Richard Black is the man most obviously at the delivery end of the BBC’s deeply biased approach to greenie reporting, as readers of this blog well know.
This post unusually requires going back in time because I have only just got access to the transcripts, they take time to prepare. It’s worth re-visiting because they show the extent to which Mr Black works with others at the BBC to pursue and exaggerate the green agenda.
Back on November 14, he decided that – at the bidding of an extremist outfit called Client Earth (motto: ‘Justice for the Planet’; patrons, those scientific experts – Coldplay)- he would elevate the perennial greenie bogymen ‘atmospheric pollutants’ (in this case, especially nitrogen dioxide) to a whole new level of menace.
And in the process he had a willing partner, Today presenter James Naughtie. Between them, they told us that because of this new peril, triggered, of course, by vile capitalist activities such as power generation, flying and driving, we now face in the air that we breath a bigger daily danger than the London smogs of the 1950s.
For Mr Black the story had a double bonus, because the rise in nitrogen dioxide, he claimed, was due to two factors: flouting of that nice, benevolent EU’s atmospheric standards laws, and (boo hiss) second, “government cut backs” that had led to a failure to test for the gas properly.
To reinforce his utter outrage that EU standards are being breached , he turned to those nice, totally non-baised people at Client Earth, who obligingly stuck in the boot even further: they blamed the government’s “localism agenda” for this flagrant crime against humanity. What’s needed, therefore, is billions to be spent in introducing new car emissions laws (those nasty motorists must be curbed at all or any cost) – and by the way, we must also abandon any idea of a third runway at Heathrow. That would allow too many proles to be able to fly abroad on their holidays.
In other words, this was a perfect storm for Mr Black, all his green propaganda targets rolled into one alarmist orgy.
Now, I am not an expert in air pollution and don’t claim to be. But I have spent some time looking very carefully at the evidence about atmospheric gunk and the one thing that is clear is that if nitrogen dioxide at current atmospheric levels is the killer that it’s claimed to be, the evidence is not exactly easy to find, nor can it be described as a definite killer (which even the UN admit). Of course if you breath too much of it in, it has side effects; but even the most alarming of greenie sites have nothing that nails a massive area of risk.
And on the other side of the coin, there is clear evidence that the greenie obsession with amospheric pollution is another of the scares that has been totally over-cooked. Junk Science, for example, here demonstrates that one of the eco scares regarded as the nadir of nasty industrial smog was not as lethal as was claimed. The World Health Organisation, of course – in line with their UN anti-capitalist agenda – claim that millions are dying every year because of such pollution, and the EU says that 310,000 of its citizens meet a similar fate. But my guess is that this is trumpeted on the same basis as most greenie scares. Scratch the surface, and those figures (as Junk Science shows) are built on statistical sleight-of-hand linked with dubious models.
Which brings me to the second phase of the Black-Naughtie manipulation of this story.
Today carried an item that morning which was an interview with Joan Walley, the strident and blatantly alarmist Labour MP who chairs the parliamentary select committee responsible for air quality. Naturally, her committee, being part of the Westminster bubble, has swallowed the alarmist view of the topic wholesale. Miss Walley wanted, of course, massive increased spending on dealing with nitrogen dioxide to meet EU standards, and so-called “interviewer” James Naughtie sounded suitably aghast as she recounted the tale of woe.
But did he challenge the evidence? Did he ask on what basis such figures of doom are conjured up? Did he ask her why we must slavishly follow EU laws? Did he for one second think about the consequences on the cost of motoring and flying of tougher emissions laws?
Er, no. Mr Naughtie’s main concern was simply to amplify Ms Walley’s alarmist message. he asked:
What you’re saying, in effect, is that as many people are suffering, and indeed dying early, now, as a cause of pollution than they were when the smogs were a subject of public outrage in the 50s?
This, of course, was the cue for Ms Walley to deliver another sharp kick the government’s way, and to amplify her alarmist message still further – and she duly delivered, exactly as Mr Naughtie intended.
And there we have it. Richard Black set the agenda, and Today obligingly followed and magnified it. I am not clear where the evidence is that nitrogen dioxide is killing as many people as the London smogs of the 1950s, but it certainly was not provided by Mr Black or Mr Naughtie, and if it’s common knowledge, I have not been able to find it. And the UN actually state in its report on the gas:
The few long-term studies have not shown evidence for association between NO2 and mortality.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Of course, Mr Black would deny he influenced Mr Naughtie, and vice versa. But this shows how the BBC climate propaganda machine works -hand in glove with any alarmist who shouts loudly enough.
