Facebook Google Menu Linkedin lock Pinterest Search Twitter

Advertisement

Journalism

Mar 11, 2010

Maurice Newman's pudding tastes a little off

Maurice Newman's grubby comments about climate science reflect a denialist mentality that treats climate change as a game rather than a massive threat.

Share

“The proof of the pudding,” said Maurice Newman to ABC staff yesterday, “is in the eating.” If nothing else, Newman’s instinctive grasp of cliché shows he’s in the right business.

Newman has an outstanding business background and he’s been a pretty good ABC board member and chairman. His resignation over board leaks in 2004 commendably shone a light on the iniquity of a staff representative holding a position on the ABC board, prompting the Howard government to finally getting around to removing it.

But his comments yesterday about media coverage of climate change were grubby and contemptible.

Let’s boil his claims down to their essence: he compared climate science with the spivs and shonks of the 1980s, the corporates house of cards such as Enron in the 1990s, and the financial chicanery that prompted the GFC. Journalists failed to spot those until too late, he told ABC staff, and a similar thing is happening on climate change. He thus implicitly compares climate scientists with frauds and criminals.

It’s no wonder climate scientists get hate mail and death threats when public figures of standing like Newman equate them with Christopher Skase and Bernie Madoff.

But if the proof of the pudding is indeed in the eating, Mr Newman, let’s see what fare your corporation has served up. Because this is the other fiction Newman is perpetuating — the idea that somehow climate sceptics and denialists don’t get a run in the media. Chris Monckton — conspiracy theorist and serial fantasist — got extensive and frequently uncritical coverage from the ABC during his recent visit — radio interviews  locally and nationally, online coverage, a 7.30 Report piece, ABC-hosted debates. Indeed, the ABC gave far more coverage to Monckton than any other single outlet. And all for a man who is taking seriously only by the extreme right in his homeland.

Compare and contrast: James Hansen is currently in Australia. Hansen is probably the best-known climate scientist on the planet, but you wouldn’t know he was here from the ABC, which, a Phillip Adams interview last week excepted, has barely mentioned his presence. The bald figures tell the story: as of today, Monckton has been discussed on the ABC 161 times this year, while Hansen has only been mentioned nine times.

Indeed, The Australian has given Hansen more coverage than the ABC, because of his support for nuclear power.

In fact, you’re as likely to see Hansen being savaged by climate denialists on the ABC’s comments boards as you are to hear from or about him.

I asked the ABC about the disparity in coverage.  The response from the ABC’s News Kate Torney was, in full:

ABC News stands by the accuracy, the breadth, the depth, the balance and the fairness of its coverage of climate change. For many years, ABC News has led the way in covering all aspects of this important issue in its news bulletins and in its longer-form current affairs programs, and our coverage has been recognised, among other things, through Walkley awards.

The various elements of that coverage, whether the announcement of government policy, the exploration of the science itself or the various public pronouncements or campaigns by advocates for change or critics of the process, have been accorded the coverage they deserve based on newsworthiness. ABC News has never been influenced or advised to change its coverage of this issue in any way by ABC management or the Board. Our coverage has always been determined by following the ABC’s fundamental editorial policies and will continue in the same way.

Newman is a stereotypical climate denialist — wealthy, white, male, conservative. Like nearly all other climate denialists, from the editors of The Australian and conservative bloggers right down to the angry old men penning poisonous emails from their Sunshine Coast dens, he will never see the true consequences of climate change. And like other denialists, he will pay little if any of the cost of actually doing something about it. These people have no stake in either climate change or action to prevent it.

The climate change “debate” is a parlour game for them, something to bait environmentalists and “the Left” about. At least the rentseekers who corrupted the CPRS with their alarmism and demands for handouts were motivated by self-interest. For most denialists, they have no motivation other than to continue the culture wars.

The moral equation here is straight forward. To the extent that climate denialists — whether powerful media figures, or crank retirees with a chip on their shoulder and too much time on their hands — delay action on climate change, they bear responsibility for some of the future costs of it, including the cost in human life. It shouldn’t be a parlour game for smug conservatives such as Newman.

Update: Radio National Breakfast also ran an interview with Hansen last week.

Advertisement

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

14 comments

Leave a comment

14 thoughts on “Maurice Newman’s pudding tastes a little off

  1. Keith is not my real name

    Yeah! what he said.

  2. Stevo the Working Twistie

    Hasn’t it occurred to anyone that giving blanket coverage to Monckton might be a clever ploy to hoist the climate denialists by their own petards? After all, I had heard that he was a monster raving loony, but I until I actually heard him speak I could not realise the full extent of his lunacy. It’s the same sort of tactic being used against the Libs by those crafty infiltrators Abbott and Joyce…

  3. Charles Richardson

    Nailed it. Those two paragraphs starting with “Newman is a stereotypical climate denialist …” are among the best things on the topic I’ve ever read.

  4. Frank Campbell

    “…the other fiction Newman is perpetuating — the idea that somehow climate sceptics and denialists don’t get a run in the media”

    They do now Bernard, but apart from some Murdoch trollholes, they were never heard on the BBC, ABC or any mainstream media before the Copenhagen fiasco. Journalists were intimidated by the AGW cult like everyone else. Anyone who questioned AGW was a pariah, remember? Only 4 months ago? As a Green voter, I’ll always treasure the insults served up to me by Crikey AGW trolls.

    Can’t you see Bernard that the hysterical note in your frequent articles on AGW of late (and far more so in Calvin Hamilton’s) tells us that the reign of terror is over. The spell is broken. But Crikey’s extremism on AGW has had consequences- Crikey has contributed to the empowerment of the Nasty Right. Remember Hamilton’s Higgins Hubris? The Crikey illuminati were sure Savonarola would sweep into parliament nor at least scare the knickers off the big parties. Joke. Look at the polls- people are no longer intimidated or fooled by climate Armageddonism.

    So methinks you protesteth too much.

  5. Frank Campbell

    “Newman is a stereotypical climate denialist — wealthy, white, male, conservative. Like nearly all other climate denialists, from the editors of The Australian and conservative bloggers right down to the angry old men penning poisonous emails from their Sunshine Coast dens…”

    Numerically, this collection of caricatures wouldn’t add up to 5% of the population. Look at the polls. And look to your left. Legions of people are sick and tired of the climate cult.

  6. Meski

    Well, if you over-egg a pudding, it will taste a bit off.

  7. baal

    Perhaps Stephen Conroy will expedite yet another delayed Labour election promise: the reinstatement of the staff elected representative on the ABC Board. As soon as that happens Newman will resign because he is dead against this particular form of industrial democracy (which would entail having someone who knows a bit about broadcasting sitting around the table)

  8. Mack the Knife

    Get this viper off the ABC’s board immediately, he really does think its ‘his ABC’.

    At least those of us that have been wondering why the ABC went all feral on Labor and sweet on the coalition know why.

    The man and other denialists (cos that’s what they all are) will be long dead when younger generations suffer the effects.

    These people will truly have blood on their hands, as will Abbot and all those who frustrated the passage of the legislation.

    To follow the coalitions logic of resigning for causing deaths, they themselves should all be resigning for the many deaths they will cause.

  9. baal

    @FRANK CAMPBELL – I notice the ploy. Citing ‘millions’ you claim the debate is over because they are sick of it. No, Frank, it’s not about what’s boring you, it’s the future of the planet.

  10. John Ryan

    I see the usual suspects crawling out from under their rocks,I hope some of you fools are alive to explain to your grand kids how wrong you were

  11. Michael R James

    @Frank Campbell said “Look at the polls. And look to your left. Legions of people are sick and tired of the climate cult.”

    So we should run the world according to polls. Actually they do not show what you claim, but merely that more people than before are rating other issues of higher importance, and that yes, more people are sick of hearing the constant uninterpretable noise on the subject. Throw enough mud…….Does this mean the anti argument (the denialist argument) is correct? Only if your life is poll driven like some politicians.

    Frank, I didn’t think you lived on the Sunshine Coast but I guess you must.

  12. Jeremy Williams

    Bernard the last paragraph is a beauty I often think about these people the oz etc who really have blood on their hands in relation to this debate. Intelligent people who probably do know better. It is unfortunate that some of the greatest and independent minds Lovelock, Hansen etc offer up a terrifying future that when you factor in feedback loops etc it all makes too much sense.
    Its possible decades from now we will all wonder what the hell we were doing all this time and why so many average joe citizens thought they were smarter than the climate scientists, unfortunately though it may be too late.

  13. John Bennetts

    @ Frank…

    …Oh, what the Hell? You are beyond rational thought.

    The real debate concerns not denialism, but the extent of the catastrophe which awaits.

    If the ABC had a true balance, it would be drawing out the threads of the differencees between the moderates who are afraid to scare the horses being ridden by the front line in Copenhagen and the remainder of climate scientists, who expect things to be much harder to manage. 2.5 degrees may prove impossible to achieve. Sea level rises, acidification and warming may combine in truly horrid ways, tipping points re methane and other natural feedback processes may amplify the problems confronting the next couple of generations.

    So, let’s have real balance. And cease wasting our time on do-nothing time wasters, many of whom have been so neatly characterised by Bernard in his final few paragraphs.

    Jeremy Willams… sorry to repeat some of what you have posted while I hunt and peck my own.

Advertisement

https://www.crikey.com.au/2010/03/11/maurice-newmans-pudding-tastes-a-little-off/ == https://www.crikey.com.au/free-trial/==https://www.crikey.com.au/subscribe/

Show popup

Telling you what the others don't. FREE for 21 days.

Free Trial form on Pop Up

Free Trial form on Pop Up
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.