Rod Diridon, a member of the CSHRA board has called on the boards new $9 million PR agency to stop misinformation spread by a “few rotten apples.”
At a recent board meeting, Mr. Diridon said the following, verbatim:
"Second is, and I'll use as an example again one area, but I have an idea that its occurring in other areas too, misinformation is causing serious media relations problems in the mid-Peninsula Atherton, Menlo Park, Palo Alto area especially. That misinformation coming sometimes from in-advertently our own staff, but then again it's being presented by opponents, blatantly providing false information to the media and then having no correction. No information being provided that would counter that misinformation and I think you related to that earlier.
So would you relate to those two examples, not those two specific cases but those examples as kind of in the weeds detail, that you really need to be on immediately, so that it doesn't, the kind of thing are like a sore that festers, or the rotten apple in the barrel, if you would like to use another example. And you got to get that apple out of the barrel immediately and please figure out a way and let us know at some time in the future and call us individually or give us a report on how you would be creating kind of flying squads of emergency response to nip those problems in the bud. You want to avoid them if you can but if you can't avoid them you need to have a way of countering them immediately so that, misinformation isn't allow to float around, its corrected. So please consider that as early tasks."
Cutting through the grammatical confusion, here is what he is saying:
1. He is accusing people in Atherton, Menlo Park and Palo Alto of generating misinformation that is causing serious media problems.
2. Although this misinformation comes from some of the media inadvertently, it is not being corrected and therefore becomes an immediate task for the new public relations company, Ogilvy.
3. This misinformation is coming from opponents who blatantly provide false information to the media.
4.The false information is not being countered by CHSRA information, which, presumably, is not false. This correction must become Ogilvy's first assignment.
5. Although this process is at an "in the weeds" level of detail, it needs to be addressed immediately, because it becomes like a sore that festers.
6. Switching metaphors, Mr. Diridon refers to people who raise issues about high speed rail as the rotten apple in the barrel. He says that Ogilvy has to get that rotten apple out of the barrel immediately.
7. Having given this assignment to Ogilvy, he calls for them to figure out how to do this - get the rotten apple out of the barrel -- and report to him (and others) individually, presumably not during a public board meeting.
8. Mr. Diridon calls for Ogilvy to create flying squads with emergency response capability to nip those problems in the bud.
9. He points out that misinformation must not be allowed to float around without being corrected.
10. He considers this one of the first tasks for this $9 million contracted PR firm.
We agree. Misinformation needs to be corrected!
Perhaps a fitting place to start is by fact checking statements by the CSHRA and members of the CHSRA board. In innumerable speeches, press releases and even in the most recent business plan, (Page 67) the CHRSA compares the price of a $105 HSR ticket to driving by using $118 as the cost to drive between Northern and Southern California. Yet the CHRSA’s own research found that the average number of occupants per car traveling between North and South was 2.6 people. So the actual, factual, not misrepresented comparison is $276 for HSR rail tickets (2.6 people X $105) compared to $118 for the car. And that does not take into account that a large majority of people traveling from North to South via HSR would need to rent a car once they arrive at their destination. Here are the facts from the CHSRA’s own research.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20080130155550_app_2f.pdf Page 2-f-1
“The No Project Alternative (see Chapter 2) defines an intercity highway system represented by the interstate and state highway facilities in the geographic area serving the same intercity travel markets as the proposed high-speed train system. These highways are illustrated in Appendix 2-A of the Program EIR/EIS. In order to assess the magnitude of the demand to be served by this intercity highway system, the total intercity demand is first converted to total vehicle trips. This is accomplished by dividing the total annual intercity demand between major city pairs throughout the study area by an average auto occupancy factor (number of people per auto) to generate annual vehicle trips.
An average vehicle occupancy rate of 2.40 passengers per vehicle was assumed which is based on the independent ridership and revenue forecasts prepared for the California High Speed Rail Authority.1 This estimate assumes a weighted average of work and non-work trip average vehicle occupancy rates of 1.9 and 2.6, respectively.
