Following the Gleick incident Richard Black of the BBC thinks there is a lack of transparency for the organisations involved. I agree, and so I also tried to see how transparent the BBC were.
I requested information on the number of flights taken by Richard Black, this is important as he is increasing CO² in the atmosphere. The BBC refused to give me the information stating an exemption under the Freedom of Information Act. Though they did give me the BBC policy concerning flights in Economy and Business.
I then requested information on the annual operating costs of the BBC News Environmental Unit, in particular :
- Salaries
- Travel Costs
- Expenses
- Office Space Costs
The response from the BBC Information unit was that this information was excluded from the FOI Act as it concerns journalism.
I then requested the contractual status of Richard Black with the BBC. Many correspondents at the BBC are not employees, they create companies so that they can avoid tax, some of them even creating a company in Ireland, a well known ploy used by many BBC journalists. The BBC refused to state what his employment position is stating an exemption under the FOI Act.
So the BBC are quite happy to demand transparency from private companies, but as a publicly funded company they habitually refuse to publish information transparently.
The smell of hypocrisy is overpowering.
For your reference the FOI request replies are (PDF) :
- For the flights RFI20120199 – final response
- For the Environment Unit Annual Costs RFI20120210 – final response
- For the employment status RFI20120205 – final response
Footnote
I performed the same exercise in 2008 demanding the number of flights for Roger Harrabin, that time the BBC responded with the information:
RFI20080378 – final response_Harrabin (PDF)
So why not now ? Hmmmmmm, strange.
========================================================
For those that wish to track Mr. Black’s publication record, there’s a website dedicated to it called Black’s Whitewash. – Anthony
Cant see why there would be an exemption under FOI for asking how many flaights he took last year. The data should be readily available— he should just look back through his diary — simples
I can understand some off the reluctance with detailed personal contract details— but not the number of flights— the preach to everyone else to keep these down.
I would put in a formal appeal to the information Commisioner on the Flights issue— this was what the FOI was supposed to be for. Shows the BBC up as hypocrictical—- usual left tendancy
Steve (Paris) says:
March 17, 2012 at 10:06 am
Talk of the devil
Arctic climate ‘tech fixes’ urged
UK scientists say the threat of sudden methane release from the melting Arctic is a “planetary emergency” requiring urgent intervention.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17400804
According to a recent article posted on the U.S. Geological Survey web site, there is no emergency at all:
Gas Hydrates and Climate Warming:
Why a Methane Catastrophe is Unlikely
http://www.usgs.gov/blogs/features/usgs_science_pick/gas-hydrates-and-climate-warming/
In the same way that men sweat but women glow, mortals are hypocrites but gods are capricious.
Perhaps it is time to occupy Mount Olympus.
For those who do not live on these islands.
“You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it’s being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder.
It costs £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for a black and white TV Licence.”
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/
Points to note
Who has a black and white TV? Not many.
“if you watch or record TV ” Even if it’s not the BBC. As for computers, phones, etc, if they’re out to get you you, have to prove that you don’t watch or record TV.
The TV licence fee a tax in all but name.
His latest piece returns to the thesis that Arctic Septembers will be wholly ice free ‘within a few years’, which he backs up with a graph which I believe must be using rolling trends of a few years, as there is no way that 2011 had considerably less sea ice than 2007.
His latest focus is methane emissions and the need for geoengineering approaches, presumably pioneered by academics at Edinburgh University either holding funding for- or bidding for it currently.
There is no evidence presented as to the current contribution to arctic ocean warming of underwater volcanism, which has been reported as being significant activity currently. This is the obvious first point of call for rapid warming in arctic waters and I for one would like to see far more research data about that presented.
The theme of the article, as usual, is imminent catastrophe. There is no mention of the likely evolution of solar activity in the next 30 years, nor is there any evidence presented that multidecadal cyclicality of arctic sea ice is not entirely normal.
A review of his latest theses by suitably realistic scientists would be much appreciated.
The biggest word in the English language is “if”–and the Warmistas milk it with all the gusto they can muster. By failing to apply logic when discussing “if”, they make themselves look foolish while the rest of us pick up the tab ($). You’d think modern civilization would have generated enough logic by now to control “if” and eliminate abuse. But apparently Mann and other pseudo-scientists have found a way to make money and exploit the populace by replacing science with the smallest of words–“if”.
That’s funny. Heartland posts its annual tax return online. Took me 3 minutes to find it.
http://heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/2010-IRS-Form-990.pdf
But they are opaque?
Here, by the by, is BBC’s financial report. I doubt they have the information you need in there, but you can always check.
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/pdf/bbc_ar_online_2010_11.pdf
DirkH says:
March 17, 2012 at 10:23 am
“Salter’s duck”…
It gets more farcical by the minute. If it wasn’t costing so much I’d find it amusing.
Doug Proctor said (March 17, 2012 at 10:03 am)
“…The power to determine what is and what is not discussed. Hansen, Gore, Gleick – none will argue publicly because they will not be able to control what is said by the other side, and not be able to control what they have to answer…”
And I’ve noticed it whenever they post somewhere – they tend to prefer sites where the moderation agrees with their views. Every time their “message” is sent out of their “zone” the comments are HEAVILY negative to their tactics.
This has been a well-known idea in law circles – don’t ask a question unless you already know the right answer. You may not like the reply you get.
An addition to that would be “Never make a posting at a blog where you don’t control the moderation. You may not like the comments you receive.”
The British Broadcasting Communists are just the same as the Canadian Broadcasting Communist: FOI for you but FO for me!
The current focus by the Warmistas on Methane is due to the anti-Fracking hysteria – It’s Methane, by God! This will destroy the planet … nay, the whole fracking Universe!
The Nobel Committee is to blame
They gave CAGW it’s glitter and fame
Now wannabe heroes
who really are zero’s
Are putting the science to shame
Richard Black and Michael Mann look as though they were separated at birth.
It would explain one heck of a lot if they turned out to be one and the same person. (:-
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17400804
> According to a recent article posted on the U.S. Geological Survey web site, there is no emergency at all… http://www.usgs.gov/blogs/features/usgs_science_pick/gas-hydrates-and-climate-warming/
RC don’t believe it either:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/01/an-arctic-methane-worst-case-scenario/
I don’t believe the AMEG folk:
http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2012/03/arctic_methane_emergency_group.php
Jeremy says: March 17, 2012 at 10:22 am
As if on cue, Richard Black as a total wing nut article on BBC front page.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17400804
———————————————————
That graph of Arctic sea ice reductions, in this Richard Black article. Did not someone prove that this was merely a computer model, and not resl data (it certainly does not look like the sea ice data on the WUWT widget).
If so, is Richard Black using misleading data in his article??
.
Mardler in re “the facial similarity between Black and Mann”: Good call, the resemblance virtually leaps out. Probably more than skin deep… mayhap the milkman made a transatlantic stop one day.
Michael T in Craster, UK says: “…I recently requested info from the BBC…concerning his academic achievements and scientific experience…”
I don’t know what you’re complaining about. If he doesn’t have any, that’s not their fault, is it?
Anything is possible says:
March 17, 2012 at 1:55 pm
Richard Black and Michael Mann look as though they were separated at birth.
It would explain one heck of a lot if they turned out to be one and the same person. (:-
Obviously Gavin Schmidt, Richard Black, and Michael Mann ARE the same person.
If you want to know all about the BBC’s attempts to ‘hide the truth’ just Google ‘Balen Report’. The BBC spent around £200,000 of licence payers money to prevent details of a report into biased reporting, by the BBC, from being released to the public.
The BBC is now known worldwide for the politically-based slant they place on articles of ‘key subjects’ – e.g. AGW, the EU, certain religions…., the Israel/Palestinian conflict – to name but a few.
From once being a beacon of accurate and impartial reporting the BBC are now an embarrassment to the British public.
Richard Black seems to be a bad un.
> That graph of Arctic sea ice reductions, in this Richard Black article. Did not someone prove that this was merely a computer model
It is PIOMAS, like it says it is.
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/
We don’t have obs of sea ice volume (well, certainly not back that far).
re: the schmidt/mann/black clone look-a-likes…
Just caught a Chevy Volt commercial during the NCAA tournament.
Sure enough, bald smug guy with a scraggly goatee touting his Chevy Volt.
Guess it’s de rigueur for earnest World-savers.
OMG. Clones!!!!
We’re all doomed……..
“I don’t believe the AMEG folk:”
That’s odd William, you swallow everything else that has a warming theme, and by the way. Why is there an Arctic Methane Emergency Group? I think you know the answer. When it comes to AGW the funding never stops; AGW gets the gold and the taxpaying public gets the shaft.
Reblogged this on pindanpost.