Lying for Reason and Science

[Clinton Huxley]

Concur with Hades, here. The producer credit could be entirely justified. There are numerous reasons why they could have been added retrospectively, no skulduggery is required.

[Rum]

And really, who cares anyway.

And I don't mean that in a dismissive way. There are simply bigger fish to fry.

[lordpasternack]

Also-- I asked earlier who it is that's giving you this information.

You've mentioned that you're being "informed." By who? How is this not mainly gossip?

When I mention that I've been 'informed', then yeah - it's just someone's word. When I present some kind of evidence, then that's different. And I got the information about her coming up with ideas for videos from her RD.net bio.

And as to what a 'producer' does - I would have thought that they'd have some physical hand in making the video a reality - most likely post-filming. If you're going to call someone a 'producer' merely for suggesting general ideas for videos that could be made, it's setting the bar pretty low, I think.

And how do I know she wasn't physically involved? Because I damn well know that that was Timonen's domain, and as does Richard Dawkins - and also that, if she were there, she'd have been credited, along with all the miscellaneous subcontracted companies that were credited for their services in producing the video. And if she was there, actively involved in producing the finished product, and wasn't credited - she would no doubt have complained, or simply added herself, at the time - or mid-2010, even - after Josh left. Leaving it till after the summer of 2011 to have that flash of insight, is rather taking the piss, if you ask me…

And yeah - that isn't the last of the pretensions that she took upon herself after the summer of 2011…

[Clinton Huxley]

I'm not sure a "producer" has to do much at all. Movie stars get themselves "Executive producer" credits on films but it doesn't mean they did anything.

The gun is not smoking......

[lordpasternack]

Fine then - perhaps you're happy just to conclude that she's vain, and became especially so after the summer of 2011. And perhaps that she's a little neurotic for repeatedly amending the credits prior to having had that afterthought?

But we'll get to the other stuff, today.

[Clinton Huxley]

Is the other stuff better than we have seen so far? So far its looking like you just don't like this woman much and are hunting around for any stick to beat her with.

[lordpasternack]

Is the other stuff better than we have seen so far? So far its looking like you just don't like this woman much and are hunting around for any stick to beat her with.

I think you're mainly being contrary, or dense, to be honest. I think that if you saw that kind of behaviour in one of your own managers - you'd at least put them down as a bit of a bullshitter.

[Clinton Huxley]

Is the other stuff better than we have seen so far? So far its looking like you just don't like this woman much and are hunting around for any stick to beat her with.

I think you're mainly being contrary, or dense, to be honest. I think that if you saw that kind of behaviour in one of your own managers - you'd at least put them down as a bit of a bullshitter.

And I think your weird obsession, indeed infatuation, is making you abusive and clouding what, for want of a better word, I'll refer to as your judgement.

What exactly are you expecting from this thread? Applause?

[lordpasternack]

Right… This woman works systematically through videos, repeatedly, to meddle with credits - popping in to add her name some time after July 2011 - years after the fact - and that's entirely nothing out of the ordinary. But if I go to the bother of digging up what to me (and some others in this thread) smells distinctly like bullshit, and report on it - then it's clearly indicative of a 'weird obsession', which is clouding my judgement?

[Pappa]

When vanity goes to abusing your position to get yourself credited for stuff done before you even came onboard, something still is pretty wrong.

She was present within the Foundation since its inception, and she reportedly came up with some of the initial ideas for the videos - but she had no physical hand in actually creating the videos at any stage. And yes, I still think that having enough preoccupation with the issue to go and run through videos systematically to efface credits and then later to stick your name in there dishonestly, years later, represents something pathological in someone who is supposed to be at the helm of a charity devoted to reason and science.

It's sometimes legitimate to feel that you've had your ideas used and been denied due credit - but when your best claim to involvement in a particular area was floating some frankly rather mundane (if very sensible) ideas - and your subsequent reaction to your internal feelings of indignation is to scrub out the people who did substantially more to polish those ideas, give them legs and make them concrete - and then to shoehorn your name in years after the fact, even if it means being dishonest - then you've crossed the fucking line.

Anyway - I need to sleep now. Sorry I didn't get onto what I said I would, today.

What do you think producers on a film do?

Adding her name to the credits doesn't necessarily mean they don't belong there. I don't know this woman from Adam, but nothing you've written has indicated to me that she wasn't a producer on those films. Just that she wasn't given credit as such earlier.

That was exactly my first thought too. Her input in the projects does appear to be that of a producer as opposed to anything else, and it's perfectly conceivable that she may not have been credited correctly at the time... it was after all a small organisation, not as familiar with these kinds of things as a film studio would be.

[Clinton Huxley]

Even it is it "bullshit", which you haven't proved as we are only seeing one side of the argument........so what?!? Oh no, someone bullshitted! Stop the world, I want to get off!

As Hades and Pappa have said - a producer credit could be entirely appropriate, even it it was added later.

[Pappa]

LP, producers don't have a physical hand in the film making process at all, as such the word is quite misleading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_producer

[klr]

Is the other stuff better than we have seen so far? So far its looking like you just don't like this woman much and are hunting around for any stick to beat her with.

I think you're mainly being contrary, or dense, to be honest. I think that if you saw that kind of behaviour in one of your own managers - you'd at least put them down as a bit of a bullshitter.

That would describe at least 80% of the management that I've had contact with in my working life. At least.

[Svartalf]

I'm not sure a "producer" has to do much at all. Movie stars get themselves "Executive producer" credits on films but it doesn't mean they did anything.

The gun is not smoking......

Producers are the folk who take the important decisions about the film, and hold the purse strings. The main parts of a movie are usually decided over the head of whoever does casting, producers decide if funding will be allocated for on site filming, and extensions if some more stuff has to be done after the normal end of filming (like, if the realisator wants to redo a scene or two because he doesn't like what's been done already... They don't make the films, but they still dictate much of what will make it a success or failure beside realisation, photography and the actors' work

[lordpasternack]

LP, producers don't have a physical hand in the film making process at all, as such the word is quite misleading. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_producer

Well, she didn't 'oversee' the video projects, or manage them in any way, so far as I'm aware. Her direct involvement in most of the videos began and ended with proposing ideas for videos that could be done. Josh & Co coordinated everything else to do with video production after that. And Maureen Norton most likely has a far more legitimate claim to the title of 'producer' than Elisabeth Cornwell, for sure.

This is kinda hinted at in this video, where Richard, after crediting Cornwell with having come up with the idea of having a group of freethinking scientists speaking at AAI (which I believe she did also organise) - turns around and says:

"Among the RDF staff who I want to thank are, erm, Josh Timonen - who's doing the camera - and does everything to do with our… [applause] …and who is the linchpin of our entire organisation, and who has talents too numerous to mention."



At any rate, she has never claimed involvement in overseeing or managing the process of video production, in any of the guises of her RD.net bio - but she has claimed to have "proposed the idea". Calling someone a 'producer' for simply proposing ideas of projects that could be done, is a very loose sense of the word, I think.

And the dearth of videos from RDF since 2010 perhaps speaks well enough of her skills as 'producer'…