Blink and you’d have missed it. Out of ten minutes of relevant and substantial material they recorded, just one tiny soundbite made it into the final cut of tonight’s “6pm with George Negus”, a trivial point that we “need more debate.” I’m not going to give a link to it – it’s really not worth watching. It was a typical alarmist piece with Will Steffen featuring heavily.
This is the battle we face with the media. They are afraid to give people the tools to let them make up their own minds.
Welcome to the world of the mainstream media. All I can say is, long live the blogosphere.
Twitter...
Australian Climate Madness 
Despicable, but not surprising. Negus’ craven alarmist group think mindset was apparent long ago. His grovelling interview with the repugnant Nicholas Stern in June 2009 still sticks in the craw. To-night’s travesty was another low point in gutter journalism.
http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/transcript/id/600050/n/Interview-with-Nicholas-Stern
[snip – irrelevant rant – don’t bother coming back, by the way]
I think a good example of this is the global temp for 2010.
If you went by the MSM you would think that it was the hottest year by far but that is not the case but the man/woman in the street does not see the real figures because there is no real news in non scary stories.
Old George is probably finding out, via ratings, that there are enough left-leaning talk and interview shows for a viewer to choose from. The moment someone comes out with an interview show that even slightly leans away towards the centre and provides some balance may suddenly find a large amount of viewers who have been lost in the wilderness looking for something to watch. Perhaps the new investors in Ch 10 might start to encourage a bit of balance after all.
I only watch my local views because they mainly talk about issues affecting my daily life and has an excellent weather section.
I think you worry too much. In the US our MSM is the same. Maybe I hang with the wrong crowd but most people I know either don’t take climate change seriously and the one who have strong feelings think it is nonsense. Unlike most news stories, the weather is something experience every day. They don’t see catastrophe approaching in the weather noise. So while warmists may have the MSM, it seems to most mother nature has other ideas on where she is headed.
Sean
To see what happens when good people do nothing or don’t care look no further than Britain.
The people who are running this scam just love it if the public doesn’t get involved till it is to late then you get things like the EPA.
Agreed. Sean’s point is valid when there are no important consequences. For example, the media tends to go crazy over celebrities when, in my experience, most people couldn’t give a hang.
The CAGW scam is altogether different. Its threat to economies, living standards, individual liberty and science itself may well be unprecedented. Inaction spells disaster. Fittingly, rukkidding, you seem to allude to Edmund Burke’s maxim:
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
Hi Sean, I actually think it is very important what the MSM feeds their viewers, readers and/or listeners. People who are not necessarily up to speed on the climate debate, via the blogosphere for example, are being told what to think by a biased media. They play down the uncertainties in climate science, and push the consensus for all its worth (also remembering that they are governed by the following simple rule: end of the world = good story, nothing to see here = no story).
I saw it. I don’t know why they bothered pretending at some balance. It would be bad enough if it were only on where we are being fed propaganda, but it isn’t. Leftist promotion and political correctness now permeates media programming.
Would Negus have been calling the shots with the editing?
Is it just coincidence that the BBC here in the UK aired a show called “science under attack”, it was hosted by Sir Paul Nurse who happens to be the President of the Royal Society & Nobel prize winner, trying desperately to debunk sceptics he interviewed James Delingpole of the Daily Telegraph U,K who is a well known sceptic, anyhow he caught Delingpole off guard by comparing denialism to not listening to a doctor regarding the cancer scare scenerio, needless to say delingpole was speechless as he didnt expect such a pathetic comparison to be made by a supposed educated & level headed scientist, of course the BBC used this section to make Delingpole look stupid, anyhow here is a link to the cringeworthy prog, & note that Phil Jones from the UEA (climategate fame) is interviewed but no mention of him ignoring the FOI request he was guilty of.,,,,,,,http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00y4yql/Horizon_20102011_Science_Under_Attack/
Sceptics were NEVER going to get a fair run on a program entitled “Science Under Attack” aired on the whoring BBC.
A more fitting title would have been “Religion Under Attack.”
And there would be no problem with the content..
That BBC video doesn’t run “in our area”, froggy, but the gist of the blubbering gush by the new head of the debauched Royal Society is here
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-face-shocking-levels-of-vilification-over-discoveries-2192462.html
BTW, Nurse has a Nobel Prize under his belt. Is that supposed to be good? Gore has one too. And porn peddler Pachauri. And Obama – for seeming before doing.
Try these Graham.
Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2wMGU8-2bE
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FklwzRihv6Y
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHr36wELGrY
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orlqa039jlQ
Part 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvZS2USXPms
Part 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehlZNEv3mec
BE WARNED!, You might want to have a bucket handy!.
Delingpole shouldn’t have allowed himself to get so flustered. Morano would have used the opportunity to debunk the myth of the Holy Consensus.
I suspect Channel 10 would have been hoping to similarly trip up Simon. The trivial 5-second sound bite they used, suggests that they didn’t manage to do so. The chances of a climate sceptic being allowed a win on Australia’s left-ridden TV stations is probably around zero. Simon was lucky to at least not lose.
Agreed, I reckon Delingpole is great, but Morano would have (rightly) laughed this off as you say…
Though I still feel that Delinpole handled that question poorly, from Jo Nova’s page it appears that the BBC interviewed him for 3 hours.
Jo’s page: http://tinyurl.com/456vch5
Ever sat for a three hour exam? Imagine being allowed no blunders.
I think that TV interviews, either in Australia or England, aren’t going to be of any benefit to the climate sceptics while the latter have no say in what gets presented. It’s like being in a war and asking your enemy to supply your munitions.
Absolutely, he was set up for a deceptive attempt to discredit from the bloody start. And further, they displayed their disgraceful breed of “balanced reporting” by only airing the part where he stumbled.
They must take the public for complete FOOLS…
James talks his experience here:-
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100073116/oh-no-not-another-unbiased-bbc-documentary-about-climate-change/
To Simon et al.,
I know it’s easy to get wrapped up in the one sided portrayal of climate science in the media but I think when you really read polls to see how committed the population is in controlling this threat to humanity you’ll find that when it comes to committing personal funds to this cause, most draw the line at half the cost of a dinner out in a months time. That’s not much more than many would give a panhandler on the street. Does that sound like the public is being swayed? Folks have been hammered for years on climate change and frankly, most have more important things to worry about. The haunting the library poll bears this out. The repetition of the “worse than we thought” projected scenarios is seen like an advertising tag-line which of course it is. Give people a little credit, they actually get real smart when you start talking about their money. They are beginning to see how much these green schemes cost, directly out of pocket and indirectly in lost opportunities.
“Give people a little credit”
….and give the propagandists a little time.
What can be achieved with control of the media and a little time?
Just ask Joseph Goebels…
To Loaded Dog,
The circumstances today are quite different than in Germany in the 30’s. The German economy was weakened by WWI and then with reparations demanded by France, further devastated their economy in the aftermath. So the proud Germans, their economy in a ditch, were primed to listen to a group who preached Aryan superiority. The relative properity of today makes people much less inclined to listen to a radical fringe group, particularly when that group is promissing LESS properity. Second, communication is now viral and interactive. Mr. Goebels would need a very different strategy in this day and age when everything message he made could be fact checked. Unfortunately for the MSM, they still have Mr. Goebels mindset and think they control the message.
Perhaps I have a very different perspective here in the US than you have in Australia as we don’t really have an official news agency like the ABC or the BBC in the UK. We can get news from traditional liberal media as well as several conservative ones. Read a variety of sources and most folks can sort truth from opinion. I would think when “authoritiative” sources start pushing stories that are inconsistent with personal reality, people will trust their reaility and the “authority” will lose credibility.
I am an early retiree and stopped buying newspapers some years ago, as did many others according to circulation reports. Television is going the same way, at least in my anecdotal perception.
Whe the Labor government hands out tax breaks worth $250,000,000.00 they do expect a lot of loyalty from the free to air TV stations.
Different with ABC they’re more left then the Labor / Greens coalition.
Yes it’s a terrible thing.
After pledging help with our money they shouldn’t be treated like this:-
http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillard-defends-flood-levy-to-the-hilt/20110128-1a7hu.html
What’s the country coming to when a politician can’t buy support with our money?