Bishop Hill Who is Joe Smith?
Nov 20, 2011 Joe Smith has posted a comment on Booker's Telegraph article disputing the characterisation of him as a "climate activist".
Christopher Booker describes me as a ‘climate activist’. In the interests of accuracy and fairness I want to state clearly here that that is a label which I flatly reject. The research and policy dimensions of climate change are not simple or easy. Myself and thousands of scholars around the world will need to be thoughtful, open minded and dogged in doing justice to their complexity. People need to keep in touch and exchange views in a thoughtful and civil way. I would have welcomed a conversation with Christopher as he prepared his piece but was not given the opportunity. The free exchange of views about demanding topics is one of the things that the seminars that his piece refers to have been all about.
Yours
Dr. Joe Smith
The Open University
Bishop Hill
Take a look at this video of Joe Smith speaking at the Communicate 2009, a conference for environmental communicators (sponsored by, among others, the BBC). Particularly from 2min30s.
Reader Comments (115)
Mr Smith if you don't want to thought off as whore here is an idea stop offering people 'favors' for money .
He's Blair re-born: charming, reasonable, well-spoken – and without an original thought in his mind.
In short, precisely the kind of plausible rogue we should all be very afraid of.
Hell, sign this bit of paper.
"I Joe Smith, Will pay back to Nick all the extra taxes and charges, along with interest, on all extra costs imposed because of climate change, if the predictions in 20 years are above the actual temperatures"
Oh, you want some payment in return? What the hell do you think I'm paying now?
Being a 'Climate Activist' has lost much of its panache - maybe the good Dr. is simply waiting for the next fashionable scholarly pursuit?
DBD
I had the opportunity very recently to edit a paper based on 'Action Research'. It was quite an eye-opener. No-one with a science or engineering background would fail to be dumbfounded at what passes for 'research'. As Richard Tol says above, it's more about sociology than science. It is endemic incidentally in the NHS where pretty much anyone with ambition is doing 'action research' on various 'tools'. The technique is essentially about changing things iteratively as you go about the various 'interventions'. In short the investigator is changing the parameters under study as they go, and coming to conclusions which are more or less what they want them to be. Any form of data collected is more or less impossible to quantify, it's all qualitative.
click "next page" at the bottom to get the second part of Smith's entry:
Complaint to Ofcom Regarding “The Great Global Warming Swindle”
Appendix J: Backgrounds of the Peer Reviewers of this Complaint
J.9 Dr Joe Smith
Dr Smith is a Senior Lecturer in Environment at The Open University. He has written books on the green movement (2006) climate change (2003) and the media and global environmental issues (2000). He is currently developing an edited volume “Do good lives have to cost the Earth?”. Two current research projects explore the politics of consumption, and the media’s role in shaping public debate about complex issues.
He is Co-Director of the Cambridge Media and Environment Programme which, since 1996, has run seminars on environmental change and development issues for senior media decision makers, mainly from BBC news and TV. He has acted as academic consultant on a number of BBC projects including David Attenborough’s BBC One programmes for the 2006 climate change season and BBC Two’s Coast (2005). He is initiator and chair of Interdependence Day, a new communications and research project that takes a fresh look at global issues: www.interdependenceday.co.uk. He holds a BA degree in Social and Political Sciences and a PhD in Geography from the University of Cambridge. See also http://tinyurl.com/yvao5r.
Dr Smith reviewed those sections of this complaint that relate to the Channel 4 programme’s criticisms of the media.
http://www.ofcomswindlecomplaint.net/fullcomplaint/p171.htm
btw if u click "prev page" at the bottom, u will come to:
J.2 Dr William Connolley
Research interests include sea-ice modelling and comparison of climate models and observations (see http://tinyurl.com/yqzox7). A frequent contributor to Realclimate (www.realclimate.org), a weblog initiative to explain the latest climate science developments to laymen. Senior Scientific Officer and Climate Modeller in the Physical Sciences Division of the British Antarctic Survey, but reviewed this document in a personal capacity.
Dr Connolley reviewed the entire complaint.
pdf: Carbonundrums:
Making sense of climate change reporting around the world
Seminar/workshop organised by the Environmental Change Institute (ECI) and the
Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ), Oxford University
Wednesday 27 June 2007
Session 1:
1410 - 1515 pm: Climate change reporting around the world
1410-1430: Andy Revkin¹, New York Times environment correspondent:
Trends in climate change reporting in the USA: obstacles and successes...
Session 3:
1700 – 1730 pm: Getting climate change stories on air in the UK
David Shukman*, BBC Environment Correspondent
Session 4:
1730 - 1830 pm: Identifying Training Needs in the UK and abroad
CHAIR: Dr Joe Smith, Open University
Amongst the participants will be:
Kevin Burden, Head of Training, BBC World Service Trust: India project ‘Focus on the
Environment’
1830 pm onwards: Drinks at 13, Norham Gardens
¹ by video linkup (to save on carbon emissions)
* subject to BBC news requirements
http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/events/070727-carbonundrum/programme.pdf
"Any chance of an English translation, Hengist?"
I think it was a Rhetorical Rant of obfuscation....is it paid by a green group top post here..:)
Joe. forget the labelling. You is one genuine guy. I loved the way that you eschewed the filthy lucre and passed your economic gains to others less fortunate than yourself. A true activist without any of the capitalist greed associated with those losers that only do it for self-enrichment.
That you'd wrapped around yourself with the protection and armour of the BBC can only be to your credit. You and them are the true crusaders for truth and dispassionate integrity. Gawd bless.
Every penny that you earned went to a good cause and that's why the 50 million climate refugees had such an easy transition to an unreported status.
Love you Joe. U iz so much for uz common folk!!!!
Joe Smith is a climate activist. No amount of dodgy charm and Alice-like logic from him can convince me otherwise; his statements in this video alone are proof enough of his activism.
I suspect that because Joe Smith spends all his time with those who think as he does, he does not consider himself to be an activist. This is similar to how Jeff Randall described the BBC
"It's not a conspiracy. It's visceral. They think they are on the middle ground",
Jeff Randall former BBC Business Editor,
in The Observer, Jan 15th, 2006.
Re the Bristol City football ground (there is NO "Bristol" Football Club - rather City , and Rovers). They have been trying to move to a new site on the edge of town, right by the Long Ashton bypass, for some tears, to increase capacity and increase revenue from various facilities. The Council pretty much gave the go-ahead, and then the greenies moved in. The last I heard was that it was a "village green", therefore could not be used. Odd, as most of the land has been a park-and-ride for years. Now its a wetland is it? There has never been any attempt to protect said "wetland" before. It is not an SSSI. There are no signs saying "This is a wetland". It's a piss take.
So he is not a "climate activist" but an "action researcher".
Shades of Homer Simpson:
"I'm no supervising technician, I'm a technical supervisor."
http://citizenjoesmith.wordpress.com/2011/05/26/climate-contrarianism-is-ideological-not-hypothetical/
I wonder how many here have seen the rambling psychodiagnostics posts from Joe Smith at his blog.
A man with a guilty conscience. It's about time this phenomenon made its appearance. Expect more.
================
@shub... yes what a window on a mind... fascinating... complete b*ll*cks, but fascinating just the same.
You see you have the "knowing elite", then you have the population. If only you can control the message to the masses you have them. Just nullify the contriarians and you have won.
Personally, I regard people like Joe Smith as woodworm. They bring down the edifice they inhabit.
Joe, just to help your action research look up the phrase: "sold a pup". I think you may better understand what motivates many of us.
*His definition: "Or rather a bundle of ideological commitments rooted in a particular view of political economy (neoliberal), anti-statism, extreme techno-optimism and civil libertarianism (the latter two explain why some are of the far left, though most seem to be of the radical right)." Yeah right... sums it up perfectly
Joe may be the first Green activist to have made an honest effort to understand us. From the link provided by Shub:
“ .. many of the active contrarian bloggers .. are .. motivated by .. a bundle of ideological commitments rooted in a particular view of political economy (neoliberal), anti-statism, extreme techno-optimism and civil libertarianism (the latter two explain why some are of the far left, though most seem to be of the radical right). So they start out strongly motivated to find any hole to pick at in a very ambitious intellectual project that is not just unfinished but probably unfinishable. No wonder the contrarian bloggers are willing to give up a large portion of their lives to tear down ill-considered phrases like ‘the science is complete’ and cliched and threadbare imperatives to ‘save the planet’. They didn’t arrive in the twenty first century expecting all life to be rationed on account of exaggerated claims and tired green catchphrases.
The contrarians’ incredibly energetic assault on what they see as an edifice, an orthodoxy, a bullying and wrongheaded statist plot isn’t going to be overcome by rational argument. Indeed it isn’t going to be overcome by anything”.
The phrase, guilty by association comes to mind! He may state that he is not an activist but he certainly hangs around with a bunch that are.
Nice to see people at the O.U. have got over those awful tank top pullovers though.
mikemUK,
"I imagine that full-scale activist alarmism seemed a pretty safe horse to back at that time..."
I agree. And it must have felt great - fighting the good fight, for a cause that was obviously right. It wouldn't surprise me if he didn't consider it to be activism, on the grounds that it was just so clearly the rational, compassionate thing to do. Like fighting against child abuse. Who would object to a huge "conspiracy" against child abuse? Who would care about who was funding whom? Or who was influencing whom? As long as it was all going in the right direction.
For climate science, things have got a bit more complicated since then.
Indeed, activism has become so embedded in such a variety of spheres, that Smith perhaps claims he is not an activist because he doesn't do sit-ins at St Pauls with a big banner reading 'Save the Polar Bears From Melting'.
His rejection of the term 'climate activist' is disingenuous at best.
P.S. Having just re-read what I wrote above, it could look as though I was saying that, two years ago, climate activism was the right way to go. That's not what I intended. I rather meant that to someone like Joe Smith it might have seemed so obviously right that it didn't seem like activism, to him.
I have to say, having read through all the above comments I'm still LOLing.
Poor Dr. Joe Smith seems to be well and truly f***ed, as we say in the software development biz, damned from his own mouth and keyboard.
[Snip - venting]
If you're going to make a public statement "Dr" Smith (and I hope you read this), you would be advised to include a modicum of truth, somewhere, in that statement. You're simply another trougher feeding at the bottomless pit of funding available for professional dissimulators.
@bentley, I really do not think he is a liar. In his video he mentioned "love" in an almost religious sense. He believes his world view is the moral and correct one.
My issue is the undemocratic leverage such people can exert.
Dear Andrew
I've posted the below at Tony Newbery's blog and think it is relevant to post here:
Dear Tony
I have answered your direct questions in the past on the only occasion you have presented them to me, and recently republished the document I sent you. You are quite right: I recall now that you didn't contact me directly but rather when DEFRA got in touch with me following an FoI from you I suggested it might be more efficient if I had direct contact with you and I got in touch and sought to answer any questions you had.
However one detail that is not answered in that document is when the seminars ended. You raise this question in your post above. The residential seminars finished in 2008 due to BBC budget cuts (the BBC always paid their own costs in relation to the seminars) when there was a blanket announcement across the organisation that there would be no residential meetings for the foreseeable future. CMEP was wrapped up formally in 2009 in the sense that I was confident I wouldn't be organising any more residential seminars anywhere under that heading. But the BBC have run a further 'Real World' seminar in 2009 on site at Television Centre ('Real World Seminar' is the heading used to describe the seminars from around 2005 onwards), and I gave advice on the design of that. It was much shorter than the residential seminars, and with a small number of contributors from government, research, banking and economics backgrounds.
As an aside, these meetings started way back in 1996, just a few years into the short history of the internet. The last CMEP seminar took place in the early days of 'web 2.0'. In the context of the rapid growth of the blogosphere, and the misunderstandings it seems capable of multiplying, I must admit that if I were starting now I would seek to publish more information online about the seminars, and would ask attendees if they mind their names being published, as well as a brief account of the seminars.
I have fitted in the work around the seminars around a demanding job and busy family life, mostly in evenings and weekends, and simply didn't see the need or find the time to write about them for an audience I didn't know existed. But we all live and learn.
By the way I'm sorry you understood my note about my blog post on CMEP being boring as 'crass arrogance'. In truth I think the organisational detail about the seminars IS boring to my rather modest blog readership.
I hope to find the time this week to write a piece that describes the Creative Climate project (www.open.ac.uk/creativeclimate). The project includes some radio and TV commissions (referred to in yours and Andrew M's blogs) and also a short film competition for students that we will launch this week. But at its heart it is an online diary project that welcomes all voices, and invites people to hold a diary on the website that plots their unfolding understanding of and action (including their blogging!) on environmental issues. The project has been forged in response to my conclusions about the limitations of the maintream media when it comes to handling complex environmental change issues and the diverse debates and activities that surround them. We hope it will be very plural, open and allow for a neutral and welcoming space where people can represent their views in their own way. I do hope you and some of your readers will consider coming to start a diary with us.
Yours
Joe
Dr. Joe Smith
Climate change: from science to sustainability By Stephen Peake, Joe Smith, chapter 7;
"...we have to alter the whole path of our development and decision making in order to make our societies both environmentally adaptable and sustainable.
The leading journal in action research is Action Research. It's here http://arj.sagepub.com/
The manifesto is interesting. Climate change features prominently.
Thanks Joe, a diary sounds fun. You might get all sorts of things of things filling up your diary!
Joe
A couple of questions:
1. Can you throw any light on how the BBC Trust came to believe that the climate change seminar was attended by scientists rather than as was apparently the case - NGO people?
2. Can you explain what your role was on the programmes referred to in the recent BBC Trust report on sponsorship.
Thanks
Mr smith " I didn't know existed"
What? you had no idea that outside the room in which these invite only seminars took place there are people interested in what the BBC was planning to allow us to see and that we also maybe interested in how these events were funded and what the script would be who was there and why? failing that even a list of know sceptics that were allowed to attend !
On his web page:
"In much of my work I have combined thinking and writing about these issues with direct engagement. Hence I draw on the term 'action research' to describe projects that generate research but are simultaneously designed to make a difference to the way the world is. "
There will soon be a new Thomas Cromwell and a visitation of the Universities.
Dr Smith, your diary project sounds interesting, I'll certainly take the opportunity to look in.
Dr Smith
Do you still "flatly reject" your description as an activist?
If the rest of his presentation was like that 6 minute exerpt I am sure glad tha I did not waste my time attending the seminar. What waffle. What would anyone have learnt from that? What does the calibre of this presentation say about the abilities of a PhD Cantab? I sure hope that it is not typical.
Why did I write "things of things filling up your diary!"? Early morning keyboarditis, but now I see it, I rather like it.
I bet Joe's diary will be just full of 'things of things'.
Well, I was so moved by Joe's video - I decided to get with the programme and start my Climate Activism Diary on his site right away.
Registering and logging on was no problem, but sadly my entry has to "be approved" by one of Joe's team before it appears.
Just in case there are any technical glitches in that department, I thought I'd repost it here:-
21/11/11
After a restless night, following my viewing of Joe Smith's lecture on Bishop Hill blog, I decided to make a positive personal contribution to the climate debate.
First of all, I visited Joe's "Creative Climate" website and began to read the efforts of other contributors.
I saw a short movie entitled "Hot and Bothered" which explained how, if temperatures increase by a couple of degrees, people in the UK might have to walk around nearly naked and give up having sex.
I wondered briefly why, in the hot countries I visit, people seem to have no problem wearing clothes in public or producing children.
Then I read further and found interviews, posted by Joe's team, of dozens of people expressing enormous concern over climate change. This disturbed me greatly but, as I flicked through the interviews, it gradually became clear that nearly all the individuals were people whose career advancement and income stream depended on being concerned about climate change.
I was somewhat relieved by this, until I gradually realised that most of these people, including Joe and his team, were being financially supported by public funds raised from general taxation - often on people much poorer than the professional "climate worriers".
I find the ethics of this even more disturbing and wonder if I will have another restless night tonight.
Only a 10 year diary??????????
Does that tell us that something nasty will happen in 2020?
Dec 31st 2019
Dear Diary,
This will be my last entry. It's New Year's Eve and the BBC are once again broadcasting Jools' Annual Hootenanny. I can't take anymore, I tell you, I can't take anymore.
OF COURSE Joe is no activist. Just like Maximilien was only distributing justice:
Read more:
Wonder just what's goin' on in there.
Saw an eyeball peepin' through a smokey cloud
Behind the green door
When I said Joe sent me
Someone laughed out loud
behind the green door.
Wish they'd let me in
So I could find out what's
behind the green door.
Pharos - v. good!
Mac - something nasty going to happen in 2020?
Doesn't anybody read The Guardian anymore?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/20/rich-nations-give-up-climate-treaty?intcmp=122
Having watched the short clip, I feel that Mr Smith is more than a climate enthusiast, more than an activist; he comes across as a fanatic. In addition, despite his appearance and his civilised voice, I just wonder what good he is doing. It was only a clip from what I assume is a longer presentation, but it was such drivel I wonder that anyone bothered to sit through it. Is he paid for giving these presentation? Finally, what influence does Mr Smith have on national policies regarding 'green' issues? Is he just an empty vessel or does he actually have much clout?
I look forward to seeing Joe Romm's and Gavin Schmidt's contributions to the diary - maybe even a guest appearance from da Mann...
@foxgoose
Your diary has been posted publicly at
http://open.edu/openlearn/nature-environment/the-environment/creative-climate/explore-the-diaries/activism-diaries/my-worries-about-the-climate-change-m-2
But as very few of the articles at this seemingly moribund website have ever attracted a comment. it seems that you may have been wasting your time.
As it also seems Dr Joe Smith has. I have absolutely no objection to him wasting his own time on whatever crackpot ideas turn him on. But I have very strong objections to him doing it on my shekel.
It seems that there may be many 'academics' who are wasting our money on equally fatuous and useless projects. What sanctions do we - the public - have to bring them to heel ...or to fire the bastards?
Wow Latimer - It appears I've been accepted into the climate establishment.
You bunch of knuckle dragging, right wing retards can get lost now.
"The sceptic class can lick my a*s, I've got a climate job at last"
@foxgoose... and don't forget to throw out those Genesis records... the Smiths for you now son...
Ah, foxgoose, it didn't take much to turn you, did it? Poacher turned gamekeeper in 3 short hours. It's easy to see now why these people become so enamoured of their cause when a little fame comes their way, as foxgoose has so simply demonstrated.
By the way, did you see Little Louise Gray in Saturday's Telegraph being the only journalist on the maiden voyage of Greenpeace's Rainbow Warrier 111's maiden voyage? Apparently, Thom Yorke is one of the ship's major donors - his son Noah, 10, inspired him to get involved with all things environmental. School indoctrination is working, then.
Foxgoose, it's Radiohead for you now!
Oops, sorry, too many maiden voyages.
Richard Tol
The weasel phrase 'action research' was first coined (as far as I know) by an educational academic, A H Halsey in the 1960s. These were 'Halsyon days' (geddit?) for the educationalists. Using 'action research', they soon transformed Britain's proud working class self-help into a thing of the past.
At its heart, 'action researchers' make two astonishing claims. The first is that truth is manifest, so any one who denies it is a troublemaker by definition. The second is that (likewise) morality is self-evident. Once you know something for certain, you know whether it's right or wrong. In Halsey's case, the wicked 'denier' was a Professor E G West, who showed that by the time of state education in 1870, the country was well on the way to literacy. Such was Halsey's fury in the public prints, he was forced to apologise wholeheartedly to West.
Both - absolutist - claims have traditionally been made by a priest caste. It is thus 'no accident' that the very same priests, the 'progressives' who are still in command as they were in 1965, have made truth their first casualty in the Climate Wars.
Looking out from beneath the rubble of British state education, I'd be the last to complain Smith or any of his cohort are not working hard enough. The less 'action' the better.
Clearly "action research" was the perfect vehicle for climate research to climb aboard.
Scary.