From cartoonist Marc Roberts, via Andy Revkin:
We await Josh.
A new apology today from 10:10’s director, to replace the half-witted first one. [Game show buzzer sounds] too little, too late.
Statement by Eugenie Harvey, Director of 10:10 UK
Last week, 10:10 made available a short film. Following the initial reaction to the film we removed it from our website and issued an apology on Friday 2 October.
Subsequently there has been negative comment about the film, particularly on blogs, and concern from others working hard to build support for action on climate change. We are very sorry if this has distracted from their efforts.
We are also sorry to our corporate sponsors, delivery partners and board members, who have been implicated in this situation despite having no involvement in the film’s production or release.
We will learn from this mistake. Today I have written to supporters and stakeholders explaining that we will review processes and procedures to make sure it cannot happen again. Responsibility for this process is being taken by the 10:10 board.
The media coverage of the film was not the kind of publicity we wanted for 10:10, nor for the wider movement to reduce carbon emissions.
If people have been in touch with us personally about the film, we will be replying to individual emails over the next few days. Meanwhile our thanks go out to all those who support 10:10 and who work to combat the threat of climate change.
Eugenie Harvey
Director, 10:10 UK
hello@1010uk.org
NYT’s Andrew Revkin says:
If the goal had been to convince people that environmental campaigners have lost their minds and to provide red meat (literally) to shock radio hosts and pundits fighting curbs on greenhouse gases, it worked like a charm. Of course the goal might have been buzz more than efficacy. Too often these days, that’s the online norm. They succeeded on that front. I, among many others, am forced to write about it. Congratulations.
…
I’d like to see the group’s sponsors, including Sony, figure out an upside to this effort. They should either state why they continue to provide support or pull out.
Ask and ye shall receive, WUWT commenter Katabasis notes:
Official response from Sony:
“Thank you for your email concerning the video released by the 10:10 climate change campaign group. Sony has supported the 10:10 climate change campaign because we share its objective to reduce carbon emissions. However, we strongly condemn the “No Pressure” video which was conceived, produced and released by 10:10 entirely without the knowledge or involvement of Sony. The company considers the video to be ill-conceived and in extremely bad taste. We also believe the video risks undermining the work of the many thousands of members of the public, schools and universities, local authorities and many businesses, of which Sony is one, who support the long-term aims of the 10:10 movement and who are actively working towards the reduction of carbon emissions.
As a result we have taken the decision to disassociate ourselves from 10:10 at this time.
In our press statement we will be posting tomorrow morning we reaffirm our ongoing commitment to the reduction of global carbon emissions as part of our ‘Road to Zero’ environmental plan.”
First seen here:
http://ktwop.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/sony-disassociate-themselves-from-1010/
Paul Chesser at the American Spectator writes:
It looks like Sony and Kyocera Mita have demanded their removal from all associations with the extremist climate group 10:10.org, which produced that exploding schoolchildren video last week. The corporations’ names have been removed from the list of partners, and a lengthy post by Sony’s point-person on climate change, Naomi Climer, has been deleted from the 10:10 site.
Not only that, but a huge U.S. environmentalist promoter and partner, 350.org (headed by Bill McKibben), is no longer listed as an organizational partner. Both 10:10 and 350 have been heavily promoting an October 10 (10/10/10) “global workday” to supposedly bring fresh attention to the global warming threat. The message from 350.org’s press shop:
We respect 10:10’s previous work to encourage companies, schools, and churches to voluntarily cut their carbon emissions 10%. Upon seeing the video, however, we have informed 10:10 that we can no longer remain partners on 10/10/10 or any other initiative. 350.org maintains an absolute commitment to nonviolence in word and deed.
Ow, that’s gotta hurt.
More from NYT:
This from the article suggests that the 10:10 blunder has sucked all the online oxygen out of the environmental movement:
A YouTube repost (of the 10:10 video) by a third party Thursday got more than 149,000 views over the weekend and elicited more than 2,300 comments. Several other versions have topped 100,000 views, as well.
A Sierra Club video featuring a National Football League player warning that coal ash is a health threat to children got 95 YouTube views during the same interval.
And speaking of oxygen, the list of sponsors dwindles, and then there was one:
O2 is the only sponsor holdout thus far, we’ll see how long that lasts.
Post your updates and latest tips below, and I’ll include important ones here in the body of the post.
====================================================
1. Oh, and I should add this for Mr. Gareth Renowden, of “Hot Topic” New Zealand, the purported leading global warming website of New Zealand
Well Gareth, looks like your wrongheaded opinion of “sense of humour failure” has been falsified. Time to come clean and admit you’ve boobed.
Sony, that’s one. So Kyocera backed out, too? Still, that’s sweet! WTG everybody!
Just a thought…….corporate sponsors do things because they believe money is to be gained. If Sony pulls out of this, it’s because they understand how much clout the skeptic community has…………..the skeptics ROCK!!!!
Interesting to see how many sponsors have deserted them so quickly. When this garbage first surfaced I went to their website and was amazed at the amount of high-end sponsorships they had. Now, there’s just one! Love it!
We can e-mail sponsors. Again, no pressure.
The clip was an overdose of honesty and transparency.
Romm told us it was about messaging. Didn’t the 70 year old hippies like Hansen and Romm come out of the peace movement?
Why is it so easy to turn crackpot ideas into legislation in the UK?
And of course the spoofers have been at work!
Why not cut right to the chase?
The latest on Pachauri in context of 10:10:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/10/think-of-children_1553.html
Smokey- because our Parliament constitutionally has absolute power. It wields power “on behalf of the monarch”. There are no limits. And because we and the USA are the Progressive heartlands, is the other reason. Get rid of us (blow us up, perhaps, with a press of a button) and Progressivism- the whole package; PC, Green, etc etc, would just vanish from the face of the Earth.
Back with the video, I must admit how heartening this is that it has become such a major scandal with hardly any MSM involvement at all. Tepid articles in a couple of newspapers, including a ludicrous apologetic in the Telegraph implying that the outrage is a publicity coup, but basically silence. And yet 10:10 appear to be in meltdown. It looks like the blogosphere really does have teeth. Arguably the measure of the significance of the media is the ability to bring down the mighty. If that is so, then the blogosphere has achieved significant significance.
I keep thinking about Franny and Lizzie and Eugenie and all the other girls in the dorm laughing like drains at their creation a few days ago, so blissfully unaware of what they had done. It is chilling that they made it, but it is gratifying that (as it appears) they have paid the price for it. Only a few days before their big “day of doing” and the campaign is in tatters.
It appears that the 10:10 organisation has acquired 20:20 hindsight. Now all they need is a mop and bucket to clean up the rest of the putrescent splatter they have created by flogging the dead (stalking) horse.
Here’s the viral profile for what the 10:10 grant-hippies and Three-Home Curtis thought would happen with their oh-so postmodern effort:
Shown in schools and cinemas, the kids would pick up first on the Big Red Button device, going on to use a mimed BRB in a similar way to a “talk to the hand” gesture against anyone telling them something they don’t like. Meanwhile, the stinking “message” floats into their uncritical minds as a Fact of Life, i.e. “Deniers are too lazy or selfish to act for the benefit of the Many, so we would all be better-off without them”.
How clever they thought they were.
And how richly deserved the outcome for them now.
Open letter to Eugenie:
1. “We will learn from this mistake.”
Please tell us why it was a mistake. It is clear that you individually and collectively thought it was a brilliant idea; otherwise you wouldn’t have put a great deal of effort and resources into it.
The fact that it was met with revulsion from supporters and foes alike simply illustrates that you are out of touch with the world. However, the commercials are totally consistent with your philosophy. They weren’t a “mistake” at all.
2. “Today I have written to supporters and stakeholders explaining that we will review processes and procedures to make sure it cannot happen again.”
It is not your “processes and procedures” that are faulty, it is your view of the world that needs to change.
3. “Responsibility for this process is being taken by the 10:10 board”
This is a MAJOR screw-up. I trust you will keep us posted on the firings and resignations that must inevitably happen if your board is truly responsible in dealing with a calamity that has put your organization’s viability at risk.
Quite a train wreck the Environmental Illuminati got themselves into. I wonder how this is going down with the current US Administration plans to focus on Environmental legislation this coming year. And gotta wonder if it will be screened in Cancun ( or if there will be anyone in Cancun to watch it ) .
“a lengthy post by Sony’s point-person on climate change, Naomi Climer, has been deleted from the 10:10 site.”
I would have liked to have seen that one !
Surely this is a hate crime under legislation that has been introduced in Australia and many other countries. Shouldn’t official complaints be made and prosecution insisted on.
As many of us predicted, the video did more harm than good to their “cause”.
“..we will review processes and procedures to make sure it cannot happen again”
How? Through the use of REAL science to discover that CO2 ain’t the villain? Doubt it..!
Note on the “eco-splatter film”… You Tube has put it behind a “member only” wall. I believe that you have to be above a certain age, to become a “member”.
Now I know, I know a lot of our “friends” will say, “You Tube is running”. But actually, by policy, they should have done this RIGHT AWAY.
They are “behind” in their responsibility, but they HAVE done the right thing.
Of course, had they done that IMMEDIATELY, maybe 10:10 would have gotten the message.
Nah, wishful thinking that.
P.S. Just noticed I’ve been using a Name fill in that dropped the “son” from my name. (Actually a friend Emailed me and noted the problem.)
Well, it seems that my decision to boycott Sony (for other reasons) was fairly wise since they were involved with these halfwits in the first place. I am also cheered by the fact that their profits have been suffering as well.
Red Meat message, can’t say I’ve heard that one before.
I guess you learn a new phrase now & then. Just didn’t expect to see one.
The board members might have been thinking about how to get a really shocking message out.
Borrowing from the past?
Cause overboard.
People have what seems to me a very odd trait: we follow popularity.
We care what actors think. A movie becomes popular because it is well written, well produced, well advertised, well edited, well cast, and well acted. We as a group only seem to give accolades to the actor/actress and make them a “star” and subsequently give more value to their opinions, even though they didn’t do more for the film than the other professionals involved. They were cast for a well written part which was directed and marketed well, yet we elevate only them to worship status.
We care what sports stars think. The opinions of people born with the genetic predisposition for athleticism who are coached well and work hard are afforded more credibility than the opinions of others.
Actors/actresses and athletes can “sell” a message. It’s really odd to me that this is the case. Most of us just seem geared to unquestionably following those who appear prominent to us.
We collectively don’t seem able to differentiate between the expertise someone has and doesn’t have.
Case in point: using Julian Anderson as the skeptic in this tasteless video. The marketers knew the message they were selling: Agent Scully was the skeptic and it turns out she was wrong, Moulder was right all along, and “bam!” she gets blown up for being a skeptic. She has become a message, an advertisement simply because we’ve seen her on TV.
Why should we care what Julian Anderson thinks about CO2? Obviously she supports the AGW scare or she wouldn’t be in the video, but why should we care? I would wager that a far smaller proportion of actors/actresses and athletes have a considered opinion on AGW than the common person. I’ve seen enough Leno/Letterman/Stewart interviews to recognize that “stars” probably didn’t pay much attention in school as they were simply seeking attention instead.
I understand that arguing from the specific to the general is illogical, and I’m not doing that with the Scully reference above. I’m simply illustrating an example of how so many seem to follow beliefs/individuals simply because they are known and popular, instead of because of what they do, who they are, or the merits of the belief.
We need Steve McIntyre and Anthony Watts billboards across the country.
I am not hopeful for our societies’ ability to properly reason its way past the marketing message of AGW. I cannot recall the last time a high schooler in a cashier position was able to make change without assistance from the register. There’s no way those kiddos who can’t count to/subtract from 100 will reason through the AGW hype, and they collectively out number, and therefore will out vote, us.
Most people just simply do not stop and think. So many computer viruses/worms are spread by simply sending an email or a tweet saying “look what So-And-So has done now”.
We seem geared to following popularity, and I don’t get it. Unfortunately, AGW is popular.
I sent this to Ms. Harvey a few minutes ago:
Dear Ms. Harvey,
Your organisation needs to be radically overhauled. Whoever commissioned this appalling video needs to be fired. Producing such an evil and extreme video, then attempting to blame the negative reaction on “sense of humour failures” by people who objected is the lowest of the low. This video directly threatened children; tow the line on CO2 or get killed. What sort of organisation are you to put out such a horrific message. The UK Police should be looking at prosecuting you for incitement to violence.
I live in the Philippines, a third world country, and work for an educational charity. All around me I see the effects of rampant growth without thought, the destruction of natural habitats, the appalling poverty in which the majority live, the systemic corruption. I have taught my children that conservation and recycling are essential. Organisations such as yours, funded by the taxpayers and large corporations should focus on education about all conservation issues, not just an unproven causality that CO2 causes global warming.
In disgust,
Chris Boughton
when will the Managers of Tottenham Hotspurs, who must have arranged for the footballers’ participation, and the Administrators of Camden School for Girls disassociate themselves?
10:10’s Franny Armstrong sent the following out to 10:10 listees before the scandal broke:
alisonlowndes’s posterous: Blowing up footballers + 3 weeks till 10:10:10
From: Franny Armstrong
Dearest listees,
What a fantastically bonkers time we had on the film shoot for our very own Richard Curtis-penned mini-movie last week. First we dressed up a load of friendly 10:10 volunteers as office workers and blew them up in West London. Then we took over Camden School for Girls (see article in local rag) and blew up some schoolchildren. Then we headed down to Tottenham Hotspurs’ training ground and blew up some footballers (including even-taller-in-real-life Peter Crouch). And finally we went to a sound studio in Soho and blew up Gillian Anderson. With that kind of effort, surely we’ll have sorted out this climate change thing by Christmas?* And when I say “we”, I mean our 35-person full-on grown-up film crew, complete with lighting trucks, portaloos, paramedics and catering vans. Honestly, it was enough to get a girl completely hooked on making movies again – not to mention having to wipe away a surreptitious tear when producer/blagmeister supreme Matthew Fone explained that £400,000 pounds worth of crew, equipment and costumes had been donated by people who love 10:10. Aw…
Our next innocent lambs are Peter Crouch, Ledley King and two others (sorry, I’m an Arsenal fan). I felt bad for the one who didn’t speak a word of English for whom Director Dougal’s perfectly straightforward instructions – “on action, face the coach and listen to him as though you’re really interested. then when I shout “bang”, jump out of your skins, look towards each other in confusion and then run off in different directions” – went straight over his head.
http://alisonlowndes.posterous.com/blowing-up-footballers-3-weeks-till-101010
10:10 have removed O’Donovan’s post below from their website, but here is the cached version:
Lights, camera and carbon cutting action
On set at 10:10’s mini movie shoot
posted by Cian O’Donovan
Standing at the back of a classroom set watching a master-craftsman go about his trade is truly a privilege, despite the muscle ache. Dougal Wilson, director behind that incredible John Lewis ad and a whole host of zany arty music videos is in his element. Being on-set is akin to standing under the Sistine Chapel as Michelangelo ponders whether those two fingers are going to touch or not…
The shoot itself took place in Camden School for Girls, a perfect location considering how important 10:10 schools have been for the campaign over the year. And the school itself was beyond generous in their assistance. All totalled, Jamie and company have put together a film that should have cost over £400,000 for virtually nothing….
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OhFPWO56NRsJ:www.1010global.org/2010/09/lights-camera-and-carbon-cutting-action+%22Camden+School+for+Girls%22+10:10&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au
QOTW? From Dr. Richard North,
“With LBJ and the Vietnam War in mind, though, we could perhaps stand outside their office [10:10] chanting: “Hey! Hey! Ten-ten day, how many kids did you blow away?
But that would be a bit below the belt … wouldn’t it?”
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/10/epic-win.html
Konrad says:
October 4, 2010 at 5:50 pm
It appears that the 10:10 organisation has acquired 20:20 hindsight.
=============================================
Nice one!
Entering the Parody Zone:
The Early 21st Century Classics in Ideological Environmentalism Humor.
Episode #2 – From old Eugenie, Franny, Daniel, Lizzie and the whole 10:10 team
Exiting the Parody Zone.
John