With the Project Fear mantra being so effective in fobbing off good advice and words of wisdom in
the British campaign for Brexit.

Rumour has it that the Tobacco industry, as well groups and organisations that oppose or challenge
views on global warming and would love to label it a con trick; as well as
many individuals who are vehemently opposed to being ticked off about their eating
habits and are also of the view that healthy eating campaigns are another con trick.

Are jumping on the Project Fear bandwagon with glee, as an excuse to carry on Smoking, and not
change their ways by saying its all a con trick, Project Fear and the environmentalists would say
that, wouldn't they because they have vested interests.

In fact you can already see this taking place on Social Media with Smokers decrying the gross
images of the effects of lung cancer on cigarette packets as Project Fear gone mad !!

Possibly I'm being a bit thick but I've read this three times and I still don't have the faintest idea what you're on about, although admittedly the first two times were spent playing "find the sentence".

What the hell is 'Project Fear'?

Tom

He's must be on commission for how many times he can say PF in 1 post, and gets a bonus for making no sense at all

I feel a little scared right now! Going to stand at a bus stop and passively smoke a cigar...

You all know nothing.

It's a poem.

Or the account is hacked by edzoom.

Can somebody translate this into something which is understandable?

As I understand it:

Project Fear (apparent moniker for the Remain Campaign's raison d'etre) accused of overselling the doom and gloom of leaving the EU.

Brexit wins because a majority is convinced Remain are a bunch of drama queens and it can't possibly be as bad as all that.

Ciggie industry observes this behaviour and seems to be adapting the same kind of discrediting tactics to strip the "project fear" of the health professionals/scientists, whatever, of credibility so it slows the amount of people giving up fags.

Feel free to correct or amend as appropriate, but that was just my understanding of the OP's point.

More or less my understanding too.


My observations on that:


I think the tobacco industry has already lost its offensive. Most people do accept that tobacco has negative side effects. That is not going to change. At best, the tobacco lobby can still fight for their cause on a platform of "it's your body, it's your freedom, so do with it what you want". Ditto for nutritional and lifestyle choices that are also not optimal for your health. This includes drugs.


Fighting against that "freedom" aspect requires a paternalist authoritarian attitude that could easily backfire.


People over-stating causes is quite a normal part of advertising and political discourse. There is nothing new about this. People wanting to sell something will over state the negative sides of the alternatives (to the point of Godwinization). Sometimes the gloom they prophecize never comes to pass, and this damages their reputation.


In science, one would hope, that scientists refrain from exaggerating negative affects as this can hurt the reputation of science as a whole. Sadly certain pro-science people feel their opponents are exaggerting and that the only way to counter that is to exaggerate too. If this is what the Op is concerned about, I agree.

Well Trump for one reckons the environmentalists are over playing global warming and
as he has little chance of arguing against Scientific theories on global warming - he's never refrained
on falling back on Project Fear accusations , to dismiss scientific theories, as it plays well to his
supporters and an excuse to refrain from signing up to the Paris Agreement.

The only thing is Trump also engages in Project Fear himself by playing on American fears
about unrestrained immigration down Mexico way, if his wall isn't built.

Long Friday lunch sesh ?