“The judge identified nine aspects of An Inconvenient Truth, nine core errors, where Al Gore either misstated the IPCC or prejudicially exaggerated what they found.” John Day is the lawyer for a British parent who sued the British Department
of Education when they tried to distribute An Inconvenient Truth to schools.
Journalistic Math: 45 is bigger than 300
Written by Ann McElhinney & Phelim McAleer   
Tuesday, 12 May 2009 22:12

journalistic_mathWe have previously described Environmental correspondents as the nodding dogs of journalism.

Beat reporters are notorious for following the party line rather than bringing their readers the truth but enviro-corrs seem to be particularly keen to be seen as typewriters for eco-warriors.

They will publish any old eco-guff as long it is told to them by environmentalists regardless of the evidence.

But now it seems Suzanne Goldenberg the Guardian’s US environmental correspondent is in the running for the nodding dog of the year prize...

She has just reported that “Obama's key climate bill” has been hit by a “$45m PR campaign”. Ms Goldenberg is told and reports that this campaign is an attempt by fossil fuel interests to stop cap and trade legislation. “But it is an unequal contest,” mourns Ms Goldenberg. “Liberal and environmental organisations, as well as the major corporations that support climate change legislation, say they are being vastly outspent by fossil fuel interests,” the Guardian adds.

But one year ago on April 1 Ms Goldenberg, in the Guardian, faithfully reported that: “During the next three years, [Al Gore’s] Alliance for Climate Protection plans to spend $300m on television advertising and online organising to make global warming among the most urgent issues for elected American leaders.”

By our calculation that’s $100m a year from just one organistaion which seems to vastly outweigh the $45m she states is now being spent by the fossil fuel industry. But now the environmental movement has decided to rewrite history by pretending the Alliance for Climate protection does not have the money they once claimed to have. Being an environmentalist means never having to say you were wrong even when you issue contradictory statements within a year. Perhaps, more alarmingly, being an environmental correspondent means never having be consistent or reveal the half truths or exaggerations behind the environmental movement.

The Guardian today saying a $45m spend is more than environmentalists are spending: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/may/12/us-climate-bill-oil-gas

The Guardian a year ago stating that the Alliance for Climate Protection, alone, is going to spend £300m: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/01/climatechange.usa

Share this page on your favorite Social Websites...

Comments (0)add comment

Write comment