U.K. Court Coverage: A Clean Kill for Climate Confusion

authordefault
on

Media Matters has a nice wrap on how the U.S. mainstream media covered the U.K. High Court decision that approved An Inconvenient Truth for continued broadcast in U.K.ย schools.

In a few cases, the news slipped through that the judge had actually rejected Stewart Dimmock’s request to block the movie’s broadcast or insist that it be accompanied by trashy โ€œbalancingโ€ videos (The Great Global Warming Swindle, anyone?). But mostly, papers just reported that Al Gore had been caught out overstating theย case.

You have to be impressed when a disppointed plaintiff can spin a court loss that successfully. But equally, you have to wonder, did any of those reporters actually read theย judgment?

Related Posts

Analysis
on

The acclaimed climate accountability journalist says bold steps are needed to reverse the insidious impact of decades of industry propaganda on the public square.

The acclaimed climate accountability journalist says bold steps are needed to reverse the insidious impact of decades of industry propaganda on the public square.
on

With a U.S. Supreme Court decision looming on whether the company can be held liable for climate deception, internal documents show a campaign to question science.

With a U.S. Supreme Court decision looming on whether the company can be held liable for climate deception, internal documents show a campaign to question science.
on

Judges highlight stories revealing oil and advertising industry tactics for prolonging the fossil fuel era.

Judges highlight stories revealing oil and advertising industry tactics for prolonging the fossil fuel era.
on

Campaigners say advertising and PR agencies are โ€œnowhere closeโ€ to giving up their oil and gas clients.

Campaigners say advertising and PR agencies are โ€œnowhere closeโ€ to giving up their oil and gas clients.