http://www.matthewtgrant.com/2009/07/28/the-trouble-with-transparency/ Tall Guy. Glasses. Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:34:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 http://www.matthewtgrant.com/2009/07/28/the-trouble-with-transparency/comment-page-1/#comment-120 Matthew T. Grant Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:48:51 +0000 http://www.matthewtgrant.com/?p=1268#comment-120 Thanks for the serpentine comment, Latimer. I think it's also worth mentioning that the first real advocate a transparency was Gorbachev, though even he preferred to call it "openness" [glasnost]. Of course, we see where it got him and now the former Soviet Union is run by an "ex" KGB man, one who perfectly understands the tactical value of transparency. Thanks for the serpentine comment, Latimer. I think it’s also worth mentioning that the first real advocate a transparency was Gorbachev, though even he preferred to call it “openness” [glasnost]. Of course, we see where it got him and now the former Soviet Union is run by an “ex” KGB man, one who perfectly understands the tactical value of transparency.

]]> http://www.matthewtgrant.com/2009/07/28/the-trouble-with-transparency/comment-page-1/#comment-118 Latimer Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:11:30 +0000 http://www.matthewtgrant.com/?p=1268#comment-118 Great flowing and sense-making piece. I found myself nodding repeatedly, thinking yes, yes, yest, ok! this man gets it. Mr. Grant sees through the veil of transparency as a marketing device, a hiding of hiding. When all conversation turns to the actual modality of information exchange, the actual information itself has a clear opportunity to sneak back into the smoky room or smoking gun, or to never really come out in the first place. The politeness of transparency has something plastic about it - it's insidious in the same way Green has become: because you really can't argue with it; it's co-opted avant la lettre by dark interests; it presents only a bland face, no facets. Transparency is indeed the Stepford Husband of governmental and business interests, a nice enough, congenial and self-effacing host serving hors d'oeuvres lacking (one only realizes later) all nutritional value -- plus there's no main course. They've memorized the script, or worse, had it programmed into them (hard-coded). All the suits, all the special interests, all the hyper-persistent cockroach lobbyists who will survive all regimes will talk your ear off about transparency, and never will you leave this rendezvous with a scrap of useful information. Great flowing and sense-making piece. I found myself nodding repeatedly, thinking yes, yes, yest, ok! this man gets it. Mr. Grant sees through the veil of transparency as a marketing device, a hiding of hiding. When all conversation turns to the actual modality of information exchange, the actual information itself has a clear opportunity to sneak back into the smoky room or smoking gun, or to never really come out in the first place. The politeness of transparency has something plastic about it – it’s insidious in the same way Green has become: because you really can’t argue with it; it’s co-opted avant la lettre by dark interests; it presents only a bland face, no facets. Transparency is indeed the Stepford Husband of governmental and business interests, a nice enough, congenial and self-effacing host serving hors d’oeuvres lacking (one only realizes later) all nutritional value — plus there’s no main course. They’ve memorized the script, or worse, had it programmed into them (hard-coded). All the suits, all the special interests, all the hyper-persistent cockroach lobbyists who will survive all regimes will talk your ear off about transparency, and never will you leave this rendezvous with a scrap of useful information.

]]>