Even popular liberals can come under fire from the media if they offer heretical views on global warming, which many in the media promote with near-religious fervor.
Rolling Stone magazine went after 17 global warming dissenters on Jan. 6, hyperbolically labeling them “ [1]The Climate Killers.” Topping the list was Berkshire Hathaway CEO, Obama supporter and media darling [2]Warren Buffett.
The magazine criticized Buffett for “doing far more than bad-mouthing climate legislation – he’s literally banking on its failure” by adding 1.28 million shares of ExxonMobil to his books and acquiring a railroad that hauls coal.
Rolling Stone editor Eric Bates also told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that Buffett [2]“trashed climate change legislation calling it a huge tax saying it will cost jobs.”
That’s not even news, CBSNews.com reported in September that the Obama administration said cap and trade [3]“would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year.” But Obama didn’t make the list of "Killers."
The Heritage Foundation estimated that capping carbon would act as an energy tax of nearly [4]$2,000 on every American household. Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute has said “it would destroy tens of millions of good-paying jobs.”
Also on the Rolling Stone list were a number of predictable targets for left-wing vitriol, from News Corp. CEO [5]Rupert Murdoch and ExxonMobil’s Rex Tillerson to Sen. James Inhofe and retired physicist Fred Singer. Each person on the list was given a nasty moniker like “the Fake Protestor” or “The Know Nothing.”
With this sidebar to its “As the World Burns” cover story, Rolling Stone continued its one-sided crusade to stop global warming. On Nov. 11, 2009 writer [6]Naomi Klein made the case for [7]climate reparations in the magazine. Back in 2007, Rolling Stone was entertaining predictions from climate extremist James Lovelock (founder of the Gaia theory) who said that by 2100 global warming will kill [8]6 billion.
The Business & Media Institute has documented how a number of media outlets favor global warming alarmism rather than including other viewpoints in news reports. For every dissenter appearing on the networks, there were [9]13 alarmists airing their views. By censoring the global warming debate, the news media often leave viewers with the impression that the “science is settled.”
Those same networks ignored the November 2009 climate e-mail scandal “ [10]ClimateGate” for two weeks despite the looming climate conference in
Like this article? [11]Sign up for “The Balance Sheet,” BMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter.