my mind, considerable ignorance as to what it is. If the AA wishes to defend these people then I wouldn't entertain the possibility of signing a petition.

This sentence is nonsense ;
''His justification was fragmentary astronomy and empty of logic''.

Where's the logic in Horoscopic astrology and what does it have to do with astronomy, not a lot! ?

The AA could have said Cox dismissed Popular Astrology and did not acknowledge this was just a form of it.

If it went to court I'd have thought an intelligent Judge would conclude both the BBC and the AA were equally ignorant, and deny them both costs!

8
The Guardian web post was bad. The replies on the Guardian post were appalling. The days of burning books, and then witches at the stake, and then Jews in synagogues are still alive and well in Britain, not to single it out. Astrology, and astrologers, should be ridiculed mercilessly, along with homeopaths, chiropractors, and believers in God. And anyone else on the current scientific 'out of favour' list.

Until they stop existing.

Which makes it okay to harass astrology websites mercilessly, I guess. It's in the name of protecting the public. Or the greater good. Or ratings. Same thing, I suppose.

Perhaps the mob can take its rushlight torches and head in the direction of Lampeter to get the cultural astronomy programmes shut down next? Burn the libraries for good measure. 'We' can't have people stuffing their heads with this nonsense when 'we' know better.

It's lovely to see the way science promotes level-headedness, honest enquiry, and simple reason, and discourages mass hysteria.

If O'Briain is using his twitter account to promote mass harassment, is there some way of getting it shut down? Perhaps someone with more twitter-savvy than I can see about that.

10
I signed the petition but I don't expect much.
If anything it is more likely that if we imagine a hypothetical scenario where they do give an astrologer equal airtime, the astrologer in question will be chosen by them.

With that in mind consider the wide range of 'astrologers' they might choose from to represent the art of astrology in its entirety - it might be better to save ourselves the embarrassment and not have any astrologers at all. As I said in another thread, what if they chose that astrologer who doesn't realise that western astrologers use the tropical zodiac? Or if they just handpicked a sun sign astrologer who knows nothing beyond the most basic sun sign interpretations.
By allowing an astrologer equal time, we might end up doing more damage to astrology than good. Sure if we can choose the Nick Campions etc. of the world to debate with them then great, but let's be realistic, someone somewhere has an agenda to ridicule astrology. If I was such a person the first thing I would do is use this 'outrage' of astrologers as a perfect weapon to give them enough room to hang themselves and get on any old idiot who claims to be an astrologer, place them against Brian Cox or the witheringly witty Dara O Briain and allow the astrologer to make an utter fool of themselvs and of the astronomical implications of astrology and by proxy make out that every single astrologer is like that. Hey, they'd shrug, we gave you equal airtime.

11
And now, for something you will all enjoy ? please read the new Guardian article by Dr Rebekah Higgitt, in answer to Martin Robbins? (now discredited) hostile article; which makes the case that scientists need to get a lot more educated about astrology, and treat astrologers with a greater sense of respect, if they want to make critical arguments against them. Great stuff!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-l ... 1/jan/28/1

12
I like the comment you've posted over there Deb and want to thank you for taking the time and effort to do it.

It's a shame that these lovers of science seem to think that contempt is part of their role. I thought science was about experiments and rationality but it seems to have a large and loud following of ill-mannered juveniles. I've been naive and I'm having my eyes opened.

Regards

H.