DENNIS MYERS Against the Grain Advertisement

Back in the 1970s Vice President Spiro Agnew conducted harsh campaigns against political opponents, the press, church people and an inventory of others who incurred his displeasure.

He would often include language at the beginning of his speeches about how he did not "impugn their patriotism" or how he was "opposed to censorship." Then he would follow with attacks on the patriotism of his opponents or some of his allies would file license challenges to a television station owned by those he disliked. His biographer, Jules Witcover, said "the insertion of these disclaimers" paid off whenever Agnew was accused of doing what, in fact, he was doing.

This is a technique that manipulates and confuses and defeats public dialogue. It's more difficult to fault someone for something they say they're not doing.

In January when Nevada's new governor Jim Gibbons was trying to undo former governor Kenny Guinn's appointment of Keith Munro as a casino regulator, his press aide Melissa Subbotin began a press response to the Review Journal by calling Munro "an upstanding individual, a fine public servant and a good Republican" - and then followed with this: "Mr. Gibbons feels that moving forward with Keith Munro's politically motivated appointment would be undermining the tradition of the Gaming Control Board being apolitical. That would be moving back to the dark ages when politics and personal interests ruled the Gaming Control Board. This administration is not for sale." (It should be noted for the record that this is bad history - the control board has a history of outstanding performance.)

The way these little hedges can alibi a policy that can't stand on its merits can be demonstrated by something that is happening next door in Utah. A new federally funded anti-drug campaign that is expected to spread to other states has been introduced, even though there are substantial questions about whether some of the "facts" used are accurate.

A cardboard teen figure in the state liquor stores (liquor sales are a government function in Utah) tells passers-by, "New research shows underage drinking can cause permanent brain damage." Gov. Jon Huntsman says in a letter to parents, "New scientific evidence proves underage drinking can cause permanent damage to a teen's rapidly developing brain." Mothers Against Drunk Driving is planning to try to sell the campaign across the nation.

But a Salt Lake Weekly reporter checked with scientists instead of administrators and politicians and was told that the arguments are untrue. There is no such scientific evidence.

State University of New York researcher David Hanson told the newspaper, "We just don't have any evidence, it seems to me, that Italians, Greeks, people from southern France or Spain, that their young people are suffering any mental deficiencies," Hanson said. In fact, the Weekly reported, youth in those areas do better on academic tests than students in the U.S. "The naturalistic setting doesn't seem to support this [teen-brain conclusion], and research even doesn't seem to support it to me," Hanson said.

There is reason to suspect that Utah officials knew this before they created the campaign because many of their public statements begin with protective hedges like this: "I have reservations about saying anything [brain damage] is 'permanent' at this point. We don't want to convey a message you are going to be mentally retarded." That was Utah's director of Substance Abuse and Mental Health Craig PoVey. His next sentences then contradicted it: "But, on the other hand, when you see the research, it shows there is an impact on the brain we didn't know about before. We need to communicate that. From what we know now, the best way to raise kids is alcohol-free."

In fact, the research shows that people who are introduced to drinking by their parents as teens are less likely to become drunks and less likely to suffer a variety of other maladies - stroke, heart disease, cancer, age-related blindness, rheumatoid arthritis, depression, the common cold and hardening of the arteries, according to scientists interviewed by the Weekly.

It is, of course, more difficult to sell an anti-drug campaign with a mixed message - drinking is bad in THESE circumstances, but not in THOSE circumstances.

But that doesn't keep politicians from using a mixed message to protect themselves.