The politics of information.
Who has it?
What they do with it?
It is no secret that hedge funds paid for private polling to bet on which way Brexit would go.
I remember reading stories about such polls in newspaper articles in the run up to the final 2016 Poll.
Yet only now, six months before we leave, are the higher ups even discussing the morality of this.
Who should have called this out?
Clearly not the morally conflicted dodgy pollsters!!’
Speaking of pollsters and referenda – The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer is necessary viewing – particularly the last scene.
It’s fair to say that Kevin Billington and Peter Cook were well ahead of their time.
Like Terry Southern, the Tarantino of the 60s, Cook passed away in 1995.
What would have these chaps made of current shenanigans?
Perhaps it’s been going on since time immemorial – but very few people seem to have made a success of pointing these things out.
We are looking at Dark Pools on Monday:
I’m a third of the way in. One thing that has struck me is how infrequently this 2012 book about high frequency trading uses the words ‘leverage’, ‘arbitrage’ or even the term ‘High Frequency Trading’.
In my interview with Peter Jukes of Byline earlier this summer Jukes outlined how hedge fund billionaires such as Robert Mercer transferred their awareness of natural language programming and other pattern detecting machinery from profit seeking in illiquid and arcane financial markets to emotional manipulation and election influencing in political marketing.
Arron Banks and Andy Wigmore boasted about their use of AI and micro targeting at the time.
But as the story of the Brexit victory unravels, it is becoming clear that when it comes to the regulation of market and election rigging, as with corporate billionaire tax avoidance, it is the technology and legal loophole industry, and not regulatory bodies or even legal authorities, that set the pace.