Psychopaths use charm and manipulation to achieve success in the workplace, according to a US study One out of every 25 business leaders could be psychopathic, a study claims. The study, conducted by the New York psychologist Paul Babiak, suggests that they disguise the condition by hiding behind their high status, playing up their charm and by manipulating others. Favourable environmental factors such as a happy childhood mean they can function in a workplace rather than channelling their energies in more violent or destructive ways. Revealing the results in a BBC Horizon documentary, Babiak said: “Psychopaths really aren’t the kind of person you think they are. “In fact, you could be living with or married to one for 20 years or more and not know that person is a psychopath. “We have identified individuals that might be labelled ‘the successful psychopath’. “Part of the problem is that the very things we’re looking for in our leaders, the psychopath can easily mimic. “Their natural tendency is to be charming. Take that charm and couch it in the right business language and it sounds like charismatic leadership.” Babiak designed a 111-point questionnaire with Professor Bob Hare, of the University of British Columbia in Canada, a renowned expert in psychopathy. Hare believes about 1% of Americans can be described as psychopaths. The survey suggests psychopaths are actually poor managerial performers but are adept at climbing the corporate ladder because they can cover up their weaknesses by subtly charming superiors and subordinates . This makes it almost impossible to distinguish between a genuinely talented team leader and a psychopath, Babiak said. Hare told Horizon: “The higher the psychopathy, the better they looked – lots of charisma and they talk a good line. “But if you look at their actual performance and ratings as a team player and productively, it’s dismal. Looked good, performed badly. “You have to think of psychopaths as having at their disposal a very large repertoire of behaviours. So they can use charm, manipulation, intimidation, whatever is required. “A psychopath can actually put themselves in your skin, intellectually not emotionally. “They can tell what you’re thinking, they can look at your body language, they can listen to what you’re saying, but what they don’t really do is feel what you feel. “What this allows them to do is use words to manipulate and con and to interact with you without the baggage of feeling your pain.” • Horizon: Are You Good Or Evil? is on BBC2 at 9pm on Wednesday 7 September Psychology Work & careers Steven Morris guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Names emerged from interviews with Breivik and English anti-Muslim blogger Paul Ray, say Norwegian police Norwegian police say they are to question several British citizens in their search for potential accomplices of mass killer Anders Behring Breivik. Officers in Oslo said the names of individuals and several far-right groups emerged from questioning of British anti-Muslim blogger Paul Ray as well as further interviews with Breivik. Police press officer Roar Hanssen said: “We have some names and also some groups we are investigating. They came from Paul Ray, and also from Breivik and also from other things we have been investigating.” Breivik, 32, admitted killing 77 people last month when he detonated a truck bomb outside government offices in Oslo, and then went on a shooting spree at a youth camp at Utøya, 25 miles away. He was questioned again on Wednesday and prosecutor Paal-Fredrik Hjort Kraby said officers focused on Breivik’s manifesto, his alleged links to a group called the Knights Templar and potential ties to the UK. Hanssen said: “A lot of people are mentioned in Breivik’s manifesto and we, of course, want to speak to them and there are some links to the UK. I don’t know if there are specific areas they are from but there are some rightwing groups.” Ray was interviewed last week after claims he may have been the “mentor” mentioned by Breivik in his “manifesto”, posted online shortly before he carried out the killings on 22 July. Ray, who wrote his blog under the name Lionheart, has said it appeared Breivik drew inspiration from some of his ideas and writings, but he has repeatedly denied any link, saying he never met Breivik and was horrified by the killings. He said he travelled to Norway to “clear his name”. Breivik wrote that he attended the founding meeting of the Knights Templar Europe “military order” in London in 2002 where he met a “mentor” who used the pseudonym Richard, after Richard the Lionheart. He signed the 1,500-page document with an anglicised version of his name and datelined it London 2011. Breivik also repeatedly praised the English Defence League, saying he had 600 EDL supporters as Facebook friends and had spoken with members and leaders. The EDL has condemned the killings and has denied any official contact with Breivik, insisting it is a peaceful, non-racist organisation opposed to extremism. Kraby said Norwegian police did not have evidence that Breivik had accomplices, but “did not rule out the possibility.” Norwegian officers are now deciding whether to carry out the interviews in the UK or in Norway. Hanssen said: “We can ask for help from the British police. It is not decided what we will do yet but these are possibilities.” Anders Behring Breivik Norway Europe Matthew Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Dick Cheney Book: Reactions To The Vice President’s Memoir ‘In My Time’ (PHOTOS)
September 1, 2011 No Comment
Dick Cheney’s new memoir has been making waves since the former vice president first signed a multi-million dollar publishing deal with Simon & Schuster in 2009. And, while discussing the memoir with NBC’s Jamie Gangel, Cheney said there would “be heads exploding all over Washington” upon its release. A slideshow of some of the best reactions to Cheney’s book, from critics, pundits, and even some of Cheney’s political peers, is below.
Continue reading …NBC Reporter to Huntsman: Are Perry and Bachmann ‘Too Far Right to Win?’
September 1, 2011 No Comment
On Thursday's Today show NBC's Savannah Guthrie prodded Jon Huntsman to slam his fellow GOP presidential candidates Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann as too conservative, as she pressed the former Governor of Utah: “Are they too far right to win and beat President Obama?” For his part, Huntsman played into Guthrie's portrayal of his competitors by responding that the American people “don't want politics at the extreme ends,” as seen in the following exchange: SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Do you think that Governor Perry or Michele Bachmann are too far right to win and beat President Obama? JON HUNTSMAN: Listen, all I can tell you is that the people of this country, they want common sense problem solving solutions. They don't want politics at the extreme ends. GUTHRIE: Alright. HUNTSMAN: And what we're getting today is politics at the extreme ends and we can do better than that. Prior to that question Guthrie, who was substitute hosting, pointed out that Huntsman had served under Obama and had disagreed with his fellow Republicans on issues like the debt ceiling, and climate change and actually asked: “Are you sure you should be running in the Republican primary of 2011?” The following is a full transcript of interview as it was aired on the September 1 Today show: SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: And former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman joins us now exclusively. Governor, good morning to you. [On screen headline: "Will Jon Huntsman's Plan Get Americans Back To Work?"] JON HUNTSMAN: Hi Savannah. Good to, good to be with you. GUTHRIE: Let's briefly talk about this scheduling kerfuffle. I mean where do you come down on this, very quickly. Do you think that Speaker Boehner should have accommodated the President of the United States? Or do you think the President kind of blew it by not agreeing on the date behind the scenes, before announcing it publicly? HUNTSMAN: I think it is such nonsense Savannah. This is what people hate about politics. We're spending all this time about the drama of the venue, about the substance of what's gonna get this country back to work again. I think that venues are venues and the President needs to find one where he can articulate his vision. But for two-and-a-half years it hasn't worked. The economy has stalled. We don't have enough jobs. We need to get on with the big picture that will get this country back to work again. GUTHRIE: Well let's talk about your jobs plan. You unveiled it yesterday and essentially your strategy for creating jobs is to cut taxes, cut corporate taxes significantly and hope companies will hire. My question to you is, at this very moment corporations are sitting on trillions of cash on their balance sheets and they're still not hiring. Why will your plan work? HUNTSMAN: My plan is to do what I've done as governor of a state that worked. I have been there and I've done that. I have been through tax reform before and I've seen it improve the economic conditions. People – you know the reason we have a broken tax code, in part, is because it's full of loopholes and deductions and subsidies and corporate welfare. And it is perpetuated by people who can afford the lawyers and the lobbyists to keep it going. And all I'm saying, in order to be competitive through the rest of the 21st century, in order to compete with the likes of China and India, in order to get the jobs this country so desperately needs, we've got to clean out the code. We've got to wipe it clean. We've got to lower the rate. We've got to broaden the base, both on the individual income side and on the corporate side. GUTHRIE: Governor- HUNTSMAN: There aren't a whole lot of corporations that are paying the 35 percent rate. So let's get real about that. Clean out the corporate welfare and, and leave the tax code a lot more competitive for the 21st century. GUTHRIE: Governor, let me ask you. You have one entry on your resume that certainly distinguishes you from every other Republican in this race. That is you worked for the Obama administration. You were President Obama's ambassador to China. HUNTSMAN: That's right. GUTHRIE: You now have criticized him on health care, on Wall Street reform. You say he's been an utter failure on the economy. What does it say about you and your judgment that you worked for someone who, you think, has been a complete failure? HUNTSMAN: Listen I worked for President Reagan, I worked for President Bush, I worked for President Bush. I believe if you love your country, you serve her. I stood up and served my country when my president asked. And you know what? I would do it again. That's a philosophy I take to my grave. But when you stand up and you embrace a bipartisan position, like U.S. ambassador to China, it doesn't mean you resign your world view. It doesn't mean you resign your party affiliation. GUTHRIE: But you know, at one point, you- HUNTSMAN: We've got some real problems in this country, they need to be talked about and they need to be debated. GUTHRIE: Okay, but at one point you called President Obama “a remarkable leader.” You were effusive about his leadership. At one point did you sour on President Obama and, and how long did you continue to work for him, after that point? HUNTSMAN: Listen he – at the very beginning there was a lot of hope and optimism when this country began coming together after the 2008 election. I was raised to be a gracious person. I thought it was pretty remarkable that he appointed a Republican to his administration. I wrote him a handwritten note. That's what a lot of people do. But let's face it, the President has had two-and-a-half years and it's very clear to everybody that he has not been able to deliver on the one thing that the American people expect. GUTHRIE: Governor- HUNTSMAN: And that's expand and broaden and strengthen the economy and create jobs. That's the most important people – thing to people in this country, right now. And we've got to have a debate. We've got to talk about the issues, the big picture issues. GUTHRIE: Well let's- HUNTSMAN: Not the small ball but the big ball issues that will get us back in the game again. GUTHRIE: Currently you are not running against Barack Obama. You are running against a handful of other Republican candidates. Let's talk about them. You've said the Republican field has zero substance, no good ideas. You've disagreed with your fellow Republicans about issues like raising the debt ceiling, about evolution, about climate change. And here's the verdict so far from Republican voters. The most recent poll from Quinnipiac has you dead last in the Republican primary. You know it kind of sounds funny to put it this way, but Governor I guess the question is: Are you sure you should be running in the Republican primary of 2011? HUNTSMAN: I'm absolutely certain. If we were to take the numbers from 2008 and 2004 and extrapolate those to the finish line we would have had much different outcomes. Nobody is paying attention to the race. You know there are a few insiders are, at this point. But this race has a long way to go during the fall season. In the months ahead, I believe this country is gonna turn into common sense, problem solving reasoning that comes from people who have been governor. Someone who's been in the private sector. Someone who's lived overseas four times. Been an ambassador three times for his country. This country is crying out for real solutions. GUTHRIE: Do you, do you think- HUNTSMAN: We're not getting them. GUTHRIE: Very quickly. HUNTSMAN: We're getting drama but we're not getting solutions. GUTHRIE: Do you- HUNTSMAN: And that's the reason we stood up and put forward our jobs plan yesterday. GUTHRIE: Do you think that Governor Perry or Michele Bachmann are too far right to win and beat President Obama? HUNTSMAN: Listen, all I can tell you is that the people of this country, they want common sense problem solving solutions. They don't want politics at the extreme ends. GUTHRIE: Alright. HUNTSMAN: And what we're getting today is politics at the extreme ends and we can do better than that. GUTHRIE: Alright Governor Jon Huntsman. Good to see you today. Thank you for being with us. HUNTSMAN: Thank you, Savannah.
Continue reading …
Stirling University fighting attempt by Philip Morris to gain access to research under freedom of information laws Stirling University is fighting attempts by one of the world’s largest tobacco companies to gain detailed access to its research into the smoking habits and attitudes of teenagers. Philip Morris International, which makes Marlboro cigarettes, wants the university’s centre for tobacco control research to hand over its data on thousands of children who are smokers. The detail reveals their attitudes to smoking and reactions to packaging and advertising. The company has successfully complained to the Scottish information commissioner, Kevin Dunion, after Stirling refused to answer a freedom of information request seeking access to the research. The university said the firm’s application, originally made anonymously through a London law firm, was “vexatious” and rejected it. But Dunion has overruled the university and ordered it to respond to Philip Morris’s request. Professor Gerard Hastings, the centre’s director, said the tobacco company was mining his research for confidential data on children’s attitudes – details a firm would not be allowed to collect itself on medical ethics grounds. “They wanted everything we had ever done on this,” Hastings told the Independent . “These are confidential comments about how youngsters feel about tobacco marketing. This is the sort of research that would get a tobacco company into trouble if it did it itself. “What is more, these kids have been reassured that only bona fide researchers will have access to their data. No way can Philip Morris fit into that definition.” Philip Morris said it was not seeking any confidential data that would identify the interviewees, and said the research findings it wanted to see were anonymised. Anne Edwards, the company’s head of external communications, said: “As provided by the FOI [Freedom of Information] Act, confidential and private information concerning individuals should not be disclosed. “We made the request in order to understand more about a research project conducted by the University of Stirling on plain packaging for cigarettes.” The centre for tobacco control research was set up by the charity Cancer Research Campaign, now Cancer Research UK, in 1999 within the university’s institute for social marketing, and is part of a UK-wide network of units studying tobacco and smoking. The dispute throws up the prospect of a drawn out legal battle between the university and Philip Morris. If Stirling again refuses the firm’s request, the appeal process could result in a judicial hearing at the court of session, Scotland’s civil court. The Scottish information commissioner’s office said he had to judge Philip Morris’s application neutrally under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2000, which is less restrictive than the equivalent legislation for England and Wales. Dunion has not ordered the university to release the data, but to properly assess the application. “What the commissioner has ruled is that he doesn’t believe that the request is vexatious,” a spokeswoman said. “All he has done is say: ‘You need to deal with this because it is a valid request.’ But the university could still refuse it on other grounds.” Smoking University of Stirling Scotland Tobacco industry Higher education Health Children Severin Carrell guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Stirling University fighting attempt by Philip Morris to gain access to research under freedom of information laws Stirling University is fighting attempts by one of the world’s largest tobacco companies to gain detailed access to its research into the smoking habits and attitudes of teenagers. Philip Morris International, which makes Marlboro cigarettes, wants the university’s centre for tobacco control research to hand over its data on thousands of children who are smokers. The detail reveals their attitudes to smoking and reactions to packaging and advertising. The company has successfully complained to the Scottish information commissioner, Kevin Dunion, after Stirling refused to answer a freedom of information request seeking access to the research. The university said the firm’s application, originally made anonymously through a London law firm, was “vexatious” and rejected it. But Dunion has overruled the university and ordered it to respond to Philip Morris’s request. Professor Gerard Hastings, the centre’s director, said the tobacco company was mining his research for confidential data on children’s attitudes – details a firm would not be allowed to collect itself on medical ethics grounds. “They wanted everything we had ever done on this,” Hastings told the Independent . “These are confidential comments about how youngsters feel about tobacco marketing. This is the sort of research that would get a tobacco company into trouble if it did it itself. “What is more, these kids have been reassured that only bona fide researchers will have access to their data. No way can Philip Morris fit into that definition.” Philip Morris said it was not seeking any confidential data that would identify the interviewees, and said the research findings it wanted to see were anonymised. Anne Edwards, the company’s head of external communications, said: “As provided by the FOI [Freedom of Information] Act, confidential and private information concerning individuals should not be disclosed. “We made the request in order to understand more about a research project conducted by the University of Stirling on plain packaging for cigarettes.” The centre for tobacco control research was set up by the charity Cancer Research Campaign, now Cancer Research UK, in 1999 within the university’s institute for social marketing, and is part of a UK-wide network of units studying tobacco and smoking. The dispute throws up the prospect of a drawn out legal battle between the university and Philip Morris. If Stirling again refuses the firm’s request, the appeal process could result in a judicial hearing at the court of session, Scotland’s civil court. The Scottish information commissioner’s office said he had to judge Philip Morris’s application neutrally under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2000, which is less restrictive than the equivalent legislation for England and Wales. Dunion has not ordered the university to release the data, but to properly assess the application. “What the commissioner has ruled is that he doesn’t believe that the request is vexatious,” a spokeswoman said. “All he has done is say: ‘You need to deal with this because it is a valid request.’ But the university could still refuse it on other grounds.” Smoking University of Stirling Scotland Tobacco industry Higher education Health Children Severin Carrell guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Sarkozy under pressure after Le Monde claims secret service spied on journalist
September 1, 2011 No Comment
Phone records of reporter covering Bettencourt affair were intercepted, judge tells paper Nicolas Sarkozy is under pressure over yet another twist in the Bettencourt affair after Le Monde newspaper said it had proof that the French secret services had spied on one of its journalists to uncover his sources. France’s paper of record said an investigating judge had uncovered documents showing that state intelligence agencies had ordered the mobile phone operator Orange to hand over detailed phone records of its investigative reporter Gérard Davet. These included details of every call Davet had made and received and the geo-localisation of his movements. Shortly after the secret services illegally requested the phone files on Davet in July 2010, Le Monde said state spies identified an adviser in the justice ministry as the supposed source for one of Davet’s stories. The adviser, a magistrate, was swiftly demoted and posted to French Guyana. The Bettencourt affair began as a family feud between the L’Oreal heiress, Liliane Bettencourt, and her daughter. But in 2010 it exploded into a series of scandals that threatened the highest levels of the French state. Investigations were opened into illegal party funding, suspected tax evasion and money-laundering while Bettencourt’s links with Sarkozy and his government, in particular the minister of labour, Eric Woerth, came under the spotlight. Davet was targeted after an article revealing Woerth’s links to the case. Le Monde began court action in September last year, suing for the violation of the French law that protects the anonymity of journalists’ sources. The paper said the targeting of Davet and his personal phone information was illegal. The alleged targeting of journalists in the Bettencourt affair, seen as an attempt by the state to intimidate sources into staying quiet, has become known as “the scandal within a scandal”. In a scathing front-page editorial Le Monde said the tracking of journalists had become “an affair of state” which lent credence to the suspicion that a cabinet noir , or office of shady operations, existed at the highest reaches of French power, namely the Elysée. Nicolas Sarkozy France Privacy Le Monde Angelique Chrisafis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Sarkozy under pressure after Le Monde claims secret service spied on journalist
September 1, 2011 No CommentPhone records of reporter covering Bettencourt affair were intercepted, judge tells paper Nicolas Sarkozy is under pressure over yet another twist in the Bettencourt affair after Le Monde newspaper said it had proof that the French secret services had spied on one of its journalists to uncover his sources. France’s paper of record said an investigating judge had uncovered documents showing that state intelligence agencies had ordered the mobile phone operator Orange to hand over detailed phone records of its investigative reporter Gérard Davet. These included details of every call Davet had made and received and the geo-localisation of his movements. Shortly after the secret services illegally requested the phone files on Davet in July 2010, Le Monde said state spies identified an adviser in the justice ministry as the supposed source for one of Davet’s stories. The adviser, a magistrate, was swiftly demoted and posted to French Guyana. The Bettencourt affair began as a family feud between the L’Oreal heiress, Liliane Bettencourt, and her daughter. But in 2010 it exploded into a series of scandals that threatened the highest levels of the French state. Investigations were opened into illegal party funding, suspected tax evasion and money-laundering while Bettencourt’s links with Sarkozy and his government, in particular the minister of labour, Eric Woerth, came under the spotlight. Davet was targeted after an article revealing Woerth’s links to the case. Le Monde began court action in September last year, suing for the violation of the French law that protects the anonymity of journalists’ sources. The paper said the targeting of Davet and his personal phone information was illegal. The alleged targeting of journalists in the Bettencourt affair, seen as an attempt by the state to intimidate sources into staying quiet, has become known as “the scandal within a scandal”. In a scathing front-page editorial Le Monde said the tracking of journalists had become “an affair of state” which lent credence to the suspicion that a cabinet noir , or office of shady operations, existed at the highest reaches of French power, namely the Elysée. Nicolas Sarkozy France Privacy Le Monde Angelique Chrisafis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Like most other mobile companies out there, it appears Meizu is looking to branch out from cellphones to tablets. It’s a little too early to say for sure what the manufacturer’s plans are, but a recent patent filing by Jo Young Soo, Meizu’s lead designer, with China’s SIPO (State Intellectual Property Office) gives a hint that a slate may be in the works. The application isn’t for a tablet, per se, but for a protective case that holds a tablet and keyboard. Now, it’s quite a leap from case to tablet, but Meizu doesn’t seem like the type of company to suddenly jump into the third-party iPad accessory market. Obviously we’ll just have to wait and see what happens, but don’t be shocked if the Chinese manufacturer hops into the Honeycomb fray soon. Meizu tablet case patent application hints at slate plans originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:25:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
Home secretary to specify tighter restrictions under terrorism prevention and investigation measures The government is planning emergency powers to forcibly relocate terror suspects, months after pledging to scrap the existing measure. Launching the terrorism prevention and investigation measures (Tpim) bill in May, the Home Office said “relocation to another part of the country without consent will be scrapped”. But it has now brought back the powers, reserving them for “exceptional circumstances”. The emergency legislation would enable the home secretary to specify more stringent restrictions on suspected terrorists in exceptional circumstances, the Home Office said. These would include the power to relocate the individual without their consent to a different part of the country and tighter restrictions on association and communications, it said. The enhanced Tpim bill will be put before parliament should exceptional circumstances arise. Under the measures, the home secretary “may impose restrictions on the individual leaving a specified area or travelling outside that area”, the draft bill said. A suspect under such an order may also be forced to hand in their passport. The home secretary could also impose restrictions on the individual’s possession or use of electronic communication devices, including both computers and telephones. Further restrictions could also be imposed to limit who the suspect communicates or associates with, where the suspect works or what he or she studies. The restrictions imposed under the Tpim were an “imperfect but necessary step”, the Home Office said. It also rejected a recommendation from the joint committee on human rights that an alternative system of restrictions linked to an ongoing criminal investigation, such as that proposed by the former director of public prosecutions Lord Macdonald, was appropriate. “Tpim notices, like the control orders they will replace, are intended to be used in such cases – where there is no realistic prospect of a prosecution, and there is no imminent prospect that further investigation will yield evidence that could be used to prosecute,” the Home Office said. “In such cases the government is faced with a stark choice between taking no action at all – potentially leaving the public unprotected from a serious threat – and imposing preventative measures to protect the public. “In such a case the purpose of the measures is not to facilitate the gathering of evidence – which process will already have been exhausted, although of course it will continue as far as is possible while restrictions are in force – but to protect the public and disrupt or prevent the individual’s involvement in terrorism-related activity.” May’s decision to impose a control order on a terror suspect banned from London was upheld by the high court in July. Mr Justice Owen, sitting in London, ruled that the restrictions imposed on CD’s freedom, including the decision to relocate him from London to a Midlands city, were a “necessary and proportionate measure for the protection of the public from the risk presented by CD and his associates”. The judge said he was satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that CD, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was “a leading figure in a network of Islamist extremists based in north London and has been involved in planning an attack or attacks on members of the public”. The relocation powers were ditched by the coalition under the new terrorist prevention and investigation measures, which will replace control orders from next year. The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, warned MPs that plans to water down the control orders would mean that CD could no longer be stopped from living in the capital. Under the draft emergency legislation, such powers would be able to be brought back in exceptional circumstances. UK security and terrorism Terrorism policy Global terrorism guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …