Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Has anyone else noticed a growing tendency, for greens to criticise the high carbon flaws of their leading lights?
The latest focus of this green backlash is Sir Richard Branson. Branson, who owns Virgin Airlines, regularly self promotes his personal green credentials, with grand public gestures aimed at raising environmental awareness. But the green backlash has caught up to Branson, in the form of this eloquent tweet from British comedian Frankie Boyle:
Click here to view the original tweet
Frankie Boyle is no climate skeptic – he appears to be deeply concerned about CO2 and natural resources. However Boyle is one of a rising chorus of green voices, who are starting to insist that prominent leaders of the movement live by the standards which they demand of the rest of us.
Green hypocrisy is nothing new – witness the blatant green hypocrisy of the Guardian, hilariously satirised by Josh. And the regular frequent flier climate conferences enjoyed by prominent greens must upset at least some in the movement.
We also have Al Gore’s habitual disregard for green sensibilities, such as Gore’s gigantic personal household electricity bill.
What is new is that ordinary people, many with green sympathies, are starting to publicly challenge leaders who claim to be green, but whose jetset lifestyle choices generate more carbon emissions in a year, than most people manage in a decade.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Quote Daily Mail 2007 when Branson was trying to buy Northern Rock Bank “The Virgin tycoon’s first business venture, in 1969, was Student magazine, sold from a basement off London’s Edgware Road, and his next was selling records from a warehouse in Paddington.
Both enterprises were tinged by sharp practices, especially Virgin Records. Based on cheating the Customs & Excise of tax on the sale of records, Branson chortled that the fraud was “a great wheeze”.
Eventually he was fined £20,000 and paid £40,000 in taxes, the equivalent today of nearly £1million. That crime could be ignored as a youthful excess if Branson had not perpetuated another unethical ruse in 1988.
On that occasion, being depressed by the poor performance of Virgin Music on the stock market and having sold shares to the public at 140p, he wanted to buy them back for the same price, valuing the company at £248m.
Reluctantly, the shareholders agreed, although they were unaware that Branson had already agreed to sell the same shares to Pony Canyon, a Japanese media company, for £377m – that’s £129m more than he told his shareholders the company was worth.
That dishonesty was eventually revealed in 2000 when Branson was on the verge of winning the franchise for the National Lottery from Camelot.
It was his second such attempt, but his bid became mired in a dispute with the Lottery regulator, Lord Burns (a hugely respected former permanent secretary at the Treasury).
Lord Burns advised that Branson’s past business record rendered him unsuitable to be trusted to manage the Lottery’s billions. So ended what Branson called “the most important thing in my life”.
As a brilliant salesman and unique self-publicist, Branson can be forgiven for hyping his products’ successes and smudging discomforting truths. Yet he often teeters on the edge of making fraudulent claims.
For example, during his launch of Virgin Cola in 1995, he claimed that his new drink had 10 per cent of the market, while, in truth, it had fallen to just 3.3 pc.
“We’re earning £1m profits a week from Virgin Cola,” Branson claimed.
However, insiders knew the business was actually losing money and was worth a fraction of his assessment.
Branson might claim his optimism was innocent, but others would say that if public money was at stake – as with Northern Rock – such false assertions would be reckless.
Public investors did indeed risk their money in Branson’s ventures involving clothes, cosmetics and a Belgian-based airline, Virgin Express. In all three companies, the original investors lost money.
Today, in another area of his wide-ranging business portfolio, those investors who put money into Virgin Media (now haemorrhaging viewers to archrival BSkyB) and Virgin Mobile USA at the outset are now losing money.
Private investors have also lost by tying themselves to Branson. In 1999, Singapore Airlines bought a 49 pc stake in Virgin Atlantic, based on its value of £1.2 billion.
The airline is now valued at about £750 m and Singapore Airlines wants to sell its stake. Like his partners in Virgin Blue, a low-cost airline in Australia, the Singaporeans have not enjoyed their relationship with Branson.
But, more importantly, the biggest loser to date in Branson’s enterprises has been the British taxpayer – especially due to his involvement in the privatisation of British Rail.
In the early Nineties, Branson pledged he could run an efficient rail franchise and make it profitable within five years.
As a result, Virgin Rail won the lucrative West Coast franchise on the basis of a deal in which it received a £77m subsidy from the Government and would then pay back a licence fee to run the line from the anticipated profits.
Branson promised that within two years, his service would provide “hand-held TV sets, low-cost phone reservations and more staff”.
Students and groups would be offered “deeply discounted fares”.
However, Branson has failed to transform the West Coast line, with millions of passengers suffering delays while taxpayers have been forced to fork out more money in subsidies.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-499971/Why-Richard-Branson-man-trusted-Northern-Rock.html#ixzz3WErP4IAW
“However, Branson has failed to transform the West Coast line, with millions of passengers suffering delays while taxpayers have been forced to fork out more money in subsidies”
Ahhh greenies and subsidies… OUR taxes at work !!
The only point that I would question on the general criticism of Branson is that he has “failed to transform the West Coast line” . That is really unfair. When I first relocated to Manchester from London, over 30 years ago , any business trips down to London involved a slow , dirty British Rail journey of at least 4 hours to Euston. Now it is just over 2 hours and there are 3 trains / hour throughout the day. Perhaps the technology would have improved anyway , but when it was rumoured that Virgin would lose the West Coast franchise it created the greatest public displeasure up here since the Poll Tax riots.
Branson and his brat(s) are nasty little shits. I once accidently caught one of his brats on independent TV in the UK being intervieved by an ex-gardiner. He said, before flying out to his dad’s island on a 747, that we all need to cut back on our energy use, turn down the heat and turn off the lights. The gardener was sitting there nodding his head. I presume in agreement. But then he did also draw money from the Brussels Broadcasting Corp.
Well said Boyle although you are a nasty ……….
Don’t be so quick to criticize hypocrisy and unprincipled exceptions. If it was not for hypocrisy and unprincipled exceptions, the EPA would have us back in the neolithic scratching the ground with digging sticks.
If the ever purer leftists get the upper hand over the insufficiently pure leftists, we will be in Cambodia’s year zero.
You are right, save for one difference… the Cambodian people weren’t armed to the teeth. Bill Ayers and his ilk will fail. Get your kicks on Rt. .30-06.
I like your caliber.
I refuse to take seriously any criticism by professional entertainers. Problem is, even politics has become mere entertainment. Sigh.
C’mon Bruckie…. it wasn’t criticism.
Just a sharp, valid observation.
Very amusingly sharp.
twitter didn’t close his account ? word “crap” isn’t fair use, but word “c***” is ? go figure … 😉
These green elitists don’t even see the hypocrisy (it’s only fodder for weak comics). They think of it as necessary evil whilst doing good for mankind. I’m surprised none of them have come out and said “I know my carbon footprint is high, but I’m too important to worry about that right now. It’s the price of being a leader in saving the planet.”
Good, let the lefties and greenies attack their celebrities for being hypocrites. The more they do it, the fewer celebs they’ll have left to use for publicity. They’re basically shooting themselves in the foot, but then #GreeniesAreStupid.
As for Branson, he’s just like any entrepreneur who’s found a target market and is milking it for all its worth. The market being green products. It doesn’t matter what the product is, so long as its labelled green, people will buy it because it “good for the planet”. That’s the power of advertising and branding which is enhanced by the public being controlled by nannying fussbuckets who think they know better over how people should live their lives. When people don’t have to think but just listen to their nannies, the are more easily led and fooled by charlatans and quack doctors and politicians.
I just wonder if Richard has had that awkward conversation with Burt Rutan. It would be an interesting ‘schooling’.
Frankie Boyle @frankieboyle 21h21 hours ago
https://twitter.com/frankieboyle/status/583642044515667968
If Frankie Boyle looked at the alphabet he might notice that the letter ‘D’ follows the letter ‘C.’ Despite the fact that both letters rhyme they’re not the same thing. Women and men are not the same thing either. Now the ‘C’ word is definitely quite insulting which I assume was Frankie’s intent. But doesn’t he realize it’s inappropriate. Wouldn’t he have been more accurate to have tweeted that Branson’s a Big D rather than a C?
Nothing will put an end to the CAGW fad faster than when the DiCaprios, the Steyers, the Podestas, the Strongs, the Gores, the Travoltas, the Kerry’s, the Redfords, the Camerons, the Houghtons, and … the Obamas (747 sized private jet, 22+ aircraft travel fleet, 40 vehicle motorcades to fundraisers) get called out to live the same lifestyle they seek to impose on the rest of us.
Who the hell is Fwankie Boyle and why should anyone care?
Good question. And do greens even know about Branson’s low lying island resort development amidst the rising sea jargon line? Do they even know how to view the math involved in the tax credit benefits bestowed on the 1 percent from generalized renewable tax credit policies?
I’ve just checked his twitter feed, he says: “I regret calling Richard Branson a mad c***. He’s not mad. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/13/greenwashing-sticky-business-naomi-klein …”
Bet he doesn’t really regret it at all. There ain’t no such thing as bad publicity to a greenie-luvie-not-so-funny comedian.
Ha ha.. I think you missed the follow up joke there… he just narrowed his terminology… (apologised for calling him mad, therefore confirming…. etc)
Yea Markx got in there first, I thought his follow up was funny too haha!!
Sounds like a second wave of enviro extremism. Girondists being ousted by Montagnards and Jacobins; we’ll soon have a Committee for Public Safety
Gareth Phillips
April 3, 2015 at 2:10 am
True Brandon, but is that under specific circumstances? I am one of those terrible threats to all that is good in society, a greeny and a lefty. However, I fly about four times a year. I don’t think it is hypocritical because I try to offset that by having solar energy for electricity generation and hot water amongst other things. Until someone replaces air travel with something equally as useful, I’m not sure we can just ‘not fly’, but we can adapt, and adaption in my books is the key to many challenges we faced with in climate change.
——————————————————————————–
Gareth, what possible connection is there between your solar roof panels and flying, or indeed climate change? You have mentioned personal guilt/responsibility, but have not provided a jot of evidence. Would the sun shine less or more if your roof panels were not there? Would the local power station (if you are lucky enough to have one) do anything other than be made less viable by your narcissistic worldview?
Truly, I despair at times about the Gareths of this world. They really imagine that it is all about them, and that whatever symbolic stuff they do is hugeley important.
Perhaps they are products of the “self esteem” cult for children. Instead of facing reality, they get told at every hurdle that they are right, and the world is wrong. They are “special”, and everyone who disagrees is a bully or is prejudiced against them because of their sex/race/disability or whatever.
johanna,
Of course not.
Irony. And what’s this “less viable” nonsense about? PG&E wants you to sell them power. For money:
http://www.pge.com/en/mybusiness/services/nonpge/generateownpower/index.page
Solar is specifically mentioned, and California is sunny. Except where I live.
To recap, you demand evidence from Gareth, make factually incorrect statements about the viability of utility companies, and end on speculating about other peoples’ motives. Consistent much?
http://www.virginballoonflights.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Balloons-RBlovesT-Nobby21.jpg
What a shame to spend one’s time and energy dwelling on the theory that has already proven itself to be highly erroneous. Get the big picture of climate Frankie!
Eric Worral –
‘What is new is that ordinary
people, many with green
sympathies, are starting to
publicly challenge leaders who
claim to be green, but whose
jetset lifestyle choices generate
more carbon emissions in a year,
than most people manage in a
decade.’
OR
‘green leaders who
claim to be green, but whose
jetset lifestyle choices generate
more carbon emissions in a year – then the families of medivial tenants in generations.
d’accord – Hans
My only comment is that Gore’s and Branson’s, and the like, carbon footprint is far, far greater than ten time’s the average person’s. But in their mind that is ok because they are leaders in the new progressive autocratic state.
Ahh, the quandary of casting the first stone. So Boyle makes his living without requiring any production of carbon dioxide?
No production of CO2 is required to produce DVDs? No CO2 to produce TV shows? No CO2 to broadcast TV shows? No CO2 to receive TV shows? No CO2 to play a DVD? No CO2 to power his microphone at a stage show? No CO2 from the travel of all the people to get to his shows?
It’s good to know that all of these are powered by magical unicorn burps.
That’s where The Guardian are going to park their investments.
Then you get into advertising.
C*** is somewhat apropos. You may remember Branson’s ad campaign:
Virgin Airlines — Take us for all we’ve got.
Maybe green feminists should be up in arms … (or legs).
But more CO2 is good. Something around 1,500ppm (0.15%), the average for modern life on earth, would probably be ideal. That’s about 4x current levels. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to cause any detectable warming. Either that, or it just prevented us from sliding into another Little Ice Age, which is very, very good thing. The current brief interglacial is coming to an end and we are in for an average drop in temps of -6C for the next 100,000 years. Science!
I get very frustrated reading about these poo-fights. Who’s doing the most to reduce CO2 and keep temps cold. They whole premise is insane.
C*** (i.e. vagina) name calling has a certain pagan charm for a ‘Green’ of the Mother Gaia worshipping type.
Mother Gaia must be proud if green males are summoning the tunnel to her womb in Tweets. How fertile.
The name calling Boyle character is given airtime? It looks like diminishing returns achieved on news.
John
Nothing new here.
Every cult eventually eats itself.
The cult of calamitous climate is behaving in an entirely predictable manner.
As the public ignores their doomsayers, the faithful will examine their messengers. But never the message.
The failure of communication will be ascribed to, first the evil deniers, then to a failure to communicate , then to the faults of the high priests.
This religion of life fearing bedwetters is far too humourless to successfully sell.
Their foul creation, via mass hysteria, is engaged in eating its own tail, enjoy.
Hell has no fury like a zealot who recognizes themselves in a mirror.
Thenself? Damn spellcheck.
john robertson on April 3, 2015 at 7:57 am
– – – – – – – – –
john robertson,
You bring to mind a quote. I adapted this following Dorothy Parker quote,
John
Every cult eventually eats itself
That was the thought when I made my previous post concerning the French revolutionaries eating themselves.
Here in Colorado Oprah is building a new mega mansion near Telluride, cutting down over 500 trees to clear the path for it and closing off a long held hiking trail. But, that’s okay because after all she is a modern day princess who lords over us modern day serfs is she not?
At the risk of sounding a bit crotchety, when did ‘vagina’ supplant ‘vulva’?
(Being a grammar Nazi is not all that it’s cracked up to be 🙁
I think you should leave crotches out of this discussion.
Yeah a minor hangup. Even though Hollywood uses the term ‘vagina’ for the obvious visual parts, that is not medically accurate unless its a baby making scene. Personally prefer ‘pussy’ as in James Bond’s Pussy Galore (much cuter) or the band of the same name.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Cv-0TBEhWVE/SEkCUsaPFjI/AAAAAAAABbI/seCSOWtCp9c/s1600-h/3.jpg