Thanks to Bishop Hill for putting the word out about this little blog.
One thing a few people have said in the comments over there is that they feel I am targeting Richard Black personally.
So, let me state my position on this.
I have no ill feeling towards Richard Black as a person. Unlike some of the nutty elements of the people who think the planet it going to burn next week, I am not on a personal vendetta, nor am I harassing him etc.
Richard Black represents the BBC’s position on AGW. He is responsible for most of their output on the subject and he covers all major events for them. Therefore, he is in a unique and powerful position within a public broadcaster. Ultimately accountable to me – one of the millions who pay his wage through our license fee. I therefore demand of the BBC that their journalism and people follow the charter laid out in 2006, especially around balance and impartiality.
Even someone who is completely sold on the runaway global warming hypothesis, if they have any sort of open mind, knows that the BBC’s coverage does lack balance. No coverage of “Gleickgate” for example. If this had happened in any other field of science the BBC would have been, quite rightly, all over it. The fact they were not shows that they are willing to basically condone and cover up wrongdoing. This obviously contradicts their obligation under the Royal Charter.
So that is the purpose of Blackswhitewash.com. To watch and investigate the BBC environmental coverage and to hold it and it’s journalists to account.
The fact a BBC journalist has, as I will show in my next post, influenced the UN directly both into holding RIO+20 and shaping the agenda for that conference, is in complete contradiction to the stated aims of the Royal Charter. Black’s activities make Jeremy Bowen’s championing of the Palestinians seem irrelevant by comparison.
Today on BBC’s “Newswatch” show, Richard Ayre of the BBC Trust stated that the trust took issues relating to impartiality and bias in the BBC very seriously and that they would investigate and punish where these were found. Richard Black, evidently condoned by David Shukman, blatantly shows bias in an issue where there is still debate and uncertainty, should you have an open mind enough to read about that uncertainty. As the BBC and the Trust are failing to act on my behalf, I am totally within my rights to find the truth myself and highlight it.
Lastly I would like to state that nothing I have written or am about to write is stolen, been sent to me, or otherwise been illegally obtained. It is all out there on the internet. Searchable, visible and public to anyone who has the willpower to use Google to its full potential to find it. All I am doing is putting the pieces together to get the truth on how a BBC journalist is ALLOWED to behave.