The BBC is so “impartial” that they teach students “the positive impacts of climate change” along with the negative ones.

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” – Desmond Tutu

The BBC has now removed the “positive impacts of climate change” sections on its science curriculum revision site.

Keep calling this shit out when you see it, people. It does make a difference.

@aral bbc kinda has a duty to be so I can see why they are like that ig, I suppose they should give a final conclusion tho for why people consider this a significant issuse

@aral 🤦🏻‍♂️ there are no positives and bbc its Climate Crisis not change 🤦🏻‍♂️

@adamprocter @aral Should be shocking. Sadly, BBC has become the UK Government's mouthpiece and no longer an impartial media player

UK politics 

@aral the BBC has always had a very "pro-establishment" bias. They mostly got away with it because of their comedy department.

@aral The idea of needing to be "impartial" with regard to climate change is quite bizarre, and this obviously is classic misreporting by the BBC. As is very typical for them, it's not that what they're saying is technically incorrect, it's just they're lying by omission by leaving a huge amount of other information out.

I will be warmer in the UK. There probably will be a longer summer and growing season. But there will be much shorter or no growing season elsewhere, and there will be major shifts in where and how food can be produced. The heatwaves and forest fires of recent years are just a taste of what climate change will bring.

@aral BBC Bitsize teaches the material that's on the curriculum/what the exam boards say will be tested. It's the same stuff taught *in school*.

Your ire should be directed at SQA ( the Scottish accreditation body and/or the Scottish Government as they're the ones setting out what must be taught in schools.

If the curriculum is changed then the BBC will change the material accordingly.

@CreatureOfTheHill @aral

Yeah, you're right, apologies for the misinformation.

I saw others linking to/quoting SQA's course specification[0] in response to this and I assumed that the Bitesize page was for Scottish Highers and not GCSEs.

[0] page 28

@jack Indeed (and how worrying is it if that’s the curriculum?) And yet, also, every institution and every person at an institution decides certain things for themselves. Someone at the BBC had to type that in. They did it. They followed orders. So, sure, let’s find the source of the issue by all means but let’s also not perpetuate the “just following orders” narrative because we all know where that leads.

@aral Now, I *have* to watch Clerks again. It's one of my favourite movies anyway. 🙂


@aral Holy hell... "more resources, such as oil, becoming available" - because sure, what we desperately need is to burn MORE oil!

But hey, oranges in the UK, with Brexit and all that's not to be sneezed at, of course. 🤷‍♂️

@aral good to know the BBC is trash along with the likes of basically all American legacy "news" outlets

@aral I have the slight hope that this was meant as an attempt at irony. Please let it be so.

@mysteriarch Nope, sadly it’s literal exam prep material for English students.

@aral Also, smoking improves your thumb muscles - choose a hard lighter for best results.

@aral This looks to have been deleted now? Only 6 pages in it instead of the 7 in the screenshots.

@viv Just checked. Yep, they’ve quietly removed it.


The Western mainstream media are warning for the "Russian State media", but do the same: making bullshit propaganda.

@aral independent from the way of presentation in my opinion the numbers seem extremely understated. Jakarta alone has 34 million people - maybe they will also be affected. In this context it would be interesting what affected means😳. I know that their problem also has to do with ground water extraction but the sheer amount of people along the coast...

@aral While it could lead to a few misunderstandings, I don't see why this information should be censored...
You have to explain very clearly that the disadvantages are worse than the advantages.
Not providing these information is the breeding ground of ignorance and conspiracy theories.

@rastinza It’s no more censorship than not including a “positive impacts of smoking” section in a medical textbook would be considered censorship.

@aral @rastinza It's relevant to the equation. The truth about climate change is that life on Earth will continue, as it always has. It's humans who will suffer from it's effects. I think it's an effort to lay everything we know out on the table so that we're all on the same page. The only issue you could make about it and smoking positives in a medical book is the optics. If taken in context, they're both fine.


Doesn't work in Australia

It's as useful as shouting at a storm, trying to make it stop

@aral the positives sides of what?! That's sounds like a satire of a centrist

@urien2 No need for satire with centrism; it’s a parody of itself. ok okay i found those "positive impacts".

i'm so relieved that UK can now grow orange and attract more tourists ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@aral AFAIK this wasn't particularly a policy decision, but more to do with BBC Bitesize providing content for the SQA's curriculum which covered that.

So while we should give the BBC the side-eye for their editorial failings, the vitriol should be left for the qualifications authority coming up with this shit.


It's definitely outside the Overton window of public and political discourse, but I've talked about it with my children. For example, the likelihood of where we live becoming more of a tourist destination and the positives/negatives that may bring...


Sign in to participate in the conversation
Aral’s Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!