Media hypocrisy: Wikileaks good, Climategate bad

Double standards...?

More journalistic double standards in our balanced media. Fairfax loves to defend Julian Assange, darling of the Left, for the release of the Wikileaks material, but is far more reticent about defending those who were responsible for the release of the Climategate emails.

Sunday Age editorial, 12 December 2010

Julian Assange and the public’s right to know

WikiLeaks, acting with newspapers around the world including The Age and The Sunday Age, is publishing information that makes governments uncomfortable. This action affirms the role of the media, which have a duty to expose the secret machinations of those who wield power. In the US, the chairman of the Senate homeland security committee, Joe Lieberman, has suggested that because it published some of the leaked information The New York Times might be subject to criminal investigation. This would breach the First Amendment protecting freedom of the press.

So leaks of intelligence that may damage national security is fine, because it is the duty of a journalist to “expose the secret machinations of those who wield power.”

The IPCC and climate scientists around the world also wield power. Lots of it. National governments are on the verge of turning their economies upside down on the basis of the IPCC’s dire predictions for the climate if emissions are not drastically reduced. How would The Age respond to exposing the “secret machinations” of the IPCC? Very differently, of course.

When Climategate 2.0 broke this week, The Age was more interested in the opinion of Phil Jones, one of the alleged “victims” of the leak, rather than staunchly supporting the release of the emails themselves:

The Age, 24 November 2011

Climatologist speaks out after new leak

The British climatologist ensnared in a major new email leak has taken his case to the public, arguing that he and his colleagues’ comments have again been taken out of context.

The University of East Anglia’s Phil Jones was one of the major players in the controversy that erupted two years ago over the publication of emails which caught prominent scientists stonewalling critics and attacking them in sometimes vitriolic terms.

The University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit is one of the world’s leading centres for the study of how world temperatures have varied over time [not any more – Ed], and Jones came under particular scrutiny following the 2009 disclosures – even receiving death threats over allegations that he was a leading a conspiracy to hype the dangers of climate change.

Jones and his colleagues have since been vindicated by a series of independent investigations, but the university’s reputation has been dented by criticism that it refused to share data with sceptics.

Jones said that his “heart did sink a bit” when he heard about the most recent leak, which apparently consists of old messages held back the first time around. (source)

A quick Google search of “Wikileaks” at “” produces 15,400 results. A similar search of “Climategate” produces just 330, barely 2% of the coverage given to Wikileaks. Fairfax also invariably refers to the release of the Climategate emails as a “hacking”, in order to taint it with illegality or criminal behaviour. Naturally, Fairfax also avoids giving prominence to the story because it challenges one of their preset agendas, that of the reality of dangerous man-made climate change.

So instead of robustly defending the release of the emails as a “journalistic duty”, Fairfax pens a teary piece about the “victims”, including rehashing the non-story of the “death threats” in order to garner sympathy for the scientists whose confidences have been betrayed. Such a stark contrast.


  1. The print media are becoming more and more irrelevant by the day. They seem hell bent in driving the nails into their own coffin

  2. Of course ClimateGates are ‘bad’ … they expose too many of the huge numjber of climate scammers.

  3. Lynn Yohana Howard via Facebook says:

    Hit the nail on the head

  4. It’s almost like the decisions of the paper are discussed in a meeting and everyone wants to keep their job. One head editor knows that he can sell more papers. (Its always been knowledge that labor types buy more papers, have to fill the day with something when you don’t work). Every time I think that something has finally put it all to shame, the warmists just keep finding some stupidly insane way of explaining things. It has literally reached a saturation point whereby no matter what information or evidence you put in front of them, they have agreed with Global warming for so long, and told so many of their friends etc that they can no longer back down.

  5. The hypocrisy becomes even more outstanding when you consider the following awards and nominations for:

    Julian Assange:
    Economist Freedom of Expression Award (2008)
    Amnesty International UK Media Award (2009)
    Sam Adams Award (2010)
    Readers’ Choice for TIME magazine’s Person of the Year (2010)
    Le Monde Person of the Year (2010)
    Sydney Peace Foundation gold medal (2011)
    Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism (2011)
    Voltaire Award of the Victorian Council for Civil Liberties (2011)
    Romanian Press Freedom Award (2011)
    Nomination Nobel Peace Prize (2011)
    Honorary member Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (2011)

    “hackers” …
    “stolen emails” …
    “tracking down the hackers” …
    “Climate deniers shouldn’t get too excited” …
    ” ? ” …
    “old messages” …
    “ClimateGate: People need to go to jail” …
    “Big Fuss Over Nothing” emails …
    “Climategate was a scandal of corrupt, deceitful, and shoddy reporting” …

  6. I hadn’t though of that but you are absolutely right. Thank you, now I have even more ammunition for debates.

    like: What if the climategate emails was released by wikileaks?

    Going to be fun to see how them weasel themselves out of that one trying not to look like hypocrites. 🙂

  7. Mervyn Sullivan says:

    Amazing… to see how, in my lifetime, this form of moral corruption has swept through the western countries.

    The problem is that the media and all the others who have been promoting the IPCC mantra simply cannot even consider the idea that they have been barking up the wrong tree. They are prepared to maintain the lie at any cost. And unfortunately, until politicians acknowledge the IPCC mantra is false, nothing will change.

    The pseudo-science will continue to be promoted… the rogue scientists will continue to be praised… the genuine scientists will be belittled and, sadly, the world will no longer be a better place.

  8. Jimmy Haigh says:

    Motsatt November 26, 2011 at 8:42 pm

    “like: What if the climategate emails was released by wikileaks?’

    I’m sure I saw a video somewhere in which Assange and one of his sidekicks were answering questions from the audience and they claimed that they had been the source of the Climategate emails…

  9. Anna Lemma says:

    Jimmy Haigh: “I’m sure I saw a video somewhere in which Assange and one of his sidekicks were answering questions from the audience and they claimed that they had been the source of the Climategate emails…”

    Imagine the cognitive dissonance if that were to happen! Millions of warmist heads would asplode!! (think of the Nazis at the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark).


  1. […] Media hypocrisy: Wikileaks good, Climategate bad Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]

%d bloggers like this: