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

Discussion > Yorkshire Post's war on fracking

Just like the Times seems to have a team of PR people churning #DieselsRpaedoes articles the YP seems to have disproportionate coverage against fracking.
Only one site lies in its area the Third Energy operation at Kirby Misperton.

I don't know the reasons for the slant
#1 Advertising, I'm guessing much of its advertising comes from biz pushing the Green Dream like Drax
#2 Politics, Most news stories are either run or spiked according to a political agenda, it could be a bash the Tories technique by the YP.
With Brexit they also seem to have a political slant , as they print every Brexit negative story they can.

Feb 8, 2018 at 2:29 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Yesterday they ran an excited front-page story seemingly trailing the end of fracking
.. on the grounds that Third energy have move SOME equipment off site due to the government making them wait for a financial review.
- There was a dead giveaway that YP didn't believe its own story cos otherwise they'd have made it the main story.

Feb 8, 2018 at 2:35 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Thursday
Pg 5 article "Government told to focus on renewable energy instead of fracking"
... Yesterday Friends of the Earth issued a statement.

Letters Page : 5 letters against fracking, some written in a tricky way.
That's a bit unusual, they usually have 1 or 2 pro fracking letters for balance.

Feb 8, 2018 at 2:46 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

I would assume the slant comes as a directive from the owner, Johnston Press, or from the editor if they have that discretion.
I have never worked in professional journalism, but every story I ever read says it is completely normal to have an editorial line on many topics. The starry-eyed ideals of journalism were, apparently, very rarely true, anywhere.

Where does an editor take his/her line from in the absence of orders from above? Presumably from whatever they think the competitors are doing. Going against the herd is often a perilous strategy.

The downside is obvious from the climate-skeptical perspective, but it is a sword that cuts both ways. When the whole field changes direction, or merely loses interest, then the boot is on the other foot: There is now hardly a day goes by without the BBC now harping on about plastics. While no less egregious than their coverage of CO2, it is probably a lot less harmful for the global economy if they go off chasing some other wild goose that attracts their attention.

Feb 8, 2018 at 8:26 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

I have been watching the issue with interest, too, Stewgreen, as well as PNR in Lancashire. These people are immune to facts – give them a fact, and it’s: “Oh, yes! You would say that, you shill!” as if that explains everything away. Sad, really. And I truly feel sorry for the locals, some of whom were actually worried about fracking (and may still be, but they keep themselves to themselves). At KM, I have long wondered how they can reconcile the protests against noise and traffic with the noise and traffic involved with Flamingo Land. Another episode that raised a wry smile was when some marched off to protest at one of the existing fracked sites… but could not find it, despite marching right past it!

I suspect that they will only acknowledge the dangers of “ruinable” – sorry, “renewable” – energy when someone gets impaled by a wayward turbine-blade – and do note, I did write “when” not “if”.

Feb 8, 2018 at 8:54 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

I'm not too concerned with the media anti fracking narrative. The shale gas isn't going anywhere and the technology seems to be constantly improving. If we get to the stage where we suddenly need cheaper gas and shale gas is economically viable here I assume we could get it up and running fairly quickly.

Feb 9, 2018 at 5:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterRob Burton

But that is the problem, Mr Burton – we really do not know if shale gas extraction is economically viable, and we are not being allowed to find out, with all the hoops and hurdles that are thrown into the path of the industry by government, as well as having to contend with a highly vociferous, small to the point of tiny group of aggressive activists who are so ill-informed that they appear to actually have no idea what they are talking about, but just want to cause mayhem. All those problems increase the costs, but there are still some companies willing to take the risk, and all without a penny subsidy from the tax-payer.

Feb 10, 2018 at 10:12 AM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

I recall Rob Burton's argument being made about the big, multinationals like Shell and MobilExxon about why they weren't involved in the shale-gas exploration in its infancy. The response was that MobilExxon were big enough to wait it out, and that if, in the future, it turned out that shale gas was important they were big enough to buy their way in. They weren't.

Feb 10, 2018 at 11:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

Yep Michael
Media news is driven by POLITICS first rather than newsworthy events.
That's why so many stories don't get reported and others are selected for #BangingOn

Feb 10, 2018 at 4:52 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Saturday : No actual anti-fracking stories.
Just on Letters' page 1 letter kind of pro fracking saying , you guys spread fear about fracking in the US, but that's handwaving where's your videos if hard evidence ?
I guess the activists have got the weekend off.

Feb 10, 2018 at 5:10 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Did I?

My interest in the oil industry is mainly having to do with having done a Geophysics degree and actually going out to see the UK oil industry in the field. Going to darkest Dorset and seeing the Vibraseis trucks in action doing seismic surveying was awesome. The bored truck drivers also had there fun throwing huge quantities of cowpats at the group of spotty students who had shown up to see them.

Also being a massive hiker I often walked the Dorset coast (studying at Soton) and a really weird sight to come across a nodding donkey pumping oil in England just where you were going to pitch your tent for the night. Also relevant in that Wytch farm has been fracking for decades in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and it really is beautiful down there.

Though still being interested in the really amazing oil/mineral extraction sector I did take the easy option instead and started a climate science degree instead ;-)

Feb 11, 2018 at 11:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterRob Burton

"we really do not know if shale gas extraction is economically viable"

RR, Why do we never get even basic numbers for this? Surely the costs extraction of X amount if gas must be reasonably well known. So some statement such as we can afford to di this if gas sells at Y dollars per pint..... or whatever with at least some level of accuracy.

All I ever read about is the super Pro versus super Anti argument with zero pragmatic middle ground whatsoever. Just like the ridiculous leaps of faith/lies to make some renewables more viable than they really are (ie lets get solar going in Spain/Portugal/Arizona before pushing it too much in Scotland...)

Feb 11, 2018 at 11:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterRob Burton

Ah, but Witch farm is fracking for oil not gas, innit? Far safer, innit? You obviously no nuffink and are a shill.

Feb 11, 2018 at 11:34 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

Mr Burton: I think the point is that we have not actually managed to frack for gas for some time, now (or even if at all, in the UK), so we have no idea how much gas will be recovered (or is recoverable) from each fracking operation, or how much each fracking operation will cost. I have no doubt that they have projected costs on this, but (surely?) as any fule kno, it is only when you taste the cake that you know if the recipe is right.

Feb 11, 2018 at 11:42 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

In a way, though, the enforced delays by the rabid protestors is working to the advantage of the frackers, as yet another revolutionary process is being developed, whereby water use is minimised with the well being fracked with its own gas! This solves quite a few problems, not least being the amount of waste water generated.

Feb 11, 2018 at 11:49 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

YP normally has 10 letters
Today there are 6 on fracking/energy
Neutral -1
Anti -2 - dramaqueening "Anti-fracking businesses in the area have been targeted for abuse on Facebook and Twitter by profrackers" ... the idea there is any proportion with anti-frackers tricks.
Pro - 3

Feb 13, 2018 at 12:56 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

I notice there has recently been some almost gleeful claims about some report of how industry and/or government had over-estimated the likely number of fracked wells in the future. Some of them use the word "exaggeration". I haven't yet seen any of them suggest that the now-reduced estimated number might actually be due to the successful political obstruction of fracking development. Obstruction loudly promoted by the same people now accusing the industry of exaggeration!

It's just like the attacks on the nuclear industry: Campaigners against nuclear were instrumental in successfully increasing costly regulation of the industry, above and beyond what is needed. They then started campaigning against nuclear by additionally asserting that it is also uneconomic.

It's a well established mainstay of environmental politics. The co-ordinated campaign by the BBC and cronies suggests they now think they are going to do something similar with plastics, though they probably haven't stopped to think yet about how a "plastic" is legally defined. What if it's made from modified cellulose (aka wood)? Once again, they are not thinking about real solutions to their alleged problems, because they don't actually want solutions.

Feb 14, 2018 at 5:42 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

Wednesday Letters
- Anti - 15 lines plugging anti-frackers film event
- Pro - 4 lines : bet protesters go home to gas central heating.

Article on activists calling for Minister to revoke planning permission for Banks open cast coal mine in Durham.

Feb 14, 2018 at 3:10 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Friday :
- Title "Cost of policing fracking site up again
Text : " Police say they spent £48K in January ..the lowest since cost started being collated"
"A total of £670K since last August"

- "Fracking harms songbird nesting"
"A new study says"
"monitored 2009-11 & from 2013-15"
Dr Leesia Marshall
.... How can it be new then ?

Feb 15, 2018 at 2:27 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Pg 15 from Jayne Dowle
"In our house we’re committed to a small monthly donation to the World Wildlife Fund to sponsor both a snow leopard and a polar bear (my 12-year-old daughter badgered us for the cuddly toys sent out to new subscribers) and the Dogs Trust, "

Ah that is the kind of person brainwashed by WWF PR

Feb 15, 2018 at 2:58 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Pg2 Activists to appeal anti- obstructive protest injunction that Ineo got in November.

Using the famous tricky law firm Leigh Day

Feb 16, 2018 at 3:24 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Friday Letters
2 anti-fracking letters.
One complains the gas will be used to make plastic.

Feb 16, 2018 at 3:45 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

A young Tory council is allowed to give his "better safe than sorry" view, " but I went to the open debate"
YP frame the article with a photo showing 20 police surrounding the anti-fracking tea lady

Feb 16, 2018 at 3:53 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen