How should a newspaper play the biggest story of the year?
Once upon a time that was a no-brainer. Page One was the only answer possible.
Today is not that time.
The no-brainers who work at the Winnipeg Free Press have decided that the biggest story of the year should be run on the second-last page of the third section of the Saturday paper.
Reporting news, it seems, is not part of the job description of today's "professional journalists."
"Stolen e-mails suggest scientists rigged climate data." blares the headline.
"Revelation challenges accuracy of computer-modelling research" declares the sub-head.
It seems a computer hacker has posted on the Internet hundreds of e-mails and internal "research" documents from England's Climate Research Unit (CRU). The story they tell is comparable in impact to the exposure of the Pentagon Papers in the Nixon years.
"The e-mail exchanges, between a group of powerful, life-minded scientists based in Britain and the U.S., written over the past 13 years, suggest they may have rigged their data, suppressed contrary information and conspired to control what should be an independent peer review process surrounding the publication of their scientific papers." wrote Richard Foot for Canwest News Service.
Oh, is that all?
You mean that the "settled science" that proves mankind is responsible for the global warming that's going to destroy the world is bogus? And that the skeptics who have been villified for the past decade are vindicated?
Frank J. Tipler is Professor of Mathematical Physics at Tulane University, and one of the skeptics.
"The now non-secret data prove what many of us had only strongly suspected - that most of the evidence of global warming was simply made up. That is, not only are the global warming computer models unreliable, the experimental data upon which these models are built are also unreliable. As Lord Monckton has emphasized.... this deliberate destruction of data and the making up of data out of whole cloth is the real crime - the real story of Climategate."
"It is an act of treason against science. It is also an act of treason against humanity, since it has been used to justify an attempt to destroy the world economy."
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-the-skeptical-scientist%E2%80%99s-view/
Noooooo, say the defenders of the lies.
John Bennett, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada, said the emails have been "taken out of context" and the scientists were speaking in their own "high-level code" that cannot be understood by mere mortals. The emails were written "in the heat of the moment," declared Phil Jones, director of the CRU, and surely you don't think they represent what the scientists really thought.
You mean like when they discuss inventing data that doesn't exist and destroying data that does exist.
Or when they talk about the best way to damage the reputations of scientists who disagree with them.
That sort of stuff, eh, Jonesy?
Climategate broke ten days ago.
On the Internet.
It's been the burning topic on websites for a week and a half.
Yet the mainstream media has barely mentioned it. CBC hasn't yet.
Can you ask for greater proof of the gulf between events in the real world and the manipulated coverage that passes as news in the mainstream media? Who do you trust to bring you the news first---your daily "news"paper or your favorite blogger *?
We can't say it better than Alan, a poster on the CBC-watch website theteamakers.com:
Next to being inaccurate and unreliable, the worst thing that can happen to any news outlet, large or small, is to become irrelevant?
News Rehab http://www.theteamakers.com/2009/11/18/news-rehab/
The Winnipeg Free Press is three for three.
* The best and most comprehensive coverage of Climategate has been by Kate McMillan at www.smalldeadanimals.com, such as todays entry
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/012763.html
Once upon a time that was a no-brainer. Page One was the only answer possible.
Today is not that time.
The no-brainers who work at the Winnipeg Free Press have decided that the biggest story of the year should be run on the second-last page of the third section of the Saturday paper.
Reporting news, it seems, is not part of the job description of today's "professional journalists."
"Stolen e-mails suggest scientists rigged climate data." blares the headline.
"Revelation challenges accuracy of computer-modelling research" declares the sub-head.
It seems a computer hacker has posted on the Internet hundreds of e-mails and internal "research" documents from England's Climate Research Unit (CRU). The story they tell is comparable in impact to the exposure of the Pentagon Papers in the Nixon years.
"The e-mail exchanges, between a group of powerful, life-minded scientists based in Britain and the U.S., written over the past 13 years, suggest they may have rigged their data, suppressed contrary information and conspired to control what should be an independent peer review process surrounding the publication of their scientific papers." wrote Richard Foot for Canwest News Service.
Oh, is that all?
You mean that the "settled science" that proves mankind is responsible for the global warming that's going to destroy the world is bogus? And that the skeptics who have been villified for the past decade are vindicated?
Frank J. Tipler is Professor of Mathematical Physics at Tulane University, and one of the skeptics.
"The now non-secret data prove what many of us had only strongly suspected - that most of the evidence of global warming was simply made up. That is, not only are the global warming computer models unreliable, the experimental data upon which these models are built are also unreliable. As Lord Monckton has emphasized.... this deliberate destruction of data and the making up of data out of whole cloth is the real crime - the real story of Climategate."
"It is an act of treason against science. It is also an act of treason against humanity, since it has been used to justify an attempt to destroy the world economy."
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-the-skeptical-scientist%E2%80%99s-view/
Noooooo, say the defenders of the lies.
John Bennett, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada, said the emails have been "taken out of context" and the scientists were speaking in their own "high-level code" that cannot be understood by mere mortals. The emails were written "in the heat of the moment," declared Phil Jones, director of the CRU, and surely you don't think they represent what the scientists really thought.
You mean like when they discuss inventing data that doesn't exist and destroying data that does exist.
Or when they talk about the best way to damage the reputations of scientists who disagree with them.
That sort of stuff, eh, Jonesy?
Climategate broke ten days ago.
On the Internet.
It's been the burning topic on websites for a week and a half.
Yet the mainstream media has barely mentioned it. CBC hasn't yet.
Can you ask for greater proof of the gulf between events in the real world and the manipulated coverage that passes as news in the mainstream media? Who do you trust to bring you the news first---your daily "news"paper or your favorite blogger *?
We can't say it better than Alan, a poster on the CBC-watch website theteamakers.com:
Next to being inaccurate and unreliable, the worst thing that can happen to any news outlet, large or small, is to become irrelevant?
News Rehab http://www.theteamakers.com/2009/11/18/news-rehab/
The Winnipeg Free Press is three for three.
* The best and most comprehensive coverage of Climategate has been by Kate McMillan at www.smalldeadanimals.com, such as todays entry
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/012763.html