This is an excellent point.

Ben Goldacre in the Guardian, talking about something quite different, has this to say, which is worth adding:

Then, of course, the media privilege foolish contrarian views because they have novelty value, and also because “established” views get confused with “establishment” views, and anyone who comes along to have a pop at those gets David v Goliath swagger.

2. Dr Goldacre also invents (as far as I know) the most useful phrase — “zombie argument”:

… I can spot the same rhetorical themes re-emerging in climate change foolishness that you see in aids denialism, homeopathy, and anti-vaccination conspiracy theorists.

Among all these, reigning supreme, is the “zombie argument”: arguments which survive to be raised again, for eternity, no matter how many times they are shot down …

Zombie arguments survive, immortal and resistant to all refutation, because they do not live or die by the normal standards of mortal arguments. There’s a huge list of them at realclimate.org, with refutations. There are huge lists of them everywhere. It makes no difference.

We could add transformational government to his list of climate change, aids denialism, homeopathy, and anti-vaccination conspiracy theories as a home of zombie arguments.

Thank you for that, Ben.

Aaronovitch’s research seems to have consisted of reading the jacket of a book on home education I published 10 years ago. Yup, I was still a musician then and home educating my sons. Throw in a few references to hippies, libertarians and the middle-classes and you probably know my type: a bohemian who lets my kids chill out while I run African-drumming classes and wail songs about peace. If you were a practitioner – or a certain journalist – you could probably visualise me in kaftan and ethnic headband, doing the weekly shop in ‘tofu’n’lentils’… Does the picture change when I say ‘classical music – R3’ and ‘failing local schools’? (believe me, this isn’t Hampstead or even the right-on bit of Hackney). I think it’s probably Aaronovitch who needs to get out a bit more.

If you weren’t so cross, you’d have worked out it hasn’t taken Aaronovitch 9 months to work this out. He’s been prodded by the Cabinet Office. It is clear from internal evidence he has an advance copy of the response credited to Wills. I would not like to guess at the briefing that accompanied it.

http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/Pages/20081029e
verychildmatters.aspx

“Five years after the green paper Every Child Matters and eight years after the child’s death, “there is little evidence of better outcomes for children and young people” resulting from the requirement that local areas in England set up special panels to coordinate services.”…

“The Audit Commission study found too much time and energy being expended on
“structures and process” at the expense of improving the lives of children
and young people and their families.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7925123.stm
Services for vulnerable children in England deteriorated last year and remain the weakest area of councils’ work, the Audit Commission has said.

Haringey, where the Baby P scandal took place, was among four councils to go from a three-star rating to one.

Doncaster, Milton Keynes and Surrey did the same, while only nine authorities achieved the maximum four stars – three fewer than had managed it in 2007.

Great stuff

I think you’re fairly safe; his piece is rambling, ranting, confused and lazy. I’m sorry – I meant to be positive. OK: his piece is carefully and competently crafted to enter via the eyes, arrive at the hind brain, cause the outraged head to nod, and then exit, job done. The fore-brain is left entirely undisturbed, free to devote itself to the Earl Grey and Frank Cooper’s.

What I think surprises me most is the arrogance of someone who seems to assume that that a group of informed people (even if they don’t share his views) can analyse 46 government IT projects and find something objectionable in them… and yet have nothing to say which merits serious consideration.

Of course, a generalist OpEd writer’s snap analysis of the state and intentions of government IT is far more likely to reveal the true privacy and social implications. Thank heavens for quality analysis.If I were a Times reader, I’d drop my toast and write a stiff letter to the editor. No fore-brain required.

This post was mentioned on Twitter by williamheath: Here’s just how poor I think Aaronovitch’s column today is http://bit.ly/7zHpO4 Plz comment, Friends. Plz RT #databasestate…

At last an opportunity to tell my NUS anecdote. Many years ago, when I was a student hack reporting NUS conference and Aaronovitch was a stalinist apparatchik, er, much-loved member of the NUS executive, he mounted the podium and observed, “I must be really popular. I’ve just been to the toilets, and as soon as I went in, they filled up.”

Voice from the audience: “Filled up with what?”