Oh, and the Tim Key poem on the underpants bomber was excellent.
Newswipe With Charlie Brooker - Series 1 Page 6
Quote: chipolata @ January 20 2010, 11:53 AM GMTOh, and the Tim Key poem on the underpants bomber was excellent.
Agreed. I know a lot of people don't like his poems, but he was the highlight for me.
Quote: bamalamafizzvaj @ January 20 2010, 12:11 PM GMTAgreed. I know a lot of people don't like his poems, but he was the highlight for me.
They should broadcast that bit on Al Jezeera.
It was good but the "fear" thing was a bit over-familiar (reminded me a bit of Bowling for Columbine). Agreed that the poem was good - maybe I have warmed to Tim Key via We Need Answers cos I used to be averse to the poetry bit on CB's show.
I had a degree in English Literature, so I should probably know the answer to this question, but: when is a "poem" a "poem" and not "just some guy talking"?
When he appears slightly smug. I hate Tim Key. I hate you, Tim Key. You tit. Ahem.
Quote: Cheesehoven @ January 20 2010, 9:07 AM GMTOdd he should devote the programme to media fear-mongering and the weather without mentioning the biggest media exercise in masturbatory fear inducement ever: global warming. It would have been more challenging (instead of Brooker's faux-challenging but highly PC style) had his researchers wheeled out 1970s BBC footage of the new ice age hysteria they were peddling back then (and which may soon comeback into vogue if we have another few winters like this) or the hilarious old moonshine of the 80s about the tropical rainforests losing "an area the size of Wales" every day (its still there 20 years on).
This is a wonderful example of the failure to accurately assess risk. The continual media scaremongering means that when something comes along which really does have the whole scientific community shitting its pants, people dismiss it as another scare story.
The new ice age theory was nto so daft. Air pollution does have a significant cooling effect, 'global dimming', but this is more than offset by the countervailing global warming from greenhouse gas emissions.
Science does not have all the answers. Sometimes scientists get it wrong because they do not have all the relevant information. This could be the case with global warming. Let's hope so. But in assessing risk you work with the best information available. Global warming is arguably one story where the media are underplaying the risk. Until it is too late there will be no sexy footage of death and catastrophe for them drawl over.
I have no idea how much of the Amazon rain forest has been lost since the 1980s, but I am bloody sure it is a lot. A lot of work has gone into ensuring that it was not more.
Sometimes the reasons disasters do not happen is because people take note of the scare stories and take action. The hole in ozone layer for instance was a disaster that was averted by concerted action. Arguably the spread of Aids has been controlled by public education.
Only the second time I've managed to catch one of his ...wipe programmes, but thought it was hilarious. Looking forward to the next episode.
Glad to see Charlie back! Referring to the reporters stood in the snow as looking like tramps looking through the window of a posh restaurant was genius 
First episode was excellent, especially the analysis by that Canadian (?) guy who was talking about how the news focused hugely on the ebola outbreak which killed about 250 people, but barely covered the civil war that killed 3 million. Particuarly eye-opening was mention of the suicide bomber in Oklahoma City that got ZERO coverage. Talk about the power of nightmares.
Quote: Timbo @ January 22 2010, 6:46 PM GMTThis is a wonderful example of the failure to accurately assess risk. The continual media scaremongering means that when something comes along which really does have the whole scientific community shitting its pants, people dismiss it as another scare story.
The new ice age theory was nto so daft. Air pollution does have a significant cooling effect, 'global dimming', but this is more than offset by the countervailing global warming from greenhouse gas emissions.
Science does not have all the answers. Sometimes scientists get it wrong because they do not have all the relevant information. This could be the case with global warming. Let's hope so. But in assessing risk you work with the best information available. Global warming is arguably one story where the media are underplaying the risk. Until it is too late there will be no sexy footage of death and catastrophe for them drawl over.
I have no idea how much of the Amazon rain forest has been lost since the 1980s, but I am bloody sure it is a lot. A lot of work has gone into ensuring that it was not more.
Sometimes the reasons disasters do not happen is because people take note of the scare stories and take action. The hole in ozone layer for instance was a disaster that was averted by concerted action. Arguably the spread of Aids has been controlled by public education.
I think Cheesehoven is right but his approach is wrong. Simply saying that global warming is wrong is ridiculous - I mean, Brooker doesn't say Middle Eastern terrorists don't exist, he says that the likelihood of terrorist attacks is exaggerated and I think the same is true of the effects of global warming. Remember that bit from Newswipe when Brooker said that the news, when faced with a best & worst case scenario, will always report the possible 300,000,000 dead instead of a definite best case 300? Well I think there's no subject that's been given that treatment more than global warming.