One of the BBC’s main climate change propagandists, James Painter (whose work I reported here,) has prepared a so-called survey (funded by Reuters) on the media’s coverage of the Copenhagen climate change shindig last year, which – it seems – was astonishingly attended by more than 4,000 journalists. His main purpose – as befits a seasoned corporation econut crusader – is to bewail the fact that in 400 articles surveyed, “the science” was not properly reported, that some journalists dared to question the certainty that there is a climate crisis, that that too much credence was given to Climategate (which, incidentally, broke almost exactly a year ago), and that the real message of the event – that the world must be ruled by the UN, endure more taxes, stop burning oils, and slide into serious economic poverty – was lost.
I could go on, but those are the main facts of this useless but chilling document. What it underlines yet again is that BBC staff are up their gills in the political process of disseminating alarmism; the fact that Mr Painter (aided and abetted by the unbiquitous Richard Black) has written this report is proof positive that his main concern, as the Cancun phase of the climate alarmism approaches, is to affect greenie change by propaganda. It will be very interesting to see whether the BBC Trust – who are currently assessing the corporation’s science coverage, and have received this excellent submission from the Bishop Hill and Harmless Sky websites – can spot the constant dissembling, spinning and contortionism being perpetrated so blatantly by BBC staff.
Similar theme, but as the bbc have appointed themselves the official opposition to the Coalition government, so Farming Today has appointed themselves leader of those opposing the farmers wishing to install a large new dairy in Lincolnshire.
We now have programmes full of people who don’t like the concept of Holstein dairy cows and people who would rather see imports of dairy products continue to rise and UK dairy farmers continue to leave the industry, rather than allow any economies of scale.
Why not rename the programme ‘BBC Views on Farming Today’ ?
Forgive my cynicism but Steve Jones is the last (well nearly last) person who could be expected to criticise the BBC’s treatment of science.
In the interests of what exactly? – not science – Jones has already betrayed his own speciality (genetics) by stating ex cathedra that there is no genetic connection between race and intelligence (or per this article http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/1996/jun/07/genetics that to imply a connection is obviously ridiculous). Unsurprisingly, he is the model of a political scientist. He is as much part of the political class (shoulder chip division, Welsh battalion – I suspect his sergeant-major is John Humphrys) as it is possible to be. He was, after all, “Secularist of the Year http://www.secularism.org.uk/professorstevejonesisnamedsecula.html in 2006. Also, according to his wikipedia entry (I know I know) he described – on BBC Radio 5 Live: Breakfast, broadcast 13 January 2009 – private education as “a cancer on the education system” – not only non-judgemental but so scientific!
I could go on but the idea that Jones is going to sympathise let alone agree with His Grace concerning the BBC coverage of climate “science” is seeking the triumph of hope over experience. Prepare for yet another whitewash.
Excellent Robin.
Did you notice within the report the admission that BBC dominate climate journalism within the UK media by number of journalists. Even if they aren’t biased – they are certainly the most influential.
Excerpt here:
http://bit.ly/dt9aZm
Apologies if it’s been posted before, but this is quite a startling statement by senior IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer:
“The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War … one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.”
A nice admission of what many of us already know or suspect or what?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/ipcc_confirms_the_climates_just_the_latest_excuse_to_snatch_the_wests_wealt/