The great global warming swindle swindle

close
more_vert
Merrick M
Merrick Jul 21, 2008 12:15:02
Replying to PMM

Good (inevitable) result.

One bit that baffles me is near the end of the report about the bit of the complaint that they didn't uphold.

===
The Broadcasting Code requires Channel 4 to show "due impartiality" on "matters of major political and industrial controversy and major matters relating to current public policy"....

Ofcom's logic is that "the link between human activity and global warming... became settled before March 2007".

This being so, it says, disputing the scientific link between human activity and climate change does not meet the Broadcasting Code's definition of "controversial".

====

Isn't this contradicted by the earlier bit that says "Channel 4 said it aired the documentary to demonstrate that "the debate" on climate change was not over. "?

Oh, and the people making the film turned up at the Climate Camp in 2006 and did an extensive interview. The interviewee was so good - refusing to be goaded into saying anything that was unsubstantiated or steered into saying otherwise de-contextable stuff - that none of her stuff could be used for the film.

They had to content themselves by using footage of a toddler there hitting a drum with a stick to imlpy that it's all anti-technology luddites.

N nigelswift
nigelswift Jul 21, 2008 12:47:56
Replying to Merrick

I agree, they seem to have done summersaults not to allocate full blame.

However, the regulator said it did not believe, given the nature of the programme, that this led to the audience being "materially misled so as to cause harm or offence" - the standard that Ofcom says complaints have to reach.

What, in the history of the world, has ever been more harmful than telling millions of people that their behaviour won't affect the climate?

"Ofcom's logic is that "the link between human activity and global warming... became settled before March 2007".

Actually, the logic that flows from that bit of Ofcom logic is that both they and Channel 4 knew the programme was a pack of lies yet it didn't meet "the Broadcasting Code's definition of "controversial". One therefore wonders what would! Holocaust denial? Nope.