BBC4's "Meet the Skeptics"

Lord Monckton is rather upset with the producers of this show, so much that he filed a legal action for a right of reply according to Bishop Hill.

I was interviewed (captured really, they flagged me down in the conference hall foyer with no notice) by this production group at the Heartland conference last year in Chicago, giving well over an hour’s worth of an interview in which they asked the same question several times in different ways, hoping to get the answer they wanted. This is an old news interviewing trick to get that golden sound bite. I knew what they were doing, and kept giving the answers my way.

Then, they showed me the contract they wanted me to sign (no mention at the beginning before the interview) and I spent several minutes reading it, finally deciding that the contract basically amounted to me giving them all rights to my image, words, and opinion, with specific rights to edit them together in “any way they saw fit”. Yes, as I recall, that was exactly the way it was worded in the contract, and basically gave them a license to create their own alternate “Watts interview” reality as they desired. My years in television news have shown me how editing can be brutally unfair in the hands of somebody skilled, and I basically told them to “stuff it” and refused to sign the contract. They spent the next two weeks via email and phone trying to come up with contract variations to get me to sign and I still refused. The entire affair was rushed and unprofessional in my experience.

The “repeated questioning of the same topic” interview technique of these blokes was a tipoff for me that the interview was a setup. I wanted no part of it and refused to allow them legal rights over me by not signing the contract. After watching the trailer below, I’m glad I stood my ground.

Here’s the BBC video and intro text for the program (note: the BBC does not allow people outside of Britain to watch the video; some sort of cranial-rectal problem I’m told, a proxy server in the UK is needed to view it if you live elsewhere):

Filmmaker Rupert Murray takes us on a journey into the heart of climate scepticism to examine the key arguments against man-made global warming and to try to understand the people who are making them.

Do they have the evidence that we are heating up the atmosphere or are they taking a grave risk with our future by dabbling in highly complicated science they don’t fully understand? Where does the truth lie and how are we, the people, supposed to decide?

The film features Britain’s pre-eminent sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton as he tours the world broadcasting his message to the public and politicians alike. Can he convince them and Murray that there is nothing to worry about?

This is the trailer, which everyone can view:

h/t to Bishop Hill

UPDATE: James Delingpole of the Telegraph tells of his experience with this outfit:

Nine months ago, when I was at the Heartland conference in Chicago, I was approached by a  louche, affable, dark-haired, public school charmer called Rupert Murray. With his friend Callum he was making a documentary about climate sceptics for the BBC and wondered if I’d like to take part.

“The BBC? Not bloody likely. You’ve come to stitch us up, haven’t you?” I said.

“Not at all,” said Murray. “Look, there’s something you need to realise. I’m an independent filmmaker, I have no big budget for this, so I’m dependent on my work being original and interesting. The very last thing the BBC wants to commission is another hatchet job on sceptics. How boring and predictable would that be?”

Very true, I thought. It really is about time the BBC examined the issue from the other side. They are a public service broadcaster, after all, not a green investment fund. (Ho ho).

Unfortunately, the ending Delingpole paints is worse that my own, be sure to read his take on it.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

207 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 1, 2011 12:09 am

This actually makes the Horizon program look impartial restrained and balanced….
They went after James Delingpole as well… see his thoughts on how it was done.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100074116/meet-the-sceptics-another-bbc-stitch-up/
Delingpole:
“Let me tell you the story so far:
Nine months ago, when I was at the Heartland conference in Chicago, I was approached by a louche, affable, dark-haired, public school charmer called Rupert Murray. With his friend Callum he was making a documentary about climate sceptics for the BBC and wondered if I’d like to take part.
“The BBC? Not bloody likely. You’ve come to stitch us up, haven’t you?” I said.
“Not at all,” said Murray. “Look, there’s something you need to realise. I’m an independent filmmaker, I have no big budget for this, so I’m dependent on my work being original and interesting. The very last thing the BBC wants to commission is another hatchet job on sceptics. How boring and predictable would that be?”
Very true, I thought. It really is about time the BBC examined the issue from the other side. They are a public service broadcaster, after all, not a green investment fund. (Ho ho).
Over the next few months I came to like and trust Murray. He was there filming Lord Lawson, Lord Monckton, Lord Leach and me when we debated at the Oxford Union. And he was there to capture our joy and surprise when we won – and to hang out drinking with us, afterwards, like he was our mate. By this stage, we’d all come to accept that Murray was genuinely interested in presenting our case sympathetically. In fact, I must admit, I was really looking forward to seeing the finished product. “God this is going to be fantastic!” I thought. “At long bloody last, the BBC is going to do the right thing – and at feature length too.”
read the rest; will anybody ever trust the BBC again?
REPLY: Thanks, I’ve added this to the body of the story – Anthony

February 1, 2011 12:10 am

The Leni Riefenstahl, Triumph of the Will homage was adorable. Pretty much put paid to any credibility this dolt might have had.

February 1, 2011 12:22 am

I almost sprayed coffee all over my computer when that BBC guy said he put aside his bias. This was a pretty clear slander piece.
It portrays Skeptics as old, gun toting, motorcycle riding, nazi’s. It is truly a stunning piece of propaganda. The only people that are shown as rational are warmists.
I am glad that you didn’t sign the paper. Smart move on your part. I will try to remember that lesson in the future.
John Kehr

William Gray
February 1, 2011 12:23 am

This is more balanced.

February 1, 2011 12:25 am

What a hit piece this is. It basically portrays all skeptics as mindless, gun toting, motorcycle riding Nazi’s. They jumped all over Godwin’s law in this one.
I am glad you didn’t sign this one. Smart move that I hope more people can learn from.

Dr A Burns
February 1, 2011 12:29 am

Trenberth must be joking when he says “They tell lies” . It’s not hard to find plenty of his blatant lies, such as claiming his mate Phil Jones didn’t say “there’s been no significant warming for the past 15 years” … of course Phil did say that, on BBC.

Policyguy
February 1, 2011 12:30 am

Lord Monckton rules. This trailer is sanctimonious breast beating at its worst.
Rupert Murray apparently feels the need to use most every iconic reference he can concoct to make skeptics look like crazed, gun loving, boozing, motorcycle gangers, senile, gay, conservative biggots. I suppose someone could create an equally offensive look at alarmists, but its not worth it. What a pathetic trailer, so probably Nobel worthy.

February 1, 2011 12:34 am

BBC – time to say goodbye to the money you forcefully extract from my pocket by means of legal menaces.

Oxonpool
February 1, 2011 12:34 am

You were right not to get sucked into this. The BBC did its usual hatchet job, spinning the story of noble climate scientists against ignorant sceptics.

Ben
February 1, 2011 12:34 am

There is obviously an organised campaign going on by the BBC and other media agencies – I think sceptics are going to need to communicate with one another as much as possible when approached by these people to ensure that we’re all aware of the latest stitch up being planned. Luckily we have Wattsupwiththat to help.

Rhodrich
February 1, 2011 12:34 am

I wouldn’t worry too much about this programme. BBC4 is one of those ‘special interest’ channels that very few people watch. If they’d really wanted to give this some exposure, they would have put it on BBC1 or BBC2.

Mycroft
February 1, 2011 12:35 am

Watched and thought Lord M did not come across too well,but as Anthony has indicated, editing in a skilled way can make an angel seem a devil.
Clearly the out come was already pre determined and lots of questions and facts not even looked into,and soon as i saw Trenberth i knew what sort of prgramme it was meant to be,title was misleading “meet the sckeptics” only saw two Lord M and Prof Lindzen.??warminista’s and BBC getting desperate two programmes on climate change in two weeks, both dissing the sceptics side of the argument.
On the bright side good to see the public in USA and Australia not swallowing the AGW BS story,all we need is balanced programme maker and we could get the message across a lot better and show the facts data fudging and adjustments etc.

KenB
February 1, 2011 12:38 am

Put down by ridicule, suggestion, association and odious editing. Probably the lowest form of TV journalism. Huge money spent on a reporter, to push his networks agenda and what for? really, a nothing result, unless you have a snide agenda in mind. Just about as bad as the Australian female Journalist who was flown all the way to the Antartica, to stand behind “scientists” on the snow, ignore, then brush aside those scientists carefully worded replies to her own pre ordained viewpoint promoting CAGW. The ABC must really fear the truth and consequent loss to their reputation, to trot out that infantile rot.

KenB
February 1, 2011 12:39 am

Left out BBC alongside the ABC – one is as bad as the other!!

Paul Williams
February 1, 2011 12:41 am

What do you expect? The BBC have a pension scheme to protect.
Like Peter Sissons says, the BBC do what the Guardian tells them to.

AleaJactaEst
February 1, 2011 12:43 am

So we’re all redneck oil fixated gun toting nazi-loving extremists.
We’re still right about CO2’s effect on the planet.
What did you expect from the BBC? Balanced journalism?

Michael
February 1, 2011 12:48 am

Nice to see Alex Jones in the trailer. Some people don’t like his style and get a brain fart when they see or hear his name. Most people have no clue who he is. However, his work on credible documentation and support from many credible personalities is helping him work his way out of the MSM closet, Lord Monckton included. Last week I saw Brad Meltzer’s Decoded Season Finale: Secret Societies, on the History Channel. Brad and his team, for the first time in history, exposed The Bohemian Grove secret society on cable TV.
Check the entire 45 minute episode if you like on the History Channel website.
http://www.history.com/shows/brad-meltzers-decoded/videos/playlists/full-episodes#brad-meltzers-decoded-secret-societies

John Lish
February 1, 2011 12:50 am

Dr A Burns,
“there’s been no significant warming for the past 15 years” was part of Phil Jones’ testimony to a UK Parliament select committee. You’ll find it in Hansard.

Dave (UK)
February 1, 2011 12:58 am

Rhodrich says:
February 1, 2011 at 12:34 am

If they’d really wanted to give this some exposure, they would have put it on BBC1 or BBC2.

When the BBC sees the coverage in blogs like this, and responses by James Delingpole et al, they will show it on BBC2 in order to widen their audience for this type of stitch-up.
Not only was the programme a mess, having no logical structure (rather like the woolly thinking of the typical warmist), it attempted to portray sceptics as being among the following types: pensioner, poofter, biker, eccentric, neo-nazi, or coal miner. Yet again, the warmists in the media are resorting to name-calling rather than concentrating on the science.
As for the science, where was Bob Carter? He is a palaeoclimatologist based in Queensland. If anyone knows anything about the climate, he does. We can only guess that he was not interviewed because the Murray would not have been able to twist anything Carter would say, or that Carter would make it clear that, in fact, Murray is the fool.

Stacey
February 1, 2011 1:03 am

Anthony
You were quite right not to sign. The producer/interviewer Murray carried out a complete hatchet job on Monckton.
The programme in Australia, kept referring to the old age of the audience with long shots of a golf course.
The majority of the scientists interviewed were the usual darlings,Trenberth, Santer etc.
The programme concentrated on Monckton, I recall, Prof Lindzen had a very small part compared to the alarmists.
The usual shots of floods etc, the voice over from Murray how he likes motorbikes and wanted to believe the skeptics but couldn’t because the scientists had proved their case, we must all change our life style.
Funny really, lots of people sound bited in Oz an the USA and of course the extremist bits broadcast. It is the British Broadcasting Corporation but no British People interviewed on the streets?
Two complaints made about bias,ageism and alarmism, but nothing will change.
Sorry wish this could have been more analytical but typing on a phone.

Ian E
February 1, 2011 1:05 am

As we who know the BBC say, ‘Those who sup with the devil should use a long spoon’!

Robinson
February 1, 2011 1:06 am

UK Sceptic: BBC – time to say goodbye to the money you forcefully extract from my pocket by means of legal menaces.
How do you propose to do that without throwing out your television set?

Bertram Felden
February 1, 2011 1:09 am

I didn’t watch this, and I didn’t watch the Horizon programme either.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the BBC (or GBC, Greenpeace Broadcasting Corporation) is no more than a propaganda channel these days. It has become a habit of mine to never watch any of their output that has the misnomer ‘science’ in the title or description and to immediately change channels the moment they mention ‘science’ because I know that within milliseconds it will be another AGW diatribe.
In this way I have managed to avoid hating my television.

Tony
February 1, 2011 1:12 am

The BBC have gone too far. This programe is SO bad that you can see the deployment complete set of journalistic techniques that constitute and motivate the MSM.
And as AGW is sustained by the use of just such techniques, we can see that the failure of AGW is also the failure of the MSM.
So, it ain’t just about the science any more; the stakes are much higher.

Mike Haseler
February 1, 2011 1:15 am

I think this will all backfire for the BBC.
The British don’t take kindly to deceitful attacks on individuals. The days when the BBC could just dismiss Lord Monckton as a “Thatcherite” have gone, it’s not the Lords fault that they still exist as they are.
All this will do is to highlight Lord Monckton in the UK public’s mind and trigger a series of high profile interviews on major TV shows (excluding any run by the BBC) leaving a very sour taste in the mouth of the BBC viewers who are fed up to the back teeth of BBC propaganda on global warming.

1 2 3 9
Verified by MonsterInsights