Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The BBC has admitted their embarrassment at having to fly a reporter to see climate brat Greta Thunberg, because they didn’t have time to travel by boat or train.
BBC put presenter on a plane to interview Greta Thunberg
PA Media
Sun 29 Dec 2019 10.38 AEDTSarah Sands, editor of BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, admits it ‘felt awkward’
Putting a presenter on a flight to Sweden to meet climate activist Greta Thunberg “felt awkward”, the editor of BBC Radio 4’s Today programme has admitted.
The 16-year-old campaigner, who was a guest editor on a special edition of the show, avoids air travel because of its environmental impact.
The BBC sent presenter Mishal Husain on a return flight to Stockholm to interview her.
Programme editor Sarah Sands told the Sunday Times: “We did discuss that among ourselves. It felt awkward but we did not have the time for trains or boats.”
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/28/bbc-put-presenter-on-a-plane-to-interview-greta-thunberg
I don’t understand why the BBC feels so uncomfortable. Extinction Rebellion tells us it is OK for celebrities to fly, because they are trapped by the system. And Greta flew at least four boat crew across the Atlantic to help sail her non-recyclable plastic boat, to avoid a single transatlantic flight for herself.
So plenty of climate hypocrisy all around. I doubt the BBC’s climate hypocrisy really stands out from everyone elses.
I have a simple calculation based on Global GDP, BBC Annual Budget and Global annual CO2 emissions that the BBC is responsible for about 2.5M Tonnes of CO2 emissions each year and that’s before all the CO2 emitted to watch and listen to their programmes is accounted for.
There are many of us in the UK who believe that the BBC can and should simply reduce their emissions to zero. It’s easy. Then their carbon footprint and gross political bias would be eliminated in one fell swoop.
It is strange that they continue to make Top Gear (and profit enormously from global sales), which has always promoted hugely emitting , expensive supercars whilst urging the rest of us (who pay for the progamme and the presenter’s salaries) to buy bottom of the market cars, or bikes, or, ideally, walk.
They also stage cooking competitions with delicious meat courses whilst lecturing us with the need to cut out meat and survive on cabbage soup.
I would also like to know how much they are paying HRH Greta to be a day’s editor- according to “saveenergy” on Paul Homewood’s site yesterday she has amassed $49 million in less than 2 years.
How is that possible?
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2019/12/28/charles-moore-accuses-bbc-of-climate-bias/#comments
The BBC is hoping Top Gear will continue to be popular as it was when hosted by Clarkson, May and Hammond. Not a chance BBC. They made Top Gear what it was, not the BBC and certainly not any of the new presenters, with possible exception to Matt LeBlanc.
IIRC tax rates are pretty high in SW, so maybe she won’t see the total amount unless there has been some financial adjustments.
Please include the US NPR ie National Public Radio in that swoop.
Search ‘thunberg guest editor radio 4’ – on the BBC Monday 30th December.
Well, never mind the Grumpy Greta, the little gremlin causing malfunction of inferior human brains software. Just few days ago there was big brouhaha over the two SC25 sunspots, however they lasted only 2.5 days and we are back into ‘good’ or bad (whichever you prefer) familiar daily zero number, so the December count looks like to be SSN=1, on the classic Woolf numbers.
I believe the number of attendees at the recent climate circus in Spain numbered around 28000. Don’t quote me, but I’m pretty sure they all flew there and back, spewing out tons of that evil CO2. The hypocrisy is breath-taking. Have they not heard of video-conferencing?
Chris
That’s about right, and not only did most arrived in Spain by aircraft, by far the most arrived at the conference centre by car and bus.
I am sure the BBC has plenty of taxpayer funds to pay the appropriate Gaia indulgences for their sins against the environment.
Once Boris and Dominic cut the licence fee, they can be as hypocritical and partisan towards “Left wing issues” as they like for all I care, but with their “own” money not ours.
You’d think the BBC crew would have enough sense to not let everyone know just how stupid they are, wouldn’t you? Other means of transportation went unheeded, other means of doing this so-called interview were not even brought up. No, they just had to let us ALL know what a pack of attention whackers they are by failing to take advantage of modern communications and transportation other than planes.
IDIOTS.
Embarrassment? They can wallow in it.
And if you dare to question BBC bias on climate matters, you will be earmarked for eventual attendance at a re-educational establishment. Fortunately burning at the stake is now no longer acceptable.
Big brother algorithms have got you covered these days.
I’m a bit upset about you calling Saint Greta a “brat”, which says so little about a very complex and troubled (troublesome?) individual. You should, at least call her the more accurate term “shrill”, or perhaps “scold”.
hope she met them with a nice, friendly, How Dare You!!
doncha love the” her high standards” bit?
I wasn’t aware that the prerequisite for interviewing someone was to embrace their beliefs.
In 2012 the BBC ditched their charter and decided to go all in supporting climate action, so its kind of embarrassing if the BBC can’t avoid high carbon transport when visiting an anti-flying advocate.
Is no one at the BBC capable of conducting a Skype/Facetime interview?
Maybe they don’t know about Skype/Facetime yet.
This is the level of intellectual analysis Licence fee payers are expected to swallow, and be ‘grateful’ for!
This is too good and so relevant:
https://babylonbee.com/news/experts-warn-global-outrage-levels-will-reach-point-of-no-return-in-2020
This is too good a take on all this BS:
https://babylonbee.com/news/experts-warn-global-outrage-levels-will-reach-point-of-no-return-in-2020
Well, the BBC functionary did admit that she ‘felt awkward’ so that should be good enough for the Green Blob. 😉
‘felt awkward’ … thereby signalling virtue?
I am complaining to the BBC about child abuse, pointing out that they will have dropped her into obscurity by this time next year – with damage to her psyche, poor little brat,
Did you hear Leonardo DiCaprio and Greta are going to star in Titanic 3, but it is only going to be a love story because there will be no icebergs left.
It will be a wind powered too, not a lump of coal in sight! There are many people who didn’t believe the first movie was based on an actual disaster where a ship actually called Titanic actually did sink after striking an iceberg.
Isn’t Greta a little old for Leo? She’s turning 17 in a few days.
Nah, LdB, Titanic 3 while be where Winslet’s character tells her #metoo story about Leo’s character.
“We did discuss that among ourselves. It felt awkward but we did not have the time for trains or boats.”
These dummies think that the new game of ‘holier than thou’ should trump all normal business, despite that Ms. Thunberg’s presumed holiness must be balanced by the vast expenditures of her never-reported support organization. It buys the plane tickets for yacht captains to make round trips across the Atlantic, it burns up the phone lines and airwaves organizing secret promotional schemes, it buys all her train tickets and hotel rooms and logistical conveniences for her oh-so-spontaneous ‘appearances’, and those of her promotional flacks and logistical flunkies. In balance, her economic activities playing lead in ‘holier than thou’ role-playing contribute more to global warming than any ‘savings’ gained by freeze-dried vittles and elegant racing yachts.
Consumers of ‘news’ staged by the guiltier-than-thou BBC crews have no reason to shed tears for the theatrical sins of the BBC – its minions willll be schlepping all around the world 24/7 doing their ‘normal’ gathering of propaganda for bulldozing public opinions, regardless of the Thunberg soap opera.
A day or so early, but it’s kinda on topic, so..
HOW DARE YOU have a happy, successful and prosperous new year, WUWTers..
How dare you all. 🙂
BBC elitist don’t have time to save the world, because they are too busy saving the world.
To all in the UK, simply stop paying the licence fee, and use your TV for a computer monitor if it has enough resolution. There is more than enough material on the Internet now for several lifetimes of entertainment or improvement, thus rendering broadcast TV redundant.
If it is live streamed BBC content from the interweb, you need a license for all devices. But I agree, don’t pay it. I ever only paid it twice IIRC (80’s). I paid a similar tax in New Zealand once (90’s) and have never paid a TV tax since.
Also, it is up to the “license inspectors” to prove you are using your TV to receive live broadcasts but they don’t have any right by law to “catch” you, they also have no right of entry to your home, even though they wave “court orders” in their hands at you.
BBC’s Today guest editor accuses it of ‘biased preaching’: Author Charles Moore blasts Corporation over Brexit, climate change and ‘diversity doctrine’
Charles Moore, who edited Saturday’s edition of the show, made accusations
He faced ‘obstacles’ to getting science writer Lord Matthew Ridley onto the show
Moore said BBC had become a ‘secular church’ which had ‘nationalised culture’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7833693/BBCs-Today-guest-editor-accuses-biased-preaching.html
This embarrassment about using air transport is a fool not knowing what they are talking about, the alternative they listed takes more energy to transport you there. Years ago during the energy crisis in the seventies it was pointed out the to most efferent ways to travel energy wise was to use a bike of fly a jumble jet, the energy unit per mile is lowest with those two. Presently the modern jet liner is more efficient that the jumble jet of the seventies so only an idiot would apologize for using air travel. The only way to save energy on an interview where you need to travel is to use teleconferencing. God we live in a world of idiots.
Didn’t have time?
OK, that works for getting him there, but then they flew him HOME as well?
The bullshit is strong in this one!
Does the fact they have used the full fuel weight as the CO2 produced make the bull shit bigger or less?
no bullshit, they had a pressing agenda back at home as well … didn’t have time to wait.
Their time is valuable (more so than yours); what they do is important (more so than you); they have weigh the trade-offs and draw the line somewhere (and it is almost always just behind them, and always in front of you).
The bigger hypocrisy is the BBC have told computer modelling engineers who want to put the case again that as they are not climate scientists they have no right to be heard. They then give air time to a semi educated not very bright mentally disturbed teenage brat.
So much for a charter calling for unbiased broadcasting. Time to end their licence rights and at least decriminalise it so we can go to court to refuse payment until they honour their charter properly instead of going to prison and still get no voice.