{"id":258823,"date":"2023-05-24T11:55:20","date_gmt":"2023-05-24T09:55:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=258823"},"modified":"2023-05-24T11:55:23","modified_gmt":"2023-05-24T09:55:23","slug":"regime-climate-censorship-enforcer-newsguard-the-tragic-case-of-zack-fishman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=258823","title":{"rendered":"Regime Climate Censorship Enforcer NewsGuard: The tragic case of Zack Fishman"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Note: read on for the full Josh cartoon below.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I know that many of you have experienced censorship of climate information at some level. Whether it is on Facebook, Twitter, WordPress, YouTube, Google search, or other platforms, there has been an almost a universal effort to reduce what our Mann-inspired Climate Information Overlords deem \u201cmisinfomation.\u201d In some cases, such things are warranted, as there is some climate information that is held up by climate skeptics that is in fact, wrong. I think we do a pretty good job here at WUWT of weeding that out and we work hard to present information that is factually accurate \u2013 even though it is often disagreed with.

Unfortunately, there has sprung up a plethora of so called \u201cfact-checkers\u201d in the past couple of years who believe they are on a mission to \u201csave\u201d the planet. In almost all cases, they suffer from an inflated sense of self-importance bolstered by what is called \u201cnoble cause corruption.<\/a>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From that WUWT essay: Stephen Schneider recognized the dilemma for scientists and was quoted in Discover Magazine<\/em> (October 1989 vol. 10 no.10):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cOn the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but \u2013 which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts.

On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we\u2019d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broad-based support, to capture the public\u2019s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This \u2018double ethical bind\u2019 we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Essentially, while the climate alarmists of the world deal in \u201cscary scenarios,\u201d such as the recent hype that the coming El Nino will push us past the \u201cdangerous\u201d 1.5\u00b0C tipping point<\/a>, we point out that we\u2019ve already experienced 1.5\u00b0C of warming<\/a>, and the world didn\u2019t roast, and we are still here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate alarmist claims are almost always driven by questionable climate model projections, such as the now overheated and discredited RCP8.5<\/a>. Climate skeptics deal in the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts \u2013 but we are excoriated for doing so. A good example is my survey of NOAA stations last year, where I found that 96% of them don\u2019t meet NOAA\u2019s own published standards<\/a> for station siting, leading to a warm bias in temperature. Standards are in place for a reason. Yet, despite that, I was told in no uncertain terms by Polifact<\/a> that none of this matters, and that climate scientists are \u201chandling it.\u201d Newsflash: they aren\u2019t. Of course just like Zack, neophyte climate \u201cexpert\u201d Madison Czopek<\/a> didn\u2019t want to hear the facts we presented, deferring instead to opinions.

Despite our best efforts to inform the world of the the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts, we are labeled pejoratively as Exxon funded \u201cclimate deniers\u201d when in fact we at WUWT don\u2019t (and never have) received a dime from Exxon, Koch, Texaco, BP, etc. It\u2019s just a convenient fantasy to apply a derogatory label so that low-information activists can slime us. We don\u2019t deny the climate is changing \u2013 not at all, we simply don\u2019t feel it is a crisis, and that the methods, science, and conclusions that are being used to totally rework global energy policy in chasing unobtainable goals such as \u201cnet zero\u201d is an overwrought, overzealous, and overhyped viewpoint that does more harm than good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Enter Climate Regime Censorship Enforcers Zach Fishman and NewsGuard.

NewsGuard assigned their new hire\u00a0Zack Fishman<\/a>, who was fresh out of \u201cclimate journalism finishing school\u201d to perform an evaluation and rating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I went through an \u201cevaluation\u201d last year with Zach to determine\u00a0the rating<\/a>. Looking at the their process then, and thinking \u201cwell, maybe it isn\u2019t biased,\u201d I received and considered a number of questions, many of which had nothing to to do with content or accuracy. Charles\u2019s response at the time was to \u201ctell him to [sanitized] himself.\u201d In retrospect, I probably should have followed Charles\u2019s advice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

My response:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The result? Their own rules about platforms were simply ignored, which indicated to me that there was an agenda from higher ups; Zack admitted as much in the email exchange then. Needless to say, WUWT received a terrible rating. The same thing occurred at The Heartland Institute, where I am a Senior Fellow for Environment and Climate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NewsGuard is a Pentagon funded member of the US Government\u2019s Censorship Industrial Complex.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Embedded in the post was a picture of a nearly $750,000 award from the Department of Defense to NewsGuard, an organization the independent journalists characterized as a \u201cgovernment-funded\u201d entity implicated in the Censorship Complex.https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2023\/03\/13\/newsguard-claims-not-to-be-government-funded-but-a-750k-grant-suggests-otherwise\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

They work to strengthen and enhance government approved narratives and work to suppress, starve, and deplatform independent thinkers and publishers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

In response to Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz\u2019s question<\/a> \u2014 \u201cWho is NewsGuard?\u201d \u2014 Shellenberger explained: \u201cBoth the Global Disinformation Index and NewsGuard are U.S. government-funded entities who are working to drive advertisers\u2019 revenue away from disfavored publications and towards the ones they favor.\u201dhttps:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2023\/03\/13\/newsguard-claims-not-to-be-government-funded-but-a-750k-grant-suggests-otherwise\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

In addition to attacking revenue and deplatforming, NewsGuard works with the ideologically captured teachers\u2019 unions and school system to block, discredit, and censor wrongthink and thoughtcrime.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

AFT Partners with NewsGuard to Combat Misinformation Online<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

National Partnership Will Roll Out Crucial News Literacy Tool to Tens of Millions of US Students and Families<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Release:<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Tuesday, January 25, 2022<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WASHINGTON<\/strong>\u2014The American Federation of Teachers has launched a national partnership with a leading anti-misinformation tool NewsGuard<\/a> to protect and champion legitimate journalism and fact-based reporting and to help educators and their students navigate a sea of online disinformation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under the terms of the pathbreaking licensing agreement, coinciding with National News Literacy Week<\/a>, the AFT\u2019s 1.7 million members, tens of millions of kids they teach, and their families, can now receive free, real-time \u201ctraffic light\u201d news ratings and detailed \u201cNutrition Label\u201d reviews, via a licensed copy of NewsGuard\u2019s browser extension, whenever they search the web for news and information.  https:\/\/www.aft.org\/press-release\/aft-partners-newsguard-combat-misinformation-online<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This control of information into schools by NewsGuard is partly the reason I wrote Climate at a Glance for Teachers and Students: Facts on 30 Prominent Climate Topics<\/a> last year (get a free digital PDF copy here<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This year, I received a fresh set of questions from Zack as did The Heartland Institute. The Heartland Institute decided not to waste any time on Zach again. After seeing how it all went down last year, I came to the same conclusion; interacting with Zack and NewsGuard is a pointless exercise in futility. From my own observations, the process goes like this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n