Who’s Payin Who?
UPDATE: No news is good news.
The winner James Fong of the Oursay.org project called ‘Climate Agenda’ ,did not get to join the panel group at the Wheeler Center.
The web page that clarified that the winner would go to the New News Conference can be seen here but the Oursay website doesn’t have a link to get to that page now.
Having dug around, the only information regarding the New News Conference was by the Public Interest Journalism Foundation and the winner from the previous Oursay.org projects’ winner Kevin Rennie.
Having looked at the PIJF website, one gets the sense that the keynote speakers present, the members of the panel, and the articles singling out climate skeptics failed to produce a head hunting job that the Fairfax Media Group attempted to undertake.
Instead, what we do know is, is there is only one article on the web that discusses the results of the project, and of course that is only the Fairfax Media Group paper(s). No other news reported on this propaganda that attempted to put climate skeptics in a sort of class as witches.
A ‘Climate Skeptic Witch Hunt Failure’ would be my headline’, but Fairfax CEO Greg Hywood at the moment is doing everything possible to put this behind him.
Otherwise, the article that started all of this, “Who Is Funding Climate Change Skeptics?“, would have created a media storm if Mr. Hywood could have gotten away with manipulating the media.
So, No news is good news.
An interesting story(propaganda) is brewing down under.
On August 10th, 2011, Michael Bachelard wrote, “Who Is Funding Climate Change Skeptics?”
Here is an image of that article:
The Climate Agenda ?
The source of this article comes from OurSay.Org . OurSay.org is hosting an online media event called, “The Climate Agenda.”
In their words, they say:
“Worried about climate change? Furious about the carbon tax? Confused about the science? Walkley-award winning journalist Michael Bachelard will lead The Sunday Age team investigating the 10 most popular questions on OurSay which will be featured and updated on The Age’s Climate Agenda website.”
The website encourages its readers to post a question, then have others vote on it. The person who’s question has the most votes, gets to be part of a three member panel that will attempt to answer the question.
Later in the article, Michael Bachelard writes:
The top question so far, with more than 230 votes, listed by Jason Fong soon after the project opened on Sunday, asks: ”The very point of Australia’s carbon tax is to reduce global warming. How much will reducing 5 per cent of Australia’s around 1.5 per cent contribution of global CO2 emissions reduce global temperature by?”
The second most popular question question asks The Sunday Age‘s reporters to find out who, if anyone, is funding prominent climate change ”sceptics” in the media, including Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt and Sydney radio broadcaster Alan Jones, and whether those people had a vested interest in maintaining ”the industrial status quo”.
While the top vote-getter was on topic about carbon tax and reducing emissions, the headline here is about the second most vote-getting question on who funds skeptics.
The very next day, Andrew Bolt, who is mentioned in the article, takes the article to task.
Andrew Bolt blogged about the top 5 vote-getting questions from OurSay.Org.
Andrew was mostly defending against this question/statement that he mentions as question 3(notice that the statement has moved from 2 to 3 now) on his blog :
“There are some very vocal and seemingly influential climate change sceptics who have been given well supported platforms by some media organisations in Australia. 2GB’s broadcasting of Alan Jones and News Limited’s publishing of Andrew Bolt is a couple of examples that spring to mind. It appears that these media organisations have the goal of destroying the credibility of anyone who supports the science of and actions to mitigate the effects of human civilization’s influences on earth’s climate. Do these media organisations obtain funding from any corporate, organisational or individual entities with a vested interest in maintain the industrial status quo where unlimited greenhouse gas emissions are largely the norm?”
– Mark Dennis
To which Andrew responds, “The answer to question three is “no, no funding to influence the debate”. Indeed, the official policy of News Ltd(Rupert Murdock) is to “give the planet the benefit of the doubt”. But look at the sponsors, backers and designers of this Sunday Age project. Haven’t their funds and support influenced the Sunday Age’s coverage? Is this ethical?”
Read more of this post