Bob Ward has thrown his toys out of the pram, after he had yet another complaint rejected by IPSO.
This time he complained about Booker’s article in the Mail last summer about the heatwave. Below are the segments he complained about: […]
Ward has made a habit of making vexatious complaints about articles, which don’t kowtow to his extreme views on climate. His aim is to discourage editors from publishing such views because of the hassle they will face.
I gather that Ward has lost every complaint made against Booker over the years, except for one minor technical point.
I have been fully involved in rebutting the last three, including this latest one. It was only a few months ago that his previous complaint against Booker was thrown out. That was the article which correctly claimed the US had experienced some exceptionally cold winters in recent years.
Following his latest loss, Ward has written this characteristically rambling, incoherent rant, demanding that IPSO change their rules: […]
Threat to the press
Ward rambles on about the “error–filled” online version, but he has failed to actually convince IPSO that there were any errors at all. After all that is IPSO’s job, to ensure factual accuracy.
He calls for IPSO to use “expert advice” in future, but which experts? The Met Office, or sceptics like Judith Curry and John Christy? Science is never settled. It would indeed be dangerous if we were to have only the officially approved version of science.
We can, of course, laugh at Bob Ward’s incompetence. But his attempt to interfere with IPSO’s independence has sinister overtones.
What he is proposing is that the press should not be allowed to report the facts, unless they interpret them in the officially approved manner.
Where will this road lead?
Will newspapers be forced to report the government’s version of events, every time a set of economic data is published, rather than being allowed to offer their own analysis?
Will they be forced to limit their reporting of European affairs to the EU’s official line, at the risk of being fined if they dare to offer their own interpretation?
If Bob Ward gets his way, this will be a very slippery slope we find ourselves on.
h/t to The GWPF