BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers • Hacker News Board

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#71

Post by thenmar » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 10:21 PM UTC

olouv wrote: post #39

I've always had mixed feelings regarding man-made climate change, seeing it as a marketed mainstream show. For me, this broad, somewhat blind, frightening threat is the ecological equivalent of the idea of terrorism. I can't help myself to think that there are a lot of other ecological issues, even more critical, and affecting our societies today. Water/soil pollution for instance does kill millions of people a year.…

Do you think equal time should be given to all opinions on scientific issues that are not backed by evidence? Should we teach Christian creationism next to evolution? Should we teach about the balance of humors next to germ theory?

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#72

Post by Steko » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 10:24 PM UTC

muuh-gnu wrote: post #52

Steko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it should be free to be debated." Right but it shouldn't be subsidized and given an artificial equal weight with a vast scientific consensus of experts. That's misleading which is the opposite of what journalists are supposed to do.

Journalists arent supposed to involuntarily spread goverment mandated propaganda. If the vast scientific consensus isnt able to make their point even to journalists and have to force them to print state mandated "truth", then maybe, just maybe their point isnt defensible in the first place. It is hard to sell "we need global socialism or we're all gonna die!" when your whole argument amounts to "when I press this but…

"Journalists arent supposed to involuntarily spread goverment mandated propaganda"

That's not what's happening here no matter how much talk radio word salad you want to throw at it.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#73

Post by Steko » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 10:32 PM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #45

Steko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it should be free to be debated." Right but it shouldn't be subsidized and given an artificial equal weight with a vast scientific consensus of experts. That's misleading which is the opposite of what journalists are supposed to do.

That's the problem with media like BBC - airing the view point becomes "subsidizing", and which opinion gets discussed and which is not becomes matter of centralized public policy instead of matter of private preference and market of ideas. Yes, this is the opposite of what journalists are supposed to do - instead of being free agents in the market of ideas, they become essentially a part of executive branch in enfor…

"which opinion gets discussed and which is not becomes matter of centralized public policy"

Not really. Should they stop and give equal time to the Flat Earth Society every time they show a picture of a spherical earth?

If climate deniers want to continue to get anything like equal time they should earn it, not be granted it. They were granted equal time for a long time, longer than they deserved. Now, after several decades of firing blanks while the evidence supporting anthropogenic global warming and climate change has continued to snowball, deniers have been demoted. Expect to see more and more such demotions unless they start backing up their astroturf and propaganda efforts with real science.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#74

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 10:33 PM UTC

tieTYT wrote: post #3

Karunamon wrote: post #2

Were every network to start doing what the BBC is, their unfounded opinions would cease to be heard, Bill Nye wouldn’t have to keep debating them, and maybe, just maybe, they’d all just go away. Not bloody likely. Now you've just put them in the same group as the other conspiracy theorists, and given them the additional (legitimate) ammo that "the establishment is censoring them". Confirmation bias is a hell of a dru…

Devil's advocate: When's the last time a fringe* conspiracy theorist's agenda has been able to effect legislature? EDIT: Added the word "fringe". As in, a conspiracy theory that doesn't get media coverage.

[deleted]

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#75

Post by alexeisadeski3 » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 10:40 PM UTC

Funny thing.

Everyone here compares climate denial to other left wing bugaboos: 'creationism' 'ancient science' 'earth is the center of the universe'

So why not compare to things where the left wing is wrong?

Why not say, "if we're not going to give equal time to one thing where science is settled (climate change), we also shouldn't give equal time to..."

1. Economic fact: Minimum wage hurts low earners

2. Economic fact: Free trade is almost always good

3. Economic fact: Unions hurt the poor

So is climate change really something you care about, or is it just another tool to be deployed in the left-right debate?

The left brings climate change - their settled science - the right brings anti union policies - their settled science. Each side has heterodox scientists, each side has the vast consensus of professionals on their side. Yet only one topic gets a zillion upvotes on HN, only one topic gets extensive coverage on our favorite media aggregators.

I wonder why.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#76

Post by jarrett » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 11:02 PM UTC

7952 wrote: post #47

jarrett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For any given fringe view that the media properly marginalizes, some people will go on believing it. But that doesn't mean the number of believers (or undecided people) will stay the same. It's quite possible, and in my view probable, that reducing airtime from fringe views will substantially reduce the number of people who hold or lean towards those views.

Climate change scepticism is not a fringe view, but moderately widely held. It is hard to believe that those people will suddenly support environmentally literate policy. They will just switch to a different set of trite anecdotes to prove why nothing should change.

> Climate change scepticism is not a fringe view, but moderately widely held

Amongst 1) the general public, 2) scientists in general, or 3) climate scientists specifically?

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#77

Post by jarrett » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 11:12 PM UTC

zeteo wrote: post #43

Hmm let's play "recognize the phenomenon": 1. An important truth will cause cataclysmic consequences because it's not recognized by the general populace. 2. The deeper aspects of this truth are in the possession of an elite. 3. Only the elite is qualified to speak about this truth. 4. The elite is self-selected and meets in regular councils that issue binding pronouncements. 5. The only solution is for the populace t…

Other than the scientific method, how would you propose humankind gather the information needed to make important decisions?

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#78

Post by anodari » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 11:16 PM UTC

olouv wrote: post #39

I've always had mixed feelings regarding man-made climate change, seeing it as a marketed mainstream show. For me, this broad, somewhat blind, frightening threat is the ecological equivalent of the idea of terrorism. I can't help myself to think that there are a lot of other ecological issues, even more critical, and affecting our societies today. Water/soil pollution for instance does kill millions of people a year.…

People are scared with hurricanes, floods, droughts, heat waves, etc.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#79

Post by jarrett » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 11:21 PM UTC

logfromblammo wrote: post #38

I think this is a dangerous precedent for media coverage of science. If there is any doubt in your mind, you never read what Feynman had to say about Millikan's experimental results for measurement of elementary charge. Some scientists cheat at science, so they can be more popular. And this is why we don't trust conclusions until after they are independently repeated. If someone were to produce real, verifiable exper…

> Silencing the ongoing debate, even if one side or the other is obviously delusional, is completely contrary to the spirit of science.

A news outfit does not have the power to silence scientific debate. Real, productive scientific debate does not occur in 5-minute talk show segments. That's just entertainment. Scientific debate occurs in less glamorous venues, such as conferences, journals, and labs. And it involves a great deal more time and technical detail than what you get on a news show. News organizations don't control those venues.

Now, one can of course raise valid concerns about process in the scientific community. Much has been written along those lines as of late. But that's entirely separate from the BBC's policy, and out of the scope of this discussion.

Re: BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers

#80

Post by bdamm » Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 11:25 PM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #33

woodchuck64 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religious dissent? Unqualified, uninformed dissent? Yes, quell the hell out of it.

You may read a bit on US history and the role religious dissent played in it. It's no accident that religious freedoms are in the first amendment.

Asserting a policy of not publishing an opinion is quite different from a legislative edict to make an opinion illegal. Just because your opinion is legal does not mean I have to listen to it.