The ABC has clearly given up on any pretence of any claim to rational, balanced and impartial journalism. This fact is evidenced on a daily basis in the piffle that emanates from the publicly funded national broadcaster.
Take as but one example, the reporting of the tidal flooding of Venice this week. This particular king tide was the sixth occasion that Saint Mark’s Basilica has been flooded by such a tide since its construction in the 11th century, mediated by the confluence of the moon and Sun’s gravitational pull when certain periodic alignments between the two occur. Furthermore, this particular king tide was of lesser magnitude than that which last flooded the same Basilica back in 1966.
Now any rational, considered appraisal of such an event might conclude that this particular king tide was yet another in a series of well-documented events falling within the normal parameters of such events as recorded over the last 1000 years. But not for the so-called journalists at their ABC. No, this was evidence without qualification that the bogeyman of climate change was at work again. And whose word do we have to take for that, well no less than the scientific institution of the Mayor of the city, who was quoted as attributing this natural event as the work of carbon dioxide. Never mind the fact that Venice is well documented as subsiding. This fact was a bridge too far for the agenda-driven excuse for journalism at the ABC.
Furthermore, since the 1960’s the amount of anthropogenic CO2 released into the atmosphere has been at least 10 fold and atmospheric Co2 has risen from 300ppm to approaching 420ppm. So why the lesser king tide than that experienced in the 1960s? That should be the paramount question of any journalist worth their salt. But to expect anything other than the parroted mantra of human-induced global warming out of the ABC would be to hold the erroneous expectation that their journalists would look beyond agenda-driven propaganda. Indeed, with a continuously subsiding city and a king tide with a reduced impact to the last similar event over half a century ago, one could make a case for sea level decline rather than sea-level rise.
However, to presume such a rational appraisal from the ABC is to presume that reason and rational thinking underpins their journalism rather than emotive activism. We see this daily from the(ir) ABC in relation to the current bushfire crisis, which not surprisingly are the two regions predominantly affected by the current drought.
There is a current production line of catastrophe emanating out of the ABC reporting and a deliberate attempt to paint the current drought as something beyond the normal parameters of such events in Australia, thereby again linking it to the global warming bandwagon.
Instead, before one gets too carried away with such a narrative one should deeply ponder the Bureau of Meteorology’s rainfall chart (a full-size version is available here) to gain the perspective so deeply lacking at the ABC.
Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.