Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Media Praise BBC Censorship of Climate Skeptics; Attack Dissenters
News Busters ^ | July 8 2014 | Sean Long

Posted on 07/08/2014 11:04:44 AM PDT by PoloSec

Climate alarmists have trouble debating skeptics. They’d rather censor them instead.

On July 5, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) announced it was training journalists to ignore skeptical views on man-made climate change. Predictably, both mainstream news outlets like the Washington Post and liberal bloggers like the Huffington Post praised BBC’s censorship, amidst relentless attacks on skeptics.

The Huffington Post touted the BBC as “fighting its addiction to false climate change balance,” while Salon and the Telegraph (UK) respectively attacked skeptics as an “anti-science fringe” or “cranks” with “marginal views.” The Washington Post also joined in for the anti-free speech fun.

The Telegraph (UK) reported on July 4 that the BBC had trained 200 staff members to “stop them giving ‘undue attention to marginal opinion,’” specifically naming the question of man-made climate change.

According to the Telegraph, “the [BBC] found that there was still an ‘over-rigid application of editorial guidelines on impartiality’ which sought to give the ‘other side’ of the argument,” and science correspondent Sarah Knapton called it “false balance.” The Washington Post’s Gail Sullivan, on the other hand, crowed that “BBC journalists are being schooled in how to cover science.”

Other outlets jumped on this notion of “false balance.” Salon’s Lindsay Abrams wrote “the [BBC]’s journalists were criticized for devoting too much airtime (as in, any airtime)” to climate skeptics, whom she described as “unqualified people with ‘marginal views’ about non-contentious issues.”

Similarly, the Huffington Post’s Jack Mirkinson described the BBC as “fighting its addiction to false climate change balance.” He alleged that “it would be wise not to hold your breath” waiting for American networks to censor climate skeptics, ignoring the broadcast networks’ habit of doing just that.

Of course, these publications couldn’t refrain from viciously attacking those skeptical of man-made global warming. The Washington Post dismissed “climate change deniers and others on the scientific fringe,” while Salon blasted skeptics as an “anti-science fringe.”

But the BBC has always censored climate skeptics. According to The Washington Post, the BBC issued a statement on July 7, saying “across our programmes the number of scientists and academics who support the mainstream view far outweighs those who disagree with it.” Clearly, the BBC already largely ignores climate skeptics, so this recent push indicates that they will simply move towards eliminating all dissent from the debate.

In fact, there are hosts of qualified scientists skeptical of man-made catastrophic climate change. In 2010, Climate Depot released a comprehensive report of more than 1,000 scientists from around the world who dissent from the mainstream alarmist view. The website Popular Technology published a similar list in February 2014 that detailed more than 1,350 peer-reviewed articles criticizing global warming alarmism.

A key point: Journalists have an obligation to cover both sides of every issue. For example, the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics holds that journalists must “support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.”


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 07/08/2014 11:04:44 AM PDT by PoloSec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PoloSec

This is precisely how the world’s most advanced society fell into madness back in the 1930s. We are now living in 1930s Germany.


2 posted on 07/08/2014 11:08:43 AM PDT by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always A Marine
*This is precisely how the world’s most advanced society fell into madness back in the 1930s. We are now living in 1930s Germany.*

“Ja, expressing the truth or speaking about actual Science is verboten!”

3 posted on 07/08/2014 11:10:04 AM PDT by PATRIOT1876
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec

How would a journalist know what constitutes science?

The journalists I have met were illiterate in math and the sciences.


4 posted on 07/08/2014 11:18:17 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec

Given this, it can no longer be claimed to be ‘settled science’. True science is always open for review/debate...ALWAYS. Its an endeavor to discover and understand the truth. Peer review and is a healthy and necessary part of that. This is SOP for all engineering and science Ive ever been involved with. The path the media is taking smacks of propaganda. Then again the climate change silliness is being run by non-scsientists for reasons other than stated above. The end is power, wealth and fame for themselves.


5 posted on 07/08/2014 11:30:36 AM PDT by 556x45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec
Headline / Sub-headline should be:

In Decline, Liberal Media Push for Even Lower Ratings
Rejecting censorship, viewers tune in to Fox for
balanced reporting on issues like global warming.
6 posted on 07/08/2014 11:40:12 AM PDT by zencycler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec

“(BBC) announced it was training journalists...”

Stay! Sit! Lie Down! Roll Over! Play Dead! Good Boy!

Journos (rhymes with pornos) are easily trained, it seems.


7 posted on 07/08/2014 11:45:54 AM PDT by ChicagahAl (Don't blame me. I voted for Sarah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
The journalists I have met were illiterate in math and the sciences.

And becoming illiterate in journalism.

8 posted on 07/08/2014 12:55:10 PM PDT by TangoLimaSierra (To win the country back, we need to be as mean as the libs say we are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec

So the IPCC admits there has been ~ 16 years of no increase in global temps despite what their models predicted but its somehow considered crazy to dispute their predictions.


9 posted on 07/08/2014 1:34:42 PM PDT by Brooklyn Attitude (Things are only going to get worse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson