2011-05-29 05:28:32SkS-SourceWatch Partnership???
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
99.95.221.238

As you may be aware, SourceWatch has posted an impressive amount of quality information about climate change and climate change denial. There is a quite a bit of overlap between what is posted on SourceWatch and what is posted on SkS.

The overlap between SkS and SourceWatch is readily apparent at: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_warming_skeptics  and http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_warming_skeptics_(detail

Although the information about climate change and climate change denial posted on SouceWatch is generally of a high quality, much of it has not been updated for a couple of years. Some of the information posted could also be enhanced with additonal details.

I believe synergies could be acheived if SkS and Sourcewtach established a ongoing working relationship with each other.

If John Cook can open a dialogue with SoiurceWatch about working together, I'd be willing to some of the grunt work to make it happen.

2011-05-29 11:31:54How would you envisage a partnership?
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.31.47

Just trying to think what would an exact form of a collaboration look like? SkS using their summary of each skeptic on our site? Sourcewatch using our quotes database on their site? A joint third effort? Would the collaboration be SkSers updating their content? Sourcewatchers harvesting quotes/climate myths by skeptics? Not sure what the best thing would be but should have a clear idea before approaching them.

2011-05-30 00:40:11John Cook
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
99.95.221.238

Rather than jumping into an accross-the-board colloborative effort with SourcWatch, I suggest tackling a specific item as a "trial run" of sorts. We all know how "one thing leads to another."

The item I suggest starting out with is the list of well-known climate sceptics. The first task would obviously be to meld the two lists into single list and establish a mechanism for uptdating both simultaneously. Up for discussion is whether the info provided about each sceptic would be identical on both websites, or would be unique to each website.

 

2011-05-30 00:46:46Background Info on SourceWatch
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
99.95.221.238

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) is a national independent publisher located in Madison, Wisconsin. We publish PRWatch, SourceWatch, BanksterUSA, The SPIN, and the Food Rights Network.

Through our reporting and analysis, we are fearless fighters of PR spin and propaganda:

  • We think protecting democracy requires informing citizens not just about what’s really happening behind the scenes but also about what you can do about it.
  • We believe in holding the powerful accountable. And we do.
  • We believe the truth matters. And, we are willing to dig for the facts through mountains of paper and obfuscation.
  • And, we are not beholden to or funded by for-profit corporations or the government.

Our team of writers focuses on:

  • Reporting that promotes informed decision-making about policies and products, especially those affecting our lives--our economy, our environment, our health, our liberty, our security, and the health of our democracy--and aids citizen involvement and grassroots action.
  • Investigating and countering PR campaigns and spin by corporations, industries, and government agencies about issues and products that affect our health, liberty, economic opportunities, environment, and the vitality of the democratic process.
  • Advancing transparency and media literacy to help people recognize the forces shaping the information they receive about issues and products affecting their lives.
  • And promoting "open content" media as an alternative to corporate media, so people from all walks of life can "be the media" and help write the history of companies, front groups, politicians and CEOs, and public policy.

http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/index.html

2011-05-30 07:01:18John Cook
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
99.95.221.238

Per her author proficle, Anna Haynes is a contributor to SourceWatch. You may want to send her an email and invite her to participate in this discussion. 

2011-05-30 12:28:32Possible first idea
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.31.47

Have been talking to Sandi Keane at www.independentaustralia.net about the Galileo Movement - she suggests we add them to SourceWatch.

Now The Conversation/STW/SkS will be doing an article about the Galileo Movement on June 23 (see here for the series of articles planned from 13 to 24 June). And I was hoping we could do two possible posts around this time - a debunk of the climate myth "Galileo disproved the consensus" and a blog post featuring climate myth quotes from the Galileo Movement founders. So I wonder if adding content to SourceWatch on the Galileo Movement could be part of this coordinated outreach. Anyone interested in being involved in this/have any thoughts?

2011-05-30 13:00:51We need a list of all climate skeptics, not just individuals
milka

s_keane1@bigpond...
58.175.128.220

John, we need a list of all climate skeptics, not just individuals.  There are skeptic groups out there like Landscape Guardians who helped send the windpower industry into freefall.  Their President in Victoria is Randall Bell, a well known climate skeptic.  The Guardians manufacture varying spinoffs such as Coastal Guardians and for the proposed community wind farm at the well known spa, Daylesford, used the name Spa Guardians.  They have 2 full time staff running anti wind campaigns - on behalf of vested interests.  They are incorporated so they have to submit an audited report annually.  I'm wondering whether we can get hold of this to identify who is funding them?  How do we go about this?  

They go into communities where wind farms are built and run a scare campaign.  The so-called "nocebo" effect works as a reverse placebo.  Individuals in the community become convinced that they have "wind turnbine syndrome". The Guardians then set up a so-called "community" site.  The Waubra Foundation is a perfect example.  Sounds genuine (and probably the individuals involved are) but the website is too slick to be a genuine community website and the P.O. Box turns out to be the same as the Landscape Guardians.  These community websites fool an awful lot of people into thinking there are genuine concerns in the community about windfarms.  So successful has Bell been that our new Premier, Ted Bailleu now requires a min 2km buffer between wind farms and residential area.  The irony is that he has just OKd a new coal fire power station which is able to be built less than 2km from the nearest resident!

We need to "out" people like the Landscape Guardians.   Any suggestions as to how we get hold of their annual report?

2011-05-30 13:42:49Skeptic orgs
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.31.47

We have a skeptic admin where you can add skeptics and skeptic organisations and assign skeptics to particular organisations:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/admin_skeptic.php

The main purpose of it currently is just to add quotes from skeptics but this is a growing and potentially useful database that could be used for many possible purposes. One way to roll it out is to add info on a specific group then do a blog post about it. But the emphasis for SkS would be on their scientific quotes more than personal backgrounds - we're not quite in that business yet. The SkS principle is sticking to the science.

Am planning to do lots of rebuttals of wind myths so if groups like Landscape Guardians perpetuate a bunch of wind myths, we could debunk them as we publish each rebuttal.

2011-05-31 00:25:12Sticking to the science
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
99.95.221.238

The SkS principle of sticking to the science is exactly why I believe an ongoing working relationship between SkS and Sourcewatch is needed. SourceWatch can continue do what it does best and SkS can continue to do what it does best.