I think this was broadcast on The Daily Politics yesterday and was followed by a “balanced” discussion, chaired by Andrew Neil, between Bob Watson and Nigel Lawson – it is worse than the introductory report: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11576013

 

While I have high regard for the BBC’s coverage of climate change, The Daily Politics frequently exercises double standards by uncritically promoting the views of ‘sceptics’ while being fiercely critical of mainstream researchers. This approach appears to reflects Andrew Neil’s own views on the subject, as can be seen through his blog (eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/01/the_dam_is_cracking.html).

 

I think it is worth drawing attention to the coverage of climate change by The Daily Politics for Professor Steve Jones’s review of the impartiality of the BBC’s science coverage: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/march/science_impartiality.shtml

 

 

Bob Ward

Policy and Communications Director
Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
London School
of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street

London WC2A 2AE

http://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham

Tel. +44 (0) 20 7106 1236
Mob. +44 (0) 7811 320346


From: Discussion list for the Crisis Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of jo abbess
Sent: 19 October 2010 20:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: The BBC Gets It Completely Wrong Once Again

 

Dear Crisis Forum,

 

This is a really appalling re-write of recent history from the BBC :-

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11574503

"Doubts over scientists' climate change debate claims"

 

I counted at least 10 inaccuracies in a piece of film shorter than an ad break.

 

Surely some of you have some energy left to complain ?

 

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

 

TEXT ON WEB PAGE

 

19 October 2010 

Last updated at 13:48

 

Press coverage has cast further doubt on climate scientists' claims that man-made global warming is real and adversely affecting the planet.

 

Polls show that the public are becoming increasingly confused about the issue. Adam Fleming reports.

 

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

 

TRANSCRIPT OF AUDIO IN FILM PRESENTATION

 

It's the year that "uncertainty" became the buzzword in the climate change debate, even for scientists who are convinced that human activity is warming the planet.

 

Last year saw the publication of private e-mails written in these buildings, the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. Experts spoke of doing "tricks" with numbers. They hinted at the deletion of data that didn't fit their theories.

 

This summer, an inquiry, the last of three, left the scientists' reputation intact, but told them that they had to be more honest about how they reach their conclusions.

 

Then came "Glaciergate". In 2007 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group of international scientists that inform global environmental policy, had written a report saying that most of the glaciers in the Himalyas could melt by 2035, but that was proved to be wildly inaccurate.

 

The head of the IPCC, the Indian academic Rajendra Pachauri came under pressure to quit. In future [the] chairman will serve just one term, and again the academics were told to be more honest about the question marks in their research.

 

Back at home, David Cameron has pledged the "greenest Government ever", but there are limits This week the Coalition announced it wouldn't fund tidal power in the Severn Estuary because the bill was too high.

 

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

 

Furiously punching at the keyboard,

 

jo.

+44 77 17 22 13 96

http://www.joabbess.com

 


Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/planningAndCorporatePolicy/legalandComplianceTeam/legal/disclaimer.htm