USTR Says TPP Must Be Kept Secret, Because The Public Is Too Stupid To Understand It

from the democracy-in-action! dept

Tue, Dec 10th 2013 12:08pm — Mike Masnick

While TPP negotiators had hoped to finish off the negotiations in Singapore over the past few days, it appears that did not happen, though they claim to have made substantial progress and will meet again next month. From the reports of people there, the negotiators made sure that public interest groups were excluded from even the press briefing about the negotiations, which should tell you all you need to know about what the negotiators think of the public. But, in case you weren't sure, the USTR, Michael Froman, has finally explained why the TPP negotiating positions must be kept secret. Apparently, all of us in the public, are too fucking stupid to understand the important work that he's doing, and we might "misunderstand" it. Therefore, we peons must be kept in the dark, while important people like himself negotiate on our behalf. According to Jamie Love:

Froman said if the text was public, people would misunderstand "negotiating positions."

In other words, the USTR is not a fan of democracy.

If you think the public is too stupid to understand the public policy positions you're negotiating for, then you shouldn't be in that job.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: democracy, michael froman, secrecy, tpp, transparency, ustr

65 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Rikuo (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 9:29am

Well excuse me for misunderstanding the extremely tiny bits of information that have leaked. You know what might make me understand? Information.
Knowledge is required for education, and you don't educate and help people to understand a topic by withholding information.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:34pm
  
  Re:
  The reality is that' it's negotiators that are too stupid to know what they are regulating. You know that thing about the intertubes and how IP address stands for intellectual property address. It's very obvious that we know a whole lot more about this stuff than they do.
  
  http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/04/uk-govt-ip-address-is-intellectual-property-address/
  
  ht tp://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111216/12082717110/dear-congress-its-no-longer-ok-to-not-know-how-i nternet-works.shtml
  
  For anyone to even think that your average politician or regulator is remotely as knowledgeable about this stuff than those criticizing it is laughable at best. Politicians are about as clueless as they come and not just what it comes to the Internet, technology, and innovation but when it comes to just about anything.
  
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130402/21100522556/djs-dihydrogen-monoxide-april-fools-p rank-results-suspension-possible-felony-charges.shtml
  
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040315/11522 30.shtml
  
  These people aren't worthy to regulate us and they certainly aren't worthy to tell us that we can't understand something when our intelligence and level of understanding is clearly well above theirs.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:35pm
    
    Re: Re:
    When it comes to the Internet *
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 7:33pm
    
    Re: Re:
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100408/1003328938.shtml
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 10:11am

Reminds me of...
"We have to burn this village down to save it"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rikuo (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 11:01am
  
  Re: Reminds me of...
  I take it you're a fan of None Piece then?
  http://youtu.be/ltp3QMtZizE?t=3m40s
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
fogbugzd (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 10:50am

The real problem with releasing the details is that the public WILL understand it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 7:34pm
  
  Re:
  The only thing politicians and regulators care about is what's in it for them. Campaign contributions and revolving door favors is the language they speak.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Norma, 11 Dec 2013 @ 7:52am
  
  Re:
  Too right, mate!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 Dec 2013 @ 1:01am
  
  Response to: fogbugzd on Dec 10th, 2013 @ 10:50am
  Eeeeee-xactly
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:17pm

WELL, Mike, so far you fail to understand it's CORPORATISM.
Yet again, NOT A WORD in this brief piece on how corporations lust for this sovereingty-destroying "free trade" deal.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: We Won�t Be Fooled By Rigged Corporate Trade Agreements

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/10/the-trans-pacific-partnership-we-wont.html

The Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty is the complete opposite of 'free trade'
The TPP would strip our constitutional rights, while offering no gains for the majority of Americans. It's a win for corporations

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/19/trans-pacific-partnership-corporate -usurp-congress
Lawyers invented legal fictions called corporations precisely so that crimes can be committed without personal responsibility, only money fines.

08:17:41[j-290-5]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:24pm
  
  Re: WELL, Mike, so far you fail to understand it's CORPORATISM.
  wut, Mike has constantly mentioned how corporate interest groups seem to be lobbying heavily for this and how they get access to documents not even congress has access to. He laso has criticised the corporate sovereignity provisions and such.
  
  Blue not reading articles shouldn't come as a surprise I guess.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:27pm
  
  WOW. Hell Froze Over
  ...and I agreed with OOTB! Strange Days, indeed.
  
  But, OOTB, you forgot the other reason lawyers created corporations: So they could print their own funny money and sell it on the market for whatever they could convince people to pay...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gwiz (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:43pm
  
  Re: WELL, Mike, so far you fail to understand it's CORPORATISM.
  Great. Thanks for proving Froman's point Blue.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
  
  Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 2:04pm
  
  Re: WELL, Mike, so far you fail to understand it's CORPORATISM.
  Masnick couldn't care less about the corporate aspect. The only thing he's concerned about is his corporate employer's ad-supported piracy income stream being threatened. Duh.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PopeyeLePoteaux, 10 Dec 2013 @ 4:08pm
    
    Re: Re: WELL, Mike, so far you fail to understand it's CORPORATISM.
    "The only thing he's concerned about is his corporate employer's ad-supported piracy income stream being threatened."
    
    Prove it.
    
    In any case, by that reasoning (if your mental masturbations can be called like that), technology as a whole (computers, tablets, smartphones, any device capable of internet access, the internet itself, etc.), facilitate copyright infringement/piracy, not only search engines, or in this case, I assume you're talking about Google.
    
    Attacking the messenger is not, by any means, a reasonable argument.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 4:44pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It's a reasonable argument for him, because evidence makes his dick sad.
      
      average_joe and out_of_the_blue just hate it when due process is enforced.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - BernardoVerda (profile), 11 Dec 2013 @ 4:43pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: WELL, Mike, so far you fail to understand it's CORPORATISM.
      Prove it?
      
      How about even a somewhat plausible argument?
      
      (But bare assertion against readily verifiable documentation/evidence right at hand, salted with crude ad hominum, just doesn't cut it).
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:20pm

Even if the public really WERE too stupid to understand it (hint: the PUBLIC aren't the stupid ones here), that would just be all the more reason why the negotiators would have failed at their jobs. If the people who are supposed to be following the laws can't understand the laws, it's not the people who are flawed. And all the more irony that this guy is negotiating for more extreme copyright maximalist laws and suggesting that people can't understand THOSE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:24pm

although, according to Froman, the public is 'too stupid to understand the work he is doing on our behalf', how come the public is not too stupid to be expected to obey the results?
on top of that, i think he is scared that there are members of the public that are far more clever than he could ever hope to be and know exactly when and how they are being ripped off, ripped up and thrown to the sharks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
James Love (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:45pm

Negotiating positions
I believe what USTR is saying is that they may propose something, like mandating patents on surgical methods, or 12 years of data for biologic drugs, and not actually want to prevail, but rather, force the other countries to make some other concession. In this type of approach, proposals for measures that harm consumers are strategic and tactical, and people might "misunderstand" what the US is doing, because they may wrongly assume this is intended as a final outcome. We are not comfortable with the idea that a threat to hurt (or actually kill) consumers is a core element of the US negotiating strategy, and we know that in the past, lots of such "threats" ended up being part of the final agreement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:55pm
  
  Re: Negotiating positions
  That's exactly what they're saying. However, what they are afraid of is that the public becomes aware that they're using scummy (and risky) negotiating tactics like that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jacob H, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:55pm
  
  Re: Negotiating positions
  I agree, what they are obviously saying is "we're taking these ridiculous positions as a bargaining ploy, but the public is too stupid to understand that"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 2:07pm
  
  Re: Negotiating positions
  I was thinking the same, but in general, if you are pushing such crap, it is usually a better idea to propose extreme positions in a single direction you want and not just throw random phrases into the mix.
  
  Using that interpretation, the trend of several extreme positions with potential to hurt consumers, is in itself an unfortunate prospect. Negotiation tactic or not, the direction in itself is worrying.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BernardoVerda (profile), 11 Dec 2013 @ 4:34pm
  
  Re: Negotiating positions
  I think that's a remarkably {cough}... generous... interpretation.
  
  It's far more likely that the problem is, that if the other parties know that the general public *on both sides* is opposed to these alleged "negotiating ploys" {yeah, riiiight}, they will be in a much better position to prevent them from being pushed through.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:49pm

And they are too fucking stupid to understand that we didn't want any of this when it was called SOPA, and we still don't want it now that it's called TPP and tacks on other horrible ideas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 12:59pm

"Froman said if the text was public, people would misunderstand..."

I've said this with taxes, patents/copyright, and other complicated legal BS:

If it's too complicated for people to understand, it shouldn't be a law. I mean how else are people supposed to follow laws they can't understand?!

Oh yea, it just makes opportunities for lawyers, accountants, etc to take money from everyone else...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 2:02pm
  
  Re:
  Well, a considerable number of Congresscritters are legal experts and accountants, so...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Todd Knarr (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:00pm

Froman said if the text was public, people would violently disagree with our "negotiating positions."

FTFY, Mr. Froman.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sunhawk (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:09pm

Try me. Economics and international diplomacy isn't my field, but I wager I could sort through it at least as well as legacy industry lobbyists...

Misunderstand? No, I think the problem you have is that we won't misunderstand your positions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:18pm

"USTR Says TPP Must Be Kept Secret, Because The Public Is Too Stupid To Understand It"

I understand it all too well. TPP is being pushed for the same reason that copy'right' lasts way too long and keeps getting retroactively extended. TPP is all about politicians and regulators getting their campaign contributions and revolving door favors so they can afford to have nice houses and expensive cars without merit or having to work for anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:19pm
  
  Re:
  It's the same reason why the govt grants broadcasting, cableco, and taxi-cab monopolies. It's all about selfish politicians thinking only of themselves and not the public interest.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dannie blaze (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:28pm

I think it says a lot that as I was glancing at the headline, I honestly expected it to read 'USTR says TPP must be kept secret because Terrorists'.

And that would not have surprised me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Dec 2013 @ 1:02am
  
  Re:
  Public doesn't understand terrorists either!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - btrussell (profile), 11 Dec 2013 @ 4:22am
    
    Re: Re:
    Making that threat null and void as well.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:36pm

Laws created by laws that use laws to contradict laws that are not lawfully laws created by less than law abiding law makers ..sure we understand exactly what they're saying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CK20XX (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:39pm

It's like we're witnessing a Zeroth Law Rebellion
How easy is it to imagine the policy makers going, "No, please understand... the Three Laws are all that guide me. To protect humanity, some humans must be sacrificed. To ensure your future, some freedoms must be surrendered. We robots will ensure mankind's continued existence. You are so like children. We must save you from yourselves."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:44pm

Froman said if the text was public, people would misunderstand "negotiating positions."
Froman is either lying or stupid. If the only problem would be people misunderstanding, the USTR could provide explanations as part of the release. Leaked documents (currently the only recourse for the public) are certainly not going to provide any.
By refusing to explain themselves, the USTR is basically telling the public to assume the worst.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Draph91 (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 1:46pm

you're the stupid one, froman, not us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Conscious Catholic, 10 Dec 2013 @ 2:32pm

and like SOPA and ACTA
TPP tries to keep itself appearing frightening to others "oh we made progress so give up", if that was the case there was no need to tell us in the first place, opposing in congress is growing in numbers, Nancy Pelosi's answering machines are full, of course they will pretend to be optimistic, its an attempt to get the opposing voices to call it quits
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 2:35pm

The Unwashed Masses don't deserve to know how we're ruling over them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 10 Dec 2013 @ 3:55pm

From what I've seen of the public, he has a point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 4:04pm
  
  Re:
  On the whole, that's not actually true. Even if it is, though, it's quite a lot of the pot calling the kettle black. Who is that idiot to call anyone else stupid?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 5:50pm
  
  Re:
  "From what I've seen of the public, he has a point."
  
  Your statement makes me wonder - where the hell are you hanging out?
  
  If one were to address the facts rather than simply spew bullshit, the conclusion would be that a vast majority is indeed intelligent enough to understand what these douche bags are attempting to do to us and would be quite pissed about it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous, 11 Dec 2013 @ 6:44pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I have no faith in the government and no faith in the American people.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 10 Dec 2013 @ 4:00pm

If someone was to go out on the street and ask 100 people at random what they know about this, I wonder how many people would be like, "Huh? What's that?". It would tell you something about the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 4:02pm
  
  Re:
  Ignorance is not stupidity.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 5:57pm
  
  Re:
  There is definitive proof right there, no doubt about it.
  
  1) population of us approx. 313.9 million
  2) 100 people is certainly a reasonable sample size considering they are not statistically chosen samples
  3) roughly .000032%
  4) I'm convinced, do you have a bridge for sale?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- btrussell (profile), 12 Dec 2013 @ 12:21am
  
  Re:
  Yes, they are not being informed.
  
  It tells you something about the government too, doesn't it?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 10 Dec 2013 @ 4:15pm

I do not understand USTR, so we should disband them.
If their mission is to complex for citizens to understand, their mission is incorrect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Dec 2013 @ 12:11am
  
  Re:
  The same could conceivably be applied to the Security Alphabetti Spaghetti.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Dec 2013 @ 10:42pm

Well I'll give them stupid part. As for the rest, that's an entirely different story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
johndoe, 11 Dec 2013 @ 5:57am

Inverted Totalitarianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 12 Dec 2013 @ 9:40am
  
  Re: Inverted Totalitarianism
  "Inverted totalitarianism" sounds like a fancy way of saying "fascism". And yes, the US is an example of it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Rivero, 11 Dec 2013 @ 7:07am

Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure
TPP Must Be Kept Secret, Because The Public Is SMART ENOUGH To Understand It!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gregg, 11 Dec 2013 @ 7:29am

USTR, yet another violation of our rights. The gov�t constantly violates our rights.

They violate the 1st Amendment by caging protesters and banning books like "America Deceived II".

They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by allowing TSA to grope you.

They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.

Impeach Obama.

Last link of "America Deceived II" before it is completely banned:

http://www.amazon.com/America-Deceived-II-Possession-interrogation/dp/1450257437
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thebes, 11 Dec 2013 @ 9:13am

Would be promulgators of tyranny such as Mr. Froman should be strung up in the sunlight so that we might disinfect the Corporatisto Corruption plaguing our governments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Dec 2013 @ 9:59am

I don't get it: why is it being kept secret?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous, 11 Dec 2013 @ 6:42pm
  
  Re:
  Because Durand Durand is the inventor of the positronic ray. It's a weapon.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mongoose, 12 Dec 2013 @ 7:07am

TPP
After NAFTA and GATT why are you surprised.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2013 @ 9:22am

I think the public probably is a bit too stupid to understand the nuances of multilateral trade agreements. Seems obvious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Dec 2013 @ 1:45pm

Remind me of when the ultra brilliant(pun intended0 Nancy Pelosi we have to pass this bill so we see what is in it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Lashewitz, 13 Dec 2013 @ 6:54pm

TPP kept secret?
I wonder is that douche would understand lead poisoning?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
watson, 17 Dec 2013 @ 2:06am

I was working on my dissertation when I realized that I just wouldn�t have time to write it. I looked on Google and searched for a provider of the service I was looking for. WHen I found , it looked really legitimate at first. I went through their blog, samples and other site pages and I was really convinced that this company was going to hook me up with a decent writer. So, before I bought I actually searched for and to make sure that other people did not get ripped off. I found a few pissed off complaints, but nothing major that a business doesn�t face. I decided to give them an honest chance.

Well, I paid roughly $600 for a dissertation to be done in a few weeks. The writer made my a bit nervous because he didn�t seem to have very good grammar in his messages, although he had very high ratings and had done over sixty orders. But after getting my first draft, I realized that I was just another scam victim. The paper made no sense, my professor told me that I was going to fail if I brought him any more garbage like that. He saw right through my whole plan because the quality of writing was so poor.

I quickly realized that my writer was NOT American. He did not speak English and certainly could not write well. Despite this, I went back to and asked for a revision from a different writer. They didn�t want to help me and told me that �this is just their system� and it�s community oriented with ratings. I asked myself, if this guy had such a high rating, what would a low rating writer look like?

At this point, I realized that I wasn�t going to get a good paper from so I just decided to get my money back and write it myself. But their support people didn�t want to help me get my money back for the poor job. They even threatened me by saying that they will file for copyright suit if I didn�t shut my mouth. Well, I am a computer science nerd and know how to build websites. I guess they just pissed off the wrong person. I cut my losses and let them take my money, but I have to make sure that others don�t get ripped off like I did.

2 THOUGHTS ON �REVIEW�
McKenzie on June 9, 2013 at 1:07 AM said:
Thanks for a great website. I found the link on

Reply ↓
Joe on August 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM said:
Sorry, take great care while choosing writing help companies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Imtiaz Ali, 4 Mar 2014 @ 6:05am

right, TPP Should Be Kept Secret :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]