Rupert Murdoch goes green.

Rupert Murdoch goes green.

I’m not really sure of his motivation. How can you make such a dramatic switch, from no concern to steadfast determination to prevent? It does happen, so it’s not entirely unrealistic. There is money to be lost in climate change, and money to be gained in avoiding it, so there’s the possibility it’s merely an economic move.

Maybe it’s just the latest rich-guy fashion, maybe it merely serves to ease the guilt, who knows.

He bought himself a hybrid car. Good, hybrid private jet/glider would be nice.

He plans on making the entire News Corp business carbon neutral. Aside from cashing in on carbon credits, I’ll assume that this will come at a cost, and mucho kudos for that.

It’s important to be cautious of Greenwashing, and those planning to exploit climate concerns, but I doubt this applies here.

However, I have reservations. *ahem*

“This one is clear. Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats. We may not agree on the extent, but we certainly can't afford the risk of inaction”

But Mr Murdoch signalled that News Corp would not be reporting climate change as "the end of the world".

Uh.. what?

"The challenge is to revolutionise the message," he said. "For too long, the threats of climate change have been presented as doom and gloom — because the consequences are so serious.

"We need to do what our company does best: make this issue exciting. Tell the story in a new way.

Clear, catastrophic threats, can’t afford the risk of inaction, I got that bit. But not the end of the world, revolutionised message, no doom and gloom, make it exciting, tell it a new way? Sorry, you may have just lost me.

And I think Murdoch just admitted guilt to the long list of accusations of media manipulation right there.

So let me get this straight, just so we’re clear on this Mr Murdoch. The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Sunday Mail, The Cairns Post, The Gold Coast Bulletin, The Townsville Bulletin, The Daily Telegraph, The Herald Sun, The Weekly Times, MX, The Geelong Advertiser, The Advertiser, The Sunday Mail, Messenger Newspapers, The Sunday Times, The Mercury, The Sunday Tasmanian, Northern Territory News, The Sunday Territorian, The Tablelands Advertiser, The Tablelander, Fiji Times, Nai Lalakai, Shanti Dut, Papua New Guinea Post-Courier, The Sun, News of the World, Times Newspapers Ltd., The Sunday Times, The Times, New York Post, The Timesledger, Bayside Times, Whitestone Times, Flushing Times, Fresh Meadows Times, Little Neck Ledger, Jackson Heights Times, Richmond Hill Times, Jamaica Times, Laurelton Times, Queens Village Times, Astoria Times, Forest Hills Ledger, Ridgewood Ledger, Howard Beach Times, The Courier-Life Newspapers, Caribbean Life, and Fox News will all now be reporting that climate change is bad yet exciting, but not the end of the world.

So, what you’re saying is, for this whole time, for the decade of the Kyoto Protocol, you’ve had the ability to adjust the reporting angle of climate change from the news sources that most citizens of the western world get their news from, and you’ve decided NOW to allow it be considered real and a threat?

You are a monster. What was the policy before – claim it’s not real, spin it as not a threat? I’m pretty sure that was the angle, and I’m pretty sure the angle was your decision because you just admitted your own ability to twist the reality of news in your publications.

Imagine the public opinion you’ve shaped in that time. Giving equal credence to conspiracy nuts? What ignorance you’ve spread, what inaction are you culpable of?

You want to claim the pro-environment viewpoint now, you carry the blame for the anti-environment viewpoint of the past, and every single perception of the changing world in the millions upon millions of minds that have laid trust in the accuracy of your publications.

Go repent elsewhere.