Friday
Feb042011
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill A message from BBC Vision
Feb 4, 2011 BBC I wrote to Emma Jay asking for a comment on the implication that her email had misled James Delingpole and I've just had a response from the publicity people at BBC Vision.
Just to let you know, your request for comment has been passed onto BBC publicity. We’re currently liaising with the relevant parties and will come back to you with a response.
Reader Comments (19)
how about the program misleading the public...!!!
ie particularly the Horizon defence of 'hide the decline'.....
in light of Paul Dennis' and many other response to it.
let alone failing to interview mcintyre, mckitrick, Spencer, Lindzen, Carter, Pielke jr/sn, even Judith Curry
Ah, you're going to get a reply from a marketing droid. Lucky you.
BH
Deja vu.
Harmless Sky and the BBC...
Is this yet another example of BBC bias....You be the judge
...An interview with a representative of the power industry
(Beagle Blog Cartoons)
http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/
It has never been in my nature to bother about making complaints to organisations. However, apathy or laziness never achieved anything. If enough people complain to the Beeb the complaint will rise in importance. This may not achieve much on its own, but over a period of time the complaints reaching the trustees will begin to be an embarrassment.
Evidently the BBC consider themselves the true ruler of the waves, and the airwaves. But who will set them straight? All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. St. George, here's another dragon for you to deal with...
Doesn't this response say it all about the BBC. A simple question put to the exactly the right person but the BBC has to refer it to the "publicity department" !!! One wonders how on earth the place actually functions well enough to produce any programming at all , no matter what the quality.
What the BBC have forgotten is that a considerable audience have traditional scientific literacy in one or other discipline relevant to the climatic earth sciences, many of whom have become so-called climate sceptics as a direct result of what they clearly recognise as mischievous practice in various forms of exaggeration and trickery, motivated by a variety of ideological belief, financial reasons, etc., to facilitate the promotion of a radical agenda. Sceptics are entitled to somewhat more respect than to be parodied in a crude biased polemic billed as a 'documentary' callously enlisting the status of the the Royal Society to feign legitimacy of bilious activist propaganda. These sceptics are merely honourable critical custodians of ethics, who detect significant malpractice and deserve far better than the crude witchhunt that the BBC has embarked upon.
Bish,
You might recall "The Letters of Henry Root" and in particular two letters sent to the BBC about "That's Life", one praising it to the skies and the other caustically rude; they both got the same reply.
Schrodinger's Cat:
I think it's outrageous that you're suggesting a coordinated campaign to bombard these poor people with complaints. The BBC complaints department is a very busy small unit doing important, valuable work and it just doesn't have the time or resources to deal with a large number of complaints, whether justified or not.
This is harassment. It is clearly a high-level, orchestrated smear campaign to distract the public about the nature of BBC bias.
/sarc
Some sympathy for our friend Bob- fighting a losing battle trying to change their stinking nappy all on his own.
Items for Steve Jones' review of partiality in the BBC's science reporting?
Emma Jay's malleable integrity
Paul Nurse misleading the audience on the proportion of man-made CO2 in the atmosphere
Whitewashing decline hiding and email deletion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/march/science_impartiality.shtml.
Once again, I ask "Why do you pay taxes to support these people?"
Mad dogs and Englishmen.
Interesting ZT. But then I think "oh no!". Another one of my favourite scientists stepping up to the plate to destroy his credibility.
Do Brits actually say "liaising?" I thought Brits were the keepers of the language. In the USA, we live with this nonsense. A favorite new word here is "tasking." Apparently, some people find that they have been "tasked" with collecting the garbage. I suppose it is easier than saying that they "have been given the job of" collecting the garbage. I look forward to the day that I get to say "I am sorry, Sir, but you are detasked."
I was expecting a post by Phil Jones Auntie this morning - must be too busy gossiping with Phil Jones Mum ;^)
The West Coast Climate Equity Association (a society of climate activists and writers based in British Columbia,Canada) featured Andrew Weaver's reponse to Glaciergate on CBC's radio show “The Current“ broadcast on February 10th 2010. Andrew Weaver is a member of the West Coast Climate Equity Association advisory board along with such illuminaries as Bill McKibben and James Hansen. It is clear that Andrew Weaver sees he has a public duty to become involved in climate activism by supporting groups like the West Coast Climate Equity Association, being involved in Greenpeace videos and taking part in the climate debate in the media, be it TV, radio or newspapers.
The headline for this featured story of Andrew Weaver's involvement in this radio programme was;
Climatologist Professor Andrew Weaver Answers Questions About “Glaciergate”
http://westcoastclimateequity.org/2010/02/13/audio-climatologist-professor-andrew-weaver-answers-questions-about-glaciergate/
Andrew Weaver has claimed that he has never described himself as being a 'climatologist' but it would appear he has had no problems in the recent past as being described as such in the public domain.
It raises the concern that Andrew Weaver in pursuing this matter thru the courts may be leaving himself open to the counter arguement that he is more public activist than government funded scientist, and that it is reputation as a public figure involved in climate activism that he is trying to protect.
Schrodinger's Cat:
"If enough people complain to the Beeb the complaint will rise in importance"
I for one have complained
I was asked if I wanted a reply
We shall wait to see what they say
Don Pablo 12.07 am ""Why do you pay taxes to support these people?"
Because we want to watch many worthy programmes (movies sport etc ) on Sky. It sticks in the craw.
My petty rebellion is to refuse a direct debit to TV licensing and to spin out paying until I feel obliged to send a cheque.