For Immediate Release: Katie Wright (703) 683-5004 - Thursday,
November 2,
2000
Networks
Push Gore and Nader Line on Global Warming "Threat," But
Ignore Skeptical Scientists
TV
Balances Liberals... with Ultra-Liberals
-- Does this sound
balanced to you? Last week Al Gore trumpeted a leaked UN report on
the alleged perils of global warming, so the CBS Evening News
showed him pledging "to protect the environment with all my
heart and soul." Balancing Gore on the October 26 newscast:
Ralph Nader, the only other candidate who thinks global warming is a
real threat requiring immediate government intervention in the free
market.
-- "Al Gore is
suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the
environment is anything to be proud of," Nader twitted from
Gore's left. The only other on-camera source in John Roberts'
report: a Greenpeace spokesman, who said of Gore: "The promises
are great, the rhetoric is great. Keeping the promises, doing what
you say - that's our concern."
-- CBS never told
viewers of skeptical scientists whose insistence on proof is plainly
irritating to those who impatiently wish to start re-shaping
American society right away. Instead, the pols, activists and
journalists conducted a closed discussion that treated the UN paper
as irrefutable.
-- "Earth's average surface temperature could rise from 2.7
to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit over the next 10 years - that's
according to a draft report from the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," asserted Natalie
Pawelski, host of CNN's weekly Earth Matters.
-- "Eleven
degrees may not sound like much of a change, but to put it into
perspective, consider this: the Earth's average global temperature
today is only about nine degrees warmer than it was during the last
Ice Age," Pawelski hyped, but allowed "some observers are
wondering about the timing of this report, leaking out so close to
the presidential election."
-- Observers are
doing a lot more than "wondering." Weeks ago, climate
expert Patrick Michaels warned that Gore would cynically seek an
"October environmental surprise," and - right on
schedule - the heavily political UN document found its way to the
public a month early. "A copy of the summary was obtained by
The New York Times from someone who was eager to have the
findings disseminated before the meetings in The Hague,"
related Andrew Revkin, the Times reporter who received the leaked
document.
-- TV reporters
haven't talked about the still-to-be-officially-released
report's flaws, but "fourteen international experts gathered
on Capitol Hill in June to review the report. They unanimously
agreed it contains systematic errors and omissions bordering on
scientific fraud," revealed Cato Institute scholar Steve Milloy
in a Sunday New York Post op-ed. Further, according to an
editorial in today's European edition of the Wall Street Journal,
"The vast evidence and models compiled by over 100 scientists,
and casting doubt on the evidence of human-enhanced greenhouse
effect, were ignored."
-- Two questions
for the networks: Are you unable to track down any of the numerous
experts who disagree with the Gore-Nader-Greenpeace view of the
environment? And will you seek to discover whether it's really the
Earth or the Democrats' campaign that's in such peril that it is
crucial to pump out a sloppy summary report a few weeks ahead of
schedule? -- Rich Noyes
-
L. Brent Bozell III, Publisher; Brent Baker, Rich Noyes, Editors;
Jessica Anderson, Brian Boyd, Geoffrey
Dickens, Patrick Gregory, Ken Shepherd, Brad
Wilmouth, Media Analysts; Kristina Sewell, Research Associate;
Liz Swasey, Director of Communications. For the latest liberal media bias, read the
CyberAlert at
www.mrc.org.
|
Home | News Division
| Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts
Media Reality Check | Notable Quotables | Contact
the MRC | Subscribe
|