Biofuels Harm Planet, Cost More, British Group Says
Biofuels harm the planet more than fossil fuels, and even lead to greater deforestation, according to areport put out this month by the British think tank Chatham House. The study also said that biofuels are far less cost effective than traditional fuels.
The think tank said that sticking with traditional fossil fuels might actually be better for the environment, since the use of cooking oil as an alternative fuel leads to higher imports of palm oil from Indonesia, a product often grown on deforested land.
Still Trying to ‘Parse’ What New NYT CEO Mark Thompson Knew About Savile Sex-Abuse at BBC
Mark Thompson, the New York Times Co. chief executive, was director-general of the British Broadcasting Corporation when a BBC news program into a massive child-sex abuse scandal involving veteran network entertainer Jimmy Savile was abruptly squashed. Uncertainty lingers as to just what (and when) Thompson knew about accusations against Savile and the cancellation of the program, questions that occasionally made it into the paper, until a report commissioned by the BBC gave Thompson a pass.
Journalist Maureen Orth has a useful new summary of what we know (and what we still don't know) on the web site of Vanity Fair.
The Hiring Hypocrisy At The New York Times
Mark Thompson, a former director-general of the British Broadcasting Corporation, began his new job Monday as president and CEO of The New York Times. The lack of embarrassment was remarkable. Thompson claimed he was the worst kind of ignorant buffoon, knowing nothing about the massive sex-abuse scandal – and then its censorship – that’s rocking the BBC.
The Hiring Hypocrisy At The New York Times
Mark Thompson, a former director-general of the British Broadcasting Corporation, began his new job Monday as president and CEO of The New York Times. The lack of embarrassment was remarkable. Thompson claimed he was the worst kind of ignorant buffoon, knowing nothing about the massive sex-abuse scandal – and then its censorship – that’s rocking the BBC.
The Hiring Hypocrisy At The New York Times
Mark Thompson, a former director-general of the British Broadcasting Corporation, began his new job Monday as president and CEO of The New York Times. The lack of embarrassment was remarkable. Thompson claimed he was the worst kind of ignorant buffoon, knowing nothing about the massive sex-abuse scandal – and then its censorship – that’s rocking the BBC.
NY Times Hyped Pope Abuse Cover-Up Questions, Buried Them for New CEO
- Thirteen Catholic church abuse articles made the front page; just one BBC piece did
- Lead sentence linked Pope to scandals 20 times; linked new Times boss to BBC scandals just once.
It’s a horrifying and tragically familiar story: A beloved and trusted institution is rocked by allegations of sexual abuse of minors over many years. Intrepid reporters dig to learn how the crimes could have gone on so for so long, who knew about them, and if officials kept it quiet. Story after newspaper story leads with speculation that corruption may be systemic and the cover-up may go all the way to the man at the top.
NYT’s Public Editor Questions ‘Unwanted Baggage’ of Incoming CEO Mark Thompson After BBC Coverup Scandal
New York Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan challenged her paper on its incoming chief executive Mark Thompson, who was director general of the BBC when it "killed an investigative segment on its Newsnight program about a celebrity TV personality, Jimmy Savile, accused of sexually abusing hundreds of young girls."
In her Tuesday post, "Times Must Aggressively Cover Mark Thompson’s Role in BBC’s Troubles," Sullivan noted that "Killing the story has impugned the BBC’s integrity," and challenged the New York Times Co. on the issue of Thompson, who will become president and chief executive of the NYT Co. starting November 12.
BBC’s Katty Kay Laments Mideast Crisis Making it Harder for Obama to Attack Romney’s ‘Disastrous Response’
On Sunday's NBC Meet the Press, BBC America Washington correspondent Katty Kay dismissed the electoral impact of the Obama administration's mishandling of the crisis in the Middle East: "I'm not sure that who said what, when, and when the intelligence came out...I'm not sure that that's going to be a huge issue for voters in the course of this election." [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
However, she did bemoan the fact that ongoing chaos in the region may blunt Obama campaign attacks against Mitt Romney: "It does mean that it's harder for the White House to keep focusing on what was a pretty disastrous response from the Romney campaign initially. So it kind of draws a line under that." And what of the "pretty disastrous response" by the President of the United States?
Liberal Media Takes Quote Completely Out of Context to Paint Romney as Out of Touch
Mitt Romney recently took a trip to Louisiana to assess hurricane and flood ravaged areas, and to draw attention to the situation, possibly stirring people and organizations to help those in need. During the course of his visit, Romney encountered a woman who had lost her home in the flooding. Jodie Chiarello, according to a joint report from the Huffington Post and Associated Press, gave this account of her conversation with Romney:
"He just told me to, um, there's assistance out there," Chiarello said of her conversation with Romney. "He said, go home and call 211." That's a public service number offered in many states.
On NBC’s ‘Today,’ BBC’s Katty Kay Laments American Desire for Limited Government
During a report about "why we love the British" on Thursday's NBC Today, special correspondent Tom Brokaw declared: "In one of our election years, the British watch America with a sense of bewilderment." Left-wing BBC anchor Katty Kay sniffed: "When we talk about God, guns, and government, those are the three big things we don't understand." [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
She then lamented: "The role of government here [in the United States] is much more complicated, people don't want it in America. In Britain, we expect government to provide things for us."
Chris Matthews: ‘Can the President Make Mitt Romney Scary?’
Chris Matthews must be really getting concerned that the man that gives him a thrill up his leg is in serious jeopardy of losing in November.
On this weekend's syndicated Chris Matthews Show, the host asked his panel of perilously liberal journalists, "Can the president make Mitt Romney scary?" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Can he make, with all we know about his allies like Donald Trump and all those connections of the past and cultural conservatism, can the president make Mitt Romney scary?
That's some question for a so-called journalist to ask.
Are we at the stage where all pretense of impartiality has been dropped and the media are now just flat going to campaign for their guy without even trying to appear neutral?
Apparently so.
And wouldn't it have been nice if Matthews were as concerned in 2008 about Barack Obama's "allies" and "connections of the past" such as the America-hating Rev. Jeremiah Wright, convicted real estate developer Tony Rezko, and domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn?
That would have been too much like journalism for the likes of Chris Matthews.
Let's hear what his colleagues had to say:
ANDREW SULLIVAN, DAILY BEAST/NEWSWEEK: I think he can make the policies scary. I don't think the person. And I think, again, this is why a slight nuance here. I do think Obama should aggressively attack the policy proposals, but not attack the person. I think that’s the key thing because Obama…
MATTHEWS: Katty can he do that, can he make him scary?
KATTY KAY, BBC: I think he could make the vision of what America might be under President Romney seem scary to Hispanics and women, and that would help him a lot in certain sects.
SULLIVAN: Especially because Republicans control the Congress.
And what has Obama done for Hispanics and women since taking office? That never seems to be an issue with these folks:
MATTHEWS: Andrea?
ANDREA MITCHELL, NBC: I do think that Mitt Romney is concerned about being portrayed scarily because that’s why they came out this past week with a new video showing, and it was talking about his wife and her illness and the really touching effectively, you know, emotional parts of him.
Why shouldn't Romney be "concerned about being portrayed scarily?" The media have been doing that for over a year. Shouldn't he defend himself by presenting evidence to the contrary?
Apparently not:
JOHN HEILEMANN, NEW YORK MAGAZINE NATIONAL AFFAIRS EDITOR: In the middle of the electorate, people are, if you look at under the independent swing voters in swing states, they think that they are to the right of Barack Obama. They think they are closer to Mitt Romney than are ideologically to Barack Obama, but they think their furthest away from Republican trickledown, the Republican social issues, all of that stuff. So if you can make Mitt Romney own the Republican brand…
MATTHEWS: You think they can do that? Make him a scary right-winger on culture, economics and everything?
KAY: Look at what he did to himself during the primaries.
HEILEMANN: You look at the positions he took during the primaries, they're going to try to freeze him like a bug in amber.
MATTHEWS: I guess they think he can do it.
I guess they do - especially with the help of "journalists" like these.
Member of British Parliament Schools Paul Krugman: ‘I Find His View Reckless’
As NewsBusters previously reported, England's Telegraph published an article last Thursday with the absolutely glorious headline "Britain Can’t Afford to Fall for the Charms of the False Economics Messiah Paul Krugman."
On Wednesday, appearing on a broadcast of BBC's Newsnight, Krugman got a much-needed education from a conservative member of the British parliament who said she found his view of governments spending their way out of deficits "reckless" (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
As the segment began, Krugman was offering his normal nonsense about how austerity isn't working in Europe, and that the key to getting the British economy going again is for the government to spend a lot more money it doesn't have.
The host then said to conservative MP Andrea Leadsom, "I don't know why you're shaking your head. This is a Nobel Prize-winning economist."
Leadsom responded:
ANDREA LEADSOM, CONSERVATIVE MEMBER OF BRITISH PARLIAMENT, TREASURY SELECT COMMITTEE: I find his view reckless, frankly. I can’t believe that somebody as, you know, incredibly highly regarded could honestly think that the answer is to go and borrow more money. I mean, it is very simple mathematics, isn’t it? If you are in a hole, if you’ve overspent and overspent, spending more is simply not going to help. It’s going to make things worse. And you talk about austerity, but in reality, this is very, this is austerity lite as Ruth Lee was saying from the IEA. If you really wanted to sort our economy, you’d be doing it far faster - a much shorter, sharper hit to get us back rebounding much sooner than we can.
It really is "very simple mathematics, isn't it?"
Makes you wonder how this is too complex for a "Nobel Prize-winning economist."
Brava, Andrea! Brava!
For those interested, here's the entire segment: