Climate change is once again dominating the news agenda. A report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that even if emissions are cut rapidly, the effects of global warming will be felt across the world.
The report – which Boris Johnson has declared sobering reading – leads the news today, with the BBC dedicating seven stories on its homepage today to climate change.
So just as well then those BBC staffers were recently treated to an internal audience research briefing telling them how best to convey messages about climate change to different audiences.
The briefing – which one insider described as being more reminiscent of ‘a campaigning organization’ – identifies seven different groups of viewers and how to appeal to them: ‘progressive activists,’ ‘civic pragmatists,’ ‘established liberals,’ ‘loyal nationals,’ ‘disengaged battlers,’ ‘backbone conservatives,’ and ‘disengaged traditionalists.’
Explaining how ‘we need to talk to them in different ways’, the briefing ranks these groups on an axis of security, health, and wealth on a diversity scale based on ‘closeness’ to your neighbor.
How such metrics are assessed is not revealed in the presentation.
For ‘loyal nationals’ who are working class and authoritarian ‘boomers’ who feel patriotic but ‘threatened’, the guidance orders staff to ‘build on climate concern without feeding fears of climate migration.’
This group is the only one listed as voting for Brexit.
Meanwhile, journalists are instructed to ‘build trust’ with ‘disengaged battlers’ by showing how ‘the benefits’ of climate action will help ‘people like them.’
For this ‘fatalistic, isolated, urban group’ a ‘middle-class environmentalist lifestyle’ is judged to be an ineffective way of engagement.
Both the ‘disengaged traditionalists’ and ‘backbone conservatives’ are listed in the research alongside the euphemistic label ‘British pride.’
The former group can apparently be won over by changing the messenger and a focus on ‘national pride in practical achievements’, while the latter – skeptical, male, and working-class – are allegedly susceptible to messages which talk about ‘manufacturing fit for purpose.’
As Boris Johnson faces resistance from his own MPs over his focus on the green agenda and the cost of the government’s Net Zero target ahead of the COP26 climate summit in November, perhaps he can use the BBC guide to separate the ‘loyal nationals’ from the ‘backbone’ conservatives?
Read more at Spectator UK
The BBC and CNN are just aboutt he same fake news its not real news its leftists Propaganda
The Greenhouse Effect currently decreases direct thermal radiation to space by 342Wm-2, without which temperatures would be -14C instead of the present 15C. That makes it about 1C warming for every 10Wm-2.
The Schwarzschild equations show that if CO2 is doubled from the current 400 ppm to 800 ppm, a process that will take two centuries, there would be a further 3Wm-2 decrease of direct thermal radiation to space. That would mean an increase in global temperature of 0.3C over two hundred years.
Most people of technical common sense would find 3Wm-2 too small to have any significant effect on climate.
On January 6th 2006, the BBC held a meeting of ‘leading scientists’ to decide on its future policy on reporting Climate Change.
Present were:
28 BBC employees
17 Environmentalists
10 Others (politicians, civil servants, aid workers)
3 Scientists Mike Hulme, climatologist
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Danish ice climatologist
Robert McCredie, physicist, zoology
The meeting decided that since there was a worldwide ‘consensus’ that Climate Change is largely man-made and dangerous, the BBC should no longer provide any airtime to people with dissenting views.
In their 2015 report, the BBC Trust reported that 200 BBC journalists had gone through training on how not to give “undue attention to marginal opinion” when covering scientific issues including global warming.
Lord Reith, the founder of the BBC must be spinning in his grave.
That’s the Roger Harrabin conspiracy for which you paid thousands to fend off FOI inquiry about who attended this meeting. Everyone needs to read Montford. ‘The Propaganda Bureau’ and Donns Laframboise 2011, 2013 for the litany of IPCC dishonesties.
al*********@****ud.com
“Climate change” (which we have all now been brainwashed to interpret as “global warming”) is just one of the narratives on which BBC spews propaganda endlessly. Read two excellent books by David Sedgwick, “BBC: Brainwashing Britain” and “The Fake News Factory”. Early on, a dictat was issued by BBC executives that no airtime be given to “Climate Change Deniers”, even highly qualified scientists who seriously challenge the science assumed by IPCC. So much for impartiality and balance!
Yes sir. It is propaganda wrapped in science wrapping paper.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/08/10/links-to-ipcc6-posts/
If you have to convince some one, using propaganda that cannot be supported with facts, then there is clearly a validity gap.
Just like the recent conclusion that three people breath our enough CO2 in a year to kill one person that year. That said, why have not a third of the pollution of the world dropped dead? Let’s be logical.
Attributions of factors in the environment fabricated from nothing over coffee and doughnuts, or booze, or something else, and have no relationship with reality.