From Quadrant online; “Left internet newsletters and blog sites were outraged that sceptics were to be allowed to comment on their ABC“.
ABC then cancels climate skeptic guest.
ABC act charter an policy is available here.
Their policy on discrimination is as follows;
Quote; 2.4 Discrimination. To avoid discrimination, programs should not use language or images in a way which is likely to disparage or discriminate against any person or section of the community on account of race, ethnicity, nationality, sex, marital or parental status, age, disability or illness, social or occupational status, sexual preference or any religious, cultural or political belief or activity. The requirement is not intended to prevent the presentation of material which is factual, or the expression of genuinely-held opinion in a news, current affairs, information or factual program, or in the legitimate context of a humorous, satirical or dramatic work.
Guess the ABC are nto interested in fact, debate or anti-discrimination and dont have any problem flouting their own policies.
If you think the ABC dont just belong to the left then you can voice your opinion to them online here;
or else phone or write as follows;
Phone (02) 8333 5639.
Independent Complaints Review Panel
GPO Box 688, Sydney, NSW, 2001.
Also worthwhile to do the same to the press council online here.
Have emailed the ABC as follows and await their response;
The ABC continues to have complete disregard for discrimination and bias when it comes to the topic of climate change. In an ongoing litany of examples where those who are skeptical of global warming are discriminated against by the ABC by either being criticised or excluded from having a say the latest example where Professor Bob Carter has his opinions rejected by ‘The Drum’ is an example of the ongoing travesty against freedom of speech continually exhibited by the ABC. The ABC is there to present information not to censor it, it is there for a wide variety of opinions and not just it’s own select propaganda.
Could you please advise what actions will be taken to remedy the ongoing discrimination and bias by the ABC against those who are skeptical of climate change.
I look forward to your response.
I posted the following on the ABC website as follows – unsure if it will be approved;
ABC’s guidelines talk about discrimination especially as based on political views. AGW is a political view and not a view supported 100% by science. Even the UNIPCC acknowledged and that before Climategate that they were only 90% sure that AGW was ‘likely’. Since Climategate there have been revealed deep flaws in the UNIPCC documents which further discredit the whole AGW movement. It is also significant that the AGW theory still remains unproven, bases itself on computer models to the exclusion of real world data and is at odds with the reality of a cooling world. Furthermore ongoing scientific research brings into question the role of CO2 as a factor in warming the atmosphere.
For the ABC then to trot out the line that the science on AGW is still sound is spurious at best That the ABC continues to stifle and censor debate on the issue shows that its practices are political and discriminatory. That it typically voices a one sided view on AGW shows it’s journalism is anything but investigatory. That it fails to give freedom of speech to dissenting voices on AGW also highlights it’s failure as a public broadcaster. That it continues to defend these appalling practices when they are at odds with it’s own codes of conduct is simply unprofessional, lacking in integrity and wrong.
That the Australian public pay for the ABC through their taxes and that they now are mostly skeptical of AGW demonstrates that the ABC doesn’t even have a commitment to those who fund it – to at least simply give fair play and view to both sides of a debate. That the ABC resists skepticism – the hallmark of science – also shows that like most of the Alarmist Climate Cabal transparency is something they are not interested in.
Update 2a – Automated response from the ACMA – …. “The ABC endeavours to respond to such complaints within four weeks of receipt. However, please be aware that due to the large volume of correspondence we receive, and the complex nature of some enquiries, responses may at times take longer than this”.
Complaint as lodged online with the Australian Press Council;
The ongoing endemic bias and discrimination by the ABC against those skeptical of AGW. Specifically as follows;
Gagging Bob Carter
More generally as follows;
That the Press Council continues to ignore this flagrant and endemic bias renders your organisation useless and without integrity. I wrongly assumed you guys would be the champions of media excellence rather than simply being pen pushes quite disinterested in what happens in the press.
Update 3a – to their credit a Quick response from the Press Council
The Council has received your complaint form of March 4 in which you raise a concern with alleged imbalance on the ABC. For your information, a copy of the Council’s principles and practices can be found on the Council’s website, http://www.presscouncil.org.au. Therein are set out the standards of journalistic ethics that the Council upholds and the procedures it uses to deal with complaints alleging breaches of those standards. The Press Council deals with the print media and the news websites run by those publications. It does not deal with the electronic media nor with their websites. The ABC has its own complaints handling processes, as you are well aware from your reading of the ABC News Watch website (a link to which you attached to your email). I would suggest that you take up your concerns with the ABC and, if you cannot achieve a satisfactory outcome, you might then take up the matter with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (www.acma.gov.au) in accordance with their procedures.
I would however suggest that you might try and strengthen your case if you are going to make a complaint. While the ABC editors might have exercised their function to edit, they can hardly this week be accused of gagging those who deny climate change or the assertion that human activity has contributed to it. Last week the Drum section of the ABC website ran a series of five articles by Clive Hamilton. There was robust discussion in the comments section on the issues raised, including strong arguments from those who disagreed with Hamilton’s hypotheses, and many links to external websites that questioned the current acceptance of the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory among climate scientists and scientific institutions generally. This week the same section of the website has published four articles, with the promise of a fifth, from those whose views diverged from Hamilton’s and from the scientific consensus. The IPA on Monday; Tom Switzer on Tuesday; Barry Brook on Wednesday; Joanne Nova on Thursday. If they didn’t publish Bob Carter, who it must be said, has been prolific in his media appearances, they have given voice to others with similar views.
In any case, your concerns should be expressed through the ABC and ACMA, not the Press Council.
The Australian Press Council Suite 10.02, 117 York StreetSydney 2000
Update 3b – Guess Jack Herman (Executive Secretary of the Australian Press Council) reveals his views in green – with particular reference to the red. Is it appropriate that the Press Council makes statement that AGW is the ‘scientific consensus’ ! One wonders what proof he has to back that up – surely not the latest IPCC report! Climate models? Cooling temps?
IPA article – A turnaround on climate change
Tom Switzers article – The Politics of climate change is changing
Barry Brook here – Mr Herman who would have thought Barry was a climate skeptic?
The Press Council has its mission statement here which in part reads “The Australian Press Council Incorporated is the self-regulatory body of the print media. It was established in 1976 with two main aims: to help preserve the traditional freedom of the press within Australia and ensure that the free press acts responsibly and ethically”.
Hmmm one wonders what traditional freedom of the press means when one holds a religious view on climate change and then claim (without proof) its view is supported by the scientific consensus.
More from the Climate Skeptics Party here, BBC presenter not allowed to question AGW, Governance making itself a dangerous enemy of the public, Blogosphere and climate change, Gust of hot air! Semantics and how a trick isn’t a trick when its a trick! Mother Jones cant see the forest for the trees! What Al Bore would really like! Fabricating a crisis is really profitable, The left continues to be unfailing in its pettiness, Gore – world to end Fox news to blame!,