The New York Times remains a slave to climate alarmism even after its miserable failure in Paris on December 12, and continues to push the fossil fuels conspiracy theory. It’s regularly publishing fake news. A NYT piece that appeared on December 29, How Climate Change Deniers Rise to the Top in Google Searches, mentions me, my website DefyCCC, and WUWT, and I take this opportunity to reply. In November and December 2017, I experimented with distributing the climate realism message using advertising options on Google and some other platforms. I will report on the results of this experiment in a separate article. Apparently, some of my Google ads caught the attention of the NYT. On December 4th, a NYT reporter named Hiroko Tabuchi interviewed me for 45 minutes in preparing for the above NYT piece.
In the interview, I attempted to convince the reporter that the NYT got science wrong, that real scientists are against climate alarmism, and that other countries build coal power plants and more. The reporter was honest in telling me that the NYT piece would be about the ads, not about the climate debate (I hope NYT does not fire her for this act of honesty, unfit for its organizational culture), so I already knew what to expect. However, the piece weaves lies, half-truths, and trivial facts so seamlessly that it elevates fake news into an art form. I will comment only on some falsehoods related to me.
The only thing that surprised me in the NYT piece was how it used me to link Trump to Russia.
“Of course, people click,” said Mr. Goldstein, who said he had emigrated from Russia two decades ago and had worked in the software and power industries. “Google is the No. 1 advertising choice.”
The proliferation of climate disinformation, both online and off, has coincided with an effort to undermine measures to combat climate change. Republican leaders regularly question climate science and President Trump has called climate change a hoax.
I emigrated from the Soviet Union (not from Russia) before it dissolved in 1991, the dissolution that happened twenty-six years ago. I was born and grew up in the Ukraine, then a part of the Soviet Union. This information is present in the About page of my site. I did not tell the reporter that I “emigrated from Russia two decades ago.” Here, the New York Times has “slightly” changed times and names in order to evoke another conspiracy theory, one of a Trump-Russia collusion. The rest could have been expected. This is how the NYT linked me to the Koch brothers:
DefyCCC, the site that recently bought the “climate change” search term on Google, devotes an entire section of its site to content from WattsUpWithThat, a well-known climate denial site by the blogger Anthony Watts. Mr. Watts has received funding from the Heartland Institute, backed by the billionaire Koch brothers.
Beyond that, little is known about DefyCCC. …
The reporter ran this line (except for the last quoted sentence) by me in the interview. In fact, DefyCCC has no sections at all. It does have a menu, and links to my articles in WUWT are collected under top menu items In WattsUpWithThat and WUWT 2016. I explained that to the reporter. But the NYT still published this line, falsely insinuating that I am connected to the Koch brothers. The next sentence was supposed to cement this lie as truth: “Beyond that, little is known about DefyCCC”. This is also a typical line in the hatchet job pieces, used when it cannot find dirt on somebody. For the record, I also told her I have no information about other allegations in that paragraph. Further in the piece, the NYT made another wild insinuation about me:
He received help with his site but would not say who his backers were to protect their privacy.
In the interview, I said I have colleagues and refused to name them. Then, I told the reporter about the shooting of the UAH building as a reason to withdraw personal information. This topic was blacked out by the media, so the NYT didn’t mention it, but made up its own explanation. This is where fake news becomes an art form. In the sentence, the word help (from colleagues or coworkers) is followed by the word backers, subtly turning it into financial support. And then a quote, taken out of context, cements this impression.
Having written about my imaginary backers, the NYT failed to disclose its own. Its largest shareholder is Mexican multi-billionaire Carlos Slim, who was the world’s richest man a few years ago. Mr. Slim has significant investments in oil and natural gas in Latin America, which compete against U.S. oil, gas, and coal industries. The NYT’s attempts to damage the U.S. fossil fuels industry promote the financial interests of its largest shareholder.
I took record of the insults that the NYT hurled at me, but I will not dignify them with a response.
The NYT piece mentions WUWT and DefyCCC, but it links to neither of our sites. I understand that it doesn’t want to transfer “link equity” or encourage readers to visit them. But, when the NYT wrote about white supremacists, it linked to Stormfront with a perfect, link equity carrying link (3), although it didn’t have to, or could have used a nofollow tag that prevented transfer of link equity. When I checked in September 2017, I found that the top neo-nazi websites received most of their link equity from the leftstream media. Just a note.
I don’t want to finish this article on the NYT links to neo-nazi websites. Sorry, I mean, the links from the NYT site to neo-nazi sites. Reading the NYT is not only misinforming, but also morally degrading. The NYT published two pieces about UFOs in December 2017: 2 Navy Airmen and an Object That ‘Accelerated Like Nothing I’ve Ever Seen’ (in the section Politics) and Dad Believed in U.F.O.s. Turns Out He Wasn’t Alone (in the section News Analysis). Seems to me that the NYT is looking for its niche among tabloids.
Notes
Carlos Slim owned ~17% of class A shares of the NYT until a few months ago. But Class A shares of the NYT elect only about one third of the board. Class B shares are thought to be held by the Ochs-Sulzberger family. Father and son Ochs-Sulzberger have been the NYT publishers since 1963, so the NYT was considered independent from external financial influences. But, in the precarious financial situation into which the NYT painted itself by serving as a propaganda accessory and by false reporting — money ends up mattering more than formal voting rights. Thus, Carlos Slim probably wields or wielded much more power in the editorial room of the NYT than previously thought. To his credit, he is not a liberal. Mr. Slim also owns substantial interest in the tobacco industry around the world, which makes the NYT a sister company of Big Tobacco.
Posts about the New York Times take a good part of the fakestream media category in DefyCCC. Besides printing fake news, it was caught doing near-Orwellian re-writing of its articles to toe the party line. I have even proposed a new logo and byline for it that better reflects its new nature. It can use them free of charge under a Creative Commons license, just like other content of my website.
Addendum by Anthony:
The way the NYT article is written, it implies that WUWT has an ad campaign running in Google Adwords to attract readers. It does not, and never has. We have no advertising budget. The article also implies that WUWT is funded by the Heartland Institute. It is not and never has been. Neither WUWT nor the owner Anthony receives any payroll or regular funding from Heartland. We rely entirely upon advertisements (managed by WordPress.com and a sharing agreement) and donations from readers. In the past, Heartland helped locate a donor for a project, and Anthony has been given a $1000 honorarium and travel expenses to speak at some Heartland conferences on climate change, just like any other speaker, including pro-warming/pro-climate change scientist, Dr. Scott Denning.
Tabuchi also insinuated that WUWT and/or me is funded by the Koch Brothers; this is a laughable falsehood. They have never sent me a dime, either directly or indirectly. They don’t even know who I am and I’ve never had any contact with them or their charitable organization; it’s just a weak conspiracy theory pushed by the weak-minded who would rather take talking points from others than do their own homework.
But, the writer, one unheard of Ms. HIROKO TABUCHI never bothered to ask any questions of me. So as a journalist, she fails miserably based by relying on and writing about her own assumptions.
Is this the best the New York Times can do? Apparently so.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The NYT does not have a single writer qualified to write about actual science. Basically, they are Democratic Party political hacks pretending to dispense facts. Facts are not party-centric. No one. No one. Should ever read a word from this paper with trust.
It’s no wonder the BBC is always quoting the NYT and interviewing its reporters.
Their latest ‘bombshell’ lasted all of one hour: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/12/nyt-russia-papadopoulos-bombshell-completely-unravels-within-hours-publication/
“. . . funded by the Koch Brothers . . .”
A few years ago when I first learned of the “Koch Brothers” (meaning Charles & David — sons pf Fred) I spent about 2 hours looking for information on the things they support. I was impressed.
They control a large productive set of companies employing many people. They have foundations that give substantial sums to causes doing serious work. The Charles Koch Foundation gave $77,000,000 in 2016.
Here’s a report regarding David:
<Grants for Disease
Every progressive agency in the USA seems to have a site claiming the Kochs are evil. Thus, one has to learn enough, such that things such as ‘they fund WUWT’ is know to be false. So, it takes awhile to follow some of this stuff. Also, a person may not like their politics. Do a lot of reading and you will find they do much good.
Exactly. They are owed gratitude and not slander. I wonder whether the Koch Brothers have NYT stocks in their portfolio…
One day the Koch brothers are going to start looking at how they are portrayed in the liberal press, and decide to do something about it
I realize one shouldn’t make any statements to police w/o a lawyer – but it would seem like a wise idea to take one with you when you have an interview with a reporter as well…
I do recommend the Attorney General instead of a lawyer.
Actually, the best way to deal with ‘journalists’ is to reduce them to tears – especially if you happen to be the only person with the knowledge they are trying to wring out of you, for what you know will only be for a ‘hit piece’. They just can’t handle it – and it makes for a certain perverse delight.
LOL!
As I was reading your essay, Leo – as well as the NYT article,to which you provided a link – it occurred to me that the NYT’s timing and tone was somewhat reminiscent of Harvey et al‘s recent “execrable piece of junk science” [h/t Tom Fuller via CliScep].
And sure enough, the concluding paragraphs of Tabuchi’s hit piece read as follows:
Amazing, eh?!
The lefties can only demand more censorship.
The NYT to academia are unable to actually communicate or discuss issues. They are out of ideas and capacity, but not power.
Dangerous times.
“slave to climate alarmism”
“miserable failure in Paris”
“continues to push the fossil fuels conspiracy theory”
“regularly publishing fake news”
These phrases are not journalism or debate on climate science. They are unsupported tabloid style assertions not backed by evidence.
Emotive, not constructive and far worse than the position of the fact checked NYT – which I note does contact people before publishing about them or their work, unlike some websites…
Griff you are amazing and scary at the same time. You should try for a spot on SNL your talent would fit right in.
Thanks for concisely naming just some of the problems of the NYT. There are a helluva lot more. Feel free to publish them all here. The NYT won’t allow you to do that in their publication.
Those 4 items seem to describe you quite well, griff.
Did you take a truth serum , by accident ?
Griff you have correctly , but probably inadvertently , identified the problem with NYT in comparing and contrasting it with WUWT .
Yes NYT sends out reporters to conduct interviews, because it is a newspaper, and it employs reporters. That , along with gathering in ad revenue , is its business . The problem is that the interview can then be incorrectly reported to the public if the owners of the paper have an agenda , and all evidence is that it definitely does. It then no longer becomes a reliable journal of record .
WUWT is not a newspaper. Anthony Watts does not (so far as I know) employ a team of reporters , and it exists as a discussion forum on the subjects that the website owner has an interest in . Yes there are featured posts, and mostly these are from a climate sceptic viewpoint ( except when about pure science news like that one recently about LIGO) , but no-one is forbidden to comment , and only pornographic or libelous
That newsmedia have an agenda is not in itself news . The Times of London was so famous ( or notorious ) for its opinions in 19/20th Cent that it was known as the “Thunderer” and echoes of its thunder can be heard in the novels of eg Trollope like “the Warden” . In our present day Rushbridger when editor of the Guardian definitely had a left/liberal agenda but made no secret of that. The charge against the NYT is that it sends out reporters to get facts , then distorts them in the editing . WUWT certainly does not do that because commentators may get facts wrong or push an opinion but it is all done openly and without the hypocrisy that appears to characterise the NYT operating procedures.
(All IMO of course – I have not interviewed anyone at the NYT).
“Griff January 1, 2018 at 1:11 am
They are unsupported tabloid style assertions not backed by evidence.”
And you continually quote The Guardian as “evidence”.
It really does amaze me how upset Griff gets when facts that counter his belief system are published.
BTW, everyone of those items listed by Griff has been documented on this site and others, over and over again.
” far worse than the position of the fact checked NYT” – and pray, who is the fact checker at the NYT?
I don’t suppose he is the pheasant plucker’s son?
The work experience kid was but he couldn’t read so was of limited value in the position.
What? Can’t you read?
(that was directed at griff, of course, but others got in first (rather more intelligently)
Pretty well true, CDB. Poor Griff is (or appears to be, IMO) what is often referred to in Oz as ‘a two handed wanker’. No one gets that silly by playing with themselves with one hand – and he obviously ignored the warnings from his father/Minister/teachers/others. That he can’t read is probably from his eyes glazing over at the crucial moment? We have a lot of them down under, as well… unfortunately!
These lies by the press are just normal behaviour for them. They do it to everyone and before the internet there was absolutely nothing anyone picked on by these scum could do, so politicians either had to play the press Nazi’s game and roll over to all their demands to ignore some issues (immigration) and push forward on others (gay marriage). Or politicians had to have a really thick skin and expect to be cast as an “extremist”, “ultra” … “sex-scandal” person, and basically expect very reasonable parties to be cast as hated extremist “bigots” (as was UKIP in the UK). In contrast, those politicians playing the press game could indulge in any behaviour they wanted and get away with it as it would never be reported – hence the “the swamp” in Washington.
The big difference now, is not that the press behaviour has changed … but that now through the internet we sometimes get to hear the other side of the story. And that is why the press hate the internet, that is why they hate sites like this which do tell the truth. That is why they hate Trump, that is why they have this relentless campaign to cast anyone outside the real fake news outlets as “fake news”.
The simple truth is this, almost everyone is more honest than the press. So, if you want to know the truth, there’s absolutely no point whatsoever in reading a newspaper or watching TV. Instead, you’ve got to go out and look for first hand accounts on the internet where you don’t get the fake news bias of the media. And the benefit of that is that the fake media will lose advertising or gov. funding and it will eventually decompose into its own vile excrement.
Your mistake was in agreeing to be interviewed by the NYT.
It’s called globalisation.
The NYT and the Guardian are now taking up each others space. There isn’t room for them both. So they have to fight for the role of Official Journal of the Left.
No “softness” can be shown on any subject .
When one or the other goes bankrupt more nuanced journalism could resume.
Just now I typed WUWT into my searcher (duckduckgo).
This was right at the top of the results.
“Wuwt is a blog promoting CC denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006.
See more at Wikipedia.”
Just about sums up the Lugen Media controlled by the New world order.
Happy New Year to you and yours Anthony.
With kuugle “WUWT” is in #1 position, about 155.000 results (0,48 seconds), followde by Watts Up With That? – Wikipedia, WUWT | …and Then There’s Physics and Wott’s Up With That? | A response to Climate Change disinformation at …. So they do not seem to suppress the results rightaway but manipulate them with adding controversial blogs just right behind.
I do suggest that everyone in this community just enters the search word WUWT once or twice daily in his searcher.
If you want to tenderly kick a shin, do not leave a space after the hyphen, like in: WUWT -wottsupwiththat -hotwhopper -sks.
You have to hide “WOTTS UP” from your thoughts or filter out this program with U-Block origin or adblock plus from the search results. That works too. But such programs are currently sponsored by “BIG Money” with “BIG Money”. Anyone with a lot of money can buy them and place them first on Google or change the search order. Google is for sale, they do not do anything in vain. Or what do you mean, where the wealth of the owner comes from? Of free use certainly not.
@ur momisugly Hans-Georg
You are right. I did not deactivate AdBlock and uBlock. They make life on the internet a little bit easier…
If you really want to see how biased the search engines are type in “koch brothers conspiracy” and the top article is usually wikipedia, “Political activities of the Koch brothers”. It doesn’t deal with it like it’s a standard flat earth, or USA never went to the moon conspiracy.
The world of fake news fed to the masses.
Do you reckon that the Koch brothers are knowledgeable enough and intelligent enough to realize that their business interests are not being threatened in the least by the perversions of science that are being conjured out of dogmatic minds? The Goofyville on the Potomac politics that are fueled by the perversions may be a different matter. But then may you R. I. P., Uncle Shyster.
And, by the way, they are among the largest donors who contribute to the financial support of NOVA on PBS.
It’s baffling that the alarmists can’t come up with any other bogeyman than the Koch brothers -same thing here in Norway. As if they all quote from the same script -or scripture, maybe. Why not refer to some other “evil capitalist” for a change? But it is typical of a myth that it needs to be repeated again and again, the simpler the message the better, and no deviations from the story.
I agree it’s a pretty poor conspiracy especially if they were actually trying to do what is suggested and the sums they are supposed to be spending you could just go and buy all the media outlets 🙂
The ‘progressive’ left abhors success, progress, job creation, capital accumulation and the redistribution of wealth by the private sector, where the Koch brothers embody all that they despise. When you don’t have the truth and facts on your side, the alternative is to demonize those that do.
We like to think to ourselves that the media should be factual and completely unbiased.
Well, it is not.
They are all niche-marketing and pandering to a certain base of readers now. The NYT and CNN’s audience is now middle of the road left-wing. MSNBC is marketing to the far-left. Fox’s audience is middle right-wing, Brietbart is far right-wing.
This is what “news” is today. You are not getting unbiased news, you are getting biased news.
When a CNN headline says “Trump is right”, they lose 50% of their audience for a day. If they said “climate change is mostly exaggerated”, 25% of their audience would switch to MSNBC and never come back. It is just business. CNN used to be, long ago, an unbiased source but now they get their revenue from the democrat voters. If they switched back to the middle of the middle, they would likely end-up bankrupt before they captured enough middle of the middle audience.
You can just read headlines today and know which side that media source is “pandering to” in the current environment. Not hard to wade your way through that when you understand it from this point-of-view.
Bill, +1. If you work in media, then you must identify your customers and give them what they want.
“If you work in media, then you must identify your customers and give them what they want.”
Isn’t this true for any business?
The worlds second oldest profession.
Combined with excessive self abuse…
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-31/nyt-publishes-report-debunking-fbi-use-dossier-gets-shredded-immediately-fake-news?page=1#comment-10928738
Bill, don’t you think that there would be a niche for factual and completely unbiased?
There certainly is but the media source would have to sacrifice ratings and advertising revenue until they rebuilt an audience base. $100 million or so for a large network/newspaper.
The Grey Lady is into Yellow journalism. All the news that’s fit to $hit – in baby poo yellow.
From: How Carlos Slim Built His Fortune
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/103114/how-carlos-slim-built-his-fortune.asp
“Slim has a hand in literally hundreds of other companies, largely through Grupo Carso SAB, Slim’s global conglomerate. Grupo Carso has or has had stakes in enterprises as diverse as Elementia, one of the largest cement companies in Mexico, retail including Sears and Saks Fifth Avenue, energy and construction (via CICSA) and automotive (via Grupo Condumex). He even has a stake in The New York Times.”
ME: Of all industrial uses of hydrocarbon-based energy, the making of cement uses a tremendous amount of energy and generates a tremendous amount of CO2 and particulate emissions. It seems to me that any person who is both in the cement business while at the same time campaigning for reductions in CO2 emissions via ownership in mainstream media properties has great conflicts of interest.
“It seems to me that any person who is both in the cement business while at the same time campaigning for reductions in CO2 emissions via ownership in mainstream media properties has great conflicts of interest.’
It’s just business.
I canceled my subscription to the NYT years ago due to this sort of slanted National Enquirer sort of nonsense, obviously I’m not missing anything of value.
This is precisely why Rush Limbaugh stopped doing media interviews years ago. He quickly became aware that the story was written before the interview and that whatever he said wouldn’t matter, so why waste your time?
I’m not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish. But it would fail because of the Streisand effect. I never heard of defyccc but the first thing I did was visit the site
Thanks for this post, which along with Kip Hansen’s post from Dec. 30 on “Editorial Narratives in Science Journalism”, paints a clear picture of the problem.
Nothing surprises me any more when it comes to the NYTimes. I maintain the minimum possible subscription so that I can access it on line to get a jolt of adrenalin when I need it.
Because I am cheap and because I do not want to support the NYT I get to enjoy five free reads per month (down from ten as of December 1) per computer. And because I have access to ten computers at work and elsewhere I get to read – for free – fifty NYT articles a month.
Life is good.
I do understand that by reading the NYT for free does in fact support the newspaper in that I support the newspaper’s ad revenues each time I give the newspaper a computer hit but I am okay with that in that the revenue does not come out of my pocket but instead it comes out so somebody else’s pocket.
Marv, why would you consider the time well-spent by reading fake news?
If you ever get interviewed don’t do it unless you can video tape whole thing
Howdy bstarr, (signed dmeredith)
The New York Times
“All the News That’s Printed to Fit”
“All the news that fits we print.”
Interesting the Koch brothers are still the Left’s favorite bogey-men, given they’re both never-Trumpers. Whatever happened to the old adage “the enemy of my enemy is my friend?”
It’s a standard green eco warrior conspiracy theory, they are called leftist loons for a good reason. The dumb and stupid always find it easier to blame some conspiracy than face reality.
With that little is presented about DefyCCC. The paragraph from the NYT article had about 4 degrees of separation between DefyCCC and the Kochs. Tis’ a relationship so tenuous it doesn’t actually exist.
From the end of the article:
“Jeffrey Harvey, a population ecologist at the Netherlands Institute of Ecology, recently published a study on blogs that deny the well-documented impacts of climate change and Arctic ice loss on polar bears. He said that contrarian ads on web search results, which many users considered to be neutral territory, were especially problematic.
“If you search for ‘global warming’ and ‘polar bear,’ you’ll often get bombarded with sites that are ignoring the scientific evidence,” he said. “I think this is something that search engines need to address.”
I wondered soon after the Harvey et al Bioscience #tantrumpaper came out at the end of November that one of the objectives might be to use this paper as “evidence” for Google to censor searches, removing from searches any links to my blog posts (and any of those that repost them, including WUWT).
This is not over, by a long shot.
This is the garbage that bubbles to the top:
No Joke. During Record Cold Spell, The Guardian Warns of Global Warming
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2018/01/01/no-joke-during-record-cold-spell-the-guardian-warns-of-global-warming/
Then they outright ban the rest:
Congress Should Break Up Hatebook into Independent Identity Facebooks
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/06/15/congress-should-break-up-hatebook-into-multiple-independent-identity-facebooks/
The True Face of Fascism is Socialist Big Government Not Conservative Small Government
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/12/10/the-true-face-of-fascism/