Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace


It's all about the headline
- Actually probably no-one reads BBCEnviro reports all about sustaining the narrative by getting an alarmist headline into people's mind again like hitting a nail on the head again & again

BBC's standard bias test "well both sides complain , so we must be right"
Stew's bias test "In a 2 side debate if a report is written in the language of one side then that really looks like bias, unless there is extraordinary evidence."
- we know BBCEnviro reports are miles to the left of what a skeptic would write, yet just a bit to the right of what the most extremist alarmist might write.
- In This MMcGrath report most of the speaking lines are given to Environmental groups ..then a bit from gov, Figures , coal corps counter political view to the that's biased

... and he did mention Christiana Figueres conflict of interest with her families extensive rewables biz, NOT !

Nov 18, 2013 at 12:39 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Did anyone catch the extraordinary quote (I didn't catch who it was from) on the Today programme during a piece about the coal conference in Warsaw?

It was from a climate change activist, or similar, who said something like, "The fact that there is a conference promoting the coal industry here in Poland is awful, when you consider the death and destruction caused by Typhoon Haiyan." It was left unchallenged, obviously.

Nov 18, 2013 at 12:38 PM | Unregistered CommenterCharlieFurniss

Interesting quotes of editors agreeing to report only 1 side of the debate 20 years ago

Nov 18, 2013 at 12:07 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Yet again, Matt McGrath of the BBC turns to WWF in "Coal fires green anger at UN climate talks".

Nov 18, 2013 at 11:35 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

also in Canada
in NZ since 2011 as a result of the "All sizzle and no sausage law"

The lawyer for the Charities Registration Board Peter Gunn, said the law permitted charities to be advocates but you could not have a charity that was only an advocate.
- "You can't have just sizzle and no sausage," he said.
August 2013 The Supreme Court has reserved its decision. The case has already been considered in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal had asked the new Charities Registration Board to reconsider Greenpeace's application to be registered as a charity. link

- It's controversial in the US cos while the 3 GP orgs are tax exempt the tax authorities came down hard on the Tea Party ..from "Nichols notes that both New Zealand and Canada have stripped Greenpeace of its charity status."
"The IRS conducted an extensive review and concluded in December 2005 that Greenpeace USA continued to qualify for its tax-exempt status.” wikipedia
"The organization does not accept money from governments, intergovernmental organizations, political parties or corporations in order to avoid their influence"
<p>- Seems ? in canada GP just formed a second charity which funnels money to GP. link
- I don't really understand the rules ..maybe it's that charities get tax back from gov on the basis that they do good, whereas political parties might be counted as non-profit and don't get tax benefits/money.

- Greenpeace doesn't want it's members to be in Russian jails so perhaps at the end of the trial the Russians might offer Xyears in jail ....or a $250m fine instead
(-they could recover some of that by putting up the charges they charge the IPCC for Greenpeace activists writing IPCC reports)

- Good rebuttal by Heartland against smears of Big Oil ..Pointing out in last 10 years it received almost zero money from oil ..yet green orgs received tens of millions
- I missed the story of Rainbow Warrior been boarded & sign changed to Propaganda Warrior

Nov 18, 2013 at 10:38 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Messenger: And there was I thinking that the issue of the Greenpeace hooligans holed up in Russian prisons had created "international amusement".

Nov 18, 2013 at 9:53 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

On Radio 4 Toady this morning John Humphreys had a news item about the large donation to UKIP (see below, Philip Bratby 8.08am) and then went straight on to the next item saying: "....and now for another bit of bad news." (Unbiased, ho, ho).

There was also an item on the Greenpeace activists holed up in Russian prisons, which Humphreys said had raised
"international outrage".


Nov 18, 2013 at 9:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterMessenger

Lord Beaverbrook, tomo

I think it is high time the charity commissioners took some action against the politicisation of the charities e.g. the RSPCA spending a fortune on private prosecutions instead of spending the money on animal welfare. I believe the New Zealand government have removed charitable status from Green Peace in New Zealand. In many cases I think donators are not aware how much is spent by charities on political campaigns.

Nov 18, 2013 at 9:03 AM | Unregistered CommenterRoss Lea

UKIP getting millions here

Nov 18, 2013 at 8:08 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby


Just to add fuel to your fire don't forget that Greenpeace and the like are 'subsidised' by the UK tax payer due to their charitable status, in the green way of calculating subsidies. They receive more benefit from the nation than do coal companies.

Nov 18, 2013 at 8:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterLord Beaverbrook

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>