“CBS Sunday Morning” Put All Your Eggs In Chicken Little’s Basket ‘Repositioning Global Warming As Theory (Not Fact)’ – Are you satisfied with that?
By Russell Cook
On – of all dates – Easter Sunday, April 17, 2022. I’m not kidding, that’s exactly What did CBS’s Sunday Morning program do with “Climate change lawsuit: Taking fossil fuel companies to court” report. In doing so, they informed the nation that environmental activists really had only one seemingly viable weapon in their arsenal when backing up their claim that the fossil fuel companies have deceived the public into thinking that no harm has happened while ‘knowing’ their products have caused a man-made global warming disaster.
The premise of the 6:45 minute episode of CBS Quite simply, featuring Charleston, South Carolina Mayor John Tecklenburg giving his views on sea level rise, and Connecticut Attorney General William Tong assuring a CBS audience that the lyin’ Exxon company knew back in the early years. 1980 on the certainty of anthropogenic global warming. . David Middleton, a post author on Anthony Watts’ WUWT website, has been pretty in-depth with the flaws in Mayor Tecklenburg’s ‘scientific’ claims. Attorney General Song’s assertion that Exxon knew in 1982 that “As the level of carbon dioxide increases, the temperature of our atmosphere will increase” To be contradicts Exxon’s own 1982 document expressed sizable doubt about what the computer models predicted. The inconvenience is that the document is also dated to within two years for newspaper accounts speculating on the bleak prospects of new ice agea larger scientific discussion that Exxon most likely also knew.
Between the views of Tecklenburg and Tong, CBS stated that the US global warming lawsuits “modeled after the ‘Big Tobacco’ cases of the 1990s and accused companies and industry groups of making false and misleading statements about climate change“While their video simultaneously shows – in quick succession without allocation – two print advertisements, which clearly imply false and misleading advertising.
In the online taped version of this broadcast segment, as is usual with many news outlets, CBS Sunday Morning annotated its single ‘press promo’ illustration with the source name and a bit of ‘information’ ‘ additions not said in the video:
One of a series of newspaper advertisements in 1991 from the Environmental Information Council, an energy industry group. Internal documents state that the goal of their advertising campaign is “Repositioning global warming as theory (not reality).”
[source:] Environmental Information Council
When I watched a BBC summer 2020 report with a premise quite similar to this CBS Sunday Morning report, I didn’t simply write about it, I put in the effort. submit a formal complaint to the BBC. Using CBS website feedback form, I sent the following text verbatim to them on their same broadcast. The link in “Error 1” was included in the text of my complaint about a minor oversight against CBS. However, I have embedded three links here that readers here can click, which will go to screenshots backing up my specific points:
4 errors to withdraw 4/17/22 report “Climate change lawsuit: Taking fossil fuel companies to court”
CBS Sunday Morning Staff,
Error 1: King County in Washington state as one of two dozen participants in the US lawsuit – King County dismissed its own case in September 2021 – see: https://aboutblaw.com/ZPQ
Error 2: An illustration of an advertisement in the “Chicken Little” newspaper by the “Environmental Information Council” (ICE) – that ad was never published, it was never seen by the public and therefore cannot be used as evidence for the fossil fuel industry’s ‘misinformation campaigns’. Note that you cannot explain garbled copy with “Informed Citizen” on the bottom right, contradicting your online caption that the campaign was named “Environmental Information Council.” Your copy is a multi-generation copy in terrible disrepair. What is your explanation for that?
Error 3: Your online caption in the “Chicken Little” ad affirms ICE’s goal to “reposition global warming in theory, (not in practice).” ICE administrators, if you attempt to contact them, will confirm that the strategic goal of “repositioning global warming” is part of the proposal to them. which they flatly refused. The name “Notified Citizen” was also rejected; confirmed in a piece 7/8/91 of the New York Times Matt Wald.
Error 4: Your report seems to imply that the ICE campaign (a short-term PR effort containing no factual misinformation) was the effort of one of the energy companies named in ‘two dozen’ heath lawsuits. up globally. None of the respondent companies have any links to the ICE campaign.You need to withdraw the assertions regarding the 4 errors above and also explain why the “Chicken Little” ad copy and other ad copy are in your video – regardless of whether they were provided to you as How – DO NOT source from the ICE campaign, but instead a photocopy from Greenpeace USA.
What will CBS Sunday Morning withdraw from their report? One possible proof that they received and read my complaint is if we see a modified map from them removed King County sues BP et al.this reduces their claims of “more than two dozen cities, counties and states“With a total of exactly two dozen – 24. Their number different from my countbut that’s another math explanation/filing story.
At this point, I should note that I myself will be withdrawing my application regarding a detail of my complaint above with CBS, but my clarifications will not affect my claims. and won’t help their situation. When I said…
… Copy of your “Chicken Little” ad and the rest in your video … NOT sourced from the ICE campaign, but instead a copy from Greenpeace USA…
…. I’m right about the Chicken Little ad, when the image of my long downloaded PDF file from Greenpeace’s archive compared to CBS’ copy of Chicken commercials. But in relation to another matter, the “Serious Problem” ad published, published in the Flagstaff / Bowling Green / Fargo newspapers (I detailed that this and this), a degraded copy of Greenpeace actually much worse compared to what appeared briefly in the CBS video version of their report, which I recorded in fullscreen view for best clarity.
Who has been revealed to have a clearer copy? Neither does the mayor of Tecklenburg’s Charleston v Brabham submit (The 11th law firm of the law firm Sher Edling uses those illustrations in all 15 electronic board copy records) nor AG Tong’s Connecticut v. ExxonMobil submit; it doesn’t refer to ICE in any way. And it’s not evidence provider to Sher Edling, Kert DaviesWho Climate File Website still showing terrible degraded version that trace everything comes back as it was arrive his tenure in the old Ozone Action Organizationthat’s the place given The first continuous media traction leaked memos on “repositioning global warming”, “a year ago Ross Gelbspan push it further.
Who has popped up just within the last two years in an unlikely coincidence with a never-before-seen situation, linked to a much clearer “Serious Problem” ICE ad ?
GelbspanFiles readers will remember how I asked about that less than two-year-old new development in “…Real ICE Ads, Part 2” blog post.
The BBC article I referenced there is this is lengthy largely based on “Trader of DoubtDocumentary star/book author Naomi Oreskes and Kert Davies for allegations of a ‘disinformation campaign’ led by the fossil fuel industry (BBC online article itself This is a great development of an August 2020 BBC radio interview featuring Kert Davies).
A third of the way in the BBC article is Oreskes seriously reiterating the points of the ICE campaign, followed by two versions of public advertisement copy never seen before. Compare the BBC article’s “Serious Matters” ad copy, left, with the CBS version.
Same dust point. I would have thought the CBS video arbitrarily stopped before it reached the end of the ad, but as seen here, the BBC version cuts the end at exact same level.
Instead of having one more news outlet in a long line of outlets, organizations and individuals protested what appeared to be unreliable propaganda talking points, CBS Sunday Morning and the entire news organization CBS should take advantage of this ripe opportunity to ask a simple question, “What is really going on here?And then follow the path that this serious, unbiased, objective question leads them, asking why not see the nice neat problem-solving answers, but instead, date more and more questions arose about the ‘allegation of industry-orchestrated disinformation campaigns’ and the core faction of those who issued it long ago.
Related
