Galileo before the Holy Office, a 19th-century painting by Joseph-Nicolas Robert-Fleury

British Regulator OFCOM to Investigate Broadcaster Climate Denial

Essay by Eric Worrall

Apparently “dangerous climate lies” like claims there is no climate emergency should not be allowed to go unchallenged in TV programmes.

Ofcom to investigate complaints of climate change denial for first time since 2017

Exclusive: UK regulator makes U-turn over TalkTV and TalkRadio complaints after claims it let some broadcasters ‘spout dangerous climate lies’

Damian Carrington
Environment editor Wed 25 Mar 2026 00.46 AEDT

Complaints about programmes on TalkTV and TalkRadio were assessed by Ofcom, which then decided not to investigate, the same result as more than 1,000 other climate complaints since 2020. However, after a letter from the Good Law Project (GLP) in January, requesting an explanation for the rejections, Ofcom said it had withdrawn its original decision and would “consider afresh” the complaints.

One complaint was about comments from a Talk guest who said in November that climate change “was a deliberate effort to create fake anxiety … out of something that is false”. In the second case, also in November, another guest said the Labour government’s energy policies were “suicidal”, “driven by pseudoscience in many cases” and “a kind of cultish behaviour”.

“Rightwing channels have been allowed to spout dangerous climate lies, unchecked, for too long,” said a GLP spokesperson. “We’re glad Ofcom is finally listening and await the conclusion of the investigations. Should it fail to take action against Talk’s misinformation, we will not hesitate to hold them to account.”

An Ofcom spokesperson said: “In re-examining the programmes, we concluded that they raise potentially substantive issues under the broadcasting code which warrant investigation. We have, therefore, opened investigations [on] whether they breached our rules on due impartiality and material misleadingness.” Ofcom said it had also opened another climate-related investigation after a viewer complaint about another TalkTV programme.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/mar/24/ofcom-complaints-climate-change-denial-talktv-talk-radio

Climate skeptic websites for now do not appear to be part of the investigation. OFCOM has the power to investigate websites, and extensions to this power are being considered which might be applied to websites like WUWT.

In an age where British people can be arrested for an unkind Facebook post, the threat of regulatory investigation of statements like climate change “was a deliberate effort to create fake anxiety … out of something that is false” appears to represent a dangerous step towards shutting down freedom to criticise climate claims.

Climate change is not fake, in the sense the world has warmed since the mid 1800s. What is fake is this represents any kind of emergency.

This is a sad day for Britain. Britain can reasonably claim to be the birthplace of modern parliamentary democracy. The history of British parliaments stretches back to AD 1236, when King Henry III summoned the parliamentum generalissimum. Most of that history represents an advance of people’s right to speak, a gradual replacement of absolute tyranny with representative democracy. Threatening or curtailing people’s right to make a claim in public about a scientific point of view, whether you agree with those expressed views or not, is a major step backwards in this tradition of freedom.

Even in Shakespeare’s time, in the late 1500s to early 1600s, the British enjoyed a level of freedom unknown throughout most of the world. Shakespeare wrote plays which were widely seen as criticisms of royal policy or conduct, without being punished for his impudence – though he faced investigation on at least one occasion, for allegedly encouraging insurrection. But even Shakespeare didn’t face harassment for his scientific views.

For hundreds of years the appropriate way to respond to a scientific claim you disagreed with was to publish a counter claim. There is no tradition of having government censors on programmes to immediately dispute or red label everything the government disagrees with.

But now we face a massive retrograde step, an attempted shutdown of free speech, the right to express views about science, which is on a par with the speech regulation of the religious tyrannies of the Middle Ages, when speaking out against religious interpretations of nature and divinity was severely punished.

Is this really the kind of future Britain wants, where disputing claims we are in a climate emergency is treated as blasphemy? Where broadcasters are required to include a representative of government approved views whenever science is discussed? Because this is where Britain is currently headed.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 7 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
44 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bruce Cobb
March 25, 2026 2:18 am

Big Climate Brother is watching (and listening).

Scissor
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 25, 2026 3:43 am

He was supposed to disappear into a cloud of blue steam decades ago.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 25, 2026 3:46 am

hmmm… sounds like a theme for AI to produce an image… hmmmm

Bill Toland
March 25, 2026 2:25 am

This is actually a sign that climate alarmists know that they have lost the argument. They know that they cannot refute what sceptics are saying so they are trying to muzzle sceptics completely.

SxyxS
Reply to  Bill Toland
March 25, 2026 3:25 am

Using your logic there is also a sign that someone lost a war
by threatening to revoke TV licenses for “wrong”- reporting.

They know they cannot refute the truth so they are trying to muzzle up sceptics completely.
And this case is even worse, as AGW has a certain consistency in terms of lying and propaganda while the official war-truth changes with every tweet and makes it very hard to keep up with.

missoulamike
Reply to  SxyxS
March 25, 2026 3:42 am

Making it hard to keep up with during a conflict is the whole point if you want to keep the adversary guessing. Though the dude ladles it on too thick more often than I’d like in this case I’ll give a pass. And the other guys have threatened similar to the Starmer bunch action wrt “climate change” during the last 4 year’s clown show.

Mr.
Reply to  SxyxS
March 25, 2026 4:33 am

Which is what Sun Tzu prescribed –

All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  Bill Toland
March 25, 2026 4:49 am

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/03/jim-hoft-gateway-pundit-esteemed-drs-win-missouri/

won supreme court case against Biden censorship against opposing views . involves google etc.

Will this win help WUWT ?

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
March 25, 2026 4:53 am

The government admits that “Unrelenting pressure from certain government officials likely had the intended result of suppressing millions of protected free speech postings by American citizens.”

The important concession and agreement, secured through years of expensive and time-intensive litigation by the Gateway Pundit, is this hard-won agreement, as stated in the document:

“The Government cannot take actions, formal or informal, directly or indirectly… to threaten Social-Media Companies with some form of punishment… unless they remove, delete, suppress, or reduce… content containing protected free speech.”

For years, legacy mainstream media denied this was happening, and have refused to report on this case.
Now in court filings, it is not only confirmed, but this critical victory for free speech has been won.

March 25, 2026 2:50 am

CV watch: Damian Carrington, PhD Geology.

That makes him something of an anomaly. Not a student of literature or classics, and a geologist who is not sceptical of AGW.

Reply to  worsethanfailure
March 25, 2026 3:48 am

He probably found a way to milk the AGW fantasy.

March 25, 2026 2:51 am

That will be interesting. I once reported a political party to OFCOM for spouting ‘dangerous lies’ about renewable energy, and the response was basically ‘God and politics are ultra vires’ – which if you don’t know Latin, is a legal term meaning pretty much ‘outside our jurisdiction’.

Reply to  Leo Smith
March 25, 2026 5:02 am

My browser doesn’t like that link. Perhaps if others are having trouble this will work:

Sean2828
March 25, 2026 2:57 am

OFFCOM really needs to go after the companies that keep sending high electric bills out every month. After all, wind power is the cheapest form of electricity generation yet UK consumers pay the highest electricity prices in Europe.

Reply to  Sean2828
March 25, 2026 3:50 am

war is peace

cheapest form of electricity = highest price for electricity

strativarius
March 25, 2026 3:04 am

Should that not be Waffen Ofcom?

Recently this corrupt and censorious quango was the subject of much hilarity.

OFCOM FINES 4CHAN £520,000, LAWYER RESPONDS WITH PICTURE OF GIANT HAMSTER

Ofcom,

Thanks. As has been explained to your agency, ad nauseam, the United Kingdom lost the American Revolutionary War. We are not in the mood to discuss the matter further, and have not been in the mood for 250 years.

I note for the record that, last time your agency sent my client a censorship fine, we responded with a hamster joke. Since you have now sent my client a giant fine, a fine so large that Mr. Whiskers’ enclosure is not big enough to contain it, we will need to send the fine to Mr. Whiskers’ giant hamster cousin, Nigel J. Whiskerford. Unfortunately, Nigel is out of the country this week, touring in Japan. Here’s a picture of Nigel in Tokyo, dressed up as Godzilla and holding an equally giant peanut.

Isn’t he just the cutest?

comment image

My client reserves all rights and waives none. Reserved rights include the right to sue you again and/or to respond to future correspondence with an even larger rodent, such as a marmot.
Or, maybe, you could just stop sending Americans stupid letters and acknowledge the sovereignty of the United States.
Byrne & Storm
Guido Fawkes

Ofcom has a vendetta against GB News and other ‘not entirely conformist’ media to censor at least and to shut down if at all possible. Having lost all rational arguments shutting people up is the only way to go.

OweninGA
Reply to  strativarius
March 25, 2026 3:23 am

Now that is the most logical response to European censors fining US companies I have seen.

Congress should pass a law, automatically raising extreme tariffs against ANY foreign entity attempting to censor American platforms. The EU tariff would be about 1000% at this point. Britain should get the message.

strativarius
Reply to  OweninGA
March 25, 2026 3:31 am

I can’t express how embarrassing our elites are on every level.

You won’t find the average bloke on the Clapham omnibus kicking off about free speech, no… that’s the Islington dinner party set led by Keith Stalin. Crimethought and wrongthink now exist in a very legal and judicial way.

Reply to  strativarius
March 25, 2026 4:14 am

In the UK the closest “legal jurisprudence” is summarised by the phrase

We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

Search for the character string “Arkell” (or “Pressdram”) in this Wikipedia link to learn what some lawyers used to be lucky enough to get paid to produce on this side of “The Pond”.

March 25, 2026 3:05 am

If OFCOM is gonna poke its beak in, I’d be OK if they ordered climate emergency proponents to debate climate emergency sceptics.

If I can get someone to patiently explain for 10 minutes why there is no problem, I should not be penalized because the opposing view refuses to share the platform.

strativarius
Reply to  worsethanfailure
March 25, 2026 3:24 am

Ofcom is the progenitor of Minitrue.

March 25, 2026 3:13 am

story tip:

Trump administration will pay a French company $1 billion in taxpayer funds to not build wind farms 

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/23/climate/trump-totalenergies-offshore-wind-cancellation

“Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné said in a statement. “These investments will contribute to supplying Europe with much-needed LNG from the US and provide gas for US data center development.”

[…]

The move “will actually cause a further energy deficit in our country and increase the cost of energy certainly along the East Coast,” said Elizabeth Klein, former director of the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management under the Biden administration.

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 3:19 am

He’s probably buying his way out of the contract. One of a great many clauses, I’m sure.

You find that surprising, given a contract was signed?

Reply to  strativarius
March 25, 2026 3:28 am

I think betting on europe buying more lng in a few years when they reduce their demand (now with iran even more so) is a bad idea. Building the wind farm would have been better for the US.

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 3:35 am

It won’t work with Norway. But the [very ill fated] net zero triangle – Spain, UK, Germany are still all in.

Norwegians have more sense.

missoulamike
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 3:48 am

Enjoy your campfire cuisine when those days arrive. Stock up on cookbooks on the subject before the coming panic run on them.

Reply to  missoulamike
March 25, 2026 3:52 am

That’s a lot of projection as fossil fuels currently cause such a panic. And being at the whims of someone like trump is not a good idea, as the last few month have shown for europe.

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 3:58 am

Our panic is down to Miliband’s opposition to drilling and fracking at home – no straights of Hormuz required….

Leon de Boer
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 4:25 am

What has shown is you greentards are stuffed .. you can’t even sell net-zero in the middle of an oil crisis.

How many countries have said lets just go net-zero rather than deal with the oil crisis …. answer: ZERO.

On the converse how many countries have worked out they really can’t do without oil … answer: Every One.

Scissor
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 3:50 am

Wind farms are parasitic. LNG provides both energy and mass.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 3:54 am

Klein’s welcome to her opinion in a nation with free speech, unlike the UK.

March 25, 2026 3:45 am

I find it shocking that the UK has no freedom of speech. And no constitution. Maybe if you got rid of your “royalty”….

Scissor
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 25, 2026 3:52 am

Apparently they are fond of pedophiles, especially diverse ones.

strativarius
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 25, 2026 3:54 am

We did that in 1649, then we had the Interregnum until 1660 and then Parliament brought back the monarchy, only this time under the total control of Parliament; call the monarchy what it is, a fig leaf.

The arrangement was further revised in 1688 when Parliament wanted the Catholic James II out and a protestant king in. Enter William of Orange… Parliament is supreme and yet so few appreciate that it is in fact an elected dictatorship.

CampsieFellow
March 25, 2026 3:51 am

on a par with the speech regulation of the religious tyrannies of the Middle Ages, when speaking out against religious interpretations of nature and divinity was severely punished.”
It is generally held that the Middle Ages came to an end in the late 1400s. I challenge Eric Worrall to provide just one example of somebody who was punished, never mind “severely punished” during the Middle Ages for their interpretation of nature. Just one.
The only person who is ever quoted as being punished for “his interpretation of nature” is Galileo. He gets quoted all the time because there is nobody else to quote. But Galileo was born in 1564, long after the Middle Ages had come to an end, and his punishment was hardly severe.
But it is possible that Eric Worrall has his own definitions of the “Middle Ages” and “severe”. Maybe he is the Humpty Dumpty of WUWT: “When I use a word… it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”
However, when anti-religious people have to resort to misinformation to bolster their cause, it just strengthens the case for religion.

strativarius
Reply to  CampsieFellow
March 25, 2026 4:04 am

In the middle ages they believed in witches etc etc etc – you could call that an interpretation of nature. You know what the punishment was.

The last witches to be killed in Europe were in Germany in 1738

Scissor
Reply to  CampsieFellow
March 25, 2026 4:05 am

Roger Bacon, an English friar who supported experimental science was repeatedly imprisoned by his Franciscan superiors, who were wary of his focus on alchemy and science. 

March 25, 2026 4:21 am

I have looked at the World Meteorological Organisation “State of the Global Climate 2025”, albeit briefly.

https://library.wmo.int/viewer/69807/download?file=WMO-1391-2025_en.pdf&type=pdf&navigator=1

This paragraph appears to be totally predicated on anthropogenic reasons for an energy imbalance simply by assuming that the energy from the Sun is for all intents and purposes constant.
“The temperature of the Earth changes in response to the rate at which energy enters and leaves the Earth system. Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, all of which reached their highest level in 800 000 years in 2024 (the last year for which we have consolidated global figures), reduce the rate at which energy leaves the Earth system. This imbalance – the Earth’s energy imbalance, a new indicator in this year’s report – leads to an accumulation of excess energy.”

Also
”The increase in 2024 was the largest annual increase in the CO2 concentration
since modern measurements began in 1957. This increase was driven by
continued fossil CO2 emissions, increased fire emissions and reduced
effectiveness of terrestrial and ocean sinks in 2024. Concentrations of
methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), two other key greenhouse gases,
also reached record high observed levels in 2024. The concentration of CH4
reached 1 942 ± 2 parts per billion (ppb), 266% of pre‑industrial levels, and
that of N2O reached 338.0 ± 0.1 ppb, 125% of pre‑industrial levels.“ based on 67 years of data.

IMG_4256
Mr.
Reply to  JohnC
March 25, 2026 4:50 am

Yes, assumptions and assertions are rife throughout climate “science”.

Indeed, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if 97% of climate “scientists” relied on their assumptions & assertions to get their conjectures published.

March 25, 2026 4:24 am

When people get hurt by lies that’s where free speech ends.
Also Ofcom as a company is free to choose their program.

strativarius
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 25, 2026 4:38 am

Ofcom is a quango. It is not a commercial company.

Good grief.

March 25, 2026 4:47 am

“Climate change is not fake, in the sense the world has warmed since the mid 1800s. What is fake is this represents any kind of emergency.”

What is also fake is the program of manufactured attribution of the “warming” to incremental CO2. British meteorological experts explained in 1938 very clearly, from physical considerations, why one cannot reliably determine the surface temperature response by computing the radiation. Simpson and Brunt were not wrong about this. In fact, modern modeling of the general circulation helps make this point readily apparent.

May the UK recover its senses and turn from its present course toward tyrannical censorship.

More here.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/03/15/open-thread-181/#comment-4174555