Our follow up complaint raised the following issues with the ABC Complaints Review Executive (our points in red italics after ABC response) we still await the outcome of the review.
4. I understand 'A Journey through Climate History' is not intended as an exhaustive timeline of every single climatic event in Earth's history. I am advised that the Ordovician ice age was not included in the timeline due to its relative brevity, and not because of any 'inconvenient truth', as you suggest. Audience & Consumer Affairs does not believe the omission of this ice age from the timeline was inconsistent with the ABC's editorial standards.
While “brief” the Ordovician Ice Age is of great significance in the current debate as the Ice Age is thought to have occurred at a time when CO2 levels were as high 4000 ppm. Its "relative brevity" is irrelevant and it should be included in the timeline to provide readers with a more balanced picture of the role of CO2 on climate.
5b. Once again, as with point 4, it is relevant to note that it is not the intention of the website to provide an exhaustive timeline of all historical climatic events. I understand ABC Innovation considers that it was acceptable to include the most recent warm period, the Medieval Warm Period, and not include the Roman Warm Period. Audience & Consumer Affairs does not believe this omission was inconsistent with relevant editorial standards.
Roman Warm Period coincided with the height of the Roman Empire. This is as relevant than other historical events in the timeline.
6. We acknowledge that the placement of the Medieval Warm Period at 700 AD in the timeline was inaccurate and inconsistent with the event description, which refers to the period "between AD 800 1300". It has been moved to 800.
We also acknowledge that the statement in the entry, "the idea that it was a global phenomenon is now discredited and it is suspected that the average global temperature could have been slightly cooler than in the early 20th century" overstated the certainty of the current understanding of the Medieval Warm Period. The entry has been amended to reflect the current level of uncertainty as to whether the phenomenon was global, based on IPCC reports.
We also acknowledge that the statement in the entry, "the idea that it was a global phenomenon is now discredited and it is suspected that the average global temperature could have been slightly cooler than in the early 20th century" overstated the certainty of the current understanding of the Medieval Warm Period. The entry has been amended to reflect the current level of uncertainty as to whether the phenomenon was global, based on IPCC reports.
The timeline continues to promote references that bias one side of the debate of the extent of the Medieval Warm Period. Where are references that highlight the broad nature of warming during the Medieval Warm Period such as reference to CO2science's Medieval Warm Period Project?
10. We do not believe it was necessary for the timeline entry on An Inconvenient Truth to mention the errors found in the Dimmock case in the UK. The entry described the film as "controversial", ensuring that users are aware that it was subject to controversy. It is relevant to note that a link was provided to the Wikipedia page about the film, which discusses the Dimmock case at some length. On review, we are satisfied that the entry was consistent with the editorial standard for accuracy.
Note the way The Great Global Warming Swindle is treated for comparison. ABC do not stop at merely mentioning it was controversial but go into great detail about the subsequent Ofcom inquiry. Any reasonable consideration of these two popular documentaries would treat them equally.
11. Once again, the timeline is not intended to be exhaustive and does not contain every climate-related event in human history. Audience & Consumer Affairs does not believe the omission of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) report to which you refer was inconsistent with relevant editorial standards.
Omissions are just as significant as inclusions. The overall impression is that the producers of the timeline are biased by not including mention of the NIPCC report. In the context of the history of Climate Change it is a significant development.
Copy of official correction, note that there is no editorial comment attached to the original item to indicate that there have been changes made to it.
ABC Science website, 17 December 2009 (received)
Summary published: Thursday 25, February 2010
Complaint: An online reader complained that the ABC Science website ‘A Journey through Climate History’ contained a number of inaccuracies.
Audience and Consumer Affairs response: The ABC acknowledged the following errors on the site:
• The placement of the Huronian Ice Age at 2.7 billion years ago in the timeline, and the statement that it was “from 2.7 to 2.3 Billion Years ago”, were inaccurate.
• The placement of the event ‘First life on Earth’ at 2 billion years ago in the timeline, and the reference in the entry to primitive, one-celled creatures having appeared “about 3 billion years ago” were inaccurate.
• The reference to a Cryogenian Ice Age having occurred from 850 to 630 million years ago was inaccurate.
• The placement of the Medieval Warm Period at 700 AD in the timeline was inaccurate and inconsistent with the event description, which referred to the period “between AD 800 [and] 1300”. Further, the statement in the entry “the idea that it was a global phenomenon is now discredited and it is suspected that the average global temperature could have been slightly cooler than in the early 20th century” overstated the certainty of the current understanding of the Medieval Warm Period.
• A disputed claim that the Northeast and Northwest Passages were open in 2008 for the first time in 125,000 years was inaccurately stated as fact.
• A statement that “since [1998], the record of ‘warmest year’ and ‘worst bleaching’ has likely been broken” was unsubstantiated and did not adhere to the editorial standard for accuracy.
The errors were corrected on the website.
Complaint: An online reader complained that the ABC Science website ‘A Journey through Climate History’ contained a number of inaccuracies.
Audience and Consumer Affairs response: The ABC acknowledged the following errors on the site:
• The placement of the Huronian Ice Age at 2.7 billion years ago in the timeline, and the statement that it was “from 2.7 to 2.3 Billion Years ago”, were inaccurate.
• The placement of the event ‘First life on Earth’ at 2 billion years ago in the timeline, and the reference in the entry to primitive, one-celled creatures having appeared “about 3 billion years ago” were inaccurate.
• The reference to a Cryogenian Ice Age having occurred from 850 to 630 million years ago was inaccurate.
• The placement of the Medieval Warm Period at 700 AD in the timeline was inaccurate and inconsistent with the event description, which referred to the period “between AD 800 [and] 1300”. Further, the statement in the entry “the idea that it was a global phenomenon is now discredited and it is suspected that the average global temperature could have been slightly cooler than in the early 20th century” overstated the certainty of the current understanding of the Medieval Warm Period.
• A disputed claim that the Northeast and Northwest Passages were open in 2008 for the first time in 125,000 years was inaccurately stated as fact.
• A statement that “since [1998], the record of ‘warmest year’ and ‘worst bleaching’ has likely been broken” was unsubstantiated and did not adhere to the editorial standard for accuracy.
The errors were corrected on the website.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please keep to the topic. Abusive comments and bad language are simply not tolerated. Note that your comment may take a little while to appear.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.