Thu
Mar 1 2007
10:26 am
By: Number9

Today the Tennessean has an article by Beverly Keel that shows the thought process of Al Gore. Mr. Gore was addressing a group of about 50 people at the U.S. Media Ethics Summit II.

So far so good. Mr. Gore speaking to a group about ethics and of course Global Warming.

Oh boy, how do you explain this?

In Mr. Gore's own words, "I believe that is one of the principal reasons why political leaders around the world have not yet taken action," Gore said. "There are many reasons, but one of the principal reasons in my view is more than half of the mainstream media have rejected the scientific consensus implicitly — and I say 'rejected,' perhaps it's the wrong word. They have failed to report that it is the consensus and instead have chosen … balance as bias."

There you have it. Balance is now bias.

Mr. Gore continues, "I don't think that any of the editors or reporters responsible for one of these stories saying, 'It may be real, it may not be real,' is unethical. But I think they made the wrong choice, and I think the consequences are severe.

I think if it is important to look at the pressures that made it more likely than not that mainstream journalists in the United States would convey a wholly inaccurate conclusion about the most important moral, ethical, spiritual and political issue humankind has ever faced."

I can’t decipher that last paragraph except to guess Mr. Gore means if you do not agree with him it is because you have been “pressured”. Pressured by whom, Exxon I guess.

Mr. Gore’s point was that the media is the reason that Global Warming has not been embraced by all people. He is a man on a mission. Get with it mass media.

A 10-year University of California study found that essentially zero percent of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles disagreed that global warming exists, whereas, another study found that 53 percent of mainstream newspaper articles disagreed the global warming premise.

R. Neal's picture

Hey, maybe you could take

Hey, maybe you could take the Gore bashing somewhere else. I'm tired of seeing KnoxViews turn up in wingnut blog roundups.

But let me see if I'm understanding you.

Someone says the sky is blue.

Someone else says it is yellow.

The media is supposed to report "the sky is either blue or yellow, or possibly green."

Is that what you're saying?

Edit: (Sorry, had to go open all the windows and turn my thermostat up to 90 and turn my oven on and start my car and leave it idling in the driveway because Al Gore is a hypocrite.)

And isn't it odd that to achieve "balance" the media has to go out and find fringe "scientists" who are paid coroporate shills for the energy industry?

(Anxiously awaiting your links and lengthy excerpts from volumes of peer reviewed and Nobel prize winning science proving that global warming is a hoax and Al Gore is a robot programmed by Chinese Communists to destroy capitalism and free markets.)

MartyD's picture

global warming

I am 70 years old and I can vividly remember as a child and young adult growing up in K'town we could see thousands of stars in a dark midnight blue sky.. As recently as 25 years ago shortly after we moved to Houston my family and I could see a lot of stars in the sky. Because it is so flat here we had a panoramic view of practically the whole sky. Not any more! I'm not a scientist and certainly don't have the understanding of the situation that Al Gore does but common sense tells me that whatever is blocking out the stars has got to be having an effect on our environment.

KTB's picture

Another report from the TCPR

News Channel 5 has it here.

And also from TheRep, the Colbert report on Gore and TCPR. Funny.

KTB

WhitesCreek's picture

9, why do you hate rational thought?

A 10-year University of California study found that essentially zero percent of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles disagreed that global warming exists, whereas, another study found that 53 percent of mainstream newspaper articles disagreed with the global warming premise.

I realize you have not seen "Inconvenient Truth" and therefore feel qualified to bash it, but could you at least quit lying about it?

Let me put this in simple terms that even you could understand if you wanted to:

If essentially all of the scientists in the whole world are correct that climate change has occurred, is occurring, and is going to get much worse, and human activity is the cause, AND WE MUST ACT NOW TO PREVENT DISASTER, there will be very little economic impact although some corporations will have to adjust their business practices.

So... we can act now and have very little downside if all the scientists are wrong.

Or we can not act and have a disaster on a scale never contemplated in Revelations, if people like you are wrong.

You are asking us to take a gamble with our children's lives...I'm not willing to do that. Particularly as Al Gore and some other folks I could point out have proven, A person can be very prosperous and still do the right thing.

9, remember that guy with the bullhorn in the stairwell on 9-11 telling people to "go back into the building, everythin is under control"?

That's you.

Steve

R. Neal's picture

I don't understand that last

I don't understand that last paragraph about the 10 year study in California. Isn't that refuting the point that 9 is trying to make? What am I missing?

SnM's picture

It's refuting it. A 10-year

It's refuting it.

A 10-year University of California study found that essentially zero percent of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles disagreed that global warming exists, whereas, another study found that 53 percent of mainstream newspaper articles disagreed with the global warming premise.

Peer-reviewed scientific journals agree that global warming exists. Fifty-three percent of mainstream newspaper articles, no doubt through a desire for presenting a balance of opinions, cast doubt on it. That appears to be in essence what Gore was suggesting in the quoted text.

WhitesCreek's picture

exactly

Like I said, Why does 9 hate rational thought?

Something's loose inside his head. Metulj is right.

Andy Axel's picture

Odd edit

What's with the ellipsis in the quote?

instead have chosen … balance as bias

What's omitted here? I see it's in the original too, so it looks like a bit of creative editing here.

____________________________

Recursive blogwhore.

Sven's picture

Boy, ain't this the

Boy, ain't this the truth:

On the day that the Green Zone falls, I expect to get at least a dozen emails about Hillary Clinton being rude to her drycleaner or Al Gore buying a yacht or Cindy Sheehan not sharing her sandwich.

Elrod's picture

What a bizarre post. Are you

What a bizarre post. Are you agreeing with Gore's complaint that newspapers present global warming as "disputed?" Or are you criticizing Gore for mocking "balance" as bias against the scientific consensus? Let's take an analogy to the Holocaust to stress the point. "Some" deny that 6 million Jews died at the Holocaust. Should the mainstream press report the Holocaust as "disputed" because "some" believe it's just a "hoax?" It's that sort of "balance" and presentation of global warming as "disputed" that Gore is attacking. Do you think Gore is wrong to attack those people? And no, not every global warming skeptic is being paid by Exxon. In fact, most global warming skeptics are people who don't like the consequences: government interference in the economy to slow carbon emissions.

Rachel's picture

Balance is now bias. Yes,

Balance is now bias.

Yes, sometimes it is. Let's put this simply. You believe the earth revolves around the sun. I believe the sun revolves around the earth. All credible scientists agree with you.

Reporting this in a "balanced" fashion would be stupid, and would show a clear bias toward my (wrong) point of view.

Presenting all sides of a story is important. Giving all sides equal weight, when most of the evidence is on one side, is just bad reporting.

R. Neal's picture

You believe the earth

You believe the earth revolves around the sun. I believe the sun revolves around the earth. All credible scientists agree with you.

These so-called "credible scientists" are all heretics on a mission to spread Zionist propaganda. Here is the only scientific proof you need that what I'm saying is the 100% accurate truth:

(link...)

Number9's picture

Sometimes you learn more by listening...

And this is one of those times. An Orwellian statement is made and no one cared that newspeak had been adopted.

It is not the first time Al Gore has used newspeak. Mr. Gore in an interview with David Roberts of Grist magazine said, "In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis."

So I am asked about rational thought. Mr. Gore advocates "over-representation of factual presentations" and equates "balance with bias" but I am asked about rational thought.

I will be moving to rikki's thread to try to engage in some rational thought. I mentioned yesterday that Al Gore is not good choice for the leader of this movement. I don't think "newspeak" will carry this movement very far. Again we see that a few people believe "thought crimes" should be punished. And who should be the arbiter of what is a "thought crime"?

Your comments on KnoxViews were very illuminating:

Why does 9 hate rational thought?

Reporting this in a "balanced" fashion would be stupid, and would show a clear bias toward my (wrong) point of view.

Presenting all sides of a story is important. Giving all sides equal weight, when most of the evidence is on one side, is just bad reporting.

If essentially all of the scientists in the whole world are correct that climate change has occurred, is occurring, and is going to get much worse, and human activity is the cause, AND WE MUST ACT NOW TO PREVENT DISASTER, there will be very little economic impact although some corporations will have to adjust their business practices.

In a word, they're clamping down on it. It's the recent conclusion of 14 western European nations that Holocaust denial is just too dangerous, and these nations have made it a crime punishable by imprisonment to make such assertions. Neo-Nazi and former Tennessean Ernst Zundel was imprisoned under one such European law just last week.

It's not necessarily ExxonMobil who is corrupting the media, although they have tried with varying degrees of success. It's an inept and dysfunctional media that believe they need to "balance" what scientists are almost universally stating, with what the far right (and ExxonMobil, et. al.) is regurgitating.

This is why I called them. I needed someone who would question global warming to add an opposing view point, however silly. If I'd had more time I could probably have found an intelligent bona fide expert who doubts climate change, or that it is caused by humans. This would have been difficult, however, because not many people still believe that. So you can chalk it up to deadline pressure and/or laziness.

What a timely analogy, Elrod. My daughter just finished writing a research paper on the topic of how nations are variously responding to this type of "free speech."

Rachel's picture

Was this mishmash of quotes

Was this mishmash of quotes taken out of context and mushed together supposed to prove something?

Cause I don't have a clue what the point is.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Glibly offered

Number 9: "Again we see that a few people believe "thought crimes" should be punished. And who should be the arbiter of what is a "thought crime"?"

Recent practices in western Europe rely on juries of one's peers, 9, but actually, my comment on Elrod's Holocaust denial analogy was offered glibly, as I'm sure you realize. No, I do not support this "clamping down" on free speech--even WRT speech so heinous as Holocaust denial--and I'm afraid my daughter's research paper imparts some of her mother's opinions.

On this thread, Rachel's analogy of sun-revolving-around-earth seems to me to be the one most analogous to media's sometimes-misguided attempts to "balance" news stories that needn't be. Refer back to it?

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Off the island with you, LV.

Off the island with you, LV.

LadyVols's picture

? Off the island with you,

?

Off the island with you, LV."

?

Not fighting with anyone and as for Al I voted for the guy and worked for him but I really feel good about Hillary in 08.

Sunday I am trying out the new church on Kingston Pike at the invitation of a poster here, if works out I will have cut my drive down and be in a bit more of a traditional world of believers.

I would love to meet most of those who blog here if there is ever a chance. As for leaving I am trying to abide by the rules, I have never insulted anyone or tried in the least to pick a fight and I never will, just not my nature. I even said I don't mind being called names or being tagged as stupid even though the rules say everyone should try to be civil and respect each other here. I respect everyone and enjoy the gray matter on display..hope you will let me stay on the Island?

Tamara Shepherd's picture

What is your name, LV?

What is your name, LV?

talidapali's picture

Not fair...

I don't think it's fair to ask LV personal info. Like I said in another thread if anyone wants to know my name, google can be a friend, but that doesn't mean anyone has the right to demand that I reveal personal info. Turn about is fair play. We can disagree here, but getting too personal should be off limits. Just my 2 cents.

All I'm really saying to LV is I don't understand the worship aspect of the Hillary thing. She has done some good things, but I personally don't think she is qualified to be President her first time out of the chute. I would be glad to support her as Vice President so that she can get some international experience under her belt which Al Gore has already had. I think as the Vice President she would represent the American people extremely well, but I think she would be far too controversial to be an effective President.

The way LV goes about pushing Hillary and advertising for her SEEMS to be a little suspicious, but may, in fact, be totally innocent.

_________________________________________________________

"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"

"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali

Tamara Shepherd's picture

One lump or two?

LV: "I would love to meet most of those who blog here if there is ever a chance."

talidapli: "I don't think it's fair to ask LV personal info."

When I recently joined this blog, tali, I didn't realize it might be possible to do so without offering my name. It makes no difference to me that I might have, though. I stand behind my comments (and even the occassional piece of accidental misinformation), which I offer with sincerity, and I know enough people here to trust that they will interact with me in a kind and fair manner. Already, even some people I *don't* know have done so.

In the behavior of Lady Vols, though, I sense no sincerity and only a desire to rankle. She/he/it masks her/his/its identity behind a pseudenym, is focused beyond all reason on the subjects of Hillary Clinton and our salvation, and professes an insincere desire to meet us, as well.

She/he/it may meet *me* at any time. The full name I offer here is listed in the telephone book, in Powell, as she/he/it is aware.

So, pick up the phone, LV. Call Mr. Bill Lyons (you have his name) and me, both. We'll have that coffee klatch...in my kitchen. Troll.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

Timely analogy

Elrod: "Let's take an analogy to the Holocaust to stress the point. "Some" deny that 6 million Jews died at the Holocaust. Should the mainstream press report the Holocaust as "disputed" because "some" believe it's just a "hoax?""

What a timely analogy, Elrod. My daughter just finished writing a research paper on the topic of how nations are variously responding to this type of "free speech."

In a word, they're clamping down on it. It's the recent conclusion of 14 western European nations that Holocaust denial is just too dangerous, and these nations have made it a crime punishable by imprisonment to make such assertions. Neo-Nazi and former Tennessean Ernst Zundel was imprisoned under one such European law just last week (the N-S carried that story).

Whatever the broader implications of the trend, it's clearly a trend cognizant of the danger implicit in some types of "free speech."

Doesn't bode well for Nine, huh?

Factchecker's picture

I don't get it, Big Dan

What is 9's point? I don't see any problem from Gore here. Rachel and SnM explained it best. It's not necessarily ExxonMobil who is corrupting the media, although they have tried with varying degrees of success. It's an inept and dysfunctional media that believe they need to "balance" what scientists are almost universally stating, with what the far right (and ExxonMobil, et. al.) is regurgitating.

They're insecure to the point that if they don't give equal weight, they're afraid Faux News and the whole GOP Noise Machine will pin them forever more as one-sided and liberal-biased.

That point was well made in An Inconvenient Truth, as per the last paragraph above. So what, 9?

Sven's picture

Since we're floating in the

Since we're floating in the evidence-free zone anyway, I may as well add the taxicab confession I got from a reporter a while back. I asked him why he was repeatedly using think-tank wanker Joseph Bast as a source on climatology. This is what the reporter e-mailed back:

I'm aware of the Heartland Institute's reactionary take on environmental and other issues. This is why I called them. I needed someone who would question global warming to add an opposing view point, however silly. If I'd had more time I could probably have found an intelligent bona fide expert who doubts climate change, or that it is caused by humans. This would have been difficult, however, because not many people still believe that. So you can chalk it up to deadline pressure and/or laziness.

captainkona's picture

Well, Al Gore hasn't

Well, Al Gore hasn't committed Treason. Hasn't murdered thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Hasn't spied on his own people, turned his back on disaster victims, spit on the Constitution, signed away fundamental rights, made the White House the laughing stock of the planet, protected congressional pedophiles and thieves, ruined the strongest economy on earth or committed blasphemy by claiming "God wants me to be prez'dent".

That's why Repigs hate Al Gore...he's just not their kinda guy.

"If Bill Frist really cared about people's health, he'd get a job as a mechanic"

LadyVols's picture

Hey, maybe you could take

Hey, maybe you could take the Gore bashing somewhere else. I'm tired of seeing KnoxViews turn up in wingnut blog roundups."

Great idea! As for Al lets hope he keeps up the good fight or joins Hillary (as her VP) in the big race come 08. Which wingnut blog roundups is quoting this blog?

talidapali's picture

Ladyvols...

Al Gore doesn't have to take a back seat to anybody. If he runs, then Hillary should count herself fortunate if he decides to ask her to join the ticket as the VP candidate.

_________________________________________________________

"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"

"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali

LadyVols's picture

If he runs, then Hillary

If he runs, then Hillary should count herself fortunate if he decides to ask her to join the ticket as the VP candidate."

I love the FIRE in your literal eye when you talk about 08!!

That said, Al does not have the money, the history (she has done a great job in her state) or the "winning" record that Hillary does. I know we are all still upset with the way the election was "taken" from Al and we would like to see him step up and win again...but the world has changed and when you have to pick between a woman who is married to a democrat with a 90% approval rate in the party next to a man married to a woman who started the first sticker war on CDs and even LPs you can see the choice is clear.

Hillary brings Bill and her history...Al brings Tipper. Hillary with Al as VP is the ticket to beat who or whatever the right throws at us!

Rachel's picture

Troll.

Troll.

talidapali's picture

Ummm...actually

Al has been elected MANY more times in his life than Hillary.

In fact her current position is the ONLY one she has been elected to isn't it?

Al Gore has a proven track record.

He served in the Senate for HOW many years BEFORE he ran for President against Bill Clinton in the primary and then as Clinton's running mate in the general?

And lest you forget, HE WON IN 2000. He won the popular vote and ONLY lost in the electoral vote because the Supreme Court of the United States intervened in the recount of the Florida vote and DECLARED Bush the winner without actually allowing the recount to be finished for the first run-through.

Compared to Al Gore, Hillary is a one-hit wonder and still in her sophomore season. I believe your actual aim here is to foment dissension within the fold of the Democratic party and you are being at best...disingenuous.

I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but this constant "Hillary worship" is beginning to sound like a Republican operative tactic.
________________________________________________________

"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"

"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali

LadyVols's picture

Troll." Submitted by Rachel

Troll."
Submitted by Rachel on Thu, 2007/03/01 - 3:57pm.

Sorry Rachel, but the new name is Troll=Stupid. Thanks for the reply anyway.

LadyVols's picture

I believe your actual aim

I believe your actual aim here is to foment dissension within the fold of the Democratic party and you are being at best...disingenuous.

I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but this constant "Hillary worship" is beginning to sound like a Republican operative tactic."

I thought it was outstanding that he won the award and what he is doing now on the global warming stage. I just really like this woman and you can't over look the fact that her husband is pure star power. Nothing in this world wrong with Al either, but I want us to have the best of the best come 08! It looks like the right can't get a candidate worth running into the game but like you said remember 2000..they have ways of winning even if the don't.

I worked hard for FORD and was sure he was going to win, but guess what? We all need to work as a group to make sure we take 08. I just like Hillary because of what she and BIll did when they were running the country.

I can't really see the republicans having much of any tactic right now.

Troll=Stupid

cafkia's picture

Others

Others such as myself can be often spotted quaffing a delicious adult beverage at the Downtown Grill and Brewery on any given night but Wednesday evenings in particular. Then there is the saturday morning breakfast @ the Market Square Kitchen. We are not hard to find as a general rule. I'm the big loud one outlining the moral deficiencies of republicans.

CAFKIA

----------------------------------------------------------- 

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.
  - William G. McAdoo

redmondkr's picture

I have begun skipping LV's

I have begun skipping LV's comments as I am satisfied that he/she/it is:

a - a troll
b - a seriously overmedicated troll
c - a seriously undermedicated troll

_____________

Come See Us at

The Hill Online

Justin's picture

LV=annoying fake

LV=annoying fake sincerity.
Go away troll.

LadyVols's picture

Submitted by talidapali on

Submitted by talidapali on Thu, 2007/03/01 - 5:31pm.

I don't think it's fair to ask LV personal info. Like I said in another thread if anyone wants to know my name, google can be a friend, but that doesn't mean anyone has the right to demand that I reveal personal info. Turn about is fair play. We can disagree here, but getting too personal should be off limits. Just my 2 cents."

First I am the most open person you will ever meet.
Second for those who REALLY wanta meet me set the place and time and we will be there

Second. This blog just MIGHT become a hell of a great place for all sides to shoot the shi*t and when the smoke dies out find some great answers to the problems we swim in daily.

Third...more than a few tell me there are 20 to 30 max posters here. Could be but is that a downside? If they are strong in their convictions and love both their county then they could be a seed that grows into something very exciting

Fourth..there is no fourth...ok how about this..lets meet, drink eat..yes I will buy .. and see if together we can't find a path that will kinda make all of us smile and relax?

Troll who has been called Stupid

Love to all

JaHu's picture

Isn't all this Gore bashing

Isn't all this Gore bashing kind of like attacking the weather man because it's raining.

I guess the conserves feel that if they can get Gore out of the picture, then we want have global warming any longer.

Adrift in the Sea of Humility

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Local .GOV

Wire Reports

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

Search and Archives