The BBC has held a high level seminar with some of the best scientific experts (on whose and what measurement) and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of consensus.
That was justification for a propaganda mountain, which I have chronicled. Richard Black and his cohorts have been following that approach with relish. Their hated "deniers" are routinely ignored - or if they are mentioned - misrepresented and denigrated. So Professor Jones in his "inquiry" could not even spot what was blatantly obvious and instead unleashed another series of hate lies against those who dare to disagree with the BBC worldview.
The man who sanctioned this travesty is BBC trustee Richard Ayre, who has a pivotal role among the trustees because he heads the Editorial Standards Commission - he is the sole professional journalist on the body and in charge (on our behalf!) of journalistic integrity.
He's supposed to be independent, but of course isn't - for a start, he's a BBC pensioner (reliant on funds derived from a climate change investment portfolio)- and he worked for the corporation for almost 30 years before taking "early retirement" and going to work for Ofcom, that other arm of so-called regulation that perpetuates liberal-left media bias.
I know Mr Ayre reasonably well from contact with him during the 1990s when when he was controller of editorial policy. He believes without question he is fair minded and balanced, but it's simply not true. He's totally infected with the BBC mindset and it's obvious from the moment he opens his mouth.
External evidence is easy to come by to support this, although Richard himself won't and can't see it. First he deliberately flaunts that his partner is the homo-eroticist artist Guy Burch, a militant "humanist" and contributor to the Pink Paper. Not part of the right-wing establishment, then. Second he himself is a highly active member of the Article 19 human rights and press freedom group. Such evocative touchy-feely, conscience touching words!In reality, it's a worldwide militant force camapigning for...wait for it, climate change activism. Look at this from its website:
People living at risk of climate change or environmental degradation need to understand what is happening and take part in deciding how best to cope. ARTICLE 19 is working to ensure that people are informed and governments are held accountable for their environmental policies.
So let's get this straight. The man who is in charge of a so-called objective journalistic review into the BBC's scientific coverage endorsed findings from a so-called independent "expert" (used regularly by the BBC for contributions) who could not even see what the corporation had being doing in terms of partisanship for years, and then went on to have the effrontery to call for overt increased censorship. Not only that, this "trustee" himself is a major supporter - it says so on the BBC trustee website -of an organisation that is camapaigning for...climate change activism.
You couldn't make it up, could you?
Click source for more [LINKS]
I wrote yesterday that the BBC Trustee's report into science coverage is a travesty. It is worse. Professor Steve Jones says that too much space is given to climate "deniers". Yet at least five years ago the BBC gave up all pretence at balance in climate reporting. It wrote: