Talk:Climate change/Archive 28

message: Live earth is sponsored by MSN. With out corporate media Live Earth would be nothing. It would be a midweek pub event between karaoke and bingo at best. Give me a break already. 2 billion viewers, every single carrier part of a corporation. Bands signed to corporate labels. Public relations executed by the largest corporations on our dear Earth. Not corporate media though, alrighty. I guess it does blow apart the idea that manmande global warming advocates are somehow the 'little guy' fighting against 'the man'. Live Earth = pure corporate media propaganda. --Dean1970 17:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dean, thats indirect, and a reversal of the causal chain. The concerts were not arranged by the sponsors - nor was the media attention promised before it happened.  There is no doubt that it was good P.R. for some companies (and a good thing for the Nielsen ratings)- but that doesn't make the show a P.R. stunt for the companies. As for your last comment - that is pure WP:OR and WP:SOAP - something you should leave at home. Thank you. --Kim D. Petersen 17:36, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dean, if you write "corporate media does XX", you imply that they act in concert, or at least in unison. Fox News, for example, has been downplaying global warming for a long time, as has been the Washington Times. Your argument is analogous with claiming "African Americans are endorsing Harry Potter" just because it's on Ophra's. --Stephan Schulz 17:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Murdoch flip-flopped only recently. That's why I used the past tense. "Every single carrier is part of a corporation" - which means all media is corporate media by your definition. But then the term is superfluous. Also, you need to distinguish between "x is an instance of Y" and "x is Y". --Stephan Schulz 18:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Indeed you did, which is nonsense. We have an article on corporate media, so your link is at best misleading. And the claim is still OR. Where is your source?  --Stephan Schulz 18:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sure we also have an article on musicians. Can we not arrange the text to mention LE directly rather than indirectly? I don't think corporate or musicians really fits William M. Connolley 18:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Your definition of "corporate media" is as spurios as your speculation. The Great Global Warming Swindle, promoted by British Channel 4, does not mention "corporate media" on its page. And again, support by some corporations does not imply involvement of "the corporate media". What you have is not a valid source, but a textbook example of original research, and one that very nicely displays why we don't allow that. --Stephan Schulz 19:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Even if that were the case, what on Earth does it have to do with Global Warming? Little guy v. Big guy is irrelevant. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 07:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because there is a perception that linking the pov of manmade GW with corporate media is thought of as being an unflattering association at best, and an attempt to be damning to the whole POV of at worst. Liveearth is the currently most visible and wide reaching media platform to the masses and its probably thinking that calling it a corporate media event who somehow detract from its perception of significance.RCHM 13:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually someone did the sums, and pointed out that 150 million people staying at home to watch Live Earth on the TV saved us from a lot of carbon dioxide emissions. A thousand times fewer people actually visited the concerts. Rnt20 11:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Live Earth 

message: An act of Climate change denial denial by the skeptics?  :)  Count Iblis 14:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm trying to find some sign of good faith in that snarky comment, but am unable to. Can someone assist? Anastrophe 18:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kinda looks like humor to me. See the :) - usually implies humor. Calling a humorous comment snarky on the other hand... Aw well - roll on. Vsmith 20:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD [[Climate change denial]] 

message: CNN reports unilaterally that global warming is a "boogeyman" hell bent on destroying cherished freedoms of great America. Look at the bottom paragraph:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/10/fa.lundberg.qa/index.html
No wonder the so-called "rest of the world" hates USA! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.0.68.145 (talk • contribs) 
:Right... what you are reading is an interview with someone who does survey's of gas/petrol prices. It's their personal opinion. It is nothing official. It's POV - not fact. ScarianTalk 15:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fresh from CNN