Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t JoNova – Climate activist Dana Nuccitelli, who was hilariously outed as an employee of big oil, has made a shock discovery: Telling people the same tired climate story, over and over, doesn’t make what you have to say more newsworthy.
According to the Guardian;
During the most important year for climate news, TV coverage fell
A report by Media Matters for America reveals that the media are failing to inform the American public on the most important issue of our time.
Media Matters for America has published a report detailing US broadcast news coverage of climate change in 2015, and their findings are stunning.
2015 was a banner year for climate news. February, June, October, November, and December were each their respective hottest months on record, and 2015 shattered the record for hottest year. The pope delivered a climate encyclical. Investigative journalists at Inside Climate News discovered that Exxon knew about the dangers of human-caused global warming while it funded a climate misinformation campaign, and the New York attorney general launched an investigation into the company’s behavior. President Obama’s Clean Power Plan went into effect, and he rejected the Keystone XL pipeline. And most importantly, 195 countries agreed to cut carbon pollution as much as possible to stem global warming.
Despite all these critically important stories, as in the presidential debates, climate change was largely absent from US broadcast news. Climate coverage fell in 2015.
The reasons audience interest is falling are obvious to anyone except a climate fanatic. None of the bad stuff they keep predicting has actually happened, and climate advocates frequently refuse to debate anyone who disagrees with them.
The green blob has been predicting imminent doom since the late 1960’s, and we’re still here. It does get rather like certain religious groups predicting the Second Coming of Jesus, naming a date, and having that date pass. Very few such groups are still active. Somewhat suprisingly, a few are.
Is Mr Nuccigtelli trying for the Jehovah’s Witness Award for persistence?
Damn, can’t spell–Nuccitelli.
Nutticelli.
Vermicelli made from Nutella?
I always said the guy took the cake (or biscuit depending where you’re at!)
More like Verminelli !
g
Given the current predilection for using shortened names in the media; I propose we call him “DNut”. LOL!
Nutty-celli.
Rob,
Why not stick with “Scooter”. Pretty much everyone recognizes that moniker, even Dana.
Shortly to change his name to Damiam Nottontelli.
Why not Nutty-tellie??
Thinking paisley stringed instruments…
Thanks for that. I needed to see how you’d written the name so I could find out how to stop spelling it.
Former chair of UN climate panel charged with stalking and sexually harassing female colleague
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/world/former+chair+climate+panel+charged+with+stalking+sexually/11754685/story.html
NEW DELHI — The UN climate panel’s former chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, was charged Tuesday with stalking and sexually harassing a woman who worked at the New Delhi environmental think-tank he’s headed for more than three decades.
Police filed the case in a Delhi court after investigating a complaint by one of Pachauri’s colleagues at The Energy Research Institute, Press Trust of India said.
Pachauri has denied the allegations, but resigned last year from both the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and from TERI after the researcher’s allegations were published in Indian newspapers. The allegations caused a public uproar in a country where women face a stigma against discussing issues such as sexual harassment in the workplace.
His appointment last month to another top post at TERI renewed outrage, and a second woman, who had worked there for a year, came forward with additional allegations.
The court scheduled an initial hearing on April 23.
Separate from the police investigation, TERI’s internal complaints committee examined the evidence presented by the researcher, and questioned nearly 50 other employees, and concluded that the allegations of sexual harassment levelled by the researcher were valid.
Police have charged Pachauri, 75, with sexual harassment, stalking and criminal intimidation of the 29-year old woman.
But if you look at the PBS NewsHour (which often gets forgotten among the US’s other broadcast news outlets), it has yet to mention a solitary word about Pachauri’s situation ever since news of it broke out last year. But, this place which I call the “News climate-change-is-our-middle-name Hour” has had 11 significant mentions of the global warming issue ever since January 1st, basically an average of around once a week. This is the same news outlet I detailed in an article last year ( http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/11/pbs_newshour_continues_its_biased_global_warming_coverage.html ) of having a bias ratio against skeptic material of 529:5 at that time, going all the way back to the beginning of their online broadcast transcript archives. Meaning major mentions of the AGW side of the issue vs outright skeptic science viewpoints. Bump the figure up currently to a ratio of 562:5 with their Feb 23rd piece on sea level rise: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/what-do-rising-sea-levels-mean-for-future-generations-2/
“But if you look at the PBS NewsHour”
I’d rather not but it is good for the occasional calibration of the hard left edge.
Just wondering what you have to do for the Indian judicial system to actually charge you with sexual harassment? Those guys are not exactly sticklers for probity.
Of course, the USA didn’t exactly cover itself in laurels regarding Clinton, Edwards and Kennedy (defenders of women, all).
Having your kerosene stove blow up at a convenient time, could help the cause.
g
But it’s impossible!
If Pachauri is a sex predator, we would have harassed, well, her:
http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/273/images/oreskes.jpg
But he did not! (according to Naomi O.)
It is only sex predation if you are not interested.
Honestly who cares about nuttycellos junk science…
“2015 was a banner year for climate news. February, June, October, November, and December were each their respective hottest months on record, and 2015 shattered the record for hottest year. ”
maybe but no evidence to blame any of this on fossil fuel emissions
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292991614_THE_SPURIOUSNESS_OF_CORRELATIONS_BETWEEN_CUMULATIVE_VALUES
Nevertheless, the damage down by the ecoloon establishment to the world economy is only just now beginning to be felt, as the obsession with switching from reliable, cheap energy sources to those which are unreliable and expensive continues unabated.
In the UK, the closure of coal fired power stations has accelerated, while no one is building replacements, except of the goofy sort, like those burning US east Coast biomass (wood pellets), or offshore wind farms.
The age of rolling blackouts and sky high energy prices in the UK is rapidly approaching. As always, the lefties and loonies will say, “Don’t blame us, it wasn’t supposed to work out like this.”
Wrong: As always, the lefties and loonies will say,“Don’t blame us, you should have spent more money”.
Still Wrong: As always, the lefties and loonies will say,“Don’t blame us, you should have let us spend more of your money”.
The craziness is spreading like a virus.
Three coal fired plants in Alberta have had their power supply renewal contracts cancelled this week by TransCanada Power because of the fear that the new Alberta NDP (read Socialist) government is going to impose a Carbon Tax that will make them uneconomic. (same thing happened in Ontario where they sued for cost recovery). All according to the NDP plan to Obamiate coal and build bat killers. Be interesting if all the coal fired plants were to pull their plugs in protest given that over 50% of Alberta power is currently generated from coal. They won’t, but I wish they would. Might wake a few people up.
http://globalnews.ca/news/2561509/transcanada-to-terminate-alberta-coal-power-contracts/
The Guardian burned through £75million last year and has had to lay off staff. Fortunately, because it doesn’t have to make a profit, it still has sufficient resources to maintain free access to, and comment on, it’s Internet edition. I say fortunately, because this enables it to act as a magnate to all the self righteous Green loonies who would otherwise pollute the more sensible papers.
“to act as a magnate ”
Clever.
Sorry, it was meant to magnet – ruddy spell corrector!
The odd part is; Dana’s whole article accumulates evidence on why he, in particular should join the unemployed line.
Lots of noise.
People tuning him, explicitly, and AGW out.
Dana, especially has a way of turning people off and ruining their desire to ever read his vitriol again.
I always like the notion put forth in Tolkein’s ‘Lord of the rings’ that one’s name reflects one achievements or failures in life.
In which case, nuttifruitidaftweaselcelli’s name isn’t long enough. There are a lot of failures yet to be appended.
AtheoK
Having one’s career and name align is called ‘nominative determinism’. There was a hilarious series in the New Scientist many years ago on the phenomenon of people being attracted to careers that suited their names, such as a chef named Mr Cook.
Anthony Weiner!
Media Matters is a marxist propaganda machine that was formed to protect William Jefferson (BJ for short) Clinton from impeachment. So anything they have to say is irrelevant.
Same with MoveOn.org
Yep:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150
Which makes if very irksome that Google includes David Brock’s propagandist site in their search results. It is no better than The Onion for accuracy in reporting.
Try telling Dana (or any of the other green activists masquerading as journalists) any home truths about ‘global warming’ over at the Guardian and BOOM! – you’re banned. Result; they occupy a pro-AGW bubble where everyone agrees and robust contrary challenges are non-existent. Their loss.
Their numbers must be dropping too. One day the few faithfuls will look around and wonder what happened and where everyone went.
97% of Guardian commenters believe the end is nigh.
I’ve noticed the same thing, there is a huge number of true alarmists there. Anybody who dissents strongly is banned, unless is funny enough to be kept around. The remaining lot becomes more and more outrageously alarmist and causes aggressive comments – and that is used as a reason to ban those commenters as well.
This is pretty much the pattern in lots of media, and then there are publications which have stopped climate related commenting totally. You have no chance to point out anything which is against the message. Which is fine. I have the right to skip Gaudrian.
Examples of practically forbidden matters:
– uncertainty in decadal or centennial cyclic component of Arctic summer sea ice minimum
– any disagreement on wind power as a CAGW solution
– any disagreement on environmental net effect of solar power
– any message that tells the warming would not seem to be a reason for panic
– any message that tells adaptation would be superior to mitigation
– debunking even clear CAGW advocacy
– bringing up any good consequences of global warming
– telling there might be, according to IPCC, a significant natural component in 20th century warming
– uncertainty in GIA (Zwally paper etc.)
– difference between tide gauges and satellite-measured sea level rise
– missing tropical hotspot
– questioning the motives of the scientists who were included in the Climategate
Messages that are always accepted, however stupid, including derogatory language
– panic on hurricanes
– panic on sea level rise
– panic on WAIS
– panic on Greenland ice sheet
– panic on all environmental changes
– panic on diseases, insects and bunnies
– panic on missing sea ice
– panic on missing snow
– panic on extra snow
– panic on drought
– panic on floods
– panic on heat waves
– panic on CAGW induced cold
– panic on CAGW refugees
– panic, however it can be attached to CAGW
Many of these are stuff that, say, doctors Hansen and Spencer would strongly disagree. But media for some reason has bought one story and has very much difficulty in accepting existing uncertainty.
Nice to see your name again CheshireRed. Under my monicker Hallmarky13 I too was disabled by the Stasi moderators on CiF. My crime was “going off topic” which is insane, because mentioning the heat capacity of the oceans following an article about El Ninho would seem to be okay unless you were a zealot.
I used to wonder where guys like you and JohnJohnJohn and Max Stavros and Gretch had got to. Now I know that all sensible climate heretics are eventually excommunicated on that site.
Nice to see your name again CheshireRed. I too was disabled by the Stasi moderators on CiF. My crime was “going off topic” which is insane, because mentioning the heat capacity of the oceans following an article about El Ninho would seem to be okay unless you were a zealot. The main crime was repeatedly questioning AGW theory and the other “settled science”.
I used to wonder where guys like you and JohnJohnJohn and Max Stavros and Gretch had got to. Now I know that all sensible climate heretics are eventually excommunicated on that site.
The U.S Marines are about to spend $ 50,000,000.00 to relocate 1,180 turtles to a safe distance from the Marines new firing range !!! That’s $ 42,373.00 PER TURTLE ! NUTS !
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/03/08/marines-to-shell-out-50m-to-evac-1200-tortoises-from-desert-compound.html?intcmp=hpbt2
..Oops, forgot to sat O.T. ….! LOL
How many people could 1180 turtles feed ??
g
Depends on what they use for the appetizer.
What makes the climate story “tired” is that they lie, lie, lie.
And either people begin to believe the lie, or they call it for what it is: a BIG LIE!
We’re seeing the latter.
The first three letters of “NEWS” is NEW. If it isn’t new, it also isn’t news.
If it bleeds it leads.
The only people bleeding are those who are suffering from climate change policies. They can’t find anyone who is suffering from climate change itself.
It doesn’t surprise me at all that the media coverage is diminishing due to a lack of interest among the general public. Think about cigarette smoking for a moment. In spite of the increasingly shrill warnings about the dangers to health from this habit (a reasonable scientific conclusion, since the incidence of lung cancer among lifetime smokers is 20 times that for non-smokers), there is an irreducible minimum number of people who continue to smoke. Why? Because just like climate change, the effects are not immediate and obvious. So what is the “remedy” chosen by big government? Why of course, it’s the usual: If it won’t fit, use a bigger hammer! Hence the horrible packaging, the high (regressive) taxes, the restrictions, the exaggerated health claims, the cost of the habit to society (wrong! Dead smokers cost nothing, it’s the thin healthy people who live on and on who cost the most.) On it goes, the same response to a non-existent “problem”.
The most salient point to the smoking comparison. It wasn’t until the government manufactured the false narrative about the harm of second hand smoke to non smokers that real gains were made in convincing the masses to demand a near complete ban on smoking in public. C.Evert Koop was the surgeon general who used that office to propagate the mythology and the media took care of the rest. C. Everett even openly admitted in a speech to the faithful that he made up the danger of 2nd hand smoke out of whole cloth because smoke from cigarettes bothered him and he wished to stamp it out.
Subsequently, around the turn of the Millennium, the World Health Organization set out on a decade long study to prove that 2nd hand smoke was deleterious to non smokers health. They failed and quietly buried the results of their study in some basement archive. with the help of a complicit media who should have reported the news that, while non-smokers have a right to not have to breath it in public, if they do get a whiff it isn’t going to kill them. Instead with the truth buried we have new government regulation percolating over eCigarettes which don’t even emit smoke but water vapor. that is how powerful brainwashing is to the human psyche. Some people actually believe they are going to die if they catch a breeze containing smoke or water vapor.
Bottom line climate change isn’t going to kill you anymore than 2nd hand smoke but you will never convince true believers that the climate has always changed and they have been breathing in 2nd hand smoke since man discovered fire and there is nothing of significance that they can do about either exposure. They just can’t seem to comprehend that it is life itself which leads to their death, however it might come, such as a heart attack by a 75 year old shoveling snow. To them that is death by climate change. Or? Was it exposure to 2nd hand? It couldn’t have been old age.
“eCigarettes which don’t even emit smoke but water vapor.”
I believe the thick white cloud coming out of smoker’s lungs is not water vapor. I would rather not find out what it is by sucking it into my lungs.
Tobacco was never regulated until 2009. As a result high radiation fertilizers, heavy metals such as arsenic & cadmium/nickle, weed killers and fungicides in addition to additives in the final product were used without any regulation at all. One tobacco CEO estimated most cancers were caused by radiation products. Even after the FDA took over they don’t really seem to care about ingredients as they still allow hundreds of compounds to be added to the final product; their attitude is more like: if you smoke it’s your problem since you should know better. I’ve always wondered what the health results of an “organic” reduced additive tobacco would be like, but with the FDA’s present attitude, don’t expect to see any studies for comparison.
Make them stronger, and give them to children, preferably menthols, and maybe it will cure them before they get to breeding age. Good for the gene pool.
g
Exactly as you say…..one of my aunts smoked and died of lung cancer at age 64, 2 years after retirement. Only short-time pension payments from her employer and social security checks. Her older sister didn’t smoke and lived to 103. Collected long-time pension, social security and medicare.
Dead smokers do not pay taxes.
There’s no truth in the news because there is no news in the truth.
Walt D. — Nice one! I hope its yours. — Eugene WR Gallun
It’s a soviet proverb. You have two papers, ‘Truth’ and ‘News’. There is no news in ‘Truth’, and there is no truth in ‘News’.
Very accurately said.
The first four letters of NEWS spells North, East, West, South, as in from where it happened.
g
george e. smith — like that — Eugene WR Gallun
The unofficial quiet time for climate drum beating is between the Paris meetings and the U.S. election. That is obviously caused by the voters not seeing it as a real issue. The contrivance phase can flare back up after the election and be wrapped in the other claimed mandates—somewhere on about page 3.
Up here in Canada the CBC and the rest of the liberal left media are still banging out the climate propaganda on a regular basis. They even seem to be picking up the tempo as the argument weakens.
That’s because you already had your election.
Cap-and-trade agreements among some of the provinces and U.S. states are about to begin in Canada so the public has to be scared a lot more for them to accept this nonsense.
Yes we did and it was a disaster both at the federal levels and subsequently at a few provincial levels such as Alberta and Ontario, All three are now socialists, but hey when the economy collapses in the next little while we can blame it them!
nc – I think that’s called squealing louder. I guess the real panic is setting in, only it’s not about global warming (it’s about funding loss and loss of credibility and – oh yes – the “little people” finding out they’ve been deliberately lied to for years).
Climate change is the “gluten free” warning for the even dumber set. Nobody can tell you what it really means, but if it costs MORE and its for a GOOD reason, that’s all that counts…
“..During the most important year for climate news, TV coverage fell…”
When isn’t it a new record year for climate news importance?
Alas, so goes the propaganda machine. It needs some revving up, Dana. Surely there are some “worse than we thought” stories lurking about. If not, just make them up and write a press release. How about, “Climate Change Is Making the Polar Bears Obese.”
Folks get sick and tired of the hyperbole. Folks get tired of being lied to and betrayed.
There was a piece at talkingpointsmemo.com about middle aged white folks. They are the only group whose health is getting worse. They are committing slow suicide by smoking and drinking themselves to death. They have given up. They have given up on fixing the system, they just want to bring it crashing down. They will vote for The Donald because they just don’t give a d**n any more.
People like Dana Nuccitelli won’t see how they are in any way responsible for the collective bitterness. They are responsible though. They are part of the chorus that won’t tell the whole complicated truth because they know better than we do what’s good for us. [/rant]
A stunning piece of project review insight from the man himself …
Reasons to be cheerful, Part 3. Hit me with your rhythm stick.
The ad budgets for the paid “news” coverage ran its course.
With all the data tampering, readjustments, and destruction of past data, even NOAA can’t sort out and get around their self-imposed mess.
Back in 1997, NOAA with great fanfare claimed that year to be the hottest on record with a global average temperature (GAT) of 16.92 degrees. Now NOAA claims that last year (2015) was the hottest ever with a GAT of 13.8 degrees C! Huh?
Even though they try to explain their bungling, it’s quite clear that their poker face is no longer holding up to scrutiny, under their outlandish claims. It seems about time they got their act together if they want to be a serious player in this political world-wide farce.
Ref.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/199713 .
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/summary-info/global/201512.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201511.
Just saying…
“So you say the temperatures are the highest ever recorded? Please state the date that “recording” began. And what were the temps before that? Going back to maybe the Yucatan Asteroid Extinction Event?”
[…] the Yucatan Asteroid Extinction Event?”
Ooooo… if anyone thinks their day was rough, that was a really b-a-a-a-d day. That one probably was actually “worse then we thought,” Tekov.
A marketing strategy can be extremely effective at selling any product if the target audience feels that it’s relevant to their lives.
Everybody is effected by weather and climate………..and can relate to measures, like heat, rain, drought, tornadoes and hurricanes. So it was an environment, fertile with all the elements needed to hijack it and turn it into a political cause…….especially since many people’s basic understanding of weather and climate is limited to what they experience or see on television.
One of the foundations of the climate and weather that we were sold on, was the increase in droughts, tornadoes and hurricanes(for instance).
Over the past decade, we’ve had the least amount of hurricanes and least amount of violent tornadoes. Over the past 28 years, the best growing conditions in history in the Cornbelt of the US……and only 1 severe drought, 2012, when past history averaged close to 1 every 10 years.
When that 1 drought did occur, in that 1 year, we heard that it was from climate change. When that 1 Superstorm Sandy did occur, during that 1 year(Same as Hazel in 1954, BTW), we heard that it was from climate change.
Katrina and the hurricane scare are now over a decade ago. There is still a drought in California but the Plains eastward have some of the best soil moisture ever…the drought scare is over too.
Well I’m not affected by climate. I can drive 18.52 km down the road, and get a different climate.
And weather is not much of a big del either because it only happens once. Then it changes and happens some other way.
g
The Oil Companies are behind the Climate Scare big time. I think they are the major source of it. They may be trying to shut down competitors such as coal and fracking. If so, they are succeeding. “Renewables” are NOT competition. They invested heavily in those during and after the 1970’s OPEC oil shock. I am old enough to remember reading about those investments in the news mags of the time.
I suspect Big Oil believes in the Peak Oil Theory as well, and they think this is the gentlest way to ease the transition to other fuels and make the longest profit. I do not agree. While “renewables” are expensive and unreliable, carbonaceous fuels are SUPERRENEWABLE. Once burned, they become wood and corn and other renewables. Not to mention food. and wild things. Life. More Life on Earth.
“They may be trying to shut down competitors such as coal and fracking.”
They aren’t even hiding it here in Canada:
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/03/red-rose-countr-23.html
I think the warmunists have to face it: the 20 somethings they brainwashed as tweens are now so convinced that EVERYTHING is a problem that needs to be protested that climate change will just have to wait. I mean, saving a glacier is nowhere NEAR as important as having a sit in to get a statue of a old white guy removed from campus.
CaligulaJones:
Good point. Climate doom has droned on forever with nothing really noticeable happening, whereas they can get relatively instant gratification from having a statue removed or a speaker dis-invited within days or a few short weeks.
Yes, these poor fools are going to be stunned when they get to the bottom of the “Things to Scream About” list and realize that the ONLY way the planet can be saved is if we go back to the Stone Age.
I mean, triple-whipped half-caf strudel lattes just aren’t on the Cave Man Diet at all.
+1
At least for 2016, some of the Nuttytelli 2015 Climate Scam efforts in the USA took a serious hit.
Obama’s Government Hand-out to Green Crony Capitalists, a.k.a. The EPA’s Clean Power Plan, a.k.a. The War on Coal, was put on hold by the Supreme Court on the evening of Feb 9, 2016 by a 5-4 decision along the known ideological lines of the Justices.
(3 1/2 days later, conservative Justice Scalia was found dead.)
Wait. You mean to tell me the MSM are failing in their duty to be the mouthpiece for the extremely flawed and now-failing CAGW ideology?
Shock!
Horrors!
Outrage!
Who do we sue?
What should be covered in the media has to do with the continued march towards oceanic depletion of energy. The paleo record confirms this march upwards towards plenty (enjoy it folks), and the jagged fall towards survival (some will and some won’t). But the media is a very near sited entity that won’t see beyond the end of its own nose. Which is what I would say as well about AGWing catastrophic researchers. “Don’t look over there at the growling monster because if you do, you won’t fund me. Look here at this horrible mite! Now pass me the coinage!”
“during-the-most-important-year-for-climate-news-tv-coverage-fell”
World saved by a T V tabloid antics of the Kardazian Family.
Dana Nuccitelli is disappearing in the public’s mind faster than did the censorship advocating what’s-his-name reporter of the BBC . . .
. . . they were one trick ponies . . .
John
Climate scare ad campaigns may well be the last gasp for many media outlets. The great tune out has begun and there are more information choices than ever before. One side benefit of the internet is tuning out force fed or sponsored news. That is in parallel with the expectation of instant info. Doing a con job on people with instant access and abundant choice is not a good idea and may just be a sign of outdated tactics and ad buys.
Once interest in climate change is reduced to the point that covering it produces no profits, a new doomsday scenario will be invented. I’m hoping it will be asteroid impact. At least that will renew interest rate in space exploration..
Scratch “rate” from the above.
16 years ago the Independent newpaper predicted the “End of Snow”.
Snow is still here.
But the Independent Newspaper did not, at the time, predict the end of the Independent Newspaper.
Hey, Independent newspaper people – The snow is fine. The snow isn’t going anywhere.
You are. You’re going away…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35561145
Perhaps you could follow the lead of the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto, who refers to the media outlet in question as ‘Media Mutters’, and the Huffington Post as the ‘Puffington Host’ . . .