Cranmer on Buerk

Archbishop Cranmer has picked up on Michael Buerk's contribution to the climate debate.

By equating anthropogenic climate change deniers and those who question the doctrine and policy of state multiculturalism with paedophiles - whom society, rationally or not, now ranks as the lowest form of life and quite beyond redemption - the BBC has shown itself to be intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

But His Grace has a question: If a qualified doctor and government adviser (unpaid) can be humiliatingly dismissed for having co-authored a paper in which a reasoned correlation was drawn between homosexuality and paedophilia, why should a BBC presenter (paid by the taxpayer) not be dismissed for purposely inciting hatred against climate change deniers and multiculuralist sceptics by juxtaposing their reasoned beliefs with the perversion of paedophilia?

Update on Feb 12, 2011 by Bishop Hill

Hello? The post seems to have been taken down?

Update on Feb 12, 2011 by Bishop Hill

His Grace has reconsidered, and a new post is now here. This follows the line of several commentators here, namely that Buerk was criticising the BBC not comparing sceptics to paedophiles.

Comments

[Barry Woods]

in the corner WITH.....

racists and paedophiles ARE loathsome, and ALLWAYS will be....
so he wasn't being ironic about them was he...?

I still would like an on the record response from Michael Buerk and the BBC?

If only for his own benefit...

let's move on though. Delingpole has a good article on this, let's all get tickets to see the play 'The Heretic'
It sounds like a good night out.

[sHx]

@Simon Hopkinson
"You should hear me in the pub after a couple of pints :o)

I'd be happy to buy you a pint of your choice for you. :)

[Stacey]

Climate change deniers do not exist. (Except in the mind of alarmists)
Paedophiles hurt children.
As climate change deniers do not exist they cannot hurt anyone and cannot be compared to paedophiles at any level.
Global warming alarmists exist and they expropriate large amounts of money which could be used to save children.
Global Warming alarmists directly cause deaths by promoting ideas that snow will be rare and floods will be rare.
Thus Global Warming alarmists harm children and therefore at some level can be compared with paedophiles?

What would you call someone who phoned up a grandfather with a mate and left a message about his mate having sex with the grandaughter? I think a perverted person would be appropriate.

Why does the BBC allow Jonathan Ross to present the BAFTA's?

[Simon Hopkinson]

Following Cumbrian Lad's suggestion, I submitted the following to Radio 4's Feedback:

On Saturday 12th February, in his introduction to the programme, Michael Buerk stated the following:

"Not long ago, to question multiculturalism - the precepts or the policies of successive governments - risked being branded racist and pushed into the loathesome corner with paedophiles and climate change deniers."

I would appreciate clarification on whether the intention of Mr Buerk, or of the authors of the introduction, was indeed to group "climate change deniers" - the colloquial term for those who question the integrity or veracity of aspects of the science purported to underpin catastrophic anthropogenic global warming - with paedophiles. I would like to know if, as it seemed from the wording in the programme, Mr Buerk or the programme makers genuinely perceive that there is synonymity between the two.

Faithfully,
Simon Hopkinson

[Jack Cowper]

Just got a response from the BBC over my complaint about what Buerk said:

Dear Mr COWPER

Thanks for contacting us regarding ‘The Moral Maze’ broadcast on the 9 February.

We’re sorry if you were offended by Michael Buerk’s opening statement:

“Not long ago to question multiculturalism, the precepts or the policies of successive governments, risked being branded racist and pushed into the loathsome corner with paedophiles and climate change deniers.”

Michael was certainly not comparing climate change deniers with paedophiles. He was simply saying that paedophiles and climate change deniers are two such examples of groups of people who are generally viewed as being in a ‘loathsome corner’ albeit that they are completely disconnected in every other way.

Michael was making the wider point that from time to time there are ideas in society, like multiculturalism and climate change, that become orthodoxy and to challenge those ideas is to be seen to be beyond the pale.

However, we’re sorry if this didn’t come across as clearly as was hoped for.

We would like to assure you that we’ve registered your comments on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management. It ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.

Thanks again for contacting us.

Regards

BBC Audience Services
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided

Kind Regards

BBC Audience Services

Will sit on this for a while and decide if I should follow up or not. Interpretations welcome.