The BBC’s Green Journalism 

Posted: October 25, 2017 by oldbrew in climate, Critique
Tags:


Under their cloak of phony impartiality everyone knows, or ought to by now, that the BBC is as partisan as it gets over climate issues. Their web pages are full of stories supporting alarmism week in and week out.

With weary inevitability, the BBC has decided that it is going to issue an apology after a sceptic – Nigel Lawson in this case – was allowed a rare opportunity to state their case on the airwaves, says Andrew Montford

This is starting to be something of a ritual for the corporation. Once in a month of Sundays, a dissenting voice will be given a brief airing, an event that will be followed by a screams of outrage from greens and their cronies, a “fact-checking” by some green-minded BBC journalist, a public climb down and an apology for not being ruder to said sceptic on air or for allowing them on in the first place.


Note that the ruling is only about the way Lawson was treated on air – the corporation is not actually getting involved in the debate over the numbers.

This is probably just as well, as they are no doubt wary of the public realising that, a temporary El Nino aside, temperatures are again failing to warm as fast as climatologists would have us believe they should be.

Full report: The BBC’s Green Journalism | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Comments
  1. Richard111 says:

    I’ve been following this AGW hype for some years now and marvel at the control and support agencies like the BBC have over their reporting. This includes just about every media voice on the planet apart from a few lonely voices on the internet.
    I’m not a scientist yet it is perfectly obvious to me that AGW claims are fraudulent. This not to say that mankind is not buggering up local climates with his city building, extensive farming and massive forest destruction.
    The question is who or what is supporting this AGW fraud over such a wide field?
    My belief is it is population control. I suspect this agenda originated from Maurice Strong and his cabal from way back when.
    Again my guess is the perpetrators of this scam were expecting at least one, or more, active solar cycles which would have kept the world comfy warm while all the green energy projects were completed.
    Many people are aware the current solar cycle, SC24, is a clear warning of the coming cold hence the apparent panic to complete the green agenda.
    When the western economy is entirely reliant on green power and the snow and ice arrives you can imagine the collapse of all services.
    So again, who is driving these agencies to support this fraud with so much success?

  2. Richard111 says:

    Just want to add, the BBC no longer reports news, it broadcasts propaganda.

  3. Saighdear says:

    Likewise, Richard, I browse foreign channels as an armchair traveller and get a lot of Documentaries from the German speaking networks and ARTE ( French) – they are all no better. All I can say is that through the NARROWNESS of their film-makers lenses we get to see some lovely parts of the world, if only it didn’t have this awful taint.

  4. Phoenix44 says:

    The BBC has been pretty bad for years, but in the last 18 months or so, it has spun out of control. It seems to have assumed that Trump and Brexit have freed it from any constraints whatsoever. I have made two (pointless) complaints in recent weeks, one about a pure opinion from a Remainer that they presented as fact his view on how disastrously negotiations were going and the second about a “Reality Check” they did on how much we “owe” the EU. The latter was not only factually incorrect (apparently we have money we have to “give back”) but it made a number of claims that even if they were true would have to work both ways, such as loss of trust. And of course it didn’t bother to mention our share if EU assets.

    The apology yesterday about Lawson even managed to get in the 97% consensus claim.

    I honestly think that like a lot of Remainers and Clinton supporters, they have actually gone a little mad.

  5. oldbrew says:

    Perhaps the green bubble of unreality is not a healthy place for the mind to be 😐

    BBC UNDER FIRE FOR ‘CAVING IN’ TO CLIMATE CHANGE LOBBY
    Date: 26/10/17 Katherine Rushton, Daily Mail

    The BBC has been accused of ‘caving in’ to climate change lobbyists after apologising for an interview with global warning sceptic Lord Lawson.
    . . .
    Benny Peiser, director of the GWPF yesterday accused it going overboard in its apology.

    He said: ‘If the BBC had to apologise every time one of their interviewees said something inaccurate, they would have to close the whole shop. They are completely obsessed with the green agenda and hardly ever have a dissenting voice … and now they have essentially caved to the bullying tactics of the green campaign.’

    http://www.thegwpf.com/bbc-under-fire-for-caving-in-to-climate-lobby/

  6. tom0mason says:

    The BBC is the voice of the activist gentrifying gentry, and supra-green virtue signaling arm of the comfortably rich, left-wing elitists. And their message to everyone is “you are guilty!”.

  7. Adam Gallon says:

    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2017/10/25/the-bbcs-green-journalism/#comment-131429
    Negotiations going disastrously is a fairly accurate statement, as we’re heading ever closer to just falling out of the EU with no deal at all, with all that entails. As for the costs of the “Divorce bill”, well, who knows?

  8. ren says:

    There are good chances for the development of La Niña. The cooler eastern tropical Pacific Ocean means less water vapor introduced into the atmosphere.

  9. oldbrew says:

    Lord Lawson could have mentioned this…

    New Study: Global Warming Standstill Confirmed, Climate Models Wrong
    https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2017/10/03/new-study-global-warming-standstill-confirmed-climate-models-wrong/

    Makes alarmists look a bit excitable. Possible La Niña would be another cold shower for climate agitators.

  10. oldbrew says:

    Delingpole on his climate sceptic role:

    You don’t think I enjoy doing this stuff, do you? When you’re a climate skeptical journalist every day is Groundhog Day. Same old grant-troughing junk scientists spouting the same old junk science lies and propaganda and drivel; same old rent-seeking corporate vultures trying to make megabucks by screwing the rest of us; same old eco-fascist progressives pushing their anti-human, anti-liberty globalist agenda.

    Someone’s got to put these people back in their box, sure. But it’s a necessary chore – like pouring RoundUp on your weeds, putting out the trash, shooting rats, that kind of thing – rather than something you’d want to spend too much valuable life on.

    http://climatechangedispatch.com/an-impertinent-pup-from-snopes-tried-to-fact-check-me-on-global-warming-heres-my-reply/

    The BBC need to read that 😁

  11. Bitter&twisted says:

    Biased Bullsh1t Cartel
    Broadcasting Bloody Communism
    Bumming Boys Constantly

    The list goes on and on.
    And they are corrupt.

  12. oldbrew says:

    ‘The Brexit Bashing Corporation’: Rees-Mogg Slams Biased State Broadcaster BBC

    Leading Tory backbencher Jacob Rees-Mogg has dubbed the BBC the “Brexit Bashing Corporation” due to its anti-Brexit bias.

    Appearing on the BBC’s Question Time show, he responded to a question about the alleged bias with: “Dear old auntie. How many times have we heard on the BBC ‘in spite of Brexit?’

    “In spite of Brexit a record three million jobs have been created since 2010, in spite of Brexit unemployment is at its lowest level since 1975, in spite of Brexit England defeated the West Indies at Lords.”

    When asked to provide specific evidence by the BBC presenter, he replied: “I think anyone who has listened to the news recently has heard the ‘in-spite-of-Brexit’ terminology and I think the audience knows that.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/10/27/brexit-bashing-corporation-rees-mogg-slams-bias-anti-brexit-bbc/

    ‘How many times’ indeed.

  13. Bill says:

    The BBC doesn’t seem to do news anymore. The BBC Breakfast News (I use that term very lightly) is presented by a bunch of air heads whose only ability seems to be the ability to read an autocue. Constant self indulgent giggly banter does not a news programme make. The 24 hour ‘news’ is not much better. They have a feedback programme once a week where basically any complaint is belittled. I have never heard a single one of these editors admit they got it wrong- as an old bloke I’m getting angrier and well angrier.