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 Maurizio Morabito (omnologos) 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.
Our CBC is infamous for parroting the BBC, and they are all over the child abuse scandal.I believe they will cover this story, of BBC busted for orchestrated propaganda, as well as they covered the CRU emails. Crickets…….I just checked CBC News site, not a whisper will check again tomorrow and then start abusing their comments .We canadians were just told our federal budget deficit will be 26 billion this fiscal year, CBC gets over 1 billion in govt money, what say we make the deficit 25 billion?
Incredible! The lawyers must be laughing all the way to the bank. $160,000 of British taxpayers hard-earned cash spent on preventing disclosure of a bunch of names only to have someone finding them on the Internet! If some one wrote a script outline like this it would be dismissed as a fantasy. What incompetence !!
The 28 must be named for the West Australian parrot with the same name. Aptly named. http://pindanpost.com/2012/11/14/28282828-bbc-parrot-calls/
Only if the BBC-fee withholders have the aim of bringing down or cutting back the BBC will they be in a losing position. If their demand were the more moderate one I’ve made upthread–i.e., for an BBC oversight board consisting of randomly chosen subscribers (= demarchy)–they would hold a winning hand. That’s because, if such an oversight board had been in place in the past, abuse victims and/or whistle-blowers would have alerted it to the Savile scandal early on, nipping it in the bud. That is an overwhelming argument in the current context.
What’s needed to make this happen is for a left/right alliance (e.g., one led by Brendan O’Neil (of Spiked) and Delingpole), allied with with a few mid-road, big-name backers, to make a splashy announcement that they won’t be paying the fee until such a board is established. This could really catch on. If it doesn’t, nothing (much) would be lost.
If this protest is successful, and if the oversight board is seen to be a success, it could pave the way for subsequent general strikes aimed at instituting civilian review boards over other governmental bureaucracies and Quangos, starting with the national joke, Met Office. Other similarly derided entities would be next up, e.g., the NHS.
Later on, general strikes could demand that increasing authority (e.g., hiring and firing, then budget setting, then policy-making) over these bureaus be transferred from Parliament to civilian oversight boards. Bit by bit, a true democracy–one not dependent on professional politicians–would emerge from the phony democracy that outrages and oppresses us. Little by little, the scope of parliament’s authority would be cut back. The House of Commons could eventually be eclipsed by Houses of Commoners.
The world would be turned upside down, the meek having inherited it. (The random representatives of civilian overseers would have had greatness thrust upon them; they would not have had to scratch and scramble up the greasy pole to get it.) So, Goodbye, Grandee Government!
PS: Strike when the iron is red-hot!–as it will be in a month, when the full extent of the BBC’s complicity in the Savile affair emerges, and (probably) the press digs up other incredible in-house scandals.
Zeke says:
November 13, 2012 at 9:13 am
“The role of science is to determine environmental risk. The politicians apply the Precautionary Principle to protect the environment and the public.”
=========
Under the Precautionary Principle, motorized vehicles should be outlawed, as they are the greatest causes of accidental death on the planet. We should walk everywhere, which is healthier. Under the Precautionary Principle, bathtubs should also be outlawed as they are the leading cause of accidental death in the home.
After cars and bathtubs are eliminated, according to the Precautionary Principle, we should then look to see what is left, and again outlaw the most dangerous items. And then repeat this process over and over until we have eliminated every risk.
Until we are living in caves keeping warm over wood fires. But of course the fumes from fires are dangerous, so we should have outlawed fire right from the day it was discovered. So really, the only answer is for us to return to the jungles. But the jungle is full of dangerous animals, which under the Precautionary Principle will first need to be eliminated to make it safe …
Philip Clarke says:
November 13, 2012 at 10:50 am
Well you got the name right. On the other hand, RAE North who has written accurate articles on the IPCC, Pachauri, TERI and climate scientists which he has not retracted although the cowardly Failygragh has retracted articles he researched for C. Booker with the most abject non apologies. In other words, they did not concede any inaccuracy, just that they would not fight and would rather retract.
DaveE.
James Delingpole has written about The List in the Daily Telegraph.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100189491/28-gates-later-the-bbcs-nightmare-gets-worse-and-worse/
PPS: O’Neil & Delingpole’s first step should be to issue a call for artists to create a gigantic paper maché sculpture of the Three Monkees of see/hear/speak no evil fame. This should be varnished to rain-proof it, then planted in a park in front of the BBC building, or perhaps placed atop a nearby building. (Ideally, it would be snuck onto the edge of the front of the BBC building’s roof at night.)
A dedication ceremeny should be held that, when televised by ITV, would double the mockery of the BBC. The dedication speeches would be brief, climaxing with slogans like these, which could also be painted at the base of the sculpture and used as “campaign slogans” subsequently:
“End the monkey business at the monkey house!”
“These monkeys can’t manage the monkey house—and they shouldn’t be allowed to try!”
“’No Evil’—That’s a good one!”
“They scratched each other’s backs,”
“Conspiracy of silence,”
“’Dabba dabba dabba’—Is that all you have to say?”
In the meantime, here’s an idea for a cartoon: Sgt. Schulz (a character in “Hogan’s Heros”) saying his famous tag-line, “I know nothing!”—the caption reads, “Entwhistle’s alter ego?” Or maybe no caption, but a halfway blend of the faces of Schulz and Entwhistle.
(I hope O’Neil & Delingpole read this or it’s brought to their attention.)
Has no one bothered to count? There are 30 “specialists” listed. Even Richard LH @ur momisugly November 13, 2012 at 2:34 am says, “Lobbiyists (sic)/Advocates – 22”, then lists 24 people.
What is the dissemination of this in the UK? Others have said BBC has not reported it, and obviously will not. Will any UK MSM do so? Will any significant numbers except those reading skeptical blogs know of it? Has any blog other than those skeptical on CAGW; US, UK, Aus, EU; reported this?
What is the BBC’s legal liability? Some there necessarily lied in their FOI refusal. Were the BBC attorneys aware this was actually public information? Can the court itself be impeached?
Except to those personally involved this is far more important than a sex scandal. This is a direct assault on integrity, objective reporting, respect for truth, freedom of information, and diametrically opposed to the BBC charter. Even supposing CAGW were true, the BBC doing this would be horrendous.
I’ve followed so many links I can’t say where, but somewhere it was made clear that no minutes were kept, because this was only a conference on policy in retrospect as a fraudulent way to avoid replying to the FOI request.
Has any U. S. MSM reported this? I gave up on the portion of the entertainment industry referred to as news media years ago.
I’ll try to answer my own questions, but there are only so many hours I can spend on this. I’ve followed so many links and links from them I’m worn out. I haven’t even been able to read all the comments as I usually do. How in blazes does Mr. Watts keep up with everything and keep this blog going?!!!
The newest on BBC scandal: BBC crisis: George Entwistle pay-off is beyond reach of auditors
Dr. Richard A.E. North describes how the various organisations involved in The List are interconnected. I’m beginning to think that there is a conspiracy, after all.
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=83332
Gale Combs says: November 13, 2012 at 5:42 am
…As I keep saying the Right/Left crud is only a Dog and Pony Show for the Great Unwashed.
Gale, thank you for all your posts here. Sometimes I used to think you went OTT with the “conspiracy in high places” stuff but the more I simply follow my own path, the more I find to corroborate all this. Yet I still believe in the power of ordinary people to counter this with good energy and intuitive application.
I don’t think we’ve seen a US president who’s lived out his term, who was not a puppet, since Eisenhower, whose parting speech was to leave a cryptic message for people about what he knew was already starting to happen. I’ve been doing a lot of background reading, like The Day After Roswell (Philip Corso), The Source Field (David Wilcock) and Messages (Stan Romanek), which taken all together with yet more, and reinforced by my own logical/scientific thinking and prayer/meditation, have helped me gain a far better understanding of this “bigger picture” of which climate alarmism and cover-ups is but one facet.
I’ve just been to an amazing conference of the “Breakthrough Energy Movement” where people are all aware of all this. This is the place where people really are being silenced the worst, but still believe in the power of good over evil and still come through with incredible stories.
Robert A. Taylor says:
November 14, 2012 at 12:13 am
————————————————-
Thank you Robert. I wonder if you should get together with Richard Courtney, Tony Newbery, or Maurizio Morabito, and enlarge this sphere of interest / concern / info. It is important.
Are we sure the list of attendees wasn’t typed by the Gaurdian and where it says ‘specialists’ it should have spelt ‘special interests’
H/T ‘Lightrain’ at Jo Nova
There was a time whent he BBC was run by smart Marxists. Now it is run entirely by stupid Marxists.
[snip]
Carter,
I wasted over 7.5 minutes on your Greenpeace propaganda. I am somewhat stupider as a result of that twaddle. Please try to raise your game. There is no ‘scandal’, it is just politics as usual.
Carter – aka getcarter – is an AGW troll who normally infests the Daily Telegraph comments. The best you’ll get from him is a youtube link.
Here’s the counter to that claim:
Doubt should be higher now. Another survey should be done, using the same questions.
FAO D Böehm
‘There is no ‘scandal’’, but it is a Delingpolegate, so he as been hoist by his own petard! Hahahaha
The only scandal Carter is that Greenpeas pretend they’re not playing politics.
DaveE.
You can be sure that Canada’s CBC and ozzie ABC slavish commitment to the CAGW cause is underpinned by the same type of cabal – undoubtedlymany of the same organizations. They are offspring of the BBC with the same taxpayer funding format.
The need for all this clandestine manipulation of journalism and its mirror image in the universities and government agencies that was revealed in Climategate, certainly lays bare the basis for the settled science and the strength of the evidence.
Ryan says:
November 14, 2012 at 2:28 am
“There was a time whent he BBC was run by smart Marxists. Now it is run entirely by stupid Marxists.”
Ryan’s remark is the best of the bunch, but it could be broadened to include the UN, complicit government agencies, and the universities. Thank goodness that they have proved to be stupid, more Dr. Evil than Dr No. Let’s keep unraveling this corrupted, amoral rat’s nest. How can so many people remain committed to this cancer.
In response to DaveG..
Theoretically speaking Having so much invested into superannuation green funds would make the more bias.
and they loosing money doesn’t necessary means they lost money. They might had a great head start if their fund invested in companies that received generous grants and tariffs.
Say started at 10 got boosted to 20. Lost 2.5. Pull out at 15.. = profit ^^
My family is doing just fine with no TV, public or private. The Internet has become the vote-with-your-feet resource for finding those small islands of unprogrammed truth and information. Keep up the good work WUWT.
oh there is defiantly one lie.. Perjury????
No notes was kept about the meeting. Where did this list come from.