On the issue of access to information for adopted persons #knowyouridentity, there are others who have more expertise in this than me but since I didn't get time to make all the points I would have liked to on @morningireland earlier, here are some thoughts (Thread ⬇️)

The previous AG advised that it would be unconst to provide an unlimited right to access info in leg - reasons were not given but we can presume this opinion is based on the result in the IOT vB case, which is a misreading of that case, while privacy was prioritised in that case
The SC indicated that this was an issue which should properly be dealt with by the Oir, which is entitled to conduct a balancing exercise and decide that one right should prevail over the other. The only prob would be if one set of rights was completely disregarded
Also, the weight of law and legal opinion is on the side of the right to know your identity, a CoA judgmnt last feb identified a right right to have your identity correctly recognised by the State and that was said to encompass a right to have a birth certificate and a passport.
The ECHR has recognised identity rights in respect of a variety of adoption information context & under EU law a person’s name is their personal data to which they have a right & personal data can lawfully be restricted only if there is clear legislation that allows for it
Which essentially means that the current situation where adopted people are being denied access to their own records is unconstitutional, contrary to the ECHR and contrary to EU Law.
It is also inconsistent since under the child and family relationships Act a child born through sperm donation has a legislative right to know there identity – yet this is still being denied to adoptive persons – this is arbitrary, unjust and discriminatory.
A referendum is not needed on this - @adoptionrights has a bill, drafted by @cmcgettrick @maeveorourke @maireadenright and @JamesGallen which properly addresses all these things and is ready to go
The Oireachtas knows all this already - people like @ConorUCCLaw and @ferguswryan contributed at pre-legislative stage in 2016 and laid all of this before the Justice Committee - handing it off to a citizens assembly etc would only cause further delay and hurt
Hopefully the new AG will review all of this and will agree with all of the legal experts who have written about and advocated for this. It is not as complicated as may first appear.
Oireachtas members - please engage with @clann_project and others and just legislate for this!

More from For later read

The common understanding of propaganda is that it is intended to brainwash the masses. Supposedly, people get exposed to the same message repeatedly and over time come to believe in whatever nonsense authoritarians want them to believe /1

And yet authoritarians often broadcast silly, unpersuasive propaganda.

Political scientist Haifeng Huang writes that the purpose of propaganda is not to brainwash people, but to instill fear in them /2


When people are bombarded with propaganda everywhere they look, they are reminded of the strength of the regime.

The vast amount of resources authoritarians spend to display their message in every corner of the public square is a costly demonstration of their power /3

In fact, the overt silliness of authoritarian propaganda is part of the point. Propaganda is designed to be silly so that people can instantly recognize it when they see it


Propaganda is intended to instill fear in people, not brainwash them.

The message is: You might not believe in pro-regime values or attitudes. But we will make sure you are too frightened to do anything about it.
Humans inherently like the act of solidarity. We are social beings. We like to huddle up and be together.
They used this against us.
They convinced us that it was an act of solidarity to flatten the curve, to wear a mask for others, to take the vaccines for others,


and to reach #covidzero for others. They convinced us that this was for the greater good of society.
In reality, this couldn't be further away from the truth. They have divided us and broken the core structure of our society. They have dehumanized us with their masks.

They set us against each other into clans on opposite sides of a spectrum. They have turned us into aggressive beings fighting for our survival. Some of us fear harm from the virus, others fear harm from the vaccine, and yet others fear harm from the attack on our civilization.

We are all on a flight or fight mode. We are all operating under the influence of fear. We must collect ourselves and reflect on what has happened over the last year.
How is this for the greater good of society?

They used a tactical warfare strategy against us.
'Divide and conquer'.
We fell for it.
Now we must become aware of it and fight back.
We must reunite. We must find true solidarity to save our world. To free ourselves. To regain our autonomy.
This response to my tweet is a common objection to targeted advertising.

@KevinCoates correct me if I'm wrong, but basic point seems to be that banning targeted ads will lower platform profits, but will mostly be beneficial for consumers.

Some counterpoints 👇


1) This assumes that consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones.

This does not seem self-evident to me


Research also finds that firms choose between ad. targeting vs. obtrusiveness 👇

If true, the right question is not whether consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones. But whether they prefer *more* contextual ads vs *fewer* targeted

2) True, many inframarginal platforms might simply shift to contextual ads.

But some might already be almost indifferent between direct & indirect monetization.

Hard to imagine that *none* of them will respond to reduced ad revenue with actual fees.

3) Policy debate seems to be moving from:

"Consumers are insufficiently informed to decide how they share their data."

To

"No one in their right mind would agree to highly targeted ads (e.g., those that mix data from multiple sources)."

IMO the latter statement is incorrect.

You May Also Like

I hate when I learn something new (to me) & stunning about the Jeff Epstein network (h/t MoodyKnowsNada.)

Where to begin?

So our new Secretary of State Anthony Blinken's stepfather, Samuel Pisar, was "longtime lawyer and confidant of...Robert Maxwell," Ghislaine Maxwell's Dad.


"Pisar was one of the last people to speak to Maxwell, by phone, probably an hour before the chairman of Mirror Group Newspapers fell off his luxury yacht the Lady Ghislaine on 5 November, 1991."
https://t.co/DAEgchNyTP


OK, so that's just a coincidence. Moving on, Anthony Blinken "attended the prestigious Dalton School in New York City"...wait, what? https://t.co/DnE6AvHmJg

Dalton School...Dalton School...rings a

Oh that's right.

The dad of the U.S. Attorney General under both George W. Bush & Donald Trump, William Barr, was headmaster of the Dalton School.

Donald Barr was also quite a


I'm not going to even mention that Blinken's stepdad Sam Pisar's name was in Epstein's "black book."

Lots of names in that book. I mean, for example, Cuomo, Trump, Clinton, Prince Andrew, Bill Cosby, Woody Allen - all in that book, and their reputations are spotless.