BREAKING: The 'secret' list of the BBC 28 is now public – let's call it 'TwentyEightGate'

UPDATES ARE CONTINUOUSLY BEING ADDED at the end of this story. Check below.

WUWT readers may recall this post last week:

The Secret 28 Who Made BBC ‘Green’ Will Not Be Named

The BBC pits six lawyers against one questioning blogger, Tony Newbery of Harmless Sky, who was making an FOI request for the 28 names. In the process, the judge demonstrates he has partisan views on climate change.

Now, thanks to the Wayback machine and we can now read the list that the BBC fought to keep secret. [Damn those mischevious bloggers 😉 ]

This list has been obtained legally. (link to Wayback document.) My heartiest congratulations to Maurizo for his excellent sleuthing!

Maurizo writes: This is for Tony, Andrew, Benny, Barry and for all of us Harmless Davids.

The list from: January 26th 2006, BBC Television Centre, London

Specialists:

Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London

Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA

Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace

Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen

Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge

Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant

Trevor Evans, US Embassy

Colin Challen MP, Chair, All Party Group on Climate Change

Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net

Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation

Claire Foster, Church of England

Saleemul Huq, IIED

Poshendra Satyal Pravat, Open University

Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China

Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia

Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International

Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos

Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund

Matthew Farrow, CBI

Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer

Cheryl Campbell, Executive Director, Television for the Environment

Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables

Richard D North, Institute of Economic Affairs

Steve Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Labs

Joe Smith, The Open University

Mark Galloway, Director, IBT

Anita Neville, E3G

Eleni Andreadis, Harvard University

Jos Wheatley, Global Environment Assets Team, DFID

Tessa Tennant, Chair, AsRia

BBC attendees:

Jana Bennett, Director of Television

Sacha Baveystock, Executive Producer, Science

Helen Boaden, Director of News

Andrew Lane, Manager, Weather, TV News

Anne Gilchrist, Executive Editor Indies & Events, CBBC

Dominic Vallely, Executive Editor, Entertainment

Eleanor Moran, Development Executive, Drama Commissioning

Elizabeth McKay, Project Executive, Education

Emma Swain, Commissioning Editor, Specialist Factual

Fergal Keane, (Chair), Foreign Affairs Correspondent

Fran Unsworth, Head of Newsgathering

George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs

Glenwyn Benson, Controller, Factual TV

John Lynch, Creative Director, Specialist Factual

Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy

Jon Williams, TV Editor Newsgathering

Karen O’Connor, Editor, This World, Current Affairs

Catriona McKenzie, Tightrope Pictures catriona@tightropepictures.com

BBC Television Centre, London (cont)

Liz Molyneux, Editorial Executive, Factual Commissioning

Matt Morris, Head of News, Radio Five Live

Neil Nightingale, Head of Natural History Unit

Paul Brannan, Deputy Head of News Interactive

Peter Horrocks, Head of Television News

Peter Rippon, Duty Editor, World at One/PM/The World this Weekend

Phil Harding, Director, English Networks & Nations

Steve Mitchell, Head Of Radio News

Sue Inglish, Head Of Political Programmes

Frances Weil, Editor of News Special Events

For those who don’t know what this is about, read the back story here.

Here is the backup link to the original document just in case the original disappears:

Real World Brainstorm Sep 2007 background (PDF)

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

UPDATE: Now this Climategate 2.0 email makes more sense, as they’ve just been carrying water for CRU and the eco-NGO’s all along. The meeting with the 28 was just a pep rally. From: this WUWT post:

BBC’s Kirby admission to Phil Jones on “impartiality”

Alex Kirby in email #4894 writing about the BBC’s “neutrality”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

date: Wed Dec  8 08:25:30 2004

from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.xx.xx>

subject: RE: something on new online.

to: “Alex Kirby” <alex.kirby@bbc.xxx.xx>

At 17:27 07/12/2004, you wrote:

Yes, glad you stopped this — I was sent it too, and decided to

spike it without more ado as pure stream-of-consciousness rubbish. I can well understand your unhappiness at our running the other piece. But we are constantly being savaged by the loonies for not giving them any coverage at all, especially as you say with the COP in the offing, and being the objective impartial (ho ho) BBC that we are, there is an expectation in some quarters that we will every now and then let them

say something. I hope though that the weight of our coverage makes it clear that we think they are talking through their hats.

—–Original Message—–

Prof. Phil Jones

Climatic Research Unit

BBC and “impartiality”…”ho, ho” indeed.

UPDATE: ‘TwentyEightGate’ was coined by RoyFOMR in comments. I liked it enough to put in the title.

UPDATE3 –  Barry Woods writes in an email to me:

Don’t forget Mike Hulme Climategate email. why he funded CMEP, to keep sceptics OFF BBC airwaves… (below)

Mike Hulme:

“Did anyone hear Stott vs. Houghton on Today, radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really.

This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.” (email 2496)

let us also not forget, that Roger Harrabin BBC & CMEP – (and Greenpeace Bill Hare) were also on the Tyndall board from 2002 to at least Nov 2005.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/

When did Roger Harrabin step down from Tyndall advisory board?

(and he no made no mention, when reporting Climategate, of connections)

Tyndall were funding CMEP seminars for years to persuade the BBC, so not just that seminar, but years worth of lobbying

UPDATE4: Bishop Hill makes this excerpt from correspondence the “quote of the day”:

We now know that the BBC decided to abandon balance in its coverage of climate on the advice of a small coterie of green activists, including the campaign director of Greenpeace. This shows that the “shoddy journalism” of Newsnight’s recent smear was no “lapse” of standards at all. BBC news programs have for years been poorly checked recitations of the work of activists.

UPDATE5: Maurizo has added some analysis.

Summary for those without much time to read it all: Why the List of Participants to the BBC CMEP Jan 2006 Seminar is important

http://omnologos.com/why-the-list-of-participants-to-the-bbc-cmep-jan-2006-seminar-is-important/

UPDATE 6: Maurizo asked to add this –

I have not “given” the 28Gate list any importance. In fact, not one of the bloggers and journalists and commenters has “given” the 28Gate list any importance. It has been the BBC that GAVE IMPORTANCE TO 28GATE by spending so much money on lawyers. Therefore, 28Gate is important.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
529 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
temp
November 12, 2012 3:50 pm

Specialists:
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
O yeah thats some “specialists” right there…
Trevor Evans, US Embassy <—- why is this guy there?

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 3:51 pm

Well Entwistle has now gone in a storm of controversy all about shoddy journalism, He was obviously promoted from Head of Current Affairs to Director General
“Mr Entwistle, who stood down on Saturday night after just 54 days in the job, left the corporation with a £450,000 lump sum on top of his £877,000 pension. The payment amounts to £8,333 for every day he spent as director-general. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9673784/George-Entwistle-was-paid-double-to-go-quietly.html

Lew Skannen
November 12, 2012 3:52 pm

Experts? Experts in advocacy by the look of most of them.
Well done Mr Morabito.
Another well earned blow to the putrid BBC.

November 12, 2012 3:53 pm

Where are the scientists?

john
November 12, 2012 3:53 pm

Some of the “Specialists” seem more like heads of pressure and self interest groups……………

Kev-in-Uk
November 12, 2012 3:53 pm

absolutely gobsmacked – well done Maurizio! So now, we need to find out why some of these people were involved!

Kev-in-Uk
November 12, 2012 3:54 pm

The BBC – Bloated Barstewards Corporation! I am ashamed to be British!

Latimer Alder
November 12, 2012 3:57 pm

This was just about the BBC’s ‘A’ list of managers at the time. Not just a few middle rankers.
Amazing that they all found the time to spend a full day on this topic. And it explains why the BBC’s pre-Copenhagen coverage in 2009 was so vastly over-hyped….and such an embarrassment when it was the fiasco we all fondly remember.
There must be good grounds to suggest that all of the BBC’s participants were acting in contravention of the BBC’s Charter (its ‘statutory Rules of Engagement’) by organising such a one-sided seminar and acting upon the results.
Immense kudos to omnologos for outwitting the best ‘minds’ of both the BBC and their expensive lawyers.

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 3:57 pm

Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashok_Sinha
Another climate scientist you can’t argue with.
More like stop the AGW Boll0%^s

cui bono
November 12, 2012 3:59 pm

BBC Head of Comedy??

Mike
November 12, 2012 3:59 pm

Wow! Maurizio just destroyed the BBC. For years they have claimed their biased coverage of climate news was based on scientific advice from the best scientists. That is a total and utter lie. It is from activists and pressure groups. The list of BBC lies just grows and grows

Jim
November 12, 2012 4:00 pm

Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy?
How apt!

eqibno
November 12, 2012 4:00 pm

Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Really????? Well, it is a farce, after all…

richardscourtney
November 12, 2012 4:01 pm

Friends:
I am copying this from the other thread because I genuinely would like an answer.
Richard
————
richardscourtney says:
November 12, 2012 at 3:49 pm
Dodgy Geezer:
Thankyou for the list from Maurizio which you provide at November 12, 2012 at 3:29 pm in the link
http://omnologos.com/full-list-of-participants-to-the-bbc-cmep-seminar-on-26-january-2006/
I have a question:
These participants are listed among “Specialists:”
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation
Claire Foster, Church of England
Saleemul Huq, IIED
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
Anita Neville, E3G
Tessa Tennant, Chair, AsRia
Why?
Richard

PaulH
November 12, 2012 4:01 pm

An interesting assortment of specialists in that list. I wonder what qualifications are required to be deemed “a specialist”? ;->
There are some affiliations I am not familiar with. For example, who are Tearfund, E3G, and Open University? Of course there are the usual, obvious, rent seekers: Greenpeace, New Economics Foundation, Stop Climate Chaos, Television for the Environment, etc. No wonder the BBC wanted to obscure the bias.

November 12, 2012 4:02 pm

Move aside, Bernstein. Move aside, Woodward.
Tonight, I am you.

Jeff
November 12, 2012 4:03 pm

Claire Foster, Church of England
huh?
Methinks that if they spent less time on saving the earth and more time on saving souls,
the Church of England wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in…..they need to focus on the warming
that, er, CO2 won’t put out….

LJH
November 12, 2012 4:03 pm

So glad to see that the Head of Comedy was included.

pat
November 12, 2012 4:03 pm

as big as Climategate. Tony Newbery and Maurizio should be on every TV news broadcast today. Newbery should return to the Tribunal with the list.
keep this sticky as u say anthony. BBC Meltdown brought on by their own arrogance.
three cheers for those who have defended the scientific method.

Pat
November 12, 2012 4:05 pm

Wow… was there actually a scientist in the room???

viffer
November 12, 2012 4:05 pm

This, from our ‘impartial’ national and world-wide broadcaster. In addition to it’s demonstrable pathetic leadership and governance, not to mention the alleged turning of a blind eye (Pudsey?) to the abuse of minors on its premises, seems designed to provoke a mass withholding of the licence tax which funds this malfeasance.
Impartial my arse. This is cultural Marxism in action, funded by the UK taxpayers. I’d like to know if any of our money paid for the travel and subsistence for the delegates at these Eco-Taliban wank-fests.
Good find. Well done, and very well timed.

Kev-in-Uk
November 12, 2012 4:07 pm

I am quietly fuming – which is annoying as I have to go to bed with this on my mind now – and be up in 4 hours or so for a long day of hard graft. This needs mass media exposure an explanation for Joe Public in the UK.
sure the BBC can perhaps take a slight bias on some issues (e.g reporting Falkands War or something ‘British’) but this is a hundred steps too far in my opinion. This suggests downright political manipulation and deliberate misinformation to the masses………..

Latimer Alder
November 12, 2012 4:08 pm

Secret clip of omnologos celebrating. His part is played by Josh Lyman

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:09 pm

Here’s Dadi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4947346.stm
A know nothing charity worker. This is ridiculous the caliber is so low I’m surprised they never approached me as I live in London.

Manfred
November 12, 2012 4:09 pm

A nicely balanced and well rounded list of individuals guaranteed to hold Aunties place in the media firmament, at the infinite generosity of the British taxpayer. Objective, accurate, critical, impartial, thorough – professional ‘green-washing’ at its elite best. Along with Jimmy Saville and the recent ‘Newsnight’ debacle, they appear to be performing consistently at the very least.
/sarc

Curious George
November 12, 2012 4:11 pm

A good material for a conspiracy theorist. Professor Lewandowsky please pay attention.

Manfred
November 12, 2012 4:11 pm

Manfred says: November 12, 2012 at 4:09 pm
“They” refers to Auntie of course.

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:13 pm

Liz Molyneux, Editorial Executive, Factual Commissioning
Blimey I thought the BBC had shut that position down about twenty years ago

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:14 pm

This is brilliant , I’d now love to see something similar for UKMO or should I say Pravda

RoyFOMR
November 12, 2012 4:15 pm

If Maurizio had only revealed this earlier then think of all the public money that could have been saved.
At £40,000 per day for goodness knows how many days, it may even have exceeded the recent severance golden parachute given to the DG of the BBC – one of the attendees of TwentEightGate.
I hope that you don’t get sued by the BBC, omnologos, for wasting public funds!!!

Curious George
November 12, 2012 4:15 pm

A good conspiracy SHOULD exclude scientists.

Cam_S
November 12, 2012 4:16 pm

Wow! There are a lot of climate scientists on that list.
Yes, that’s sarcasm.

son of mulder
November 12, 2012 4:16 pm

Clear evidence that the biased BBC Climate Change editorial policy is based on evidence from very few Climate scientists. At least they had the authority of the Church of England present to explain how Noah mitigated the effects of catastrophic climate disruption.

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:16 pm

Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Was he the bloke that stood in front of that tank in tiananmen square ?

davidmhoffer
November 12, 2012 4:18 pm

Of all the questionable names on that list, most (ie Greenpeace etc) did not surprise me, only two caused me to raise an eyebrow. The first was Claire Foster, Church of England. The second was:
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
A member of the US embassy was asked to advise on the official broadcast policy of an instrument of the British government?

November 12, 2012 4:19 pm

Boaden is also on the list. Currently ‘suspended’ for her role in a paedophile mess at the bbc. The bbc covered up for Jimmy Saville. Then when it comes out, the decided that the best thing to do was go on the attack to show to distract against the mess. So they attacked a Tory donor for being involved, plus throwing Thatcher into the mix. It’s all unravelled. So she’s going to be toast.

richard
November 12, 2012 4:19 pm

another little story in the telegraph today,
the science editor at the BBC , the one who doles out the usual crap on agw was once editor of the ten o clock news, rather than sack him the BBC moved him to another department when he was responsible for a story totally wrong about a firm called Oryx. This resulted in the longest on air apology from the BBC.

November 12, 2012 4:21 pm

Let me repeat for the slowest journos that might be reading this.
The list has been obtained perfectly legally. It is available for all to see in the Wayback Machine. You don’t need no secret code or password and no knowledge of source code of any type.
All you need is to find a broken link on a publicly-available page on the publicly-available IBT website and the ability to do “copy link address” with any ordinary mouse, then “paste” with the same mouse in the appropriate field in the Wayback Machine.
If persistence is a crime, I am in for a life sentence.

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:22 pm

Note just how inclusive in their quest for diversity the BBC are, not one actual climate scientist there just every Li, Saleemul Huq and Dadi, with a hatred for the western world. Sorry but I had to say it.

November 12, 2012 4:24 pm

@Jeff 4:03pm “Methinks that if they spent less time on saving the earth and more time on saving souls, the Church of England wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in”
Not all of them are that bad – Rev Dr Peter Mullen: “Can we just get rid of the BBC, please?”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/petermullen/100189084/can-we-just-get-rid-of-the-bbc-please/

Lance Wallace
November 12, 2012 4:25 pm

From the Wikipedia entry for Robert May:
Although an atheist since age 11, May has stated that religion may help society deal with climate change. While referring to what he believes to be a rigid structure of fundamentalist religion, he stated that the co-operational aspects of non-fundamentalist religion may in fact help with climate change. When asked if religious leaders should be doing more to persuade people to combat climate change, he stated that it was absolutely necessary.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/richard-alleyne/6146656/Maybe-religion-is-the-answer-claims-atheist-scientist.html
I guess anything goes, huh?

November 12, 2012 4:25 pm

This is the Oryx story http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2002/nov/28/bbc.broadcasting1
I think tonight, I would be able to find on Google who killed Jimmy Hoffa if I so wished.

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 4:26 pm

Lolz
Well done Maurizio!

November 12, 2012 4:30 pm

This list appears to contain inter-related lobbyists and advocacy groups.
Mark Galloway, Director, IBT
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
http://www.ibt.org.uk/members.php
IBT is a membership based organisation. … one of our principal activities is lobbying, … contact IBT Director, Mark Galloway. IBT’s current membership includes the following organisations … Tearfund

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:35 pm

Another interesting fact: That well known Royal AGW campaigner Prince Charles, who is currently in SE Asia I believe ; is hoping the Savile sex scandal calms down before he gets back, as they were the very best of best of best of mates. Way beyond any rationale logic bar the scurrilous nasty stories linked to Savile’s activities that are openly claimed on dozen’s of blogs

Paul Westhaver
November 12, 2012 4:36 pm

Just like the obfuscating Penns State University that is wrapped up in a scandal, so too is the BBC. Penn State, busying themselves in the corrupt business of protecting themselves in the midst of Sandusky on campus, and preventing the “hide the decline” emails from Michael Mann from being made public, set the creepy model for the latest BBC scandal.
The entire management of BBC is resigning and getting fired in the wake of a devastating scandal.
http://tv.yahoo.com/news/bbc-news-executives-step-aside-pedophilia-scandal-235922592.html
The BBC, one of the left wing’s, progressive, pro-global warming fake news machines is self-destructing as all of its upper executives are implicated in covering up an expose of Jimmy Savile, while he was employed by BBC.
If that wasn’t weird enough for you, guess where the ex-executive of the BBC, Mark Thompson, is now the CEO…. come on guess…..
YUP ….THE NEW YORK TIMES.
This is too weird for words.

viffer
November 12, 2012 4:39 pm

1. Please can we all agree that this should be known and referred to as “28 Gate”?
2. Has anyone worked out a way to get this information to Tony Newbery?
3. Great find. Great timing.

November 12, 2012 4:40 pm

Tune into the blogosphere and drop out of the MSM. It’s there that you’ll find people like Steve McIntyre. Investigative journalism is alive and well; it’s just moved house.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2011/06/17/the-death-of-journalism-and-the-irresistible-rise-of-the-blogosphere/
We can add Omnologos to the list of sleuths. Well done amico.
Pointman

richardscourtney
November 12, 2012 4:42 pm

Friends:
I write to observe that – in the shock at surveying the list – some commentators have missed that there are scientists and climate scientists among the list.
The important points are
1.
The stated purpose of the meeting was to determine policy on broadcasting about AGW so there was no reason according to that purpose to invite any of those I listed in my post at November 12, 2012 at 4:01 pm: they are all advocates of AGW.
2.
The scientists who attended were all of one mind concerning AGW.
Hence, the list of invited specialists demonstrates that the stated purpose of the meeting was a sham because the policy which it was claimed was determined by the meeting had been decided prior to the meeting.
The only discussion which the entire list of “Specialists” would have would be on how best the BBC could “sell” their assertions of AGW and its dire effects. The advocates would say what was wanted and the scientists would caution on the limits of what could be advocated without legal challenge under the BBC Charter.
The adopted policy on ‘balance’ supposedly adopted by expert discussion at the meeting cannot be justified in the light of those invited to attend the meeting. Hence, the adoption of that policy can be demonstrated to be a deliberate breach of the BBC Charter. Therefore, the list is potentially even more serious for the BBC than any of the problems now confronting the BBC.
Richard

Stacey
November 12, 2012 4:45 pm

The Busted Broadcasting Corporation?
What an absolute disgrace.

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 4:48 pm

davidmhoffer says:
A member of the US embassy was asked to advise on the official broadcast policy of an instrument of the British government?

The BBC is independent from govt (hoho)
It’s charter forbids it from being influenced by foreign political policy.
But it takes EU money.

Jolly farmer
November 12, 2012 4:48 pm

Do not pay the licence fee.

November 12, 2012 4:48 pm

Trevor Evans, US Embassy
I need to sleep or fall into a coma in the attempt, so I am leaving now this tiny morsel wondering if any of you guys figure out what was the US Embassy doing at a BBC seminar.

November 12, 2012 4:50 pm

More than 3,000 people a week are being prosecuted for not having a TV licence… The number of prosecutions has risen in part because many more are struggling to pay. In 2010, licence fee fines totalled just under £25million a year.
Being charged/taxed/licensed to pay for their Global Warming Drivel™ is one thing, being fined for refusing to pay for it is insanity.

Editor
November 12, 2012 4:51 pm

The BBC is a national embarrassment. They are so left wing and at the same time so far up their corporate a**e they do not have a clue how the real world functions.
They take a man who, as a child lived in a children’s home and was allegedly sexually abused and name and shame the alleged abuser, this is in collaboration with George Monbiot of the “Guardian”. The alleged abuser is named as a retired, former advisor and Treasurer of the Conservative Party during Lady Thatcher’s premiership.
Of course these left wing morons could not believe their luck in having the head of such a prestigious associate of Margaret Thatcher on their plate, so they, like the cowards that they are, implicated his name in this alleged abuse. The poor man who suffered this alleged abuse, had then to go through more trauma because these collective cretins did not even have the brains to provide him with photographs to allow him to identify his alleged abuser correctly. The “abuser” was in fact totally innocent.
Welcome to the world of the leftists, who smear and insult anyone who does not have the same views as themselves. They would be very dangerous, if they were not so stupid!

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 4:55 pm

Going slightly off topic now but it is instructive to see that the left who see AGW has the weapon to smash capitalism and the west over the head with -have also been traditionally-post war anyway- have always trying to abolish censorship. The deputy leader of the Labour Party Harriet Harmon many years ago when chairing the Civil Liberties Commission was actively advocating lowering the age of consent
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9614516/Jimmy-Savile-Labour-faces-embarrassment-over-former-child-sex-claims.html

clipe
November 12, 2012 4:59 pm
Gail Combs
November 12, 2012 5:00 pm

davidmhoffer says: @ November 12, 2012 at 4:18 pm
…Trevor Evans, US Embassy
A member of the US embassy was asked to advise on the official broadcast policy of an instrument of the British government?
_____________________________
Here is an addition to that information.

State Magazine, November 2006
The November 2006 issue of State Magazine, published by the U.S. Department of State in Washington, DC,

Thinking Green
Embassy London initiates conservation strategy pg 12
…One of the embassy’s residential apartment buildings is benefiting from London’s first fuel cell,which uses natural gas to produce electricity and heat.This experimental fuel cell’s output is small and risks failure from contaminants in the natural gas. However,it is important for the Department to participate in green programs so its design,maintenance and operations staff can learn.
As funds permit,the embassy motor pool will be converted from regular gasoline to LP gas,a more environment-friendly fuel.The conversion may or may not pay for itself, but is justified and being done for environmental stewardship and emissions reduction.And this summer the embassy plans to create several “green roofs”to insulate the building

(Of course they do not care if the conversion has a payback, it is TAXPAYER money they are spending)
..Trevor Evans, is the ECON/EST Officer,U.S. Embassy, London
So there is no question that Evans was a dyed in the wool greenie and so was the US Embassy. (read starting page 12) It ends ” “Our hope is to make this the greenest old U.S.embassy in the world,”said DCM Johnson
Description of ECON (economic?) and EST

Economic officers
Advise U.S. businesses on the local investment climate and economic trends
negotiate trade and investment agreements to open markets and level the playing field
analyze and report on macroeconomic trends and trade policies and their potential impact on U.S. interests;
and promote adoption of economic policies by foreign countries which further U.S. interests.
Environment, Science, and Technology (EST) officers analyze and report on EST developments and their potential impact on U.S. policies and programs.
http://chile.usembassy.gov/econ-pol.html

GAG, I think I am going to be sick.

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 5:02 pm

Sorry but I have to say it: The BBC over the recent years has actively promoted the sexualisation of children under the guise of education and diversity, Children in Need will start this Friday night just wait and see the inappropriate content. It’s like certain elements are paid fantastic salaries to try and get the world to reflect their so called art. Any seen the story lines in rubbish like Eastenders-it’s like watching Elton John’s holiday videos.

Jolly farmer
November 12, 2012 5:02 pm

Email address for comments to the BBC:
pov@bbc.co.uk
Contact is Mr Vine. (pov = “points of view”). Pitch in, folks.

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 5:03 pm

Dr Poshendra Satyal is Post Doctoral Research Fellow at the Crichton Carbon Centre. Prior to this, he worked as a researcher and consultant with a number of organizations in the UK (The Open University, UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Bird Life International, and Forests Monitor) and Nepal (Himalayan College of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Society of Environmental Journalists,

Lawrence
November 12, 2012 5:05 pm

Gail:
Good find: I was searching for Evans and Obama as I can see him being in the white house loop.

Gail Combs
November 12, 2012 5:08 pm

andrewmharding says:
November 12, 2012 at 4:51 pm
….Welcome to the world of the leftists, who smear and insult anyone who does not have the same views as themselves. They would be very dangerous, if they were not so stupid!
____________________________
It is their handlers who are dangerous not the useful idiots.

artwest
November 12, 2012 5:09 pm

To me, one curious name on the “specialist” list seemed to be “Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer”. Hadn’t the BBC got enough producers of their own? What was the impressive track record of this “specialist” that the BBC top brass had to hear about?
IMDB turned up nothing very dazzling but then I found that he seems to be “Media Project Manager” and “Studio Manager” for The Open University.
Still didn’t seem that relevant, but then I noticed that he was also… for a whole 7 months in 2003…
“Business Consultant, Television Trust for the Enviroment (sic)”
OK, that must be it, his “expertise”.
Cache of his Linkedin page:
http://74.6.238.254/search/srpcache?ei=UTF-8&p=%22Rafael+Hidalgo%22+tv+producer&fr=moz35&u=http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=%22Rafael+Hidalgo%22+tv+producer&d=4574630585177680&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=1YdTW4ZlIp4gTWMtRbG5s-HfyBwWfFa3&icp=1&amp;.intl=us&sig=Q7A9E4NsUhsC8aFztXOqrg–

EternalOptimist
November 12, 2012 5:09 pm

I was hoping to see an ‘Ocean Elder’ or two.
whats the point in having Ocean Elders if they cant be bothered to set the Environmental policy for the BBC ?

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 5:09 pm

Follow the money:
The UK’s policy lines on World Bank and IMF issues are formally decided by the Department for International Development (DFID) and the Treasury, respectively. Within DFID, the International Financial Institutions department (IFID) leads in devising the organisation’s position on these institutions (see below). In the Treasury, the International Finance department is responsible for preparing advice on the policy issues and specific country programmes brought before the Board of Directors in Washington.
The top UK representatives at the IMF and World Bank are the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rt Hon George Osbourne MP, and Secretary of State for international development, Rt Hon Justine Greening MP. They are known as UK governors to the Fund and Bank, sitting on the ministerial committees which meet in Washington twice a year to decide on overall strategic direction for the institutions. The UK is the fourth-largest shareholder in both the World Bank and the IMF, holding 4.3 percent and 4.8 percent of votes, respectively. For comparison the US is by far the largest shareholder with 16.4 percent and 16.85 percent vote shares, respectively.
Climate Frameworks and Carbon Markets
Jos Wheatley: Team Leader, j-wheatley(at)dfid.gov.uk

temp
November 12, 2012 5:19 pm

tallbloke says:
November 12, 2012 at 4:48 pm
davidmhoffer says:
“A member of the US embassy was asked to advise on the official broadcast policy of an instrument of the British government?”
“It’s charter forbids it from being influenced by foreign political policy.”
Could this be why they were so desperate to keep this list secret? Could someone sue the BBC now claiming that the US government was directly responsible for the BBC’s global warming policy?
It would be interesting if someone in the US FOIA this guy about this event and how he got invited and why he was invited.

proxima
November 12, 2012 5:20 pm

Tonight on BBC:
“28 gates later : rise of the climate zombies”

November 12, 2012 5:21 pm

– Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Wait a minute! BP is part of Big Oil!

P Wilson
November 12, 2012 5:21 pm

They are a shameless and dull lot, the BBC

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 5:22 pm

Aha, we have a prime mover
Dr Joe Smith
The Open University
My research and teaching interests centre on the politics of environmental change. This is explored through three discrete strands of work:
the politics of consumption, pursued through a study of biographies of food in Poland and the Czech Republic
media representations of environmental change, centred on a programme of action research in collaboration with the BBC
experimental reframings of environmental change, pursued mainly through the Interdependence Day project
Through the course of my CRASSH fellowship I will be drawing on more than a decade of working with media and other organisations to offer an account of the cultural work demanded by our unfolding understanding of human-induced climate change. I will also take the opportunity to reflect on the distinctive roles and responsibilities of social science and humanities researchers in helping societies to make sense of and act on climate change.

Lance Wallace
November 12, 2012 5:26 pm

I count three climate scientists with a technical education: May, Hulme, and Dahl-Jensen of the NIels Bohr Institute. Others with an academic affiliation (Bravo, Widdicombe, Smith) have liberal arts (history, geography, philosophy of science) backgrounds.
Of the three “technicals”, two are activists. However, Dr. Dahl-Jensen seems to be an actual boots-on-the-ground scientist (latest grant is for drilling through the Greenland ice aiming at bedrock to investigate possible lakes at the bottom of the glaciers). I expect whoever was responsible for vetting her prior to the conference has since paid the price.

November 12, 2012 5:29 pm

[trivia]
Just make sure we’re not bad winners, like Richard Hammond here at time 6:10

connolly
November 12, 2012 5:32 pm

Congratulations to all who produced this list. The presence of the US Embassy at the meeting is staggering. The whole sham and shameful cause of climate catastrophism and media manipulation has been dealt a heavy blow.

polistra
November 12, 2012 5:33 pm

Really makes me wonder why the Beeb was fighting disclosure so hard and expensively. I don’t see any names or organizations on that list that surprise me in the slightest. Purely the usual suspects. In fact one big class of usual suspects is nearly absent from the list: corporations, investors and reinsurance firms with a monetary vested interest in pushing Green nonsense. (Only BP was there.)

connolly
November 12, 2012 5:34 pm

Mods – sorry can help out a harassed Aussie in his lunch break and correct my rushed spelling – “congratulations” and “sham”. ?
[We jest thought you were rightin’ sum new-finagled Australeze dialect fer the rest of us English-readers…. Mod]

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 5:35 pm
QwithnoU
November 12, 2012 5:38 pm

The BBC only claimed 28 “scientific experts” attended, and I count 30. Who’s for having a laugh and guessing which 2 aren’t “scientific experts”?

AB
November 12, 2012 5:39 pm

Really looking forward to a spreadsheet breakdown of the qualifications, political leanings, activist activities and current employment status of these charlatans. A crowd sourced summary will be very damaging to the “cause”

November 12, 2012 5:48 pm

Until now (besides what happened to Galileo) science has been nearly all about data. No opportunity for any opinions or preferences, if it was repeatable and predictable it became a theory. This meant politics was always kept as a way of running a country based on the voter’s preferences, while science was used to discover what was there already and possibly exploit its uses.
Now scientists employed by larger groups (as opposed to working for themselves) have become political activists and encouraged others to and pushed world government policies. It has divided the world generally between the ideological left and pragmatic right, and has now merged entirely into something simply used to promote collectivist policies and treated not as an unfolding discovery which constantly changes, but a core political policy, breach of which is heresy. We have been taken back into the dark ages, and I have just completed a list of quotes going back to the 1970s of how the environmental extremists, not the nutjobs and bloggers they accuse us of being, but top world leaders of all fields- politics, science, investment etc, detailing long before the hockey stick even became erect how man made global warming will be the key to unlocking the new world order.
So currently science no longer exists as it should do, its major aim is a political force to rebuild the world on an environmental platform, removing the traces of development and industry to bring it back to how it was before we ‘colonised’ it (yes, just like the trees colonise it or the fish colonise the sea). Of course they won’t be in the toilet with us useless eaters, they want to clear the planet of us just so they and their friends and family can have the space to live, ‘liebensraum’ in German (where have I heard that already?), while we become either their slaves or wiped out to provide the optimum population the planet can sustainably (their key word) handle.
So yes, although climate data is no different to a nurse shoving a thermometer up your anus and reading it, it is being taken up by political activists as if measuring temperatures is a social science and must be read in psychological and societal context. As if.

November 12, 2012 5:49 pm

Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings and commented:
Add your thoughts here… (optional)

davidmhoffer
November 12, 2012 5:54 pm

Should we go with 28Gate?
I mean, wouldn’t want anyone to get the impression that there’s only been 27 before this…

DaveG
November 12, 2012 5:59 pm

The only good thing out of this fraud is the fact they (BBC) base and invested their pension investments for all BBC staff into green funds all based on this CAGW crap. Last I heard they were down 2.5 billion pounds.
Ha Ha Ha!

Peter Laux
November 12, 2012 6:01 pm

Perfect juxtaposition for trash-advocacy veneered as junk-science.
#16 Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International.
#17 Ashol Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos.
And Big Oil backing Green yet again !

tallbloke
November 12, 2012 6:03 pm
Richdo
November 12, 2012 6:09 pm

Note to all: you Really need to read the pdf that tallbloke inked to above…
reposted here: http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/capstone/mediaclimatechange.pdf

November 12, 2012 6:12 pm

Gail Combs says November 12, 2012 at 5:08 pm

It is their handlers who are dangerous not the useful idiots.

Umm, who are their ‘handlers’?
Who is at the top; the “Mr Big”?
Are there more names we need to see?
.

Konrad
November 12, 2012 6:18 pm

So not a list of 28 impartial scientists but a sorry bunch of activists, vested interests and a couple of rent seeking pro AGW pseudo-scientists. I believe a quote from the infamous former Australian MP Mark Latham says it best – “A conga line of suckholes.”
When it comes to the physics of radiative gasses, “out of their depth on a wet pavement” doesn’t adequately describe this biased bunch of social parasites. “So far out of their depth the fish have lights on their noses” would be closer to the mark. There is only one plausible reason the BBC called this load of slime in was for a strategy meeting on propaganda. They certainly could not have been learning anything about the science.

Doug Proctor
November 12, 2012 6:22 pm

I’m hoping Donna Lafamboise will weigh in with what she knows of the eco-green power structure behind the IPCC and how it relates to the BBC.

November 12, 2012 6:24 pm

The affiliation-acronyms in the list should have been spelled out where unfamiliar to Americans.

November 12, 2012 6:32 pm

Konrad says November 12, 2012 at 6:18 pm
So not a list of 28 impartial scientists but a sorry bunch of activists, vested interests and a couple of rent seeking pro AGW pseudo-scientists. I believe a quote from the infamous former Australian MP Mark Latham says it best – “A conga line of suckholes.”
When it comes to the physics of radiative gasses, …

Hello Konrad. Did we have a discussion about IR Spectroscopy previously? The ‘group’ of 28 may or may not have a grasp of the subject at hand, but it is best to address them for those issues for which you have ‘actionable’, provable points or issues rather than simply riding one’s familiar hobby horse …
.

Taphonomic
November 12, 2012 6:32 pm

Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
What could be more apropos for TwentyEightGate, the Beeb, and Mr. Plowman than the tagline from a show he worked on:

November 12, 2012 6:40 pm

I seem to remember a report here on WUWT in the aftermath of that get-together from someone who either sat in on the meeting or was given an account of it from an attendee. I hope someone who’s familiar with the best ways of searching the archives here will take a look for it.

Jimmy Haigh
November 12, 2012 6:41 pm

Well done Maurizio. I thought the evidence might be hiding somewhere on the internet but I’m such a patzer I wouldn’t have known how to go about finding it.
No wonder the BBC didn’t want people finding out about their illustrious “28” – they had just rounded up another bunch of “the usual suspects”.
If I was still living in the UK (I jumped ship some years ago) I would not pay the BBC licence fee anymore. My brother was smart – he threw his TV out about 10 years ago..

Keith Minto
November 12, 2012 6:41 pm

Lord May of Oxford argues that although it is beyond dispute that the burning of fossil fuels is thickening Earth’s greenhouse gas blanket (to levels not seen for tens of millions of years), there remain some uncertainties about the severity of particular adverse consequences and the timescales for manifestation. (My bold)
Such certainty/uncertainty from someone so well credentialed. How can he be so certain?
Robert McCredie May, Baron May of Oxford, is an Australian scientist who has been Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government, President of the Royal Society and a Professor at Sydney and Princeton. He now holds joint professorships at Oxford and Imperial College London and is a member of the Lowy Institute’s International Advisory Council.
(source)

Zeke
November 12, 2012 6:44 pm

The “seminar had the following aims:
· To invoke imagination to allow the media to deal with the scope of the issue” **

The “scope of the issue” should include the drastic, destructive measures perpetrated on the nation in order to counter climate change/promote sustainability, as C. Booker points out.
Worthless wind turbines will cost hundreds of billions, while the back up gas plants would only cost 13 billion, according to Prof. Gordon Hughes.
The worthless wind turbines and smart meters are economically destructive, unnecessary. And don’t think for a second that it is going to work!
**research by TonyN of Harmless Sky

anticlimactic
November 12, 2012 6:48 pm

I remember reading that it was Roger Harrabin who organised the list of attendees, along with someone else whose name I can’t remember. I suppose as ‘Environment Analyst’ the BBC regarded it as his area of expertise, and that he would be ‘fair and unbiased’! At the time they would not know about his eco-activist hobbies.
Richard North of EuReferendum was an attendee and I recall reading his recollection of the event but I can not find it on his website [after a brief search]. My recollection is that he thought it was a hatchet job and he was a lone voice.
One can see why the BBC was so loathe to release this list as it was not an elite gathering, and in effect they broke their charter at the behest of activists.

Jeff Alberts
November 12, 2012 6:49 pm

“UPDATE: ‘TwentyEightGate’ was coined by RoyFOMR in comments. I liked it enough to put in the title.”
Will someone EVER come up with something original??
REPLY: The ball is in your court – Anthony

Skiphil
November 12, 2012 6:51 pm

Joe Smith of the Open University is on the list and appears to (possibly) be one of the organizers, since his bio note below says he and Roger Harrabin organized a “programme of seminars that have helped BBC and other senior media decision-makers to respond to environmental change.”
He and another “expert” participant, Eleni Andreadis, co-authored an article which appeared one year later in the British Journalism Review, where they celebrated the triumph of alarmism in UK media:

“It feels like the end of an era. Despite occasional pockets of scepticism, such as Peter Glover’s article in BJR late last year, the days when journalists would report on climate change by balancing “pro” and “sceptic” voices, or by knocking the human-induced climate-change argument with prominent coverage of an alternative theory, already seem a distant memory in the UK. This marked change in the treatment of climate change in the British media has helped lay the ground for a dramatic shift in the quality of public debate around the issue. Numerous specialists credit UK journalism of the past 18 months with being leagues ahead of their U.S. colleagues in the depth and regularity of coverage….”

“Beyond the Oozone Layer”
Vol 18, No 1, 2007

“Eleni Andreadis earned her Masters at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, where her thesis focused on media coverage of climate change. She has worked in documentary film-making and has contributed to a range of media, including the BBC. Joe Smith is senior lecturer in environment at the Open University, writing on environmental politics, and working as academic consultant to BBC climate-related programming. He has organised (with the BBC’s Roger Harrabin) a programme of seminars that have helped BBC and other senior media decision-makers to respond to environmental change.”

davidmhoffer
November 12, 2012 6:56 pm

So why was Iain Wright of BP there?
‘cuz he’s a shill trying to get governments to pony up for BP’s carbon capture and sequestration technology. Even lobbying for government regulation to support it.

The corruption is sickening.

Zeke
November 12, 2012 6:59 pm

“The point about smart meters is that they do not only enable us consumers to keep tabs on our electricity use: they also (though our Government does not like to spell this out) enable suppliers to exercise remote control over how much electricity we use. The EU knows that the windmills it wants to see covering Europe are unpredictably intermittent, and cannot guarantee sufficient power when it is needed. The answer the EU’s technocrats dream of, as we see from the Bornholm pilot project for a “European supergrid”, is that they can use smart meters to micro-manage the power we receive, right down to their ability to switch off whole categories of electricity use in our homes when there is insufficient power in the grid (what they call “  ‘intelligent’ control of household appliances” , such as dishwashers or televisions).” ~Christopher Booker

OssQss
November 12, 2012 7:01 pm

The aroma of Agenda 21 (Smart growth for those in the US) is unmistakable.

November 12, 2012 7:02 pm

A lifelong Anglophile, i had the wonderful fortune to spend six extended holidays in the UK over a three year period. Yanks get a candy coating of BBC through our PBS filter that seems “enlightened” and only slightly biased. In country, the multi-channel bilge is unsufferable, but knowing little else, the Brits accept this with the associated tenant that they are somehow superior and need not argue or defend “national” positions. As Bernard Shaw said “America and Britian are two great nations, divided by a common language”. We are now united by a common enemy, rule by neo-feudalists and their government funded, faux media spokesmouths. It is time for the “BBC Heads on Pikes” special….and a New Magna Carta.

Skiphil
November 12, 2012 7:04 pm

It seems that the BBC’s leading scientific minds for this seminar were almost entirely non-scientists from various areas of media, activism, and/or policy entrepreneurship.
Yes, the great “scientific” conclave which the BBC has tried so mightily to keep under wraps turns out to be another “climate communications” propaganda exercise, not a “science” session with leading scientists.
An article from Joe Smith of the Open University precedes the BBC’s Jan. 2006 seminar, but seems to describe the approach from other BBC/media seminars 1997 – 2004:

“The article draws on new qualitative research in the British context. The main body of it focuses on media source strategies, on climate change storytelling in news, and the “myth of detachment” sustained by many news decisionmakers. The empirical evidence, gathered between 1997 and 2004, is derived primarily from recordings and notes drawn from a series of seminars that has brought together equal numbers of BBC news and television decision makers and environment/development specialists. The seminars have created a rare space for extended dialogue between media and specialist perspectives on the communication of complex climate change science and policy. While the article acknowledges the distinctive nature of theBBC as a public sector broadcaster, the evidence confirms and extends current understanding of the career of climate change within the media more broadly.”
“Dangerous News: Media Decision Making about Climate Change Risk”
Risk Analysis, Vol. 25, No. 6, 2005

November 12, 2012 7:05 pm

How about the BP guy?

Jeff Alberts
November 12, 2012 7:08 pm

“REPLY: The ball is in your court – Anthony”
I don’t have that much time on my hands, but lots of people here do. You’d think with all the big brains inhabiting this site that someone could be more original than tacking “gate” onto something. That’s been old for 30 years. You’re the media guy, is that the best you can do?

old engineer
November 12, 2012 7:14 pm

tallbloke says:
November 12, 2012 at 5:35 pm
Jackpot.
http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/capstone/mediaclimatechange.pdf
====================================================================
You did some great sleuthing yourself, tallbloke. (although by now you are probably asleep and won’t see this for eight hours or so.)
What a find! As you say “jackpot.” Everyone does indeed need to read this.

John in LduB
November 12, 2012 7:17 pm

Boaden and Mitchell both gone now.

Julian Williams in Wales
November 12, 2012 7:17 pm

Quote Anticlimactic ……
“Richard North of EUReferendum was an attendee and I recall reading his recollection of the event but I can not find it on his website [after a brief search]. My recollection is that he thought it was a hatchet job and he was a lone voice.” End quote
Wrong – it was a different Richard North. This Richard North calls himself a skeptic and did complain about the bias. But he is NOT the same Richard North of EUREferendum who exposed Pachauri and Africagate.

PJF
November 12, 2012 7:23 pm

anticlimactic wrote:
Richard North of EuReferendum was an attendee and I recall reading his recollection of the event but I can not find it on his website [after a brief search]. My recollection is that he thought it was a hatchet job and he was a lone voice.
Different Richard North:
http://richarddnorth.com/rdn-bio/

Another Gareth
November 12, 2012 7:25 pm

Latimer Alder said: “Immense kudos to omnologos for outwitting the best ‘minds’ of both the BBC and their expensive lawyers.”
Due to the unique way in which the BBC is funded those are *our* expensive lawyers.
anticlimactic,
It’s a different Richard North who attended – Richard D North whereas EUreferendum.com is Richard A E North.

John in LduB
November 12, 2012 7:26 pm

Interesting. John Humphrys wasn’t there.

RBerteig
November 12, 2012 7:44 pm

So leaving aside the long list of non-expert specialists, why are the drama and comedy departments represented?
* Eleanor Moran, Development Executive, Drama Commissioning
* Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Is it really all that important to make sure that BBC comedies and dramas include the right amount of AGW indoctrination?

November 12, 2012 7:46 pm

Just to add to what Julian Williams in Wales and PJF have said the EURefendum.com ace blog is run by Dr Richard A E North. (Please note his initials.)

Beale
November 12, 2012 7:51 pm

In view of the presence of someone from the U.S. Embassy, it should be noticed that this was in the administration of the younger Bush.

Jolly farmer
November 12, 2012 7:59 pm

Hello Jimmy Haigh, and anyone else who believes that, in the UK, the choice is between paying the licence fee, or dumping the TV:
* you don’t have to pay;
* they can’t “detect” what channel you are watching;
* they have no right to enter your home.
I have read that c. 3000 people are currently being prosecuted. I suspect that most of these believed one or more of the myths. How would they cope with 30,000? 300,000?
Would be good to have comment from those (i.e. most) who know more than me on this “TV detector van” issue.

November 12, 2012 8:00 pm

Maurizio Morabito,
Great stuff! Well done. I hope the pain, anguish and damage this causes al beeb in interminable. Better yet, make that terminal. My cup runneth over with hate for them. You’ve made me very happy. Joy, oh joy! Thank you.

old engineer
November 12, 2012 8:00 pm

Anthony-
If I read correctly the article tallbloke referenced above, this is a much bigger story than who attended a single seminar. Apparently a group of alarmists waged an approximately 10 year effort (beginning in 1997) to convince the BBC, through a SERIES of workshop/seminars that the risk of CAGW was so great that the BBC needed to abandon the traditional journalistic even handed approach and take an advocacy role.
Apparently they were successful.

artwest
November 12, 2012 8:04 pm

An addendum to my post about Rafael Hidalgo:
True he is now “Media Project Manager” and “Studio Manager” for The Open University but he wasn’t even that in 2006.
Before the seminar there was a just over 2 year gap – not filled in on his Linkedin page – since he had been “Business Consultant, Television Trust for the Enviroment (sic)” for a massive months in 2003. No indication of even that kind of tangential climate involvement before or after that. (I say tangential because Business Consultant to a TV Trust doesn’t necessarily mean any expertise in the subject matter they deal with)
Why on earth was he invited?

Jimmy Haigh
November 12, 2012 8:16 pm

Jolly farmer says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:59 pm
Thanks for the info. Of course the myth has always been that they can see what you are watching… (Big Brother Corporation is watching you…)
In my brother’s case he had just had enough of bloody “Reality TV”. They’ve got another “I’m a Celebrity: Get me out of Here” going on at the moment. i have never watched any pf that garbage but the popularity of all that crap says it all about the UK at the moment.
Celebrities? Dump them all there – and leave them there. That’s what i would do…
There. I feel much better now.

November 12, 2012 8:17 pm

A splendid piece of back-research, – very well done Maurizio!
The actual list reveals almost no one that you could call a scientist but plenty of advocates, urgers and the like as well as a few stooges to make up the numbers. Having people like that on your committee makes the outcome so much easier to achieve. The egg is on the BBC face yet again.

November 12, 2012 8:21 pm

Well done all involved in exposing this BBC coverup.
This confirms what we all suspected: the taxpayer funded BBC is an advocate for government policy and UN Agenda 21 at the expense of openness and to the detriment of science. Government abuse of taxpayer funding in an attempt to steal more taxes from taxpayers and to controls people’s lives based on corruption and perversion of science.
Your site is much appreciated Anthony. Again and again.
A beacon for freedom and an ally in restoring scientific integrity.
Thanks, mate.

Grey Lensman
November 12, 2012 8:24 pm

It cannot be true
Its not on the BBC news at all.

Werner Brozek
November 12, 2012 8:30 pm

The following caught my eye:
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Is there any connection between this and climategate email 3000:
“From: Hill, Michael [[4] REDACTEDREDACTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 8:48 PM
To: Meardon Fiona Miss (RBS)
Subject: RE: Proposed Renewal of U.S. Department of Energy Grant No. DE-FG02-98ER62601
(Phil Jones’ Project – UEA Ref R14702)
One other thing: Do continue to require payment in advance, or would reimbursement
work? If you do need advance, do you have a bank in the United States? If so, we could
enroll you our automated payment request system.
Thanks,
Mike”

Gunga Din
November 12, 2012 8:34 pm

Nick says:
November 12, 2012 at 4:19 pm
Boaden is also on the list. Currently ‘suspended’ for her role in a paedophile mess at the bbc.
========================================================================
Well, tickle me Elmo!

gbees
November 12, 2012 8:36 pm

@temp ….
Trevor Evans, Officer for Environment, Science and Technology, Deputy Permanent
Representative of the United States of America to IMO, American Embassy.
IMO-International Marine Organization

David Ball
November 12, 2012 8:39 pm

Joel Shore? Lazy Teenager? RR Kampen? barry? ericgrimsrud? Monty?
Did I miss anyone?

David Ball
November 12, 2012 8:41 pm

Thank you omnologos !!! Score !!
I freaking love WUWT!!!!
Jeff Alberts not so much.

DR
November 12, 2012 8:51 pm

Grey Lensman says:
November 12, 2012 at 8:24 pm
It cannot be true
Its not on the BBC news at all.

ROFL
Seriously, will this get national media attention anywhere? Drudge?

Patrick
November 12, 2012 8:57 pm

“Jolly farmer says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:59 pm”
The “TV Detector Van” was more about the fear of being caught because people believed they actually worked the way the BBC said they did. The Ads ran on BBC!!! I never saw one in all my life in the UK. Back in the 70’s the fine was 1000 ponds I think, a lot of money to many back then, so people simply coughed up the license fee. Nice way to extract your income, hold a gun to your viewers head!

Matt
November 12, 2012 9:06 pm

Is this a Streisand effect of sorts? Who would have paid much attention that blogger dude if they had simply obliged to his request somewhere along the road, and where there had not been a court hearing with the associated media attention?
Haaaa-haaa ! 😉

michael hart
November 12, 2012 9:07 pm

Maurizio Morabito. Well done.
Your next task, should you choose to accept it, is to find Kevin Trenberth’s missing heat.

November 12, 2012 9:17 pm

Jolly farmer says November 12, 2012 at 7:59 pm
Hello Jimmy Haigh, and anyone else who believes that, in the UK, the choice is between paying the licence fee, or dumping the TV:
* you don’t have to pay;
* they can’t “detect” what channel you are watching; [_Jim: Yes, it can be done, from outside the home even]
* they have no right to enter your home.
I have read that c. 3000 people are currently being prosecuted. I suspect that most of these believed one or more of the myths. How would they cope with 30,000? 300,000?
Would be good to have comment from those (i.e. most) who know more than me on this “TV detector van” issue.

With TV sets becoming more integrated and smaller and smaller components (think: 0402 SMD parts) there is even less LO (local oscillator) leakage than normal, except ‘back’ (reverse direction) through the mixer and front end stages … newer direct conversion designs present a bit more of a challenge, but, an “LO” is still required, so, detection is still possible … since there is no such thing as a consumer device that has enough shielding to _not_ be detectable (to meet post and telecommunication or FCC RF ‘radiation’ or signal leakage specs yes; complete or 100% effective shielding: no. Even commercial RF equipment reaches a cost-effective limit at some point.)
A ‘for example’, a Sony Walkman is receivable on a nothing-special hand-held scanner programmed for 10.7 MHz *above* the station (scanner tuned to the LO frequency) being listened-to out to 50 or 60 feet easy … an improved receiver and better antenna could extend that 5x out … UHF TV “LO” freqs like used in GB are a cinch given the smaller wavelength allowing hand-held Yagi and Log-Periodic antennas …
In fact, the idea of ‘looking’ for receiver LOs (LO leakage, to determine audience listening preferences) has been patented for audience ‘survey’ purposes:
REMOTE AUDIENCE SURVEY SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREFOR
http://www.google.com/patents/EP0882338A4?cl=en
There were a couple of competing systems fielded to ‘survey’ public listeners a few year back using this technique; I’ll post again if I run across any present-day offerings by companies providing this service.
.

November 12, 2012 9:20 pm

David Ball says November 12, 2012 at 8:39 pm
Joel Shore? Lazy Teenager? RR Kampen? barry? ericgrimsrud? Monty?
Did I miss anyone?
– – – – – – – – –
R. Gates? William Connelly? Nick Stokes?

November 12, 2012 9:30 pm

Dunno… they may prefer this mess to the other ones.

LONDON — The BBC struggled Monday to contain a spreading crisis over its reporting of a decades-old sexual abuse scandal as two senior executives withdrew temporarily from their jobs following the resignation of the corporation’s director general in the worst setback to the public broadcaster’s status, prestige and self-confidence for years.
The BBC’s website said its director of news, Helen Boaden, and her deputy, Stephen Mitchell, had “stepped aside,” the latest moves since a flagship current affairs program, “Newsnight,” wrongly implicated a former Conservative Party politician in accusations of sexual abuse at a children’s home in North Wales in the 1970s and 1980s.

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/2-more-bbc-execs-withdraw-amid-crisis-661817/

NEW YORK — New York Times Co. CEO Mark Thompson started his job Monday amid a widening scandal at his former employer, the BBC.

In recent months, Thompson has faced questions over a decision by the BBC’s “Newsnight” program last December to shelve an investigation into child sexual-abuse allegations against renowned BBC children’s television host Jimmy Savile. That decision was made while Thompson was still in charge of the company.

http://www.berkshireeagle.com/business/ci_21984565/n-y-times-ceo-starts-amid-bbc-scandal

Tom in Worc,Ma,USA
November 12, 2012 9:43 pm

Sorry to be so late into the game …… but has the BBC reported on this little gem yet?

Mike Spilligan
November 12, 2012 9:47 pm

I’m so impressed by Maurizio – I repeat many of the above: Well done. I could be depressed by the BBC – but it’s really only what we expect after two decades of decline.

LearDog
November 12, 2012 9:57 pm

Fantastic stuff, omnologos! Hats off to you! Agree – Woodward and Bernstein have nothing on you.
The import and timing couldn’t be better – BBC just spent lots of money to keep this OUT of the press (because they KNEW THEY BUSTED THEIR CHARTER). – and now they will be faced with yet ANOTHER Coverup. Classic!
As to the naming skerfuffle (Tony) – whilst the 28-gate is poetic, it doesn’t communicate to those folks ‘outside baseball’ what this is all about. Perhaps a a description more in keeping in line with what this is about? “UnbalancedGate”? “ClimateBiasGate”?
It is proof of INSTITUTIONAL hijacking….

Cam_S
November 12, 2012 9:58 pm

Even NYT employees aren’t happy.
‘Willfully ignorant’: NY Times journalists openly attack their new boss as child sex scandal threatens to engulf ex-BBC head
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/11/12/willfully-ignorant-ny-times-journalists-openly-attack-their-new-boss-as-child-sex-scandal-threatens-to-engulf-ex-bbc-head/

RockyRoad
November 12, 2012 10:03 pm

Why is anybody surprised that Trevor Evans of the US Embassy is part of the BBC’s Gang of 28?
CAGW has always been about politics–and precious little science.
(And even in the so-called “science” there’s collusion between east and west–East Anglia and Michael Mann, et al.)
Gosh, how I’d love another dose of Climategate right about now! The perfect Christmas would be opening* the rest of the trove.
*hint, hint.

Mike
November 12, 2012 10:08 pm

Omnologos might not be getting his Big Oil check this week or at least not the BP component.

pat
November 12, 2012 10:23 pm

not only BP, Insurance, but also nuclear lobbyist:
Matthew Farrow has quite a bit online suggesting he’s a nuclear lobbyist:
14 Aug 2010: Telegraph: Rowena Mason and Abigail Townsend: Britain is struggling to power the nuclear revolution
About 40km south of Beijing, some of the world’s most exciting science is splitting atoms in pursuit of the nuclear physicist’s Holy Grail – the tiny, cheap reactor.
Nuclear is actually inexpensive in comparison to offshore wind farms, according to Matthew Farrow, head of energy planning at the CBI.
“In terms of power output and carbon saved, nuclear could be two to three times cheaper than offshore wind,” he says. “Because of this we think it should take its place alongside renewables and fossil fuels as part of a balanced energy mix.” …
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/7945867/Britain-is-struggling-to-power-the-nuclear-revolution.html
Nov 2010: ESA (Environment Services Assoc) appoints CBI’s Matthew Farrow as Director of Policy
http://www.esauk.org/reports_press_releases/press_releases/101126_ESA_appoints_CBIs_
i don’t think bbc wanted this list out cos it would show Big Oil & nuclear were with the Agenda. indeed Shell has been in from the early days.

pat
November 12, 2012 10:24 pm

the big CAGW prize has always been trading CO2:
Tessa Tennant, AsRia, is among the Specialists, in what speciality?
Tessa Tennant, Co-founder of ASrIA, Appointed to the UK Green Investment Bank Board
HONG KONG, 5 October 2012 (FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE)—Tessa Tennant, co-founder and first chairman of the Association for Sustainable & Responsible Investment in Asia (ASrIA), the region’s non-profit membership association for the sustainable and responsible investment industry, has been appointed as a Non-Executive Director of the UK Green Investment Bank (UK GIB).
The UK GIB is a funding scheme initiated by the UK government and is designed to accelerate private sector investment in the UK’s transition to a green economy. Offshore wind power generation, waste processing and recycling, energy from waste generation, non-domestic energy efficiency and support for the Green Deal will be the first priority sectors for the bank.
On the UK GIB Board Tennant joins Chairman Lord Smith of Kelvin and Deputy Chairman Sir Adrian Montague, along with five other Non-Executive Directors:
Professor Dame Julia King
Fred Maroudas
Tom Murley
David Nish
Isobel Sharp
Shaun Kingsbury is the Chief Executive…
Tennant remains on the ASrIA Board and is President and co-founder of The Ice Organisation, a personal carbon management and loyalty programme. The 2012 recipient of the Joan Bavaria Award for Building Sustainability into the Capital Markets, Tennant co-founded the UK’s first equity investment fund for sustainable development in 1988. She was Chair and co-founder of the UK Social Investment Forum and of the Carbon Disclosure Project, where she is now a Trustee…
http://www.asria.org/news/press/1349400121

pat
November 12, 2012 10:25 pm

the fact the Church of England were specialists alongside BP, makes this appointment rather amusing:
8 Nov: Financial Times: Church of England needs a pragmatist
As a former oil industry executive, Bishop Welby will bring a dash of worldliness to the post of Archbishop of Canterbury and, as such, head of the Anglican communion…
Bishop Welby will continue to straddle the material and spiritual worlds by remaining a member of the parliamentary commission on banking, which some may see as one more sign of the steady secularisation of the Anglican Church…
Bishop Welby’s rise has been meteoric, the appointment coming barely one year after receiving his bishopric at Durham. His privileged background as the Eton and Cambridge-educated descendant of former Tory deputy prime minister Rab Butler make him an establishment candidate, albeit one who brings certain risks at a time of great upheaval…
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7851c9ec-29a4-11e2-a604-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2C4RVNXPg
Bishop Welby, appointed last year to be bishop of Durham, worked for 11 years in the oil industry, rising to treasurer of Enterprise Oil, before deciding he was called to the priesthood…
Before seeking ordination, Bishop Welby worked six years for French oil company Elf Aquitaine and then as treasurer of exploration company Enterprise Oil in 1984…
http://www.news.com.au/world/justin-welby-named-next-archbishop-of-canterbury/story-fndir2ev-1226514052738
8 Nov: Telegraph: Peter Mullen: A new Archbishop but no change at Canterbury: Justin Welby is just another Left-wing establishment bureaucrat
He is of course an establishment man. I do not mean to suggest by that the old establishment based on the 16th century and the Elizabethan Settlement and supported by luminous divines such as Hooker, Law and Lancelot Andrewes. That wonderful creation was put to death decades ago. No, I mean the new establishment: a hierarchy among the bishops and in the Synod of Left-wing modernisers, devotees of all the secular fads such as diversity, social cohesion, political correctness and, of course, apostles of that sublime superstition, global warming…
The bishop does speak from the highest moral ground: “One principle that seems to me to be clear. We cannot replace what was destroyed in 2008; we can only replace it with something that is dedicated to the support of human society, the common good and solidarity.” Who are this “We” who will do the replacing, we might ask? But the point to notice about what the bishop is saying here, is his supreme confidence in the objective infallibility of his own thoughts: he begins by mentioning a “principle” but proceeds only to offer his opinion. Clearly the implication must be that he regards his own private opinions as matters of principle. This is dangerous. It has been known to lead to demagoguery…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/petermullen/100188475/a-new-archbishop-but-no-change-at-canterbury-justin-welby-is-just-another-left-win

Lightrain
November 12, 2012 10:25 pm

It’s not Specialists, its Special Interests!

pat
November 12, 2012 10:26 pm

“Specialist” Andrew Simms is no stranger to the sceptic sites:
Guardian: Andrew Simms
Andrew Simms is a fellow of the New Economics Foundation, and the author of Ecological Debt, Tescopoly and Eminent Corporations
122 articles, including “50 months to avoid climate disaster – and a change is in the air”, dating back to 1999.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/andrewsimms

pat
November 12, 2012 10:30 pm

the purpose
the purpose of the meeting was “reaching new and wider audiences” – shortly afterwards, bbc’s climate chaos series began, and david attenborough embraced CAGW:
23 May 2006: PS-Mag: David Attenborough Kicks Off Climate Chaos, 24 May 2006, 9pm, BBC One
By From bbc.co.uk web site
Are We Changing Planet Earth?
Wednesday 24 May, 9pm, BBC One
David Attenborough draws on his life-long insights into our planet and presents his personal take on climate change. Part two follows next week.
Songs of Praise
Sunday 28 May, TBC, BBC One
Sally Magnusson visits an environmental project in Oxford that has made a real difference to the local community, and meets with historian and environmentalist, Martin Palmer.
Test the Nation – Know Your Planet
Sunday 28 May, 8pm, BBC One
Are you aware of climate and environmental issues? We put the country to the test in the popular quiz show.
Can We Save Planet Earth?
Thursday 1 June, 9pm, BBC One
Part two of David Attenborough’s investigation.
Five Disasters Waiting to Happen
Tuesday 6 June, 9pm, BBC Two
We examine five global locations and scenarios: London, Shanghai, Mumbai, Paris and Tuvalu. All have been identified by experts as vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
The Money Programme
Friday 2 June, 7pm, BBC Two
The Money Programme spends a week with a family in Teesdale – the area with the UK’s highest CO2 emissions per capita.
Panorama
Date and time TBC, BBC One
The Bush administration has resisted calls to engage in Kyoto, and has been accused of a systematic campaign of disinformation and harassment against the scientific community – gagging scientists, re-writing major reports, and allowing the oil and coal industries to drive policy. Panorama investigates these claims.
Climate Change shorts
You can also watch eight short documentaries on the affects of Climate Change via the BBC Four website. For legal reasons, these are only available if you are in the UK.
http://www.psychicsahar.com/artman/publish/article_711.shtml
Panorama: Climate chaos: Bush’s climate of Fear was on BBC One on June 6 2006 (links to transcript)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/5005994.stm

pat
November 12, 2012 10:46 pm

a coincidence worth noting:
24 May 2006: Uni of Oxford: Oxford studies on the environment inform the Government and the BBC
Oxford University scientists were among those playing host to the new Environment Secretary, David Miliband, on Wednesday 24 May when he visited Wytham Woods to see first hand the effect of climate change on wildlife and habitat…
Another recent visitor to Wytham Wood was Sir David Attenborough, whose programme launches the BBC’s Climate Chaos season, **coincidentally on the same day as the Environment Secretary’s visit. Sir David is filmed in the wood talking about the sun’s energy in ‘Are We Changing Planet Earth?’ ( BBC One on Wednesday 24 May at 9pm)
Another programme in the Climate Chaos Season features Oxford University’s Lower Carbon Futures Team Leader, Dr Brenda Boardman. Dr Boardman is in ‘The Money Programme – The Real Cost of Going Green’, where she advises a family on how to reduce their carbon effect to save them money and help the planet too (BBC Two on Friday 2 June at 7pm).
http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2006/060524.html

Ilma630
November 12, 2012 10:56 pm

Just a thought, but did Helen Boaden or another claim under oath in the FOIA case that the attendees were ‘experts’? If so, isnt that perjury?

November 12, 2012 10:56 pm

Not only BBC, Australian ABC needs urgent ”Perestroika” also. All those apparatchiks named above; should have their assets frozen and passports confiscated, until is found if GLOBAL warming is for real and is cumming or not – crime shouldn’t pay!!! On taxpayer’s paid responsible jobs / abuse of privileged position – misappropriation of tax $$$ ===DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWER BETWEEN THE NATIONAL BROADCASTER AND POLITICAL PARTY, IS DEAD. Should be resuscitated!!! NO BALANCED REPORTING = NO DEMOCRACY.

Nigel S
November 12, 2012 11:01 pm

12 gates to the White City? (BBC’s current affairs and factual and learning programmes HQ, including ‘Top Gear’ so not all bad!)
There’s three gates in the East
There’s three gates in the West
There’s three gates in the North
There’s three gates in the South
That makes twelve gates to the city, hallelujah
And it’s oh, what a beautiful
Oh
Oh Lord, what a beautiful city
Twelve gates to the city, hallelujah
Reverend Gary Davis

anticlimactic
November 12, 2012 11:09 pm

Apologies – it looks like I was mistaken about Richard North of EUReferendum being there. Having read so many blogs it can be a little blurry in hindsight. I certainly remember reading something by someone who was there, although possibly in a peripheral role.
If this list is picked up by certain UK newspapers it could be more bad news for the BBC. In the past they could have shrugged it off using their reputation, but now they are wounded and open to attack.
If the papers followed this up by examining the horrible bias in their ‘science’ programs [‘Climate Wars’ and various ‘Horizon’ programs] as well as news ‘reporting’ they could spin it out for weeks or months.
This would tie-in with the backlash against windfarms, concerns from British industry that a carbon tax and increased energy prices will make them uncompetative, concerns that a lack of a credible energy policy will lead to blackouts, etc.
It may just fizzle out, but as someone who lives in the UK I hope not.

pat
November 12, 2012 11:19 pm

Zoominfo: TVE network
http://www.tve.org, 30 Aug 2011 [cached]
Rafael Hidalgo is tve’s part-time coordinator for Latin America and the Caribbean. A graduate in electronic engineering, Rafael Hidalgo worked in the Venezuelan media for 15 years. As executive director of Artévision-USB, the production arm of Simon Bolivar University in Caracas – and tve’s partner in Caracas – he played a leading role in the ground-breaking microMACRO project, the tve Latin American Network’s series on environmental entrepreneurs. He moved to Spain to complete a Media MBA (Universidad Carlos III, Madrid) in 2002 and joined tve as microMACRO project coordinator the following year. Since 2004, he has been working at the Open University, where he has had several roles involving the management of the production of teaching materials – including audiovisual, software, multimedia and web resources – see tve partners…
TVE: News
http://www.tve.org, 10 July 2001 [cached]
“Our challenge will be to adapt 60 programmes in the catalogue of the international TV Trust for the Environment into television that appeal to a diverse audience in all the countries of our continent” adds Rafael Hidalgo, chief of Venezuela’s Arte Vision.
http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profile/person?personId=28057353&targetid=profile

Berényi Péter
November 12, 2012 11:21 pm

Hilarious.

November 12, 2012 11:23 pm

Well done to Tony Newbury.
The list is not be a big surprise, the usual environmental taliban.
I don’t think anybody else has mentioned how the BBC is funded, i.e. by the UK public. If you live in the UK you have to pay £150 a year for the privilege of watching the BBC.

pat
November 12, 2012 11:31 pm

given BBC’s former Director-General Mark Thompson, now at NYT, is enmeshed in the many Jimmy Savile investigations because he was D-G when the Savile Newsnight program was pulled – i can’t see how the NYT can afford to keep him, to be honest:
12 Nov: Telegraph: James Delingpole: BBC’s latest excuse: forget Jimmy Savile, blame Nigel Lawson
The other day I argued that, following the Jimmy Savile and Lord McAlpine disasters, the BBC will learn nothing and do nothing. Patten – I’ll bet you: and there’s no bet I’d more happily lose – will keep his well-upholstered rear stuck firmly in the Chairman’s seat. The BBC will remain, as it is now, a bastion of entrenched left-liberal orthodoxy. If you need proof, have a read of this astonishing speech just delivered to Oxford University by the BBC’s ex-Director General Mark Thompson…
He quotes the Doran survey (“97 per cent of scientists say…”), quite unaware that it has been exposed as rubbish; he is impressed by Bob Ward whom he seeks to brandish as an expert in the field; he constructs his whole speech around the argumentum ad verecundiam – blissfully unaware throughout that by citing supposed authorities such as the Royal Society he is guilty of precisely the rhetorical fallacy he is striving to criticise.
My favourite bit though is the one where – again unwittingly, it seems – he resorts to yet another rhetorical fallacy (the argumentum ad populum) to demonstrate that “scientists” are considered in opinion surveys to be much more trustworthy than “journalists.”
Well given what the BBC has done over the years in its piss-poor reportage of any number of issues to discredit the cause of honest journalism, is it any wonder?
The New York Times is more than welcome to its new editor. Frankly, they deserve each other.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100189238/bbcs-latest-excuse-forget-jimmy-savile-blame-nigel-lawson/

Nigel S
November 12, 2012 11:40 pm

Poor form I know but it amused me to note how many of the BBC attendees are now ex, ‘resting’ or suing …

November 12, 2012 11:44 pm

http://web.archive.org/web/20071108153956/http://www.ibt.org.uk/all_documents/dialogue/Real%20World%20Brainstorm%20Sep%202007%20background.pdf?PHPSESSID=646ac9912b785ecd5f9230ff4d8b8ac6
The International Broadcasting Trust (IBT) has been lobbying the BBC, on behalf of all
the major UK aid and development agencies … So far, 6 seminars have taken place. They have had a significant impact on the BBC’s output … As a result of the success of these seminars, further brainstorms are now planned for 2008.
==========
Here we have it, from IBT’s own documents:
“a significant impact on the BBC’s output”
Their lobbying has changed what the BBC reports. A lobby group that works on behalf of aid and development agencies has directly affected what the BBC reports to the public.
Clearly, the BBC is no longer a public institution. It is working at the IBT’s direction, on behalf of aid and development agencies, using public money to fund this effort. At a minimum this would appear to be a Breach of Trust by the BBC Trustees.

Max Roberts
November 12, 2012 11:45 pm

Actually, that whole “INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTING TRUST” document is worth reading. Just how much is BBC output being influenced by the unaccountable organisations that seek to control its agenda. As of 2007, six seminars had taken place. What was the result of the other five, and how many others have taken place since?

pat
November 12, 2012 11:50 pm

Anita Neville is with E3G (Third Generation Environmentalism), founded by Foreign & Commonwealth Offices’s John Ashton:
E3G John Ashton, Founding Director
John Ashton is a Founding Director of E3G. He was the Special Representative for Climate Change to the UK Foreign Secretary from 2006 to 2012. He was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 2012 Birthday Honours for services to international climate change.
John is one of a new generation of diplomats equally at home in the worlds of foreign policy and green politics. Before moving outside government to establish E3G in 2005, John had a distinguished career in the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including founding and leading its Environment Policy Department.
A major theme of John’s career has been China. He speaks Chinese. He was an adviser to Governor Chris Patten in Hong Kong from 1993-7. His first diplomatic assignment, from 1981-4, was as Science Attaché in the British Embassy in Beijing…
John was the first Chief Executive of E3G in 2005-06, before returning to the UK Foreign Office as the Foreign Secretary’s Special Representative for Climate Change…
He had the personal title of Ambassador with direct access to the Foreign Secretary. John played a key role in designing the FCO’s climate change network and strategy, with its focus on climate stability as a precondition for security, prosperity and equity, and on strategic political engagement with the emerging and other major economies.
John has been continuously active in climate diplomacy in various capacities since 1997. He was involved in negotiating the EU 2020 package on climate change in spring 2007 and the decision in December 2008 on funding for CCS across Europe. He helped negotiate the agreement in 2005 between the EU and China to demonstrate zero emission coal technology in China, and was closely involved in the EU’s engagement with Russia over the Kyoto Protocol. He played a key role in the first UN security debate on climate change in April 2007. He was a senior member of the UK negotiating team in the UN climate negotiations from 1998-2002, and again at Copenhagen.
John Ashton is a Visiting Professor at Imperial College London, and a Member of the Green College Centre for Environmental Policy and Understanding. He is a steering committee member of Climate Care and serves on the Advisory Boards of the Climate Institute, Washington DC; the UK Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research; the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara; and Climate Change Capital.
http://www.e3g.org/about/John-Ashton/
17 Oct: E3G: John Ashton speaks at Asahi World Environmental Forum, Tokyo
John Ashton, one of E3G’s founding directors, gave a speech at the Asahi World Environmental Forum 2012 in Tokyo on the 16th October. Entitled “Climate Change and the Race for Growth”, the speech urges countries to raise climate change up the political agenda and move away from a ‘business as usual approach’ to growth. Climate policies of China, the US, the EU, the UK and Japan are also discussed…
http://www.e3g.org/programmes/climate-articles/john-ashton-speaks-at-asahi-world-environmental-forum-tokyo1/

Bertram Felden
November 12, 2012 11:52 pm

I think that you are kidding yourselves if you think this revelation will change anything.
For one, the timing is really bad – the beeb is so wrapped up in child abuse allegations and hypocrisy at the moment that nothing else will see the light of day – for the prurient press that is far more interesting than a deliberate skewing of editorial policy into what most of them will see as being ‘the right direction’ anyway.

Tim
November 13, 2012 12:01 am

Dr Andrew Dlugolecki produced a report for the Chartered Insurance Institute in the UK about climate change. He is of course entirely impartial. In an interview in 2009 about the report he said:
“We believe climate change is already happening, and to give you an example of hot months in the UK, the kind of temperatures that we used to see once every hundred years – in other words with a one per cent risk – has now risen to about an eight per cent risk. In insurance you would normally insure against something that comes about one per cent of the time and already we’re seeing events that used to happen once every thousand years happening with a probability of one per cent. We’re seeing a big change already in the climate, a change at the levels where insurance and re-insurance has to pay attention.”
What utter nonsense. Of course ever since he said this I don’t think we have had anything but cold wet summers and cold winters in the UK.

November 13, 2012 12:04 am

Notice to all Deniers: “Hacking” henceforth will be redefined to include using Web archive sites.

November 13, 2012 12:05 am

No surprise the BBC wanted to keep the list secret! I wonder how many others did too? Perhaps that was the reason for the odd choice of judge in the case — someone who was willing to give the “right” answer?
Even now, the BBC has links all over the place and who knows what nudge-nudge-wink-wink arrangements could have been made in an effort to preserve its appearance of impartiality.
I found it very funny that the BBC news was reporting on Entwistle’s departure as if it was a major story. I wonder if it will do the same on this story? I think not, but hopefully one of the less biased MSM organisations might pick it up.

peter laux
November 13, 2012 12:05 am

In light of recent events –
A motto for the BBC, – “Protecting the Planet and Pedophiles.”

DirkH
November 13, 2012 12:12 am

The top secret list of the TwentyEight… all in the Wayback machine… Ahhahahaha! Idiots!
Nice sleuthing, Omnologos!
(Now I can see some BBC investigative journalists trying to find out who this “Omnologos” REALLY is… and where his lair is…)

pat
November 13, 2012 12:13 am

Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant. post-katrina, maybe 2005/2006?
Center for Science and Technology Policy Research Colorado: THOUGHTS ABOUT THE IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON INSURANCE CLAIMS
Andrew Dlugolecki
Visiting Research Fellow, Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia
http://cstpr.colorado.edu/sparc/research/projects/extreme_events/munich_workshop/dlugolecki.pdf

Peter Miller
November 13, 2012 12:23 am

No one seems to have noticed the absence of Mr Richard Black from the list, the BBC science reporter notorious for being able to argue black is white (no pun intended) on all matters to do with climate.
I had thought the reason the BBC fought tooth and nail not to disclose this list was because HRH Charlieness was involved. Anyhow, that is not the case and as has been pointed out previously here, that’s all right because the BBC Head of Comedy, the US Embassy representative, the Church of England and assorted loony environmental activists were there.
This is just another instance of the amateurish way in which the once highly professional BBC is run these days.

David Schofield
November 13, 2012 12:32 am

It would be interesting to see what was said by the BBC in their defence of the FOI case. Did they actually say use the defence of the 28 being scientists? They may have perjured themselves?

November 13, 2012 12:32 am

Now we know why they wanted to keep the list confidential. Imagine if the Nazis had gotten a hold of that list? Talk about dodging a bullet.

Olaf Koenders
November 13, 2012 12:35 am

Charles Gerard Nelson says:
November 12, 2012 at 4:50 pm
More than 3,000 people a week are being prosecuted for not having a TV licence… The number of prosecutions has risen in part because many more are struggling to pay. In 2010, licence fee fines totalled just under £25million a year.
Being charged/taxed/licensed to pay for their Global Warming Drivel™ is one thing, being fined for refusing to pay for it is insanity.

Anything that can be licensed is fundamentally lawful anyway. Don’t pay it – fight back! Here in Australia, we used to pay a fee, but it’s since been revoked decades ago. Is your gubberment ripping you off THAT much eh? Who woulda thunk it..

Konrad
November 13, 2012 12:35 am

_Jim says:
November 12, 2012 at 6:32 pm
“Hello Konrad. Did we have a discussion about IR Spectroscopy previously? The ‘group’ of 28 may or may not have a grasp of the subject at hand, but it is best to address them for those issues for which you have ‘actionable’, provable points or issues rather than simply riding one’s familiar hobby horse …”
———————————————
An unfinished discussion maybe, however not about spectoscopy but rather radiative cooling and convection. You will note on that thread I gave a description of an empirical experiment including a list of materials and construction instructions. I suspect you have yet to build and run such an experiment. Type, as I often say, is cheap.

stumpy
November 13, 2012 12:37 am

Of course big oil was there no doubt there to undermine the ‘science’, those evil bastards!!
When will the AGW crowd accept they are funded by big oil?

November 13, 2012 12:39 am

Nick says:
November 12, 2012 at 4:19 pm
The bbc covered up for Jimmy Saville. Then when it comes out, the decided that the best thing to do was go on the attack to show to distract against the mess. So they attacked a Tory donor for being involved, plus throwing Thatcher into the mix. It’s all unravelled.

Out of the frying pan and into the soup.

November 13, 2012 12:39 am

A quick way for the BBC to be cleaned up would be to appoint Jeremy Clarkson as chairman and let him crack the whip. 😉

November 13, 2012 12:41 am

The bbc has far more to. Worry about than this at the moment, sacking and litigation city.

November 13, 2012 12:43 am

Well done, Maurizio.

November 13, 2012 12:44 am

Well done, Maurizio!

November 13, 2012 12:52 am

The trouble for the BBC with this list is that it directly proves coverage of AGW by the BBC was never about the science and solely about delivering a certain message. In fact the less science the better it seems, as they know facts and figures easily turn people off from a message.
It’s a pure call to arms for a one sided message: dam the science, its for the greater good. Unfortunately history is littered with expensive and dangerous events when science has been cast aside for the greater good; this seems to be a lesson hard to be learnt.
With the whole BBCpedo story atm, there is a risk this could get lost in the post – please make sure this is spread far and wide, and ideally to your local political representatives.

X Anomaly
November 13, 2012 12:57 am

And the BBC equivalent in Australia is the ABC, and they have most certainly been up to the same type of shenanigans, as evident in “the drum”
No climate change articles since Aug 29.
2 and a half months of silence.
Trying to get the public to forget the carbon tax.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/thedrum/specials/climate-debate/
So they have gone from abusing skeptics to silencing them.
Who are they, where is the ABC list?????
Maybe its this cannon fodder?
http://theconversation.edu.au/climate-change-deniers-are-rarer-than-we-think-10670

David
November 13, 2012 1:00 am

28gate? No. It’s the Voldemort List

November 13, 2012 1:01 am

Jeff Alberts says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:08 pm

“REPLY: The ball is in your court – Anthony”

I don’t have that much time on my hands, but lots of people here do. You’d think with all the big brains inhabiting this site that someone could be more original than tacking “gate” onto something. That’s been old for 30 years. You’re the media guy, is that the best you can do?

Here are some words that rhyme with Auntie”–maybe someone can make a ruthless rhyme out of them:
banty, bacchante, vigilante, panty, ranty, chanty, shanty, scanty, slanty, dilettante

Disko Troop
November 13, 2012 1:04 am

97% of the attendees at this seminar were not scientists.
What a surprise!
Ivor Ward

Dario from NW Italy
November 13, 2012 1:07 am

Well done, Maurizio!!!!!!
You are one of the very rare persons who make me proud of being an “Italian”!!!!
The “impartiality” of BBC is rivalling with that of TeleKabul here in Italy…
For non – Italians: in Italy, we have THREE Government-owned TV, named RAI1, RAI2, RAI3.
The RAI3 channel was designed in the late ’70s to be, in fact, “owned” and controlled by the then Communist Party (now self-renamed “Democratic Party”); in the ’80s, during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, RAI3, owing to his “impartiality”, was nicknamed “tele Kabul” after the official Afghan TV, owned by the pro-Soviet puppet government…

pat
November 13, 2012 1:10 am

Aviva was Norwich Union, and Sir Robert Bignold, head of the Norwich Union, matched funding by
UNEP Finance Initiative: Online Course: Climate Change Risks & Opportunities for the Finance Sector
MENTORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
Dr. Andrew Dlugolecki (Course mentor for weeks 1 & 2):
Dr. Andrew Dlugolecki worked for 27 years in Aviva insurance group, in a number of senior technical and operational posts with UK and international responsibilities, retiring from the post of Director of General Insurance Development in December 2000. Modelling the effect of weather on insurance claims in the 70’s and 80’s led to his involvement with global warming from 1987 onward. He served as the chief author on Financial Services for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 1995 Assessment Report, and has been an author, reviewer or review editor in later Assessment Reports. IPCC named him as a key
contributor when they received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. He carried out similar duties for the official UK and EU reviews of climate change. In 2009 the UK’s statutory committee on adaptation to climate change appointed him as a member with specialist knowledge on financial services. He chaired three studies of climate change by the Chartered Insurance Institute (1994, 2001 and 2009).
Andrew is a special advisor of the Carbon Disclosure Project and has been an advisor to UNEP FI on climate change since 2001, having written, edited, or project-managed several of their reports and briefings.
He also consults privately from his home in Perth, Scotland and includes UNFCCC as one of his clients.
http://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/training/climate/cc_course_biographies.pdf
History of the Climatic Research Unit
Acknowledgements
This list is not fully exhaustive, but we would like to acknowledge the support of the following funders (in alphabetical order):
Norwich Union (now Aviva)
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/about-cru/history
Linkedin: David Viner
Programmer Norwich Union / Aviva
November 2001 – March 2003 (1 year 5 months) Norwich, United Kingdom
Senior Programmer Anglia Campus
January 1999 – September 2001 (2 years 9 months) Norwich
Java, PHP, Perl programmer.
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/david-viner/38/255/752
Dec 2008: Uni of East Anglia: Norwich Union (Insurance) sponsors new university chair
Norwich Union and The University of East Anglia (UEA) have announced a new chair within the University’s School of Computing Sciences. The appointment, which is sponsored by the insurer, part of Aviva, will be the Aviva Chair in Insurance Statistics…
The new arrangement will strengthen existing relationships between Norwich Union and the University, and will help to further advance the statistical capability within the business. The initial agreement is for three years…
Professor Vic Rayward-Smith, Head of the University’s School of Computing Sciences, says: “We are delighted to receive this sponsorship. The funding of this chair will strengthen further the already strong relationship between two of Norwich’s most important organisations.
“Statistical techniques are a major research area within the School and for many years, we have worked with Norwich Union helping them to analyse their own customer databases and to develop accurate pricing and marketing strategies.
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2008/dec/Norwich+Union+sponsors+new+university+chair+
May 2003: Uni of East Anglia: Norwich Union signs up WeatherQuest
The market for insurance weather services sees a new player this month, as Norwich Union sign up WeatherQuest to provide their weather claims validation information and weather forecast support services.
WeatherQuest, with its headquarters at the University of East Anglia’s (UEA) School of Environmental Sciences, has been providing a pilot service to Norwich Union for the past six months, and following a successful review has now been signed up for a three-year service.
“We’re delighted to be working with Norwich Union,” said WeatherQuest Managing Director, Jim Bacon. “Our experience is that over 30 per cent of weather related insurance claims are not backed up by the weather records, so we believe we’re helping Norwich Union save money as well as providing them with the daily, up to date information they need…
With weather and climate remaining high on insurance agendas, WeatherQuest benefits from close links with UEA’s internationally renowned climate expertise, with both the Climatic Research Unit and the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research also being based in UEA’s School of Environmental Sciences.
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2003/may/Norwich+Union+signs+up+WeatherQuest
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
Project Duration: April 2001 to May 2003
Contact: Prof. J. Palutokof
Climatic Research Unit
The work undertaken in this project has been extremely limited by data availability.
•HadRM3H data were not made available until April 2002 (12 months into the project timetable) due to delays in the launch of the UKCIP02 scenarios.
•HadAM3H data are still incomplete.
•Access to insurance claims data has proven problematic. This is primarily due to the fragmented nature of the Aviva group (Norwich Union, Commercial Union and General Accident), a consequence of several large mergers. However, Royal Sun Alliance has provided claims data for five storms…
There is broad scope for further work:
includes:
The insurance industry in particular would benefit from information regarding windstorm activity for earlier future time slices than the 2080s available currently for HadAM3H and HadRM3H e.g., for the 2020s and 2050s.
Socio-economic scenarios designed specifically for the insurance and forestry industries, taking into account factors such as future building stock distribution, insurance coverage and forest cover, could improve the vulnerability predictions for the future.
http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/content/final-project-overview-15
Wikipedia: Hubert Lamb
Climatic Research Unit
At first his view was that global cooling would lead within 10,000 years to a future ice age and he was known as “the ice man”, but over a period including the UK’s exceptional drought and heat wave of 1975–76 he changed to predicting that global warming could have serious effects within a century. His warnings of damage to agriculture, ice caps melting, and cities being flooded caught widespread attention and helped to shape public opinion. He gained the unit sponsorship from ***seven major insurance companies, who wanted to make use of the research of the unit when making their own studies of the implications of climate change for insurance against storm and flood damage…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Lamb

November 13, 2012 1:20 am

Mann (pun intended), the BBC has a lot of “Heads”.
Off with their “Heads”!

pauline
November 13, 2012 1:24 am

How much did this panel of experts cost the licence holder? I am outraged.

Dodgy Geezer
November 13, 2012 1:25 am

@Bertram Felden
..I think that you are kidding yourselves if you think this revelation will change anything. For one, the timing is really bad – the beeb is so wrapped up in child abuse allegations and hypocrisy at the moment that nothing else will see the light of day ….
This revelation will certainly not change the AGW activists’ minds. If clear data cannot do this, then revealing one of the underhand tricks they used to force Climate Change down people’s throats certainly will not. But it will help in two ways:
– it will help persuade the average viewer that the BBC is not to be trusted. At the moment the main reason the man-in-the-street ‘believes’ is that he has been told to by an authoritative source. In this case the timing is actually good – people are much more open to believing bad things about the Beeb at the moment.
– probably more importantly, it will have a chilling effect on the pro-global-warming party’s planning. They will now be much more secretive, always looking over their shoulder, much more prone to making mistakes. They are already moving into illegal territory with Heartgate – as they keep on being exposed they will find it harder and harder to expand and keep taking over establishment bodies in the way that they have done up to now. Sunlight turns out to be a good disinfectant, and cockroaches don’t like it….

Phi Ford
November 13, 2012 1:30 am

What this list and the PDF on the link show beyond all doubt is that there has been – and continues to be – a concerted and determined political effort at the BBC to ‘weird’ it’s output across current affairs, entertainment, drama and comedy (in fact, across all genres) so as to favour and to highlight issues such as CAGW (hiding, of course, beneath a veneer of ‘developing world’ issues). It’s subtle; it’s organised and it’s both impartial and political in nature and intent.
The BBC have already decided to break with their historic requirement to provide ‘impartial’, ‘balanced’ coverage to their audience – we know this not only because they have told us they took an editorial decision to ignore climate sceptics, but also because the BBC re-wrote their own Charter to change their historic requirement to provide ‘impartiality’ to something they re-named ‘due impartiality’. A sly, clever move to allow the BBC itself to decide what is and isn’t ‘due’ ‘impartial’ coverage. See, when you run a massive, publicly-funded broadcasting behemoth, untroubled by crass commercial concerns, you can pull these kind of moves and nobody blinks. After all, who is actually paying attention?
Remember; this is a public service broadcaster, funded by what is essentially a tax on every UK household (£145.00 annually – and everyone in the UK must buy a TV license; this in turn funds the BBC to the tune of £4billion annually. If a person refuses to pay for a TV license, and doesn’t watch any BBC output, the BBC can technically have them put in prison for non-payment).
The BBC stand exposed as a blatantly left-wing, ideologically-driven organization, determined to work to their pro-CAGW agenda in the face of mounting evidence that ‘the science’, far from being ‘settled’, is perhaps more patchy, more uncertain, than ever. The BBC are a disgrace and are in clear breach of their mandate to provide impartial, honest coverage of major issues to its audience. They know this: they are just hoping nobody else notices.
But who will ever call them out on this? Who can? They are a huge, faceless organization, resistant to change, indifferent to their critics and with £4billion a year of public money to work with why should they ever have to give a damn..? It’s a tragedy.

Steve C
November 13, 2012 1:30 am

Well done Maurizio for tracking this down, and to Anthony for posting it. You have put a smile on the face of this old fool for the rest of the day. The blowing of tens of thousands of quid by a national broadcaster trying to hide the truth has been noted by this UK taxpayer, too.
RBerteigasks “Is it really all that important to make sure that BBC comedies and dramas include the right amount of AGW indoctrination?” – RB, if you had to listen to them, you’d know it was, to them at anyrate. Last Christmas they did a programme about fairies for the kids and managed to invent and lever in the evil “global warming fairy”. They really are that bad.

John Wright
November 13, 2012 1:39 am

Head of Comedy present?
Not surprising at all.
Comedy is one of their most effective propaganda weapons. A good example is the BBC’s very popular Now Show which regularly trashes global warming “deniers”.

pat
November 13, 2012 1:45 am

meant to say:
Sir Robert Bignold, head of the Norwich Union, matched funding by Lord Mackintosh, who made an appeal to raise funds to finance the building of UEA, according to page 52 of Michael Sanderson’s book, The History of the University of East Anglia. you can find Sanderson’s book if u do a search, but i can’t copy from it. Mackintosh & Norwich Union did not put up the whole amount:
4mins 26secs: VIDEO: East Anglian University
The first propositions for a university in Norwich had been made many years before the plans for the University of East Anglia were finally accepted. It wasn’t until national demand for university places increased in the 1960’s – as the post-war ‘bulge’ generation began to reach university age – that the government supplied a grant for the project to go ahead.
The first half of this film, shot in 1962 – the year before UEA accepted its first students – documents an important day in the early history of the University. As regional television presenter, Dick Joice explains from Earlham Golf Course, ‘that morning’ the Lord Mackintosh, Chancellor Designate of the University had launched an appeal at Norwich City Hall, in the hope of raising an additional £1.5 million to supplement the existing government grant…
http://www.archivealive.org/video/index/id/154

Stephen Richards
November 13, 2012 1:51 am

BBC’s former Director-General Mark Thompson was interviewed as he arrived at his new job at the NYT. He said he didn’t like to see [snip] was the pratt that did it. Poor ‘ole dozy Entwhistle just stepped into the 6m wide cowpat that Thompson left behind. What a bastard??

Aussie Luke Warm
November 13, 2012 1:56 am

Maurizio Mauribito = you are the number 1.
And one can see why the BBC didn’t want to publish the names. The list reveals that activist cranks are ensconced right in the heart of the rotten-to-the-core BBC decision making politburo.

November 13, 2012 1:58 am

There is already a 28Gate on Twitter https://twitter.com/28Gate
It is a vintage clothing store.

Aussie Poostirrer
November 13, 2012 2:00 am

Does B.B.C stand for British [snip] Children? or British Behind Communism?

Les Johnson
November 13, 2012 2:01 am

This is a summary of the IBT seminars 2004-2007. (from Maurizo)
http://web.archive.org/web/20071108153956/http://www.ibt.org.uk/all_documents/dialogue/Real%20World%20Brainstorm%20Sep%202007%20background.pdf?PHPSESSID=646ac9912b785ecd5f9230ff4d8b8ac6
Its interesting to see that there are 10 people affiliated with drama, and 11 with comedy. This would indicate that one of the intents was to incorporate the appropriate, politically correct content, to BBC drama and comedy series.
I find this much more disturbing than the fact that the seminars were warmist group hugs.
And how the heck did Richard North get to one of these?

John Blakey
November 13, 2012 2:01 am

Re Claire Foster. This link says oit all: http://www.chpublishing.co.uk/feature.asp?id=2396104

Traveller
November 13, 2012 2:02 am

Claire Foster is national policy adviser on environmental issues for the Church of England. It pains me that the Church of England seems to be hi-jacked by every fashionable eco-cause, it pains me more that someone is paid to hold this position.
Tearfund is another christian relief organisation. The Evangelical Alliance Relief Fund is a more full description. CAGW is a wonderful guilt-making reason to take donations for third world projects.

Barry Woods
November 13, 2012 2:03 am

Mike Hulme FUNDED CMEP (HArrabin, Smith) to keep sceptics OFF the BBC airwave
(see below – earlier at Watts Up)
Seminar attende Mike Hulme(tyndall Centre):
“Did anyone hear Stott vs. Houghton on Today, radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really. This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.” (email 2496)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/
The new emails reveal that not only was the CMEP being sponsored by the Tyndall Centre (UEA) to promote its agenda in the media, but at the same Roger Harrabin was on the Advisory board of the Tyndall Centre! (from 2002 until at least the end of 2005)
“1. We invite three more members to our AB:
Roger Harrabin (media; Radio BBC) – reserve Paul Brown (The Guardian) Bill Hare (NGO; Greenpeace) – reserves Mike Harley (English Nature)” (email 1038 – Hulme)
Tyndall archived webpages courtesy of the wayback machine are here: Advisory board 2002, and here Oct 2005. The Tyndall website changed after this date and no longer shows a link to membership of it’s Advisory Board. The release of the second batch of climategate emails – (2496), gives one reason why the Tyndall Centre funded the Harrabin/Smith seminars – the Real World seminars of the Cambridge Media and Environment Programme
Mike Hulme:
“Did anyone hear Stott vs. Houghton on Today, radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really. This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.” (email 2496)
Mike Hulme clearly did not like this program and clearly sponsors CMEP to use its influence with it BBC seminars to change reporting at the BBC, with an apparent intent to suppress any sceptical voices. A commentator at the Bishop Hill blog tracked down the ‘woeful’ program, where Prof Philip Stott and the IPCC’s Sir John Houghton debate the “uncertainties” of climate change”, it is mentioned in a 25 Feb 2002 article by Alex Kirby, BBC online environment correspondent, there is an audio link in the article to the radio program (probably UK only, well worth a listen)
Alex Kirby in the article quotes Stott as saying:
“The problem with a chaotic coupled non-linear system as complex as climate is that you can no more predict successfully the outcome of doing something as of not doing something. Kyoto will not halt climate change. Full stop.” – BBC

Richard LH
November 13, 2012 2:09 am

So the list reveals that it was not 28 Scientists but only 3 Pro-AGW ones and a load of advocates/lobbyists which advised on BBC ‘neutrality’!
No wonder the list needed to stay ‘secret’.

richard
November 13, 2012 2:12 am

Off tangent here but looks like Lord McAlpine is going to be suing the socks of the BBC and others. George Monbot, the BBCs favourite poodle is in his sites. Now George is always chastising others on sloppy journalism. Perhaps the Guardian should sack him, they won’t, they have their own problems, a going down the drain newspaper, propped up by a car magazine.

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 2:14 am

People should take image captures now. Thank God for the Internet.

Michael Oxenham
November 13, 2012 2:14 am

Christopher Booker should have a field-day next Sunday !!!!

Me
November 13, 2012 2:16 am

The 28th Mile would be better.

cd_uk
November 13, 2012 2:16 am

As a license fee payer why the hell am I paying for all this, all on the say so a few activists? I’m getting really pissed off now.

Richard LH
November 13, 2012 2:20 am

28 Scientists sounds like a potentially well balanced scenario.
3 Pro-AGW Scientists, 25 Pro-AGW AGW Advocates/Lobbyists is most definitely not.
It wasn’t WHO that needed to be hidden, its was how few and from which single viewpoint.

November 13, 2012 2:22 am

Can we call it the BooBoosomething? E.g., The BooBooFlee, The BooBooFee, . . .
How about Delingpole or Booker or the blog “Spiked” getting together and calling for massive civil disobedience, in the form of refusal to pay the BBC’s fee, to concentrate the BBC’s minds? The leaders should be prepared to defend themselves in court with chapter and verse of the BooBooTwee’s many sins and blunders.

Grey Lensman
November 13, 2012 2:25 am

Sorry, I just could not resist this.
Here is Richard Black, former BBC climate commissar, crowing about the success of the EU airline carbon tax.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18070789
Wonder why he quit?

Doug Huffman
November 13, 2012 2:26 am

Scientist, expert and now specialist, the list of co-opted epithets grows.
Believe nothing that you read or hear without verifying it yourself unless Weltanschauung congruent. Good people ought to be armed as they will, with wits and Guns and the Truth.

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 2:27 am

Typhoon says:
November 12, 2012 at 3:53 pm
Where are the scientists?

Indeed, where are the climate scientists? Yet they were swayed to go onto the CAGW bandwagon. With the weather not cooperating no wonder they fought so hard to keep the names secret. Shame on you all.

H.R.
November 13, 2012 2:28 am

Sunnuva gun! Aren’t these the same 28 people that wrote AR4?

ConfusedPhoton
November 13, 2012 2:29 am

Helen Boaden, Director of News
Peter Rippon, Duty Editor, World at One/PM/The World this Weekend
George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs
My my their careers just rocketed after this. Perhaps more will follow their path!
Perhaps the most appropriate attendee was Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy!

Richard LH
November 13, 2012 2:34 am

OK – sanity check. I can’t count. I think it is a 6-22 split.
Specialists – 28
Scientists – 6
Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen
Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge
Steve Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Labs
Eleni Andreadis, Harvard University
Lobbiyists/Advocates – 22
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Colin Challen MP, Chair, All Party Group on Climate Change
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation
Claire Foster, Church of England
Saleemul Huq, IIED
Poshendra Satyal Pravat, Open University
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia
Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
Matthew Farrow, CBI
Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer
Cheryl Campbell, Executive Director, Television for the Environment
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
Richard D North, Institute of Economic Affairs
Joe Smith, The Open University
Mark Galloway, Director, IBT
Anita Neville, E3G
Jos Wheatley, Global Environment Assets Team, DFID
Tessa Tennant, Chair, AsRia

November 13, 2012 2:35 am

Question for the BBC:
The Met Office and the Hadley Centre were NOT at ANY of the seminars.
which makes the BBC’s claim of top level experts totally untenable

November 13, 2012 2:38 am

Just sent this to Radio 4’s Points of View:
Dear Sirs,
I admire the way in which the BBC reports on its own affairs as if by a third party – John Humpreys being a case in point.
A brewing scandal over the 26 Jan 2006 secret meeting of a cabal of eco-activists, gravy-train politicians and BBC executives must be reported in the same impartial way.
Climate Change sceptics have today managed to “out” the attendees. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/12/breaking-the-secret-list-of-the-bbc-28-is-now-public/#more-74210
We sceptics, who are likened to holocaust-deniers by the perpetrators of the Great Global Warming Hoax, are not spoilers nor anti-science wackos. We are a worldwide group of concerned citizens questioning the scientific basis of this Doomsday Cult. The policy actions aimed at combatting a nonexistent threat are, we submit, causing the despoiling of our beauty spots with windmills; energy poverty for the vulnerable; energy insecurity for the nation and a climate of fear among the young subjected to this apocalypse propaganda at home and at school.
The BBC must investigate this conspiracy and put rational journalists to work on opposing the Harrabin-Black faction.

November 13, 2012 2:40 am

With the BBC reeling from other less significant scandals such as the decades long cover up of sex abuse by paedophile employees a full expose of this major crime against humanity concealed behind a simple abandonment of its Charter obligations should bring the whole nest of corruption crashing down.

Nick de Cusa
November 13, 2012 2:42 am

Quite few investors, insurance companies, BP, RWE, CBI, et strangest thingies like this “ArSia”, sitting between “sustainable” activism and investments, with a strong wiff of conflict of interest. In my eyes, not a pretty picture at all.

November 13, 2012 2:45 am

Oliver Cromwell’s dismissal of the ‘Rump BBC’ :
“It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place,
which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled
by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to
all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would
like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas
betray your God for a few pieces of money.
“Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you?
“Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my
horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter’d your
conscience for bribes?
“Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the
Commonwealth?
“Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil’d this sacred place, and
turn’d the Lord’s temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral
principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to
the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get
grievances redress’d, are yourselves gone!
So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the
name of God, go!”
[actually his dismissal of the Rump Parliament 1653]

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 2:47 am

Such an important decision had the likes of the following objective “specialists”. It’s worse than we thought. Wow!
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Claire Foster, Church of England
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
Jos Wheatley, Global Environment Assets Team, DFID
And some important BBC attendees:
Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Dominic Vallely, Executive Editor, Entertainment
Eleanor Moran, Development Executive, Drama Commissioning
Sue Inglish, Head Of Political Programmes
The BBC is doomed.

Grey Lensman
November 13, 2012 2:49 am

Whoops, dropped a major clanger, wrong post, should be in the EU Tax report.

Caleb
November 13, 2012 2:49 am

Interesting BP was there. Where Exxon invested in safer wells, BP invested in politics all over the world. Where Exxon was written up something like six times for safety violations, BP was written up over a hundred, if not hundreds. When BP’s well blew in the Gulf of Mexico, BP should have faced the music, but not Exxon. However when BP is buddy-buddy with politicians, it gets results.

H.R.
November 13, 2012 2:50 am

says:
November 12, 2012 at 5:35 pm
Jackpot.
http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/capstone/mediaclimatechange.pdf
==================================================
Jackpot indeed, tallbloke. Thanks!

mycroft..shared winning of nobel peace prize, EU resident,
November 13, 2012 2:50 am

Whilst a big congrats to those behind the detective work to find the names on this list…….i still think another meeting alluded to in the climategate e mails needs looking into who attended the Meeting at the Dorchester Hotel london which i think Al Gore set up..or am i thinking of something else???

November 13, 2012 2:52 am

The demand of the BeeBeeFee Slayers should be for civilian oversight of the BooBooWhee, the civilians being chosen at random from the list of subscribers. I.e., for a form of demarchy. (You can look it up.)

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 2:56 am

We have been lied to. No wonder they wanted to keep the list secret. Here it is from their own mouths. [my bold]

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus. But these dissenters (or even sceptics) will still be heard, as they should, because it is not the BBC’s role to close down this debate. They cannot be simply dismissed as ‘flat-earthers’ or ‘deniers’, who ‘should not be given a platform’ by the BBC. Impartiality always requires a breadth of view: for as long as minority opinions are coherently and honestly expressed, the BBC must give them appropriate space. ‘Bias by elimination’ is even more offensive today than it was in 1926. The BBC has many public purposes of both ambition and merit – but joining campaigns to save the planet is not one of them. The BBC’s best contribution is to increase public awareness of the issues and possible solutions through impartial and accurate programming. Acceptance of a basic scientific consensus only sharpens the need for hawk-eyed scrutiny of the arguments surrounding both causation and solution. It remains important that programme-makers relish the full range of debate that such a central and absorbing subject offers, scientifically, politically and ethically, and avoid being misrepresented as standard-bearers. The wagon wheel remains a model shape. But the trundle of the bandwagon is not a model sound.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_research/impartiality_21century/report.pdf

The bias Richard Black chose to ignore this important paragraph.

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 2:59 am

Oh, I nearly forgot, CONGRATULATIONS omnologos you are bad. 😉

Dodgy Geezer
November 13, 2012 3:01 am

@Aussie Poostirrer
Does B.B.C stand for British [snip] Children? or British Behind Communism?
In the famous words of Neil Hamilton’s wife, it’s “B*gg*rs Broadcasting Communism”
Gets both aspects of the problem in rather well…

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 3:13 am

Oh no. The LIES.
Here is the reply made by the BBC to blogger Tony Newbery who made a Freedom of Information Request to find out the names of the attendees. [my bold]

………The attendees at the seminar were made up of 30 key BBC staff and 30 invited guests who are specialists in the area of climate change. It was hosted by Jana Bennett, Director of Vision (then Television), BBC and Helen Boaden, Director of News BBC. It was chaired by Fergal Keane, Special Correspondent with BBC News. The key speaker at the seminar was Robert McCredie, Lord May of Oxford.
Seminar had the following aims:
· To offer a clear summary of the state of knowledge on the issue
· To find where the main debates lie
· To invoke imagination to allow the media to deal with the scope of the issue
· To consider the BBC’s role in public debate.
Letter from the BBC, 21st August, 2007
http://cgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=109&doing_wp_cron

Yeah, right. Here are some of the “specialists”. :-p
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Claire Foster, Church of England
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
How can you trust the British Bias Corporation on climate issues?

November 13, 2012 3:15 am

It’s definitely not about the science.
Just a nit: why are they thirty? Ah, never mind.
00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000

oldtimer
November 13, 2012 3:27 am

Congratulations to omnologos!
To understand the context of the seminar, you need to read Rules of the game: the principles of climate change communication, published by Futerra in October 2005. The link is here:
http://www.futerra.co.uk/downloads/RulesOfTheGame.pdf
Two quotes to whet the appetite:
“2. Forget the climate change detractors
Those who deny climate change science are irritating, but
unimportant. The argument is not about if we should deal with climate
change, but how we should deal with climate change.”
and
“16. Create a trusted, credible, recognised voice on
climate change
We need trusted organisations and individuals that the media can
call upon to explain the implications of climate change to the
UK public.”
Among the sponsors of this report were three UK government departments, DEFRA, DTI and the Environment Agency. This document may be worth a post on its own.
The change in BBC policy was, and remains, in breach of its Charter. This was investigated by the BBC in the Bridcut Report, which the BBC ignored – this also may be worth a post. While everyone is on the sleuthing trail, why not look up Warm Words too? Think of it as a primer on brain washing.

Joseph Adam-Smith
November 13, 2012 3:31 am

Jolly Farmer wrote about TV licence – Sorry, we’re stuffed. Follow this link for advice: http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/phones_tv_internet_and_computers_index_e/consumer_tv_licences_e/about_tv_licences.htm . This shows what a totalitarian state Brits live in JOE A-smith

Bloke down the pub
November 13, 2012 3:32 am

George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs
Currently in the news as to whether he’s going to take the big pay-off from the Beeb he’s been offered. Leaving the sinking ship was probably one of his better decisions.

DirkH
November 13, 2012 3:34 am

Barry Woods says:
November 13, 2012 at 2:03 am

“Alex Kirby in the article quotes Stott as saying:
“The problem with a chaotic coupled non-linear system as complex as climate is that you can no more predict successfully the outcome of doing something as of not doing something. Kyoto will not halt climate change. Full stop.” – BBC”

I would love to hear Hulme’s scientific refutation of that. Now, of course he can’t.
Anyone who calls Hulme a scientist is a liar. He’s a rent-seeking impostor.

DirkH
November 13, 2012 3:35 am

Aussie Poostirrer says:
November 13, 2012 at 2:00 am
“Does B.B.C stand for British [snip] Children? or British Behind Communism?”
Broad-banging C*mmunists.

JohnH
November 13, 2012 3:35 am

Peter Miller says:
November 13, 2012 at 12:23 am
No one seems to have noticed the absence of Mr Richard Black from the list, the BBC science reporter notorious for being able to argue black is white (no pun intended) on all matters to do with climate.
The list is of invitees, if Black was an organiser along with Harribin then they both would be there but not listed as they would have invited others but not themselves.

eyesonu
November 13, 2012 3:37 am

Maurizio, excellent work!
Once this is fully parsed and explained in a simplified format that a MSM journo can understand (it will have to be very simple) we may see change we can believe in. I wont hold by breath though.
That army marching for the truth will not be stopped! I think this is going to be big.

Michael
November 13, 2012 3:39 am

Now we have find out out what the few scientists on the list actually said to the BBC.
I bet they didn’t get a word in edgewise with those activists.
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen
Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge

November 13, 2012 3:41 am

PS: on civil disobedience wrt the BBC fee: The leaders of my proposed BeeBeeFree Party should demand “demarchy.” I.e., that a board of civilian overseers, composed of mere subscribers chosen by lot, should be established as the ultimate power at the BBC. I urge Britishers with gumption, like Delingpole, to put the castle under siege.

David Wells
November 13, 2012 3:47 am

You may remember a Prof of Genetics Steve Jones who the BBC asked to give a lecture designed to generate the idea that as “thousands of scientists” said the science was proven and the science was settled, engendered the notion of “due impartiality”. This bureaucratic slight of hand gave the BBC an effective and justifiable – in their eyes – means of denying airtime to anyone who cared to challenge the authenticity of AGW whom the lecture supposed were in the minority and therefore should not have a voice. The same Prof Steven Jones when asked to comment on the research of Prof Gerald Crabtree implying that advances in human intellect and intelligence for the first time has gone into reverse which if you care to observe the cognitive behaviour of BBC staff would seem to support the idea said this “If I was to be nasty I’d say it’s just plucking stuff out of the air,” “It’s what I call arts faculty science – where there’s an interesting hypothesis and no data to back it up”. My observation is that Prof Gerald is most likely correct otherwise how can it be possible for a supposedly well respected and sentient human being to support one hypothesis that is as yet unsupported by data whilst trashing another for the same reason. Unless of course his cronies at the BBC decided if Prof Steve Jones did the lecture then we as unthinking unintelligent mutants would automatically accept that as it was Steven Jones making the lecture that we would automatically take the opinion ‘well a man of his integrity would not tell a lie, would he?’ I wonder how much he was paid?

November 13, 2012 3:51 am

Reblogged this on madperspective and commented:
According to BBC, to be an climate specialist, you can sit in literally any field and still qualify! Not surprising, since everyone has an agenda these days!

November 13, 2012 3:52 am

Complaint sent to BBC regarding the above. Please do the same
The BBC recently had an FOI request turned down requesting that the names of 28 people who attended a top level meeting convened to decide how the BBC reported “climate change”. Now that this list is in public hands, I wish to know the reasons behind the attendance of the following people.
The first block contains the names of known activists and non-sceptical climate scientists.
The second those who have no business whatsoever having ANY input into BBC policy on this matter.
List 1
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA (Scientist and activist)
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace (activist)
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net (Activist)
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation – Left wing think tank
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China – activist
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos – activist
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables – commercial interest
Anita Neville, E3G – activist
List 2
Trevor Evans, US Embassy – WHAT’?
Claire Foster, Church of England – ditto
The only real surprise is that Jimmy Saville is not on the list.
There is no indication in the list of names that there was any balance in the discussions that take place – there are many reputable and well known climate scientists and scientists who do not concede the CAGW meme. Without such in attendance, and most especially with so many activists involved, I put it to you that there was never ANY possibility of future balanced reporting on climate.

Joseph Adam-Smith
November 13, 2012 3:57 am

Conspiracy theorist thought here. Terry Wogan used to mock AGW news on his well-listened to radio 2 show. Also, his contributors, via e-mail, mocked AGW…. He has now bbeen replaced by a more compliant Chris Evans…. Just a thought

Rhys Jaggar
November 13, 2012 4:03 am

Mr Watts
I hope that your correct opinion that the BBC’s climate change coverage breaks its charter does not result in your site advocating the break up of the BBC or its sale to a foreign owner.
The BBC has tens of thousands of decent, hard-working employees and most of what it does is good, very good or excellent. Like all organisations it has its faults, faults which exist to every great a level in the far-right press organs of the UK (notably that they are owned by tax avoiders, foreigners with no interest in the wellbeing of the UK etc etc, that they allow politicians to be depicted as nazis in general election campaigns, they allow the Deputy Prime Minister to be repeatedly grossly insulted by ‘bloggers’ using filth that no moderator could possibly allow to pass if they had but one of the moral standards apparently demanded by their owners/the Conservative Party, they demand a Free Press but censure bloggers operating within proper codes of conduct with impunity etc etc etc). It is not, however, a dead duck, nor is it an organisation which should be sold off to foreigners to satisfy some crazed far-right dictum but in reality would further the agenda of the unaccountable global financial elite who believe with a fervour in autocratic rule.
I and many millions of people do not wish to see the BBC judged by partisan self-serving right wingers.
I wish it to be held to the highest standards by fair-minded judges who are UK citizens.
It is, after all, the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation, not the NEW YORK Broadcasting Corporation, the SAUDI ARABIAN Broadcasting Corporation or the KGB Broadcasting Corporation.
I hope that will not be too much to ask for, since if it is, I may need to raise questions as to whether you are receiving funding from Rupert Murdoch. Were you bashing the BBC whilst taking the Murdoch shilling, your interest in science would have shifted to an interest in mafia-style lynch mob hangings.
I hope and trust that that never comes to pass.
RTJ

Gail Combs
November 13, 2012 4:04 am

polistra says:
November 12, 2012 at 5:33 pm
Really makes me wonder why the Beeb was fighting disclosure so hard and expensively. I don’t see any names or organizations on that list that surprise me in the slightest. Purely the usual suspects. In fact one big class of usual suspects is nearly absent from the list: corporations, investors and reinsurance firms with a monetary vested interest in pushing Green nonsense. (Only BP was there.)
_____________________________________________
BP was there so the “big Oil funded Climate Denier” campaign looks really foolish and you missed:
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
For the Brits
Colin Challen: Chair All Party Parliamentary Group on Climate Change House of Commons
For Americans
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
In other words both the US government and the UK government had representatives at a meeting determining what PROPAGANDA would be fed to the UK citizens. WORSE that propaganda is being dictated by a bunch of wild-eyed activists and corporations that will profit from lying to and scaring the crud out of the public.
Lets follow a few money strings.

In 2008, RWE npower renewables became part of RWE Innogy, one of Europe’s largest and fastest-growing renewables generating companies.
RWE npower renewables is a leading player in the drive to generate more electricity from clean, inexhaustable energy sources – wind, rivers, the sea and the land.
Today we are one of the UK’s biggest renewable energy developers and operators.

Sure looks like npower renewables profited nicely from the propaganda.

Enron, joined by BP, invented the global warming industry. I know because I was in the room. This was during my storied three-week or so stint as Director of Federal Government Relations for Enron in the spring of 1997, back when Enron was everyone’s darling in Washington. It proved to be an eye-opening experience…
The basic truth is that Enron, joined by other “rent-seeking” industries — making one’s fortune from policy favors from buddies in government, the cultivation of whom was a key business strategy — cobbled their business plan around “global warming.” Enron bought, on the cheap of course, the world’s largest windmill company (now GE Wind) and the world’s second-largest solar panel interest (now BP) to join Enron’s natural gas pipeline network, which was the second largest in the world. The former two can only make money under a system of massive mandates and subsidies (and taxes to pay for them); the latter would prosper spectacularly if the war on coal succeeded…..

Also see Patrick Michaels’ Why Enron Wants Global Warming

…it is common knowledge that Enron Corporation was lobbying the Bush administration for highly profitable policies relating to the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. In fact, the tatters of Enron still want the administration to place a cap on carbon dioxide emissions so the company can broker the trading of “permits” to emit carbon dioxide under that cap….
But what’s not run-of -the-sty is a 1998 letter, signed by Enron’s then-CEO Ken Lay (and a few other bigwigs), asking President Clinton, in essence, to harm the reputations and credibility of scientists who argued that global warming was an overblown issue. Apparently they were standing in Enron’s way.
The letter, dated Sept. 1, asked the president to shut off the public scientific debate on global warming, which continues to this date. In particular, it requested Clinton to “moderate the political aspects” of this discussion by appointing a bipartisan “Blue Ribbon Commission.”
The purpose of this commission was clear: high-level trashing of dissident scientists.
…While that was happening, Enron commissioned its own internal study of global warming science. It turned out to be largely in agreement with the same scientists Enron was trying to shut up. After considering all of the inconsistencies in climate science, the report concluded: “[T]he very real possibility that the great climate alarm could be a false alarm. The anthropogenic warming could well be less than thought and favorably distributed.

So that is the ENRON connection to the US Government and through that the US Embassy.
And last there is Mark Galloway, Director, IBT

The International Broadcasting Trust is an educational and media charity working to promote high-quality television coverage of the developing world. IBT aims to further awareness and understanding of the lives of the majority of the world’s people—and the issues that affect them.
IBT’s work focuses on lobbying governments, regulators, and broadcasters; dialogue with the main public service broadcasters; research on television coverage of the developing world; and developing a slate of innovative program ideas.
Focus: Culture, Development, Globalization, Technology, United Kingdom, Europe, Global
Most Emailed Pages
1. The Sustainable Development Solutions Network
2. Do Language Policies Contribute to Poverty and Underdevelopment?
3. How the Internet Will Transform Government (Eventually)
4. Chinese Sexual Culture
5. Boat Migrants to Australia Deserve Their Refugee Rights
Has a link to Global Ethics Network: Rethinking International relations
[The Carnegie Council Global Ethics Network connects students, teachers, and professionals to reimagine international relations. Read the Mission Statement and get involved.]
http://www.policyinnovations.org/innovators/organizations/data/00886

Another Gareth
November 13, 2012 4:04 am

Traveller said: “Claire Foster is national policy adviser on environmental issues for the Church of England. It pains me that the Church of England seems to be hi-jacked by every fashionable eco-cause, it pains me more that someone is paid to hold this position.”
It is rational behavior to promote climate catastrophe when your pension scheme is a member of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change – the group that have previously called for the investment markets to be fixed in favour of green investments. The BBC Trust pension scheme is also a member.

AngusPangus
November 13, 2012 4:11 am

I’m re-posting a comment I made at Bishop Hill:
Harrabin, Harrabin, Harrabin.
Seems he’s the one pulling all the strings on climate policy at the BBC.
As Don Keller reminds us [at Bishop Hill], Harrabin is the one, along with Joe Smith, as far back as 2001, asking Mike Hulme “What should the BBC be doing this time in terms of news, current affairs, drama, documentaries, game shows, music etc” leading up to the Earth Summit in Rio. [see Climategate email #3757.txt]
Then, within 4 years, Harrabin organises a “seminar” at which Hulme is a speaker. Management from across all of the BBC’s output is invited – you might say “news, current affairs, drama, documentaries, game shows, music etc.” and subjected to brainwashing by, basically, a bunch of activists.
The effect of this “seminar” is so profound, that it finds its way into “From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel”, a report by the BBC Trust, no less, in 2007. With no trace of irony, the report is subtitled “Safeguarding impartiality in the 21st century”. Let us be reminded what this “Safeguarding impartiality in the 21st centruy” report says on the subject of reporting climate change:
“The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus”.
Harrabin and Smith’s brainwave from 2001 is now BBC policy, affecting all of its output from news and current affairs to drama, documentaries, comedy “etc”. The most powerful broadcaster in the world pumping out a one-sided message on climate change through everything it does.
By pure serendipitous happenstance, there was a prime example of this on Today on R4 this morning. I only caught the headline report, so don’t know waht was said in the more detailed piece. It was to do with oil production in the US. Apparently, by around 202, the US may well become the largest oil producer in the world. OK, whatever, you may think. On the BBC website, this story can be found in the “Business” section here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20304848
There is nothing (as I write) on the Environment pages.
Now, who did the BBC have speaking about this on R4 this morning? Yup, Harrabin. And what random point did he chuck in at the end? Unbelievably, it was the zombie alarmist argument about fossil fuel “subsidies”. I couldn’t quite believe my ears, so can’t vouch for whether my recollection is entirely accurate, but it went something like: “fossil fuel subsidies will be SIX TIMES [emphasis in the original] greater than for renewables.” and “threat to the planet blah blah”. There a couple of really important points here:
1. The “fossil fuel subsidy” meme is highly deceptive and disingenuous. At a time when the BBC is desperately trying to re-establish TRUST in its output, it seems a particularly stupid point to try to make. Harrabin must surely be aware of the highly spurious nature of this point, yet he makes it anyway. Unless, of course, he employs the Entwistle defence of “I didn’t know, I didn’t look, nobody told me.” Either way it seems he is deceitful or ignorant.
2. How and why has Harrabin got his grubby green paws on a story from the Business news section and been able to leave his nasty, biased, anti-energy fingerprints all over it? And why is he making a spurious point on the radio about “fossil fuel subsidies” that is not covered in the web report, linked to above?
The current BBC “T/trust” reviews need to extended to climate change coverage. And Harrabin, it seems to me, should be joining Boaden and many of the others who attended the brainwashing session in “stepping aside”.

richardscourtney
November 13, 2012 4:12 am

Me:
What about ‘The 28 Steps’?
Richard

Lewis P Buckingham
November 13, 2012 4:15 am

It would be really interesting to gain a set of minutes of this BBC planning meeting.
After all, it is in the public interest and the meeting was financed by the public.
Since the costs of adopting the BBC view of climate will break the EU it is in the interests of all Britons to be informed.
If the British Isles adopt carbon capture and windmills this will be in the economic interest of the US, as the latter is going fracking shale oil gas and eventually nuclear, making it an energy efficient competitor of the EU including GB.
If promoting this was the US aim via the BBC the public must be informed.
As Gail Coombs has pointed out Trevor Evan’s job description includes
‘[to] promote adoption of economic policies by foreign countries which further US interests.’
Perhaps he was there to promote US economic interest over that of the UK.
Now that the BBC management is under scrutiny there needs be an overall enquiry into its content, competence and direction.

November 13, 2012 4:23 am

Mike Haseley of SCEF (Scottish Climate & Energy Forum) has reported the BBC to the Met on the grounds of fraud regarding the FOI request about this.
http://scef.org.uk/news/1-latest-news/374-statement-on-the-bbc-meeting-of-28#.UKIqvnPbwYU.facebook

Ken Harvey
November 13, 2012 4:23 am

This is not shoddy journalism. This is not investigative journalists failing to make the most elementary of checks before libeling a respected man. This is deliberate conspiracy to defraud the public. Not an insular public in Britain but the public (and Governments) worldwide.
One may suspect that such things go on, but conspiracy almost invariably lurks in the shadows and only glimpses generally emerge. What is without precedent here is that the names of seventy- some of them are documented and out in the open for all to see. My disgust could only be deepened if the British Government now fails to commence prosecutions.

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 4:24 am

Anthony, please make your post sticky.
——————

André van Delft (@AndreVanDelft) says:…………………….
Rev Dr Peter Mullen: “Can we just get rid of the BBC, please?”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/petermullen/100189084/can-we-just-get-rid-of-the-bbc-please/

I read through and the man seems that the good Rev Dr Peter Mullen is a ‘denier’. The Church of England is splitting.

….Or the arrogance with which the Corporation doesn’t even bother to deny – because realistically it can’t – its tireless promotion of the superstitious fad of global warming………….The BBC displays incompetence, partisanship and self-satisfaction in equal measure. Perhaps there was a time when it deserved our respect and even our affection, but that time is long past. These days it is a decadent institution failing in all the ways in which it is possible to fail.

Ouch!

RB
November 13, 2012 4:25 am

The list is pretty much everything we knew it would be. That the BBC reportedly spent over £100000 on lawyers to keep it secret is no surprise. This cannot be allowed to fade away. The BBC must answer for this serious breach of its charter.

Gail Combs
November 13, 2012 4:27 am

_Jim says:
November 12, 2012 at 6:12 pm
Umm, who are their ‘handlers’?
Who is at the top; the “Mr Big”?
Are there more names we need to see?
____________________________________
I have posted those types of links several times as you well know. The fact you have your head in the sand and refused to see what historians Steve Fraser and Gary Gerste point out very plainly is your problem – go look up the money connections yourself. Greenpeace and the rest do not exist in a vacuum so start digging.

Historians Are Missing a Major Factor in Politics and History: l (2005)
“… Over the last quarter-century, historians have by and large ceased writing about the role of ruling elites in the country’s evolution. Or if they have taken up the subject, they have done so to argue against its salience for grasping the essentials of American political history. Yet there is something peculiar about this recent intellectual aversion, even if we accept as true the beliefs that democracy, social mobility, and economic dynamism have long inhibited the congealing of a ruling stratum. This aversion has coincided, after all, with one of the largest and fastest-growing disparities in the division of income and wealth in American history….Neglecting the powerful had not been characteristic of historical work before World War II. ” http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/11068.html

Dr T G Watkins
November 13, 2012 4:28 am

I agree with Roger Knights 2.22am.
A mass campaign to withhold the licence fee should concentrate minds.
The damage inflicted on our electricity generation is enormous, supported in no small way by the BBC’s stance on AGW.
Will the MSM cover this scandal? I won’t hold my breath.

Gail Combs
November 13, 2012 4:29 am

_Jim says:
November 12, 2012 at 6:12 pm
Umm, who are their ‘handlers’?
Who is at the top; the “Mr Big”?
Are there more names we need to see?
__________________________________
Oh and _Jim? WHO are your handlers? Enquiring minds want to know.

November 13, 2012 4:33 am

@Grey Lensman says: November 13, 2012 at 2:25 am
The odious Black, Michael Mann’s lost twin, left the BBC to save the oceans.
He is not missed.

John Law
November 13, 2012 4:41 am

“Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy”
Says it all really.
Keeping these names secret reminds me of the classic one liner from “Dads Army”; “Don’t tell them your name, Pyke”
Comedy from the days before the BBC was occupied by a load of upper middle class lefty parasites.

November 13, 2012 4:44 am

@Joseph Adam-Smith says: November 13, 2012 at 3:31 am
Don’t worry. The TVLA is in fact, Capita. They have no right to enter your property, and you can note that formally by writing to the TVLA and stating that you are withdrawing their common law right to enter your property.
That way they can only get onto your property with a warrant.

Editor
November 13, 2012 4:50 am

One of the attendees is from “Stop The Climate Chaos Coalition” . Their website makes interesting reading, filled with the usual green mumbo jumbo, Robin Hood taxes and redistribution agenda. And their steering group has the same old candidates.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/bbc-and-the-stop-the-climate-chaos-coalition/

November 13, 2012 4:58 am

Les – you must have missed some of the earlier comments. Richard D North was in attendance; you are probably thinking of Richard A E North from EUReferendum. Different guys.

November 13, 2012 4:59 am

Tony Newberry well fires up by this …
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/~newbery1/blog/?doing_wp_cron
“As a first step I have asked the BBC’s Litigation Department to confirm or deny that the list Maurizio has found is the one that I requested at the hearing a fortnight ago.”

richard
November 13, 2012 5:19 am

dear Rhys Jaggar,
would that be the lynching the BBC was salivating over regarding Lord McAlpine- oops, the BBC in its hatred of all things to do with Conservatism , its eyes blood red with anger, forgot to do a simple bit of investigative journalism.

Editor
November 13, 2012 5:24 am

Another attendee was Tessa Tennant from an outfit called “ASrIA”.
According to their website, their membership list is full of banks and other outfits looking to make a quick buck out of “sustainability”.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/the-bbc-asria/#more-1924

richardscourtney
November 13, 2012 5:26 am

Rhys Jaggar:
I am writing to refute your rant at November 13, 2012 at 4:03 am.
I am NOT a “foreigner”, NOT adherent to “some crazed far-right dictum”, and have NOT had a penny from Rupert Murdoch. I am a left-wing socialist of the old-fashioned British kind who is – and has always been – a British Subject resident in the UK.
And I am appalled and ashamed that the BBC has become the deplorable propaganda mouthpiece of self-serving money grubbers and activists promoting the political scam of AGW which is falsely represented as having a basis in science . The BBC has a Charter which is intended to prevent such despicable behaviour, but in this thread we are discussing the clear fact that the BBC has deliberately ignored that Charter and has acted in opposition to it.
The BBC is in a unique position in that it is empowered by government and financed by a levy imposed by government (i.e. a tax). Without adherence to its Charter the BBC is no different from Pravda in the Soviet Union. And it has abandoned its Charter.
This is far, far more serious than the ‘Jimmy Saville Affair’. The BBC having abandoned its Charter can have far-reaching and long-lasting effects on UK culture, governance and security.
The BBC needs a root-and-branch reorganisation. Those responsible for the usurpation of the BBC need to be imprisoned as a warning to others who may want to usurp the BBC or any other national institution.
And if the BBC cannot be corrected then it needs to be abolished before its corrupted condition can do additional harm.
Richard

Dodgy Geezer
November 13, 2012 5:39 am

There are lies within lies in this story.
AFAIR, the seminar we are talking about was not originally intended to be a ‘policy-making’ meeting.
My understanding of the history is that the BBC unilaterally dropped their Charter requirement to provide balance in reporting Global Warming, purely due to internal activists. This change was noticed by outside bloggers, who started asking questions about why the BBC was in breach of its Charter.
So, to shut them up, the BBC responded that they had duly considered the issue, and received proper scientific advice that there was no real controversy – the science was settled. They picked a recent internal seminar (which had been held to promulgate the Global Warming message to internal BBC staff) and claimed that this comprised ‘the top scientific brains’ who had provided this policy advice. There had been NO minutes – odd, for such a fundamental policy decision.
That was meant to shut up the bloggers, who were crying for more details. The meeting was retrospectively claimed to be under the non-attributable Chatham House Rules, which neatly made it unable to be investigated.
Blogger Tony Newbery submitted a FOI request for the names of these august scientists who had advised the BBC to drop its impartiality position. The BBC fought this tooth and nail, finally spending a 6-figure sum on barristers and packing the Tribunal where, last Friday, the request was rejected on the spurious grounds that the BBC could consider itself to be a private organisation if it wanted to keep secrets from the public.
Now we can see that the meeting which was claimed to be with a policy-defining group of top scientists was, in fact, an activist jolly/propaganda exercise. And trying to hide this has cost the BBC a lot of money and face.
I wonder whether charges of perjury are in order?
Incidentally, for UK readers I suggest that one of the things you could do is write to your MP, raising the specific question of whether the BBC should be allowed to override its Charter requiring it to provide due balance, and then claim that a secret internal meeting was sufficient to OK this. And then point out that the secret internal meeting has been found NOT to have done what was claimed, and ask what he/she intends to do about it…

Gale Combs
November 13, 2012 5:42 am

Beale says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:51 pm
In view of the presence of someone from the U.S. Embassy, it should be noticed that this was in the administration of the younger Bush.
___________________________________
Who interceded on behalf of Maurice Strong to make sure Strong was the chair at Kyoto. Strong contributed to his campaign fund. As I keep saying the Right/Left crud is only a Dog and Pony Show for the Great Unwashed.

Leo Smith
November 13, 2012 5:43 am

[snip – comment in poor taste]

Peter Miller
November 13, 2012 5:59 am

I think we may have got it all wrong, here is an exclusive interview with His Charlieness on impending climate catastrophe. Obviously, sceptics were allowed to respond to these highly inflammatory comments, as required for balance by the BBC charter. My problem is I cannot find where, can someone please help.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=charles%20climate%20bbc&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CE4QtwIwCA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2F18498749&ei=uk-iUPjPIsfY0QW8zIGwAQ&usg=AFQjCNHk3Cwe5OlPShExlUy91Hhw6v5e9w

November 13, 2012 6:03 am

Richard D. North’s comments on the BBC gabfest, which I recollected having read here, were posted a year ago on WUWT here.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/
A slightly longer version of his remarks is in Christopher Booker, “The BBC & Climate Change: A Triple Betrayal”
http://gwpf.w3digital.com/content/uploads/2012/08/Booker-BBC.pdf

November 13, 2012 6:04 am

PS: Hit page-down four times after clicking my first link and go to the bottom of the page.
I highly recommend Booker’s report.

Aidan Donnelly
November 13, 2012 6:11 am

Patrick says:
November 12, 2012 at 8:57 pm
“Jolly farmer says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:59 pm”
The “TV Detector Van” was more about the fear of being caught because people believed they actually worked the way the BBC said they did. The Ads ran on BBC!!! I never saw one in all my life in the UK. Back in the 70′s the fine was 1000 ponds I think, a lot of money to many back then, so people simply coughed up the license fee. Nice way to extract your income, hold a gun to your viewers head!
I worked for the NTVLRO for a year (73-74). I don’t know how they work but work they do !!
I believe someone posted on WUWT in another thread some months ago regarding the how.
It would be interesting if you removed all ‘broadcast receive capability’ from your house as it’s not receiving the Beeb that you are legally bound to pay for the license, rather, that you have the capability to receive broadcast programs.
I could receive anything I want to see over the net, but here in the PROAustralia it’s all free-to-air .. we pay for our left-wing ABC (and SBS) through general taxation

Jimbo
November 13, 2012 6:12 am

alexwade says:
November 12, 2012 at 5:21 pm
– Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Wait a minute! BP is part of Big Oil!

Why stop at BP? Why not Shell? Why stop at tobacco? Why stop at big car? Drug companies? Why not gas as well? Here is a small sample in no particular order.

BBC Pensions – “Top equity investments at 31 March 2012”
Investment Holding £m
GlaxoSmithKline [big drug]
British American Tobacco [2nd biggest tobacco co. in world]
BG Group [big gas]
BP [big oil]
Royal Dutch Shell [big oil]
AstraZeneca [big drug]
Imperial Tobacco [big leaf]
Rio Tinto [big mines]
Roche Holding [big drug]
Vale SA [big mines]
Xstrata [big mines]
Reynolds American [2nd biggest tobacco co. in US]
SABMiller [big alcohol]
Oao Gazprom [big gas]
Total SA [big oil]
Occidental [big oil & gas]
Hyundai Motor [big car]
Chevron Corp [big car]
Philip Morris International [big tobacco]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mypension/sites/helpadvice/pages/top-100-investments.shtml

Its good to see that when it comes to global warming climate change the BBC sure puts their money where their mouth is. And they have. Its what you call spreading the risk. ;-p
Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change
Members……..BBC Pension Trust……
http://www.iigcc.org/about-us/members

Dave
November 13, 2012 6:15 am

British Brainwashing Corporation…
& from tallblokes link above, ‘Dangerous News’ – in the conclusions:
” In such cases the climate change science and policy community would be taking more
control of the representation of, for example, floods
and storms to ensure that exaggeration or ignorance
of possible climate change links is reduced.”
This conspiracy is no longer a theory.

November 13, 2012 6:15 am

Here is what Antony Jay (in charge of “Yes Minister”) said in his foreword to Booker’s report:

I joined BBC television, my first job after university and National Service, in 1955, six months before the start of commercial television, and stayed for nine years as trainee, producer, editor and finally head of a production department. I absorbed and expressed all the accepted BBC attitudes: hostility to, or at least suspicion of, America, monarchy, government, capitalism, empire, banking and the defence establishment, and in favour of the Health Service, state welfare, the social sciences, the environment and state education.
This deep hostility to people and organisations who made and sold things was not of course exclusive to the BBC. It permeated a lot of upper middle class English society (and has not vanished yet). But it was wider and deeper in the BBC than anywhere else, and it is still very much a part of the BBC ethos. Very few of the BBC producers and executives have any real experience of the business world, and as so often happens, this ignorance, far from giving rise to doubt, increases their certainty.
We were masters of the techniques of promoting our point of view under the cloak of impartiality. The simplest was to hold a discussion between a fluent and persuasive proponent of the view you favoured, and a humourless bigot representing the other side. With a big story, like shale gas for example, you would choose the aspect where your case was strongest: the dangers of subsidence and water pollution, say, rather than the transformation of Britain’s energy supplies and the abandonment of wind farms and nuclear power stations. And you could have a ‘balanced’ summary with the view you favoured coming last: not “the opposition claim that this will just make the rich richer, but the government point out that it will create 10,000 new jobs” but “the government claim it will create 10,000 new jobs, but the opposition point out that it will just make the rich richer.” It is the last thought that stays in the mind. It is curiously satisfying to find all these techniques still being regularly used forty seven years after I left the BBC.
The issue of man-made global warming could have been designed for the BBC. On the one side are the industrialists, the businessmen, the giant corporations and the bankers (or at least those who are not receiving generous grants, subsidies and contracts from their government for climate-related projects such as wind farms or electric cars), on the other the environmentalists, the opponents of commercial expansion and industrial growth. Guessing which side the BBC will be on is a no-brainer, but no one has documented it in such meticulous detail as Christopher Booker. His case is unanswerable. The costs to Britain of trying to combat global warming are horrifying, and the BBC’s role in promoting the alarmist cause is, quite simply, shameful.

nickleaton
Reply to  Roger Knights
November 13, 2012 12:32 pm

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_263808.pdf
See page 4.
Now work out how the government is going to pay the state pension debts that it has hidden off the books.
Ah yes. Contingent liability is the jargon. If we can’t pay it, we make the theft legal.
4.7 trillion (not billion) and that’s been fiddled down.
Mind you the BBC are so financially illiterate they still think you can pay off a deficit.

RockyRoad
November 13, 2012 6:21 am

Is it possible to get the minutes of these meetings/workshops? Several have mentioned an on-going series of such gatherings.
THAT would be the final nail in the coffin–and for indivuduals attending, their coffins.

John Law
November 13, 2012 6:25 am

Peter Miller says:
November 13, 2012 at 5:59
“I think we may have got it all wrong, here is an exclusive interview with His Charlieness”
You are a bit hard on Charlie, he has a great insight into climate matters, derived from his many conversations with the trees.

Bosse Johansson
November 13, 2012 6:30 am

I do not think the media will pick up on this as long as it is described as “BBC lied about the secret meeting attendance” since it is too much of interpretation of who said what, and the BBC is sure to have used some weasel words in their descriptions. Too difficult. Better to follow the advice in the paper Tallbloke found where it is clearly stated that media has difficulties with “issues” but love stories. I think Dodgy Geezer above is on the right track with his storyline, but it is still too long.
Why not describe it as the joke it is: “BBC hired 6 lawyers to refuse a blogger’s FOI request in court only to have the document found by another blogger on the internet a week later. It turned out the BBC had published the information on their website years ago.” Maybe that could get some traction, and perhaps raise interest in what the information was about and then what’s the significance etc.
But you have to start simple I think.

Peter Miller
November 13, 2012 6:32 am

Dodgygeezer says:
“My understanding of the history is that the BBC unilaterally dropped their Charter requirement to provide balance in reporting Global Warming, purely due to internal activists. This change was noticed by outside bloggers, who started asking questions about why the BBC was in breach of its Charter.
So, to shut them up, the BBC responded that they had duly considered the issue, and received proper scientific advice that there was no real controversy – the science was settled. They picked a recent internal seminar (which had been held to promulgate the Global Warming message to internal BBC staff) and claimed that this comprised ‘the top scientific brains’ who had provided this policy advice. There had been NO minutes – odd, for such a fundamental policy decision.”
This version has the smell of truth about it. An attempt to justify another part of BBC policy/philosophy being hijacked by activists. Just makes it worse – what a bunch of amateurs!