A systematic campaign by neo-fascist climate-denying BNP supporters seems to have achieved just what it wanted; the BNP campaigned against these ads and won.
Further to Left Foot Forward’s story here about the decision of the Advertising Standards Authority to ban two climate change ads, it is important for us all to be clear just why the ASA caved in to pressure and made this bizarre decision to ban the excellent “nursery rhyme” adverts on man-made climate change
So, look at this link, not widely picked up last week; here are some of the things said at this notable location:
“This development comes just six weeks after the BNP’s “Operation Fightback” urged supporters to lodge complaints with the ASA over misleading Government claims made in its ‘man-made’ global warming ‘Action on CO2’ television adverts.
“These used the words ‘scientists agree’ in connection with disputed and in some cases, retracted, IPCC findings.
“Specifically Operation Fightback pointed out that the use of the words “scientists agree” implied that all scientists agreed with the now largely debunked IPCC claims made for “man-made” global warming, something which is manifestly untrue.”
There we have it: a systematic campaign by neo-fascist climate-denying BNP supporters seems to have achieved just what it wanted. To sum up, the BNP campaigned against these ads and the ASA did what the BNP were calling for.
It is worth noting also this SERA piece:
“While the ASA decision was dreadful, it is important to be clear nevertheless that the ASA did NOT uphold most of the complaints against this ad campaign.”
22 Responses to “BNP glee at ASA ban on climate ads”
Dr Kaihsu Tai
ASA allows Électricité de France’s ‘Green Britain Day’ advert, Taxpayers’ Alliance’s exaggeration of ‘European Union cost to Britain’; but attacks Home Office’s Policing Pledge advert and Department of Energy and Climate Change’s scientific basis.
A non-statutory self-regulatory body of private advertising vehicles (read: club) is now interfering with, even censoring, the Government’s communication with citizens. It takes upon itself as a semi-judicial tribunal to adjudicate in these matters, applying rules of evidence that it made up for itself. What is going on? We have Parliament and courts for this kind of things.
This has constitutional and democratic implications. This is especially grave if the matter at hand is about national security (wartime propaganda) or public health (think AIDS, MMR, swine flu campaigns). ‘It has [not] been conclusively proven that MMR is safe and does not cause autism’: it can go either way, depending on the threshold of proof ASA sets up for itself.
Now, recall several months ago, the Outdoor Advertising Association ran the Britainthinks.com with reactionary slogans. Sounds fishy. Do you know any investigative journalist who might want to have a go at this?
Rupert Read
Thanks Kaihsu.
In reply to Jan Novak: I am well-aware of the garbage – that has been comprehensively refuted over the past few years, by the climate science academic world – that the BNP are spouting, the nonsense about ‘sunspot cycles’ and so on. More importantly: It is interesting and depressing that the fact that you are a denier of manmade climate change makes you sympathetic to a fascist Party.