Bishop Hill Sissons on BBC climate change coverage
Jan 25, 2011 BBC Climate: Sceptics The Mail has a devastating extract from the new book by ex-BBC newsreader Peter Sissons, showing just how corrupt the corporation has become, particularly on the subject of climate change.
From the beginning I was unhappy at how one-sided the BBC’s coverage of the issue was, and how much more complicated the climate system was than the over-simplified two-minute reports that were the stock-in-trade of the BBC’s environment correspondents.
These, without exception, accepted the UN’s assurance that ‘the science is settled’ and that human emissions of carbon dioxide threatened the world with catastrophic climate change. Environmental pressure groups could be guaranteed that their press releases, usually beginning with the words ‘scientists say . . . ’ would get on air unchallenged.
Reader Comments (58)
Nicely put Yertizz and Phil B.
I also have outstanding unanswered FOI requests with the BBC about "high level" meetings and would be happy for any guidance on how to get around the BBC excuse of "Journalism, arts and literature" behind which they creep.
{But I think ZedDeadsBed (Seen elsewhere) could be trolling on this comment site as well and another that has a familiar ring is MikeB, not wishing to bad-mouth unnecessarily. When "Anon, Ymous" turns up along with "flip-flop", this well-run website may find disruption, so please beware, Gentle Ladies and Gentlemen. Sorry but don't know how to put this more diplomatically. If you want to moderate off, and just leave my top comments, I shall understand}
Norfolk Dumpling
Re the BBC arts exemption, wait for the Sugar case to clear the Supreme Court. There is cause for optimism that they will rule that old stuff is not covered by the exemption for journalism, and is held for archiving purposes instead.
Bishop
I think you now understand why I do not run a blog. It is worse than trying to herd angry cats.
I note that the BBC is planninga porogramme on sceptics
Needless to say it is buried on BBC 4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y5j3v
Strange how it didn't get the prominence of the Nurse polemic
ZDB makes on off topic assertion:
"You think being right wing and having integrity are the same thing? Words fail me for how wrong that is."
Thus, clearly in ZDB's view being right wing and having integrity are mutually exclusive. Words fail me for how wrong and biggoted that is. You could just as easily and casually swap "left" for "right" in ZDB's statement and you'd be equally wrong and bigotted. ZDB thus betray's their prejudiced world view.
Note: this is not an invitation to ZDB to "justify" why being right wing and having integrity are mutually exclusive. This board should not be a platform for bigots. Alleging bad faith on the part of everyone whose political views differ from your own is just stupid.
"You think being right wing and having integrity are the same thing? Words fail me for how wrong that is."
Thus, clearly in ZDB's view being right wing and having integrity are mutually exclusive.
Jan 26, 2011 at 2:47 PM | AngusPangus
This is more nonsense and an extreme logic-hole. Criticising a statement which clearly equates right-wing politics with integrity, is very different from asserting that they're mutually exclusive. It's merely stating that one is not a necessary component of the other.
I see you've also taken taken the time to slip in an underhand accusation of my being bigoted.
Nice.
ZDB,
Nice semantics you've got there. If this were a political blog (which it is not) you could share with us your views of Margaret Thatcher or Norman Tebbit (sp?) or Michael Howard or indeed Jeremy Clarkson and the Daily Mail. That would be funny. Since this is not a political blog, I shall simply glide effortlessly over any of your comments in future and ignore you.
Cheers!
Mmmm. Journalists. As I dabble in the sport myself I thought it worth sharing a few observations.
Firstly, I went to Uni with a lot of them; many were pursuing 'Media Studies'. The majority were appartachiks of the extreme left on campus - members of SWSO, The Communist Party or Labour. A few were Liberals - and we know what happened to them over the years. They wanted to get into journalism to 'make a difference', i.e. to promote their world view and political doctrines. (Quite a few in the Law faculty were like this, but I digress).
Secondly, most of the Meeja Studies majors I knew then, and have encountered since (including very recently in the shape of neighbours' offspring), are rather dismissive of 'real-world' experience, preferring to frame everything in terms of their academic tutelage.
Finally, I've had occasional glimpses of the BBC's insides over the years, notably through a very dear friend who produced radio programmes for them. She's a true lefty and an apostle for the Beeb, but even she became ground down by the oppressive culture. And her (uncritical) recounting of the corporation's world view made it very clear that anyone right of centre did not belong in the BBC. At the very least, they would live in fear of having their views discovered, and speaking out was out of the question. Even 'centrists' - old school Liberals, say - would be disdained as wet fence-sitters.
So Peter Sisson's expose, gratifying as it is, holds few surprises for me. Perhaps only that Peter survived as long as he did. And you have to admire Clarkson's pugnacity, if nothing else. He is hated inside the organisation, not least because Top Gear is the most successful BBC programme ever. He goes beyond 'thorn in the side' to the point where I can imagine BBC managers and the likes of Alastair Campbell plotting to have him killed. Clarkson is the precise opposite of what the BBC is all about, so giving him a forum where he can pontificate about his opinion - to an audience exceeding 300 million worldwide - well, you can imagine how much that hurts.
The BBC, certainly in news and current affairs, adheres to a belief system, rather like a religious organisation. AGW has become one of its core beliefs, so questioning its veracity or expressing any doubts about it shakes the corporation to its core. The BBC is not interested in truth or 'balance' or investigative journalism in its real sense, it is all about 'making a difference'.