Worth repeating, in their own words on video, from Pierre Gosselin’s “No tricks Zone”:
For the media, at least for the AP’s Seth Borenstein (seen at left in the video), it’s not about presenting the science in a professional and balanced manner, rather it’s all about sensationalizing it and getting the editor to print it. The good stuff starts at about the 7:30 mark.
Seth Borenstein of The Associated Press, Craig Welch of the Seattle Times, and documentary producer Steve Sapienza lead an interactive session that provides insights and tips from accomplished reporters whose reporting on climate change has been lauded for its accuracy, accessibility, and originality at Metcalf Institute’s Climate Change and the News: Impacts in Marine and Coastal Environments seminar for journalists held in Washington, DC April 24-25, 2014 (Video published Online Sept 7th, 2014)
45:38 Craig Welch boasting:
Nobody in my newsroom who quotes people who don’t believe climate change is real that I know of. And if I find out about it I will go talk to them myself, but I also work in a newsroom where my managing editor used to be an environmental reporter and so there’s never been, I mean, he understands what we are doing, so.”
– See more at: http://notrickszone.com/#sthash.f3InZdi5.dpuf
Bit off thread but is not the field of climate science much like professional cycling? The leaders are all cheats but are successful so everyone just shuts up and pretends nothing is going on, but, as in cycling the truth comes out. Lets hope the ringleaders can be prosecuted and ruined, we owe it to those that were persecuted by them.
Thank you Mr. Murphy. Always glad to see your posts.
We know the routine.
– Climate Alarmism sells journalism and keeps naive people awake at night.
– Accepting “Natural climate variability” puts people to sleep.
The evolution of climate science:
natural variability –> global cooling –> global cooling –> climate change –> climate disruption –>{do loop}-|
^——————————————————————————————————————————————-<|
If the science actually supported their alarmist views, they wouldn’t need fancy catchphrases.
What a weird mutual masturbatory hen session.
1) Seth Borenstein’s effeminate gesticulations.
My creep-out radar when tilt when I started listening to Borenstein. He is one of those “guys” whose voice is all in his mouth. No base tones or lung reverberations like you might hear from James Earl Jones. Also he has that insecure head nutation. You know the one where he thinks he’s said something important and needs recognition so his statements are followed by that self affirming micro gesture… a nod or nutation. … like he;s thinking.. see me? see.. me being ar-tic-u-late?
And his self aggrandizement. I lost count how many times he referred to himself do something great and clever.
Wow. I’m no psyche expert, but he needs to see a shrink.
2) I am put off by pathetic whiners fawning over each other and exciting each other in obvious submissive impotence. Weird.
The video made me crawl.
But, but… Martinets here will tell you can’t judge by their appearance, you must argue with their “message”…
Agree 100%. Borenstein is a masochistic overfed clown for sale, and proud of it.
11:35 Seth Borenstein: [On female scientists and diversity in reporting] Katherine Heyhoe: Texas Tech Univ. She’s very media friendly, she’s smart, she speaks in sound bites, she’s an evangelical Christian and a climate scientist – what a wonderful combination. [Hey, you might give Roy Spencer a call some day after you run out of women to interview.
12:45 Craig Welch: On ocean acidification … Sarah Cooley who you guys met yesterday, and she’s a great speaker, she spent years as an oceanographer at Woods Hole, she’s not just an activist, she’s a scientist ….
To be fair snake oil salesman who cannot sell a good pitch is very hunger snake oil salesman, so you can see where he is coming from.
It’s been at least a year or two that they chose to blame the skeptical gains as “bad communication” or “failure to communicate well enough” by themselves as the sole reason. Either their public stance is intentionally mendacious or they are plain stupid, because they actually believe that FACTS are not part of “the problem”.
They literally seem to believe that there really are only two sides to this – them and the vast blank page of the public’s minds. They genuinely seem to think that nothing done by the skeptics is really part of the equation. They believe that nothing they have to say can possibly be incorrect, and that if the public doesn’t underSTAND the correctness that their group perceives, it can’t be anything except that their message is somehow not being SENT correctly. They LITERALLY cannot understand that the message itself is wrong, that the marshaling of facts contrary to their meme is even possible – that ANYTHING contrary is SO factually incorrect as to be worthless – in spite of the gains by the skeptical side.
In fact, it was CLIMATEGATE that swept their entire bullsh**t under the carpet – pushed the global warming concept under the bus.
The very tone of this video is patently disgusting – that they can openly and glibly talk about how they scam their audience INTENTIONALLY, and their total acceptance that such manipulation is acceptable and even to be LAUDED, encouraged, and expanded.
so they indoctrinate young journos! great.
i’m trying to imagine being a student of history in a Hochstadt class:
21 Oct: MyJournalCourier: Steve Hochstadt: The global warming hoax
(Steve Hochstadt is a writer, a gardener and a professor of history at Illinois College. His column appears Tuesdays in the Journal-Courier and is available at stevehochstadt.blogspot.com)
The history of scientific hoaxes is often amusing.
In 1813, Charles Redhoffer created a “perpetual motion machine…BLAH BLAH…
Hoaxers thrive when political ideology influences science. Joseph Stalin hated the Western science of genetics. When the biologist Trofim Lysenko …BLAH BLAH…
So we come to the big scientific hoax of our time, the “global warming hoax.” …
The politically correct view for any Republican running for national office is to agree with Inhofe.
It is a fact that every national science academy across the globe has endorsed the idea of global warming. Studies of thousands of scientific papers have shown that over 95 percent argue in favor of global warming.
So if there is a global warming hoax, it is being perpetrated by virtually all the world’s scientists and governments. The following organizations must also be in on the hoax…BLAH BLAH…
This would be the greatest hoax ever, because unlike every other hoax, it is being committed by all the world’s experts, which is precisely what the global warming deniers are claiming. It is hardly coincidence that those who claim that global warming is a hoax, all have a significant financial or political stake in preventing any action against global warming. Behind the newspaper articles, the radio broadcasts, the tiny number of paid-off scientists, and the politicians are the major oil companies like ExxonMobil, the coal industry, Koch Industries, but also a much larger sector of “dark money” funneled through untraceable pass-through organizations….
Who believes politicians paid by ExxonMobil instead of scientists, doctors and conservationists? Gullible people who want to believe. That’s what makes hoaxes work.
http://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/home_top-news-opinion_columns-opinon/50528044/The-global-warming-hoax
pat, clearly you are a product of the education that has been designed to make you an unquestioning “participant”. I believe this ‘directed’ education got a real foothold about 40 years ago and was perfected over the last 25 years, about the age of the tell-tale term “political correctness”. When I came to the realization of what had happened to education, I advised my own children to think for themselves but give the teacher the “right” answer so they were not penalized.
Whenever I see the likes of Seth Borenstein or AP pushing hard in one direction, no matter 18 years of no global warming, I wonder whether there are climate investments involved. The BBC pension scheme is invested in the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change. I have no investments, interests or employment in any fossil fuel company. I use fossil fuels and appreciate the benefits, that’s it.
Sorry to be flippant: but when the thumbnail of the photo at the top caught my eye, what I saw was two men in straitjackets with a psychiatric nurse looking on. Then I read the piece…
About the BBC pension fund, they have major investments in arms, tobacco, oil and mining stocks….
Top shares: (milllions)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mypension/aboutthescheme/topinvestments.html
GlaxoSmithKline – 50.7
Rolls Royce – 48.2
BP – 46.7
Amazon.Com – 46.4
AstraZeneca – 46.3
Royal Dutch Shell – 43.0
British American Tobacco – 37.8
Roche Holding – 36.3
Rio Tinto – 34.2
BT Group – 34.1
Imperial Tobacco Group – 30.9
much more fun, to try and persuade activists to get the BBC to ‘divest’ first. As surely going after the low hanging fruit, would be the way to go for the divestment activists.
Great point. It was very easy for the UK press to join with and inflame the public mood regarding ‘big pharma’ as regards the MMR jab. Their slow and painful backsliding after the damage they caused (mostly ludicrously pretending – even in the left wing press that they were always sceptical of MMR / autism links), while slightly entertaining to watch, is also creepy and disgusting.
If you think the purpose of the media is anything other than to sell product, you are misinformed. They can dress it up with “awards” and “fact-checking” but in the end it all depends on what the public will buy — either confirmation of their prejudices or sensationalism.
Well said Gary
I just looked at the comments on a Huffington Post piece about ‘Another Heat Record Set for the Month’ and I can tell you these guys are right. If they can come up with a new catchphrase, the useful idiots grab on and will not let go. Terms abound like ’97 percent’, ‘Heat in the Oceans’. My favorite was ‘If you don’t believe me here’s a graph:’. So, don’t waste your time with these idiots. But don’t buy land in Florida, because ‘There’s a road near Miami that floods everyday when the tide comes in and it never used to when I was a kid’.
What a hoot! Did anyone else notice Seth the Science clown was wearing his Halloween Costume?
Does he really think the lab coat lends him credibility?
He doesn’t need a foam rubber nose, a goofy wig, or makeup to make me laugh.
HA! HA! HA! – No treat for you Seth!
Happy Halloween.
Borenstein is nothing but a climate hack doing what he’s being paid to do; push the CAGW propaganda. He merely pretends to care about science. Catch phrases, mascots, slogans, and emotionalism are their stock in trade. Trouble is, other than with the tried-and-true Believers, they are losing their desired effect.
Correction: Seth is not wearing lab coat as I first believed. (I just watched the video again full screen.)
But he did give me a great idea for a Halloween costume.
If a Climate Clown comes Trick or Treating, give him lots of treats.
About the quote: the rambling, searching, almost unintelligible information in this quote by a person who must know the English language is a measure of the shock they’ve endured by the crumbling of the once exciting, fun-filled topic of global warming. It is a symptom of realization and denial meeting in the middle. Even the meeting itself is a workshop of desperate hope that their equally flummoxed colleagues can come up with something to save them.
These guys have brazenly and confidently staked out their reputations on the looming warming catastrophe. Now they are looking without success for meaningful one-liners or anything to ease the gloom and pain of what has happened to their careers. We have been introduced to a new psychological syndrome with climate scientists in Australia having deep depressions and uncontrolled crying jags. I guess McKibben of 350.org was the first to show the weepy symptoms.
Make no mistake. The ones who hang on, when all is lost, are not normal people who have suffered stress. They already had a problem to start with. The anger and ugliness will build up to a crescendo and then descend into depression. The comparative quiet – who hears much of anything from the once swashbuckling warmness climate scientists these days? – is a period of reflection by some considering their options for getting out of the jam and others headed for depression.
The question at 7:30 is such a leading idiocy… she does not know anything but goes on and on…
There were several questions that went on and on and on. Note that Seth holds his head during some of those questions. His eyes glazed over trying to interpret what point the speaker was trying to make. Painful as it was, I watched the entire video.
I can’t help but think of the Wegman “social networks” diagram showing the pals at work on pseudoscience. This is just a glimpse of the “corresponding” media network pals who are their shadows.
In a Venn diagram, the area of overlap of two circles shows the intersect of belief systems or ideas that both groups hold. There is no intersection of the CAGW-ers and the reporters who love them. The two groups simply are identical.
Wegman was maligned, and his “social networks” graph is now difficult to find on the internet. It was a clear view of what AGW is: a bunch of like-minded men and women who wanted to game the system of government grants and public fears of catastrophe, and who succeeded (probably beyond their own expectations). It really needs to be revivied.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/WegmanReport.pdf
Like, you know, I started listening at the 7:30 mark, like as suggested, you know, and like almost turned it off, you know, before the questioner completed her, like, question. Likey, like, like, you know?
For those concerned with the world we are leaving to future generations, perhaps they should worry more about their language skills.
As for punctuation, try:
“Are you in love?” vs
“Are you in, love?”
Commas can make a lot of difference.