If you ever needed an example of "liberal media bias" in the USA, here it is.

Full disclosure. I’ve worked in television and radio for 30 years, and I’ve seen many examples of bias in my time. Bernard Goldberg, who was a reporter for the CBS Evening News, documents even more in his book at left.

After this story, there’s example of a pattern for what peaked in the 10:10 video. – Anthony

Exploding Children in Eco-Group’s Video Fails to Upset Liberal News Media

Shocking British short to promote cutting carbon emissions shows skeptics being blown up for not participating.

By Julia A. Seymour

Business & Media Institute

10/6/2010 3:11:11 PM

Red is the new green, according to a horrific short film put together by global warming alarmists in Britain for 10:10 a “Global Day of Doing.” Blood red that is.

The group 10:10 UK’s “No Pressure” video advertisement that was intended to promote its cause begins with a teacher lecturing her students: “Just before you go there’s a brilliant idea in the air that I’d like to run by you. Now it’s called 10:10 – the idea is that everyone starts cutting their carbon emissions by 10 percent, thus keeping the planet safe for everyone, eventually.”

Preaching global warming alarmism to children is nothing shocking, but the next part of the film was. The teacher singles out the two students who are skeptical about participating, presses a red button and BLAM! those children’s bodies explode as blood and guts cover their classmates.

Skeptical soccer players, businesspeople and even actress Gillian Anderson all get blown up in the “disturbing” video for not complying with the wishes of the global warming crowd.

The violent depiction may be a new low for the environmental movement, but its violent rhetoric has been in use for years. Yet, the response from the liberal news media in the U.S. has been minimal, despite the willingness of the same outlets to portray – without a shred of evidence – conservatives as “incendiary” and violent.

Despite the horrific nature of the video and the message that skeptics should be killed, the television news media, with the exception of Fox News, haven’t reported on it as of October 5.

The New York Times has run a couple of articles on its website, and James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal wrote a strong condemnation October 5 of the “green supremacists” that created the video. But, so far at least, much of the national news media have ignored the controversy.

The video was outrageous enough to upset even climate-change extremist Bill McKibben, who called it “the kind of stupidity that hurts our side.” Taranto said that the video had “drawn lots of criticism, much of which to our mind is not strong enough.” Perhaps he had the Time magazine’s blog headline in mind which callously read: “Blowing Up British Kids: Not Everyone’s Cup of Tea.”

But compare the minimal, isolated journalistic condemnation of such a violent and shocking film, to the volume of news stories portraying tea partiers and conservatives violent, without any proof whatsoever. On March 25, NBC’s Ann Curry harangued Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., about Republicans “encouraging the violence” against Democrats.

Curry specifically cited a map from former Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin’s website that had shown weak Democratic districts in crosshairs. She pressed McCain saying “Do you know, recommend that your party use less incendiary language?”

McCain replied that terms like “targeted” and “battleground” are part of the “political lexicon.” Such terms have been long used by both parties and by the news media without concern of actual violence, yet Curry declared “These are very dangerous times.”

A few days after that “Today” interview, CNN condemned Palin with an onscreen caption that read: “INCITING VIOLENCE?” as Palin was showing speaking in Nevada.

Anchor Don Lemon said on March 28, “Sarah Palin takes on one of the highest ranking Democrats right in his own backyard, all while causing another uproar by urging tea parties to quote ‘reload.’ And the question is, are comments like that inciting violence and name-calling over the health care bill and the like?” The panelists that answered that question agreed that Obama’s political opponents were inciting violence and were motivated by racism.

But Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen took the criticism of conservatives to an absurd level on October 5 by arguing that the Tea Party movement is like those responsible for the 1970 Kent State shooting. Cohen claimed a “language of rage” fuels the Tea Party and took shots at Glenn Beck and New York gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino.

Violent Video, an Attempt at Humor?

After sparking outrage over the violent video, 10:10 pulled the video and issued an apology which read in part: “At 10:10 we’re all about trying new and creative ways of getting people to take action on climate change. Unfortunately in this instance we missed the mark … Oh well, we live and learn.”

The 10:10 UK climate group, which has several corporate sponsors including Sony, Kyocera Mita and O2, along with a number of celebrity supporters, claimed the video was supposed to be humorous. 10:10 said its sponsors did not have prior knowledge of the video and Sony issued a statement condemning the video as “ill-conceived and tasteless” and said they were “disassociating” from the group.

Kyocera Mita is reconsidering its partnership with 10:10 and said they were “very shocked by the movie.”

“We wanted to find a way to bring this critical issue back into the headlines whilst making people laugh,” said more of 10:10’s apology. But is humor a valid defense for portraying the murder of people who disagree with you?

That was the basic defense Jim Edwards of CBS Interactive’s BNet gave for the video. Edwards said, “No one but the most extreme climate change denier believes this is actually what environmentalists want. It’s obviously just a joke outrageous enough to actually get people’s attention.”

WSJ’s Taranto wrote that “one may hope that Jim Edwards is right when he denies that ‘this is actually what environmentalists want.’ But it’s bad enough that this is what they fantasize about — and that they manifestly felt no inhibition about airing such a depraved fantasy in public.”

Full editorial here

=========================================================

This incident would be simply a bad aberration if it were not for the fact that we have had a string of such blunders from the green movement.

Let’s go all the way back to 1990, where the National Resources Defense Council uses a group of babies, a John Lennon song, and Tom cruise, Whoopi Goldberg, Billy Crystal, and Demi Moore to push what they are selling.

By itself, harmless. But it does represent the beginning of a trend in the global warming movement with these two points; be afraid for the children, and pay attention to clueless celebrities. It is a theme that has been repeated again and again.

For example in 2006, we had a little girl that was going to be run over by a freight train if we didn’t do something about climate change:

Here’s another from 2006 called “Tick” using dozens of children:

While I can’t be certain, it looks like they may have used the same child actress for both of these. Compare:

Then we have this difficult to watch Finnish TV ad from Greenpeace showing a baby that could drown in a bathtub if we don’t do something about climate change

There’s the drowning puppy bedtime story from ACT ON CO2:

Then they move on to the beloved animals committing suicide:

Plane Stupid’s Polar bears falling from the sky commercial:

We have this disturbing child rant from Greenpeace:

Then we had this disturbing and insulting ad showing a swarm of planes attacking New York City to promote WWF’s view:

“The tsunami killed 100 times more people than 9/11. The planet is brutally powerful. Respect it. Preserve it.”

Yes, there’s a whole lineage of shocking, angry, tasteless, and disturbing videos from the NGO’s that take donations and turn it into pure propaganda.

But we’re the crazy ones.

UPDATE: I forgot to add this one, probably the most offensive one, from the 2009 Cannes film festival.

Source: http://www.act-responsible.org/ACT/ACTINCANNES/THEEXPO2009.htm

Act responsible?