A slightly complex story, so take your time if you have interest. It's couched in exaggerated terms, and I'm not brilliantly excited by the source, but in essence, it is alleged that:
The BBC decided to forego their impartiality over "climate change" officially after attending a conference in 2006, and subsequently put out a statement saying so.
The BBC say the conference was informed by leading scientific opinion, but have resolutely refused since then to reveal who was there and who the opinion makers were, even under FOI requests.
That information has now, apparently, been unearthed, and it is alleged the attendees were not unbiased scientists at all.
www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/13/climate28_named_wtf/
Last edited by: Crankcase on Wed 14 Nov 12 at 09:25
|
Read it..
Anyone who thinks the BBC is unbiased have obviously not read this:
tinyurl.com/9vn96ta
(Link to Guardian not Mail)
|
Any news media, whether paper, web, or broadcast is always accused of bias. Goes with the territory.
A crude measure is does upset supporters of all political persuasions? Although there are flaws in this argument.
Bias in respect of the 'global warming/climate change' argument is difficult although to call it climate change allows most arguments on its behalf. But to argue a broadaster should give equal airtime to all sides of arguments is disingenuous. Equal time for creationist views anyone?
|
|
The BBC has resolutely refused to allow atheists to contribute to 'Thought for the Day', maybe they're concerned that an atheist can't aspire to the level of puerile and patronising claptrap that most of the 'religious' contributors expound....
|
Latest BBC conspiracy theory - madf
