Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Josh 3 | Main | NZ climatologists lose their calculations »
Tuesday
Feb022010

Red tops move in on the act

They always say that when the Sun shifts its support to a new political party then political destiny is irrevocably changed. When the Conservatives lost its support at the end of the nineties their fate was sealed and they were duly swept away in the Blair landslide of 1997.

The UK's premier tabloid has a phenomenal power to change the political landscape and it is widely seen as a barometer for the way public opinion is moving. It's therefore interesting to see not only the "currant bun" but also its close, left-wing rival the Mirror moving in for the kill. The Mirror picks up on Raj Pachauri's travel arrangements, describing him variously as "authoritarian" and "hypocritical". The Sun, in the meantime says that global warming is a con.

It's not looking good.

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (12)

As you say, the Sun is more a barometer of public opinion than a leader of it, but in a sense that makes such an article all the more significant - the game is really up for unquestioning acceptance of the AGW theory. So how long will it be before mainstream politicians start following suit?

Feb 2, 2010 at 1:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterCurmudgeon

Do you think Mr. Murdoch could have changed sides recently? The Times seems to have been getting decidedly more sceptical over the last few months, and now this from the Sun.

Outside of the UK, The Australian always strikes me as being fairly sceptical, as does the Wall Street Journal.

Is Andrew Neil still associated with Mr. Murdoch in any way? Mr. Neil is clearly one of the few sceptical, if very effective, voices at the BBC. Much as I admire Mr. Neil as a political interviewer - IMO far superior to Mr. Paxman - could it be that he's reflecting the views of Mr. M publicly when it comes to climate change?

Just a thought.

Feb 2, 2010 at 2:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterPaul Boyce

I've been banging on at Trevor Kavanagh for years about the Suns position viz a viz AGW, He used to reply with cross references until about a year ago where he replied that they were monitoring Lawson and Monkton. Last email 7 Dec was in response to Met Office alarmist report prior to COP15

"Is your editor on drugs or something because after regurgitating the Met Offices 18deg rise in world temperature I seriously believe he should be taken away by men in white coats and sectioned. The world temperature has recovered from a mini ice age temperature by 0.7deg C in the last 180 years and all of a sudden people expending energy to raise their standard of living, mainly in the developing world (Oh and we used to call that the third world - what happened to that) emitting a minor trace gas to maybe double the present concentrations (still less than 0.01%) is going cause an 18deg rise in world temperature. Does this come from Vicky Pope - does she give good head or something? Have you poked your head out of the window recently and noticed that temperatures haven't risen for 10 years!"

reply was non commital. Interesting times
BB

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterBrian J. BAKER

Murdoch shows up on US television particularly his Fox News Network and he has been getting an ear full about AGW and all that, so perhaps the ship is changing course. A number of Fox talking heads have been more and more skeptical about it, and Rupert is a very keen mind. In the US he has been the spokesperson for the independent and center right.

From time to time, you will hear Obama make a rude remark about Fox. They are the only press that doesn't actively cheer lead for him.

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

Just posted to Trevor Kavanagh:-

Congratulations on your change of heart and mind.

Now I won't have to look in the Mail, Telegraph, Express, Times and Fox to find
out about the latest collapse on confidence on the doomsayers latest

Reply interesting:

not sure there's been a change, as such...


BB

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterBrian J. BAKER

Now we have web 2.0, however, I hope David Cameron et al will feel emboldened to treat Murdoch's poison chalice with the respect it truly deserves - ie very little.

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterFrugal Dougal

"Is Andrew Neil still associated with Mr. Murdoch in any way?"

Murdoch's daughter Elizabeth has links with the "renewable" energy sector and there were rumours that these were "not unconnected" to the The Times's fairly sudden endorsement of the AGW agenda a year or so back. I have no proof.

For a while, its reporting on the topic was as dire as the Green Tops (Independent, Grauniad) with a bit of glass-in-the-butter crap thrown in for good measure but it has stiffened in recent weeks. Let's hope it keeps it up.

Andrew Neill has AFAIK had no links with Murdoch since leaving News Corp. on bad terms in the mid-90s. He robustly criticised him for editorial interference at a 2008 House of Lords Select Committee and, in a more recent press article, slammed the truly appalling News of the World over a phone-tapping scandal.

Kiss and make up? Doubt it.

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterDave B

An interesting piece by Dr North on the UK government's own cap and trade scame - the CRC (Carbon Reduction Commitment). Wait until the 'red-tops' realise that local authorities and large UK business are being stiffed by the Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) with a brand new indirect tax which takes effect from April this year. Great timing - an election year.

This legislation was passed virtually unanimously be Parliament as part of the Climate Chaneg Act 2008 - so the main three parties are not going to be slinging much mud at each other about it. But a good topic for the UK sceptic community to have a go at!

Feb 2, 2010 at 6:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterEvading the truth

Early days yet but the article in The Scottish Sun was heartening. It wasn't in The Sun, so perhaps they were dipping a toe in the water.

The Red Tops will move in for the kill when it's widely accepted AGW is a con and they start to ask, why, since it's a con, are we paying for it, and spell out the staggering costs.

Since all main parties are fully committed to the AGW scam, the Red Tops can't offer a simple solution, like vote for X or vote for Y.

Feb 2, 2010 at 7:58 PM | Unregistered Commentercosmic

The bellwether for true change will be when the 'usually reliable' Richard Black at the BBC steps over from the dark side.

I found this little example of his spin doctoring at http://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/283292/diff/7/8 where he rewrote a piece on India and Copenhagen

"The Indian pledge of cutting emissions intensity by 20-25% is less than the Chinese figure, and Mr Ramesh's words make clear that the cuts will be on this scale only if western countries provide financial assistance."

Became

"The Indian pledge of cutting emissions intensity by 20-25% is less than the Chinese figure. Mr Ramesh's words make clear that the cuts are voluntary and unilateral, and expects the announcement to enhance India's negotiating position at the Copenhagen conference."

Feb 2, 2010 at 8:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterTilde Guillemet

Bishop,

Your website is one of the few oases of sense on this matter (although the number is growing) and it will be no small thanks to you when this scam is finally recognised for what it is by the general population. I don't think this is now too far away.

I have a copy of your book on its way from those nice people at Amazon.

Feb 3, 2010 at 9:14 AM | Unregistered CommenterPaul Farley

The question about how influential newspapers really are could actually be answered by this issue.
As far as I can tell, the vast majority of people don't believe in the climate change story as we are being told it. However, it seems we need an overwhelming figure against it before a paper is brave enough to mirror the opinions of their readership.

We also know that politicians and the media are the only ones who think that everyone will believe everything and anything published in the paper, - so what does Dave do now?

It would seem to me that the funding for climate change is not going to stop from the EU, so there is still an incentive to do research. There is also the question of green investments which is helping various pension and other investment funds hit their targets. This is what really counts and why the lobbying of politicians is still happening.

We are seeing the newspapers looking for readers and realising that mirroring their views is the only way of doing that. The warmists will carry on buying the Independent, and possibly the Guardian, but the red top buyers are going to feel much more comfortable now that their papers have seen the green nonsense for what it really is! The smart party will also want to look at how they can appeal to this audience (hint: tell the public that the Green tax is a con!)

I still think climate gate was this century's picnic on the Austrian-Hungarian border, but it might take a little longer before the wall comes down!

Feb 3, 2010 at 11:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterF0ul

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>