Just heard on the BBC as the talking head reads out what he's told to ask Prof. Sir David King: 'the issue is that a large number of people are saying there is nothing to be concerned about'.
Is this true?
Or is this how the government and its media shills would wish to see 'the debate' framed?
Anyone who thinks there are no issues of concern regarding PMWNCC is a) not being too rational and b) in a very small minority. Hence why play that up?
My concern, and I suspect that of others, is that 'climate' gets used as an excuse by already mediocre minds to try and compensate for fiscal failures elsewhere that will have zero or, worse, negative enviROI impacts on my kids' futures.
I smell straw men, and the media using them to frame...more like steer the issues stinks.
At least the talking head raised the contradictory point of Ed. Miliband shrieking about reductions whilst the government he is part of is advocating a 3-fold increase in air travel.
Addendum:
My first foray into how the print media complement the narrative:
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/we-wont-let-sceptics-hijack-climate-talks-1836029.html
Good to have standards. Not to have them as doubles
But this is an MSM that seems to see the US EPA and its timely actions as somehow unconnected with media management in a new era of command and control by big government.
And is one that also doesn't 'do' irony.
At least, watching today's broadcast news as I now catch up on the print.
Dancing to the tune of PROs of your mates and issuing news by press release does the BBC (or any medium) little credit. Especially when it is contradictory.
You either think greenhouse gasses are a here and now issue, or you don't.
Stick Ed Miliband and Richard Branson up together on this and I think most environmental correspondents' brains would freeze as anything either comes out with gets shared with zero critical thinking attached by our star-truck, government-slavish media.
No comments:
Post a Comment