Lean and Green


Remember when the Telegraph was castigated for allegedly downplaying stories about HSBC as HSBC was a major advertiser at the paper?  The BBC went all out on the story as it involved the Tories as well and was in the long run up to the election.

Wonder if they will do much digging over this story from Bishop Hill?…

‘Some years back I was discussing the state of environmental coverage in the media with someone from the Telegraph. I commented that I thought it was very strange that the Tele had taken Geoffrey Lean on as a correspondent given that his views were pretty much anathema to most of its readers.

“Ah, that’s simple” I was told. “He’s not there for the benefit of the readers but because green advertisers want him”. This made perfect sense at the time.

Now, as we all know, times are increasingly hard for the green blob, with George Osborne apparently wanting to put the whole renewables industry on a starvation diet. So it was interesting to see this from Lean on Twitter this morning:

Somehow I doubt it.



Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Lean and Green

  1. GCooper says:

    An interesting corollary to this is whether there may have been ‘dark forces’ at work in the rag’s loss of James Delingpole?


  2. Grant says:

    Lean is an out and out “warmist”. Most of his stuff was garbage. So I too was surprised that he was in the Telegraph. Mind you Mary Ridell is there so nothing should surprise !


  3. Doublethinker says:

    The BBC and the rest of the liberal left are very keen to adopt the precautionary principle when it comes to climate change, and within limits I can see the sense in this although the evidence is patchy and the consequences are many decades away. ( I know many don’t agree so pl don’t telling me so as this isn’t the point of my post). However, they steadfastly refuse to adopt the same principle where mass immigration is the issue. In this case the evidence is very strong , conclusive in my view, that mass immigration of people with very different value sets is highly dangerous and the dire consequences are with us now and set to grow rapidly. A clear and present danger as the Americans would say. Yet the BBC are very happy to promote more and more uncontrolled immigration of anyone who wants to enter the UK, but are urging that we spend billions to combat climate change which is very much less a clear and present danger. Why the double standards?


    • Martin Pinder says:

      Quite so. You are confronted with two enemies. One is next to you & is about to attack you, the other is miles away & will take some time to reach you. Which one do you tackle first? I think the answer is obvious.


    • Rick Bradford says:

      No double standards.

      The BBC views everything through the prism of Victim vs Oppressor, and always aligns itself with the ‘Victim’.

      The migrants play the role of Victim to the Oppressors of the white Christian persuasion. Therefore migration must be supported

      On climate, the Oppressors are the evil capitalists; the role of Victim is taken by Gaia herself, plus “the world’s poor” who we are told will be the worst hit by “climate change.” Therefore, instinctive support for expensive climate “action”, to be paid for by capitalists.


      • Up2snuff says:

        RB: “The BBC views everything through the prism of Victim vs Oppressor, and always aligns itself with the ‘Victim’. Therefore, instinctive support for expensive climate “action”, to be paid for by capitalists. ”

        Ye-esss, except the ‘capitalists’ in this case are those on low incomes who never travel anywhere, together with the basic rate taxpayer. Those who earn more than the basic rate income bracket have had nice low subsidised higher Income Tax rates in the UK thanks to Global Warming and, since 1997/8/9, Climate Change. On top of that there have been all sorts of Government funded (basic rate taxpayer, again!) schemes and investment opportunities for those with lots of disposable income to benefit from.

        Cynical? Moi?

        I could not possibly comment.


  4. Deborah says:

    I assume that as Geoffrey Lean and the BBC being of one mind, I would not hear on Auntie the real reason for Lean’s employment at the Telegraph, so thank you Alan. But who is pressing for Mary Riddell? Mr D says it is good to read how the Left think, whilst I just think, How could anyone be so stupid?’


    • 60022Mallard says:

      Mary Riddell is there to remind wavering Conservative voters just how bad the alternative is.

      And Alison Pearson is there to remind the Conservative leadership of what many Conservatives actually think.

      Her piece on the abuse of a white woman by an “Asian” descent “taxi” driver last week is worth looking up.


  5. Old Goat says:

    In the current eon of stupidity, it seems, anything goes.


  6. CranbrookPhil says:

    Wise words again in today’s DT by Charles Moore,


    I’m afraid I find Wednesday’s version a disappointment as I cannot be bothered with what Mary Riddell says.


    • Guest Who says:

      Seems more like a desperate CV bolt-on to get to join Harrabin as an ‘environmental analyst’.

      It may just work.