Now, I saw that the Council of the European Union is working onhere) linked above.
Since the revised text mentions a "post i-2010 Strategy for promotion of information society", I dared to take a look at these conclusions, concluding myself that the Council seems to be even worse when it comes to bullshit bingo language.
"HIGHLIGHTS that ICT is one of the main drivers of economic growth and social change and, as such, plays a vital role in the economic recovery, enabling Europe to emerge from the current crisis faster and stronger than before;"Such statements have no added value at all. They are empty, superficial, useless. They mix the obvious with speculation, but they yield no particular consequence. The only thing they do is distracting the reader from the overall emptiness of the text.
"NOTES that Europe has strong industrial and technology assets in ICT notably in telecommunication equipment and services, embedded ICT and business software and can build on its underpinning strengths including its scientific excellence, the exceptional standard of education of its graduates, world class high-quality infrastructures, and the world's largest ICT market"If the Council members or the secretariat had read the i2010 report of the Commission, especially the accompanying staff working document (linked here), they would have known that this is as true as it is wrong, mixing the obvious with a bending of the truth that the EU is seriously lagging behind in crucial areas.
"STRESSES that better integration requires closer articulation between European, national and regional actions and implementation in variable configurations at different levels"Why do you need to stress this in the context of ICT? "Closer articulation" is needed in ALL policy areas of the European Union, one could even say that this is the main goal of the EU. Or, if this is an important point, why not making it stronger:
"STRESSES that overcoming the uncoordinated approach of member states represented in the Council regarding ICT development would be the basic condition for any substantive progress in ICT-related matters"Example 4:
"INVITES the Member States to amplify their support to ICT research and innovation"Wow, the member states are "invited". This is diplomatic bullshit language. Why not "URGES", if this is in fact an important issue?
"seek further incentives for the more rapid emergence of innovation-friendly markets, including an extended use of public procurement of innovation, support to pilot projects, and involvement of users at all stages of the innovation cycle"The only true political statement in this sentence is the encouragement for "public" (!) procurement, and such a proposal is indeed interesting because it would mean that the Council considers public investment in ICT a way to foster its progress - but such an important statement is hidden in a bullshit bingo sentence, including "innovation", "pilot projects", "involvement of users", "innovation cycle", all more or less empty phrases.
Overall, the draft conclusions as they stand today have only limited added value, and the policy consequences that would follow their adoption would not bring about any substantive changes - in fact, the only interesting term in the whole paper is "Green ICT", so far unspecified and thus as empty as the rest of the text.