I’ll be honest and say that I’m deeply sceptical that this or any other submission will make much difference, but I admire their tenacity.
Andrew Montford ( Bishop Hill ) and Tony Newbery (Harmless Sky) have put in a submission to the BBC’s Review of Impartiality and Accuracy in their coverage of [Climate] Science. It’s a good read and summarizes very well some of the major areas of complaint about the BBC’s slanted reporting on environmentalism, scepticism and global warming.
In order to get to send the submission, they had to go through the usual Byzantine intrigue of working out just where to send it and to whom to address it.
Over the last several years, Tony N (Harmless Sky) and I have taken a great deal of interest in the BBC’s coverage of the climate debate, and this has involved a good deal of behind-the-scenes research. So we were obviously interested when the BBC Trust announced in early January this year that they were to conduct a review of the impartiality of their science coverage.
Our first reaction was to write to Professor Richard Tait, the trustee who was fronting this project, requesting that we should make a submission to the review and pointing out that the main critics of the BBC coverage of AGW were in the blogosphere. Not only were we unable to get a reply form Professor Tait, but we were unable even to get confirmation from the secretary of the Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee that he had been given the letter. This will be the subject of another post.
Fortunately, in April, I happened to spot a request for comments from the general public on an obscure BBC web page. He contacted Professor Steve Jones, the person commissioned by the BBC Trust to conduct the review, who proved to be rather more approachable than Professor Tait. It was quickly arranged that we should make a submission before the end of October. His report is due to be published in the Spring of 2011.
Anybody holding their breath? Me neither.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Two applicants go for an interview for a job at the BBC. One walks into the interview room with a rolled up copy of The Guardian under his arm, the other with a rolled up copy of The Daily Telegraph under his. Which one gets the job?
OK. It was the guy with The Guardian. D’oh……The guy with The Daily Telegraph was in the wrong room as, not being a Guardian reader he had no idea of the vacancy and had merely gone to the BBC to inquire of a job in security.
The BBC have confirmed their dominance of Climate reporting journalism when compared to their UK competitors. This makes it even more important they take input from Bishop Hill and Harmless sky seriously.
See here: http://bit.ly/dt9aZm
Scottish Dave;
Your correction is also incorrect.
Go back to “were”, not “where”. The latter is no verb. Not never nohow.