{"id":192528,"date":"2017-05-11T13:18:12","date_gmt":"2017-05-11T17:18:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/liberal-democratic-party-logo-failed-to-meet-aec-guidelines-the-guardian\/"},"modified":"2017-05-11T13:18:12","modified_gmt":"2017-05-11T17:18:12","slug":"liberal-democratic-party-logo-failed-to-meet-aec-guidelines-the-guardian","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/liberal\/liberal-democratic-party-logo-failed-to-meet-aec-guidelines-the-guardian\/","title":{"rendered":"Liberal Democratic party logo failed to meet AEC guidelines &#8211; The Guardian"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>  Liberal Democratic party senator David Leyonhjelm accepted  $55,000 in donations from tobacco company Philip Morris. Two  tobacco control experts have complained about the logo his party  used during the 2016 election campaign. Photograph: Sam Mooy\/AAP<\/p>\n<p>    The logo used by David Leyonhjelms Liberal Democratic party at    the 2016 election failed to meet the Australian Electoral    Commissions guidelines and should not have been approved, a    review of the decision has found.  <\/p>\n<p>    The logo, used during the 2016 election campaign, shows the    word Liberal in large, bolded capital letters, with the word    Democrat in smaller, unbolded letters.  <\/p>\n<p>    Complaints were made about the logo to the commission in May    2016, but the Australian Electoral Commission found there was    insufficient evidence to determine the logo should be refused.  <\/p>\n<p>    But in June two eminent tobacco control experts and professors    of public health, Mike Daube from Curtin University and Simon    Chapman from the University of Sydney, called on the commission    to review its decision. The professors are interested in    Leyonhjelm in part because of his acceptance of $55,000 in    donations from big tobacco company Philip Morris.  <\/p>\n<p>    In their complaint Daube and Chapman asserted that the new logo    was deliberately designed to mislead voters and to suggest a    relationship or connection to the Liberal party.  <\/p>\n<p>    But the commission said their decision that the logo was    acceptable stood, in part because the reasons why a party    chooses a certain logo design, or why a party chooses to change    that design, are not relevant for the purposes of assessing a    proposed logo under part XI of the Electoral Act.  <\/p>\n<p>    However, on Thursday the commission    sent a document to Daube and Chapman, which has been seen    by Guardian Australia, which said a further review of the    decision had led them to refuse to enter the Liberal Democratic    party logo into the register.<\/p>\n<p>    In the opinion of the Electoral Commission the font and    prominence of the word Liberal so nearly resembles the    Liberal party of Australias logo as it appears on the ballot    paper, such that a reasonable person is likely to confuse or    mistake the Liberal Democratic party logo for the logo of the    Liberal party of Australia.  <\/p>\n<p>    In its statement of reasons the commission said it had decided    to set aside the decision under review.  <\/p>\n<p>    A media officer with the commission told Guardian Australia it    meant that the previous decision to include the logo in the    register had been revoked and that the logo would be removed    from the register. However it is unclear what the implications    of this are given the election was held in August and the logo    has already been used.  <\/p>\n<p>    If this logo has worked to cause a significant number of    people to vote for him this is of immense interest and it    certainly should be of interest to the Australian parliament,    Chapman said.  <\/p>\n<p>    However, it is a shame that it took the commission about eight    months to come up with this finding.<\/p>\n<p>    Daube said it raises all kinds of questions about what this    means for the election result if he was elected partly on the    basis of a dodgy logo.  <\/p>\n<p>    The decision follows controversy over the name of the party in    the 2013 election, when the Liberal Democrats drew first place    on the NSW ballot paper. In what has been labelled a fluke, the    size of the ballot paper columns saw the name Liberal    Democrats split across two lines, and election    analysts said voters may have placed a 1next to the    Liberal Democrats believing they were voting Liberal. The party    won 50 times the vote it received in 2007, before its previous    name of the Liberty and Democracy party was scrapped.  <\/p>\n<p>    A spokesman for Leyonhjelm said the Senator was aware of the    finding, but was not immediately available for comment.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>More here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/australia-news\/2017\/may\/11\/liberal-democratic-party-logo-failed-to-meet-aec-guidelines\" title=\"Liberal Democratic party logo failed to meet AEC guidelines - The Guardian\">Liberal Democratic party logo failed to meet AEC guidelines - The Guardian<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Liberal Democratic party senator David Leyonhjelm accepted $55,000 in donations from tobacco company Philip Morris. Two tobacco control experts have complained about the logo his party used during the 2016 election campaign. Photograph: Sam Mooy\/AAP The logo used by David Leyonhjelms Liberal Democratic party at the 2016 election failed to meet the Australian Electoral Commissions guidelines and should not have been approved, a review of the decision has found.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/liberal\/liberal-democratic-party-logo-failed-to-meet-aec-guidelines-the-guardian\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187824],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-192528","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-liberal"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192528"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=192528"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192528\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=192528"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=192528"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=192528"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}