Sandy Starr

From Powerbase
Revision as of 14:16, 10 February 2015 by Owen Cranshaw (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
LM network resources
Sandy Starr 2010

Sandy Starr is currently communications officer for the Progress Educational Trust which has been described as “a registered charity that works to create an environment in which research and practice in genetics and assisted reproduction will thrive”.[1] He is also Webmaster for their online weekly digest BioNews, for whom he began writing articles in 2007, contributing close to 40 articles.[2] In March 2001 he joined the founding editorial team of Spiked, founded after the collapse of the magazine LM, formerly Living Marxism, and continues to contribute regularly to this having contributed over 120 articles in 14 years.[3] He is a judge for the Institute of Ideas Debating Matters competition, and has appeared on or produced 17 Battle of Ideas discussion panels since 2005.[4] Sandy Starr is also a member of Kings College London’s Autism Ethics Group (chaired by Patricia Walsh of KCL) and according to his BioNews profile is a member of the Ethics Advisory Board for the research project: 'European Autism Interventions: A Multicentre Study for Developing New Medications'.[5] However, he does not appear on the ethics advisory board section of the website for this project[6], although he did chair an event for EU-AIMS entitled 'Treating autism: the promises, perils and politics of pharmaceutical intervention'.[7]

Sandy Starr has also previously written for the LM Network linked Culture Wars and Audacity,[8] and from 2001-2005 reviewed films for The Sun’s TV Mag following his graduation from the University of Oxford with a degree in English Language and Literature. He has consulted for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), which included speaking at a conference regarding ‘Challenges and Opportunities for Freedom of Expression on the Internet'.[9] Additionally, he has consulted for The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) speaking against the regulation of ‘hate speech’,[10] and gave a talk entitled 'Regulation of decentralised networks: Necessities and problems for freedom of the media'.[11] He also contributed to the European Commission Project ‘Right’s Watch’ giving a talk on technology and regulation.[12]

Views

Starr has described himself as a 'science evangelist (no I don’t think that’s a contradiction in terms), someone who thinks science is a good thing and spends much of his time saying so' although he has no formal scientific qualifications or training.[13] His PET profile notes that 'he is an evangelist for the view that political, scientific and cultural endeavour can - if permitted to - transform humanity’s circumstances for the better'. It is from this ‘scientific humanist’ standpoint that he argues against environmentalism and the scientific consensus on climate change:

'I think that humanity and a positive political conception of it are the sine qua non of science - the things without which science cannot, in any meaningful way, exist. Science, as this enthusiast understands it, is a profoundly humanist enterprise. Science exists to serve and advance humanity’s interests… It follows from this understanding that attempts to use science in an anti-humanist spirit, drawing up scientific evidence to belittle or disparage humanity and its affairs, are a non sequitur. Using science in this way is no less absurd than a man building a pedestal in order that he might reach for the sky, only to then scrabble around in the earth once he’s standing on it... protesters calling for the authorities to do more to avert catastrophic climate change have taken to using the slogan ‘the science has spoken’, as though science represents the final word on the matter. Well, I for one am not enamoured of this version of ‘science’, which takes everything I find exciting and dynamic about science and ossifies it into static, unchangeable ‘truth’.[14]

Writing for Spiked

The main overriding themes that run through the Spiked articles centre on: anti-regulation (including messages against restrictions on advertisements, mobile phones and unhealthy food); a particular focus on internet freedom and free speech on the internet (including a number of articles seeming to provide some form of moral justification for the publication and viewing of images of paedophilia); questioning the value of the precautionary principle and highlighting events where risk has been overstated (linking to the former, with a particular focus on internet chat rooms); an anti-human-rights framework agenda arguing this has enabled increased ‘snooping’; some more defensible articles against snooping and excessive copyright (based on internet examples); a resistance to moral messages and political correctness; a negative opinion towards strategies to expand mechanisms for participation in democracy, including via the internet; and some limited references against the environmental and anti-capitalist movements (tying in with the anti-precautionary principle message). Overall the theme emerging in the defence of free speech is that it is always directed towards the defence of abhorrent issues and assumes the freedom to express hate, or to present and store certain images, precedes the right not to experience hate speech, or to be exposed to horrific images, or to be used in the creation of such images. He also implies that it is undeniable, or objective fact, that it is not and should not be a crime to view and hold certain images of illegal acts in his efforts to defend his ideological interpretation of 'freedom'.

On regulation and unhealthy foods:

The contemptuous view that the authorities and campaign groups have, of our ability to decide for ourselves what, when and how we eat, is perhaps summed up in the expression ‘unconscious eating’. The idea seems to be that if only the big, bad chocolate companies would withdraw products from the shelves, then we mindless drones would all start eating what the food police want us to.[15]

On regulation of adverts:

Advertisers should be free to hawk their wares however they wish, to whomever they wish. As the case of Mr Kipling illustrates, there are already good commercial reasons to be mindful of the disposition of prospective customers. There is no reason why advertisers should be accountable to society’s most sensitive souls, or to the morality peddled by the government and regulators of the day.[16]

On paedophilia:

Shevaun Pennington’s five-day disappearance gave undeserved credibility to scaremongers, who make a habit of mischaracterising unknown quantities as sinister, and who conflate real physical harm with unquantified psychological harm. Making a criminal offence of ‘grooming’ blurs the distinction between thinking about sexual acts and committing them, between thoughts and actions. When an adult can potentially be criminalised for having sexual fantasises about a child and arranging to meet them, without having acted on such fantasies, how far are we from creating thought crimes?[17]

On a rape case discussed in a documentary:

By the end of Raw Deal, you are left with the conclusion that whatever happened on the night of 26 February 1999, nothing good came of the subsequent involvement of the police and the courts. It is possible (though not certain) that Lisa Gier King wound up frightened, in a situation out of her control, having unwilling sex with a particularly intimidating student, and sustained some minor injuries at his hands. But even if that did happen, in retrospect King would have done just as well not to go to the police.[18]

On anti-moral message:

The government’s approach also underestimates the capacity of parents to supervise their children as they see fit. There seems to be an assumption that parents are incapable of instructing their children to behave sensibly in different circumstances.[19]

On anti-human-rights framework:

As I have argued previously on spiked, human rights legislation gradually erodes our latitude to pursue our freedoms, by seeking to enforce those freedoms on our behalf.[20]

On being pro-risk or risk-averse (based on the history of space exploration):

The CAIB report explains how ‘the Apollo era created at NASA an exceptional “can-do” culture marked by tenacity in the face of seemingly impossible challenges…. The culture…accepted risk and failure as inevitable aspects of operating in space...America’s future space efforts must include human presence in Earth orbit, and eventually beyond’. In order for that to happen, those who want to boldly go will have to challenge the political constraints placed on space programmes by our increasingly cautious leaders - who, for all their talk of going to the stars, remain risk-averse. The sooner the bar is raised for manned space exploration, the sooner it might inspire us all once again.[21]

On regulation:

Regulation of decentralized networks can only be self-perpetuating, once the state is given such license to step in and ‘secure’ our freedom from, say, the practices of unscrupulous companies such as Microsoft. This is because such a ‘freedom’ is a myth. Our privacy from the marketplace is always qualified, because as long as we consume goods and services, then to some extent our private pursuits occur within the market-place. On the other hand, we can, and should, aspire to comprehensive privacy from the state.[22]

Career Chronology

Current Board Memberships

  • European Autism Interventions (EU-AIMS): A Multicentre Study for Developing New Medications (research project) – Member of Ethics Advisory Board[28]
  • King’s College London (Centre of Medical Law and Ethics) – Member of the Autism Ethics Group.[29]

Educational Background

Battle of Ideas Panel Appearances

  • Sandy Starr appeared with: Sheila Bird (programme leader, Medical Research Center Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge Institute of Public Health), Yann Bonduelle (partner, UK Consulting leader, Data & Analytics team, PwC), Marion Oswald (head, Centre for Information Rights, University of Winchester), and Timandra Harkness (journalist, writer & broadcaster; presenter, she has written for Living Marxism, writes for Spiked, produces and hosts Battle of Ideas events, has chaired part of an Audacity event and was director of Engaging Cogs) discussing 'Big Data: Big Danger?' at the Battle of Ideas.[30]
  • Sandy Starr appeared with: Danny Altmann (professor of immunology, Imperial College; editor-in-chief, Immunology; associate editor, Vaccine), Professor Mark Baker (director, Centre for Clinical Practice, NICE), Eliot Foster (chairman, [[MedCity; CEO, Creabilis; trustee, Poet in the City), Dr Clare Gerada (GP; past chair, Royal College of General Practitioners, wife of Simon Wessely, links to SABMiller), produced with Claire Fox (director, Institute of Ideas), discussing 'Dose of reality: the ethics and politics of drug development' at the Battle of Ideas.[31]
  • Sandy Starr appeared with: Dr Tim Hubbard (senior group leader, Vertebrate Genome Analysis Project, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute), Bryan Joseph (partner PwC, Christine Rosen (fellow, New America Foundation; senior editor, New Atlantis, fellow of Ethics and Public Policy Center), Dr Martyn Thomas (vice-president for external affairs, Royal Academy of Engineering), and Timandra Harkness (journalist, writer & broadcaster; presenter, she has written for Living Marxism, writes for Spiked, produces and hosts Battle of Ideas events, has chaired part of an Audacity event and was director of Engaging Cogs), Discussing 'Number crunching and ethics in the era of big data' at the Battle of Ideas.[32]
  • Sandy Starr appeared with: Dr Anjana Ahuja (science writer), Barbara Hewson (barrister, has written for Spiked for over ten years, contributed to the Pro-Choice Forum and spoken at Manifesto Club events), Adam Rutherford (science writer and broadcaster; author, Creation; presenter, Inside Science and The Cell), Angela Saini (freelance science journalist), Jonathan Webb (neuroscientist, writer and performer, joined the Science Media Centre in February 2011), and David Bowden (coordinator, UK Battle Satellites; columnist, spiked) discussing “Science & Society: brave new world or geek chic?” at the Battle of Ideas.[33]
  • Sandy Starr appeared with: Professor David Jones (director, Anscombe Bioethics Centre, co-editor, Chimera's Children: Ethical, Philosophical and Religious Perspectives on Human-Nonhuman Experimentation), Professor Robin Lovell-Badge (head, stem cell biology and developmental genetics, MRC National Institute for Medical Research, erves on the Scientific and Clinical Advances Advisory Committee of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. He is also on the Council of the Academy of Medical Sciences, Lovell-Badge has been on the Board (now 'Advisory Committee') of the Science Media Centre since 2007), Ken Macleod (award-winning science fiction writer, author, Descent, The Restoration Game and Intrusion, writer-in-residence, MA Creative Writing, Edinburgh Napier University 2013-2014), and Gunes Taylor (researcher, University of Oxford, MSci, Human Genetics) discussing ‘Banning the brave new world? The ethics of Science’ at the Battle of Ideas.[34]
  • Sandy Starr produced a panel discussion with with: Dr Sarah Chan (deputy director, Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation, University of Manchester, research fellow, bioethics and law), Steven Edwards (professor of philosophy of healthcare, Swansea University), Ann Furedi (chief executive, British Pregnancy Advisory Service, wrote for Confrontation and regularly for Living Marxism and Spiked, was Director of Policy and Communications for the UK regulator of infertility treatment and embryo research, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority), Peter Williams (writer and speaker, Catholic Voices, senior campaigner, Right to Life), and Jennie Bristow (writer on parenting culture and intergenerational relations, author, Standing Up To Supernanny, co-author, Parenting Culture Studies, Licensed to Hug and The Social Cost of Litigation, wrote for Living Marxism/LM from 1994, She was part of the launch team of and is a shareholder of and the commissioning editor and a writer for Spiked) discussed ‘Abortion: a medical or a moral choice?’ at The Battle of Ideas.[35]


Resources

Profile Sandy Starr Battle of Ideas
Profile Sandy Starr Progress
Twitter Sandy Starr


Notes

  1. ↑ See Sandy Starr Biographical Note Why is Science Important website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  2. ↑ As of 12 November 2014. See Author archive BioNews website, accessed 12 November 2014
  3. ↑ See Author archive Spiked website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  4. ↑ As of 12 November 2014. See Biographical note Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  5. ↑ See Biographical note, BioNews website, accessed 12 November 2014
  6. ↑ See Ethics Advisory Board EU-AIMS: Autism Research in Europe website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  7. ↑ See Podcast EU-AIMS: Autism Research in Europe website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  8. ↑ See Sandy Starr Culture Wars website, accessed 12 November 2014 and Sandy Starr Audacity website, accessed 12 November 2014
  9. ↑ See Presentation, 3 February 2005, UNESCO website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  10. ↑ See 'Hate Speech:wahat is there to be worried about', 27 August 2004, OSCE website, accessed 14 November 2014.
  11. ↑ See Presentation to the OSCE conference on ‘Freedom of the media and the internet’, 14 June 2004, accessed 12 November 2014.
  12. ↑ See Biographical note BioNews website, accessed 12 November 2014. Although the link to this page on his biographical note on the BioNews webpage appears disfunctional, see RightsWatch.
  13. ↑ See Sandy Starr Biographical Note Why is Science Important website, accessed 12 November 2014.
  14. ↑ See Sandy Starr 'The Political Importance of Science and the Scientific Importance of Politics' Why is Science Important website, 11 December 2008, accessed 12 November 2014.
  15. ↑ See 'Saving me from myself: A chocolate lover mourns the passing of the King-ize Mars Bar', Spiked website, 1 October 2004, accessed 12 November 2014.
  16. ↑ See 'Commercial Brake: You need a PhD in gender studies to understand Ofcom’s decisions to ban – or not ban - adverts', Spiked website, 8 September 2004, accessed 12 November 2014.
  17. ↑ See 'Shevaun and the scaremongers: How the elopement of a 12-year-old girl became a morality tale about the dangers of the internet', Spiked website, 5 August 2003, accessed 12 November 2014.
  18. ↑ See 'Raw Deal: A remarkable new documentary exposes viewers to the ambiguities of a US rape case', Spiked website, 14 September 2001, accessed 12 November 2014.
  19. ↑ See 'We scare because we care: A government campaign to keep kids safe online risks putting their enjoyment of the internet in danger', Spiked website, 7 Jan 2003, accessed 12 November 2014.
  20. ↑ See 'Privacy: open up the debate: Critics of state snooping should stop appealing to human rights law', Spiked website, 8 October 2002, accessed 12 November 2014.
  21. ↑ See 'The future was cancelled': How the space age fell to Earth', Spiked website, 16 September 2003, accessed 12 november 2014
  22. ↑ See 'Privacy: open up the debate: Critics of state snooping should stop appealing to human rights law, Spiked website, 8 October 2002, accessed 12 November 2014
  23. ↑ See 'Trustees' Report for the year ended 31 March 2008', personnel, BioNews website, 31 March 2008, accessed 10 February 2015
  24. ↑ See Judge History, Debating Matters website, accessed 10 February 2015.
  25. ↑ The exact end date of his role in this capacity is unclear as wayback captures of the 'Spiked People' section offer conflicting information. However, as he no longer appears in one of these as far back as 2009 (see Spiked people Internet Archive capture of Spiked website as of 22 June 2009, accessed 10 February 2015) it appears likely the wayback capture that suggests this continues until 2011 (See Spiked people, Internet Archive capture of Spiked website as of 21 May 2011, accessed 10 February 2015) is a capture of an old page.
  26. ↑ Based on a Nexis Search for "Sandy Starr"
  27. ↑ See Biographical note, BioNews website, accessed 12 November 2014
  28. ↑ According to his BioNews Biographical note but no apparent link on the EU-AIMS website, see introductory section of this page. Also see Biographical note, BioNews website, accessed 12 November 2014
  29. ↑ See Biographical note, BioNews website, accessed 12 November 2014
  30. ↑ Battle of Ideas Session detail 'Big Data: Big Danger?', Sunday 19th October 2014, Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 January 2015.rt of an Audacity event and was director of Engaging Cogs) discussing 'Big Data: Big Danger?' at the Battle of Ideas.
  31. ↑ 'Dose of reality: the ethics and politics of drug development', Sunday 19th October 2014, Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 January 2015.
  32. ↑ 'Number crunching and ethics in the era of big data', Sunday 20th October 2013, Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 January 2015.
  33. ↑ See 'Science & Society: brave new world or geek chic?' Tuesday 1st October 2013, Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 January 2015.
  34. ↑ See ‘Banning the brave new world? The ethics of Science’, Sunday 21st October 2012, Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 January 2015.
  35. ↑ See [ http://www.battleofideas.org.uk/2012/session_detail/6803 ‘Abortion: a medical or a moral choice?’], Sunday 21st October 2012, Battle of Ideas website, accessed 12 January 2015.
Retrieved from "https://powerbase.info/index.php?title=Sandy_Starr&oldid=208802"