Bishop Hill BBC to review climate coverage - so what?
Jan 6, 2010 BBC Climate: other According to the Daily Mail, the BBC Trust is to review the corporation's coverage of, among other issues, climate change.
The BBC Trust today announced it would carry out the probe into the 'accuracy and impartiality' of its output in this increasingly controversial area.
The review comes after repeated criticism of the broadcaster's handling of green issues. It has been accused of acting like a cheerleader for the theory that climate change is a man-made phenomenon.
This is, frankly, a sideshow. Complaints about the BBC's handling of climate change have been brushed aside by the BBC Trust time after time. They are simply going through the motions in order to fend off complaints. No heads will roll, no changes will be made. Richard Black will continue to shut down his blog comments whenever there is a sceptic story in the air.
The only possible resolution to this problem is to close the BBC down.
Reader Comments (11)
Andrew Neal of the BBC rips into John Hirst head of the MET office about his 25% pay rise.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/8443687.stm
Total respect to the old school BBC presenters. I have a feeling that some are starting to say that the truth and their own integrity are more important than the pay and conditions!
"The only possible resolution to this problem is to close the BBC down."
Long overdue.
Do not give up on pushing through reform.
There is no way the BBC will go away. But pressure is building up to tell the truth regarding AGW.
The BBC will, at the end of the day do what they are forced to do.
They will do this by pressure.
Keep up the pressure.
I don't thing Andrew Neil really fits into the category of 'BBC presenter', I believe he's an independent contractor who's had a very long career in journalism (not always successful!) but is very much in a position (financially as well as in other ways) to be his own man, and is beholden to no-one. It seems to be a common factor in many facets of life these days that those who speak out about many topics tend to be retired, their own bosses, or financially independent (possibly all combinations of those three). People with livings to earn have to keep their heads down. This is what's known as living in a free society.
With David Cameron a fanatical greenie and warmist what hope have we of getting the BBC to reform its handling of AGW, even under a Tory government?
It's a well-worn bureaucratic tactic: announce an enquiry reporting back next year. You can then just refer all complainants to the enquiry.
An incoming Tory government would have a mandate to do anything, including selling off the BBC. But David Cameron seems kind-of gun shy. He gives the appearance of not wanting to win. And not wanting to do anything if he does win.
I have been giving "Ethical Man" hell over there at his blog on BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/2010/01/should_indians_drive_cars_part_2.html and here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/2009/12/in_praise_of_scepticism.html and here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/2009/12/a_tsunami_of_christmas_tat.html
To his credit he has posted everything I've given him, none of which is complimentary.
By definition being "ethical" means having a low "carbon footprint" and all his arguments and logic revolve around that definition. I suppose by the same definition the Somali and Afghan bandits who kill and murder, but travel by foot and live without electricity are very "ethical".
Yawn. They will not face their issues or change their behavior until they believe its in their interests to do so. They have not recognized that yet, so no change will occur.
Nothing to see here: move along.
Why do people think a Tory Govt is the only alternative to the crowd who are in at present?
All the major parties piss into the same pot
all are chasing big, city or state sector directorships
we need an individualist libertarian alternative to vote for, and we don't have one
The BBC needs a 6 month warning to prepare for the end of the licence fee, then it can fend for itself after that, perhaps it could even pay a windfall tax?.
"we need an individualist libertarian alternative to vote for, and we don't have one"
Whilst not wanting to sink to the level of politics on this esteemed blog, may I just say that any interested persons might want to check on a party with a name of four letters which has recently had a new leader.
As for the BBC, its no wonder it follows government wishes so faithfully, its inevitable that such easy funding comes with implicit "conditions". Would be great to have a real choice over broadcasters, but can't see it happening any time soon, they seem immune to any anti-competition regulations. Have the BBC Trust ever changed the BBC's behaviour ?
"Have the BBC Trust ever changed the BBC's behaviour?"
Yes, somewhat. A few back the BBC allowed an internal investigation of anti-Israel bias and anti-semitism. The "Balen Report" was made, and the BBC fought hard, not to have it released. Leaks implied the report said "yes." The only surprise being, the investigation was not a cover-up, although the final report was hidden. This wiki site implies the battle for openness lost in the courts last year-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Balen_Report