Posted on 03/25/2015 11:15:43 AM PDT by Impala64ssa
A New York Times environmental reporter told Columbia University journalism students that presenting balance in an article about global warming is tantamount to perpetuating a lie.
“It is a lie to say that global warming poses no danger,” New York Times reporter Justin Gillis told students after a screening of the movie “Merchants of Doubt,” reports The Federalist.
“Journalists care about the truth—that’s my only care in life, to find the truth,” Gillis said. “To act as if the evidence is half and half is to tell a lie. I refuse to perpetuate that lie.”
“This is much like the abortion wars: what term you use signals what side you are on,” Gillis said, adding that it’s necessary for reporters to maintain a facade of impartiality.
Gillis told students he liked to use the word “deniers” for “people who oppose climate science,” and that these people should never be called “skeptics.”
Gillis recently made headlines for a report on funding Harvard-Smithsonian scientist Willie Soon got from fossil fuel interests. Gillis wrote that Soon did not disclose that the funding came from an energy company that used coal, arguing the failure to disclose constituted a conflict of interest.
The New York Times report sparked a congressional investigation into the finances of scientists who have challenged the Obama administration’s views on global warming. Lawmakers also inquired after industry groups and free market think tanks about their funding of science. Gillis’ reporting also included quotes from Harvard historian Naomi Oreskes, the co-author of the book that became the documentary “Merchants of Doubt.”
The documentary by “Food Inc.” director Robert Kenner attempts to paint global warming skeptics as old Cold Warriors who are paranoid that climate issues are another proxy for socialism. The film also attempts to argue that the fossil fuel industry has taken a page out of the tobacco industry playbook by funding slick PR-types and shady scientists to cast doubt on global warming.
Interestingly enough, Gillis’ New York Times report, which featured Oreskes, came out just three weeks before “Merchants of Doubt” was released. Gillis also quoted former Greenpeace activist Kert Davies — who has been giving information out to the press about Soon since 2009.
After the NY Times story came out, Davies wrote in his blog that “we have an idea for coming clean, a remedy…the illustrious Smithsonian Institution should sponsor free screenings nationwide of the upcoming theatrical film Merchants of Doubt, pay for school kids everywhere to go see it.”
“Maybe half a million dollars worth of screenings,” added Davies, who now heads up the Climate Investigations Center.
In the days that followed Gillis’s report, other news outlets began poking holes in accusations that Soon violated conflict of interest standards. Bloggers even pointed out that other scientists who similarly got money from institutions with ties to fossil fuels companies that were not disclosed.
The NY Times should lead by example and shut down.
Sounds like I need a new t-shirt declaring that I am a perpetuator and denier. A twofer.
Global Warming presents some serious and immediate dangers to civilization and those perils are entirely the political uses of the hoax to try for total power everywhere and total impoverishment of the bulk of the world’s people.
“Journalists care about the truth—that’s my only care in life, to find the truth,” Gillis said. “To act as if the evidence is half and half is to tell a lie. I refuse to perpetuate that lie.”
Old school journalists may have cared about the truth, but today’s journ-o-lists of the Ministry of Propaganda only cares about the agenda. Lies to further the agenda are considered truth by them.
It’s “a lie” to report OPINION as fact.
Soon, the libs in power will say that presenting balance warrants a death sentence. They're not interested in balance, they're not interested in science, they're only interested in getting their way even if they need to assault the rest of us.
One problem now, is that if Global Warming is ever conclusively demonstrated to be false (by, for example, global temperatures starting a declining trend), then all the hysterical supporters will look like complete idiots. This means that they will have an incentive to double down and suppress any contrary evidence.
Um, the IPCC and the other NGOs openly admit this.
HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHA AHHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
'Facade' is right... but I don't think he knows what that word means.
LOL...I was going to say...and...it isn’t?
He should look up Walter Duranty of the New York Times, who didn't want the death - by starvation - of millions of Russian farmers and their families to screw up The Narrative, back in the 20s and 30s. He helped make that little mess disappear by declining to report on it. Ya gotta break a few eggs, right?
The bulb burns brightest before it burns out
No kidding! I have always maintained, that to understand what liberals are thinking, all you have to do is LISTEN to them, as hard as that may be.
I think FACADE is EXACTLY right, but the hilarious thing is...Gillis missed it completely, I am pretty sure.
THAT is “quality” journalism schools spit out.
*Global Warming presents some serious and immediate dangers to civilization and those perils are entirely the political uses of the hoax to try for total power everywhere and total impoverishment of the bulk of the world’s people.*
Exactly!
The cure is many many thousands of times worse than any possible scenario that they have come up with so far.
“if Global Warming is ever conclusively demonstrated to be false”
That cannot happen, because a testable, falsifiable presentation of Global Warming theory has not been made. In other words, the proponents don’t say “if such and such happens, the theory is false”. That means, of course, that the predictions of the theory are not useful, except perhaps to extract wealth from and exact control upon people.
Global Cooling Deniers need to get a life.
“This is much like the abortion wars: what term you use signals what side you are on,” Gillis said, adding that it’s necessary for reporters to maintain a facade of impartiality.
Gillis told students he liked to use the word “deniers” for “people who oppose climate science,” and that these people should never be called “skeptics.”
Leftists aren't confused.
Leftists are the enemies of humanity.
They don't want to "win."
They want everyone dead.
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.