The writer of the ATV article is a leader of an Idaho advocacy group against motorized back woods hunting, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
I smelled a hidden agenda, I just jumped to the wrong conclusion that it was big government. His real agenda is to ban all ATV from Idaho's back country.
Basically his article is showing ATV riders in a bad light in a way you don't realize the agenda when you read it. He used ATV ID plate size as a red herring. We all fell for it. I smelled liberal when I should of smelled ultra conservative???
Has Advocacy come to the point where double blind articles need to be seeded into the Public's subconscious?
It would be like: Todd Scot writing a article for a Royal Oak advertising rag about the need for Horses at Maybury to wear bells, to warn hapless hikers. Then show a muddy horse path cutting thru the beautiful green landscape. Unless you knew about Todd's prior connection to MMBA and the current fight about House ridding on public land, you would not realized the connection. All you would take away would be Horses and a torn up muddy environment.
Is this an advocacy tacit that should be use?
Every day example:
Every news paper will have short stories about Service (Army, Navy, Air-force ) men or women in your neighbor who just graduated from basic training. The papers get this information from Military press releases, a form of grass roots propaganda. I only know this because I worked for the Army Chief of Information.