Professor John Robertson who accused the BBC of pro-No bias
in its coverage of the referendum campaign has turned his attention to an
apparent media silence on the subject of fracking in Scotland. In a survey of a
recent 30-day period of news coverage of fracking he concluded that the
Scottish national press and broadcasters have hardly covered the question at
all, at a time when it is attracting headlines in the UK press and also in the
frack-friendly US.
During the period. The Scotsman, Daily Record and Daily
Express carried one story each, while the Daily Mail had seven, most of them
critical of anti-fracking opposition and especially the decision of the
Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, to ban the industry in his state due to
health and environmental concerns. The Herald news headlines and BBC’s
Reporting Scotland made no mention of fracking, while STV’s Scotland Today
reported fracking once.
“Scotland’s mainstream media, including of course our
‘Public Service Provider’ BBC Scotland, cannot be accused of distortion bias in
their coverage of the debate on shale-fracking, because they just didn’t cover
it at all,” writes Robertson. “Much more difficult to prove that distortion
bias is bias by omission, where the electorate is kept ill-informed and where
the media can insist that they don’t cover it because it’s not ‘newsworthy';
that no one is interested in it.” Prof Robertson points out that the event may
have attracted a great deal of attention on social media, but very little in
the mainstream media. Speaking to Newsnet.scot he made the point that Scottish
TV news in particular is dominated by murders, violence, road accidents and
sport.
The question is: why? Prof Robertson concedes that this
brief study could not reach conclusions. However, his research does point out
factors of interest to news desks and editors around the country. Fracking is
raising serious concerns within central Scotland, and especially local
communities such as Falkirk and Grangemouth, where the processing plant
operator Ineos has announced significant investment plans related to the
industry.
Robertson argues that there was ample reason to find
fracking newsworthy. He cites the UK HM Chief Scientific Adviser’s annual
report, which raised questions about fracking. During the last month there have
also been significant reports about fracking and local health in the US,
concerns that underpinned the New York Governor’s decision. A US survey of 400
peer-reviewed papers into shale gas found that 96 per cent of them drew
conclusions on adverse health impact.
A group called Concerned Health Professionals of New York
stated: “A significant body of evidence has emerged to demonstrate that these
activities are inherently dangerous to people and their communities. Risks
include adverse impacts on water, air, agriculture, public health and safety,
property values, climate stability and economic vitality.” In Ohio just before
Christmas, families in Monroe County were evacuated and a “no-fly zone” instigated
for more than a week because of an uncontrolled gas leak from a fracking well,
one of several incidents reported in the US this year alone.
In the UK, concerns are being echoed either by local
authorities such as North Lanarkshire Council – which has called for a
moratorium – and community groups. Scotland’s public attitude to fracking is
ill-defined. In Scotland, despite the existence of a thriving shale oil
industry in West Lothian until the early 1960s, it has been assumed widely that
the country’s geology means that the profitable extraction of onshore oil or
gas is very unlikely.
Fracking had a lower political profile until 2014, when
Ineos signalled great interest in the industry in two ways. Firstly, the
company is investing £300m to create docking and handling facilities for
tankers carrying US shale gas to the UK and European markets. This deal was at
the root of a dispute with trade unions over planned changes to work practices
at the company’s Grangemouth plant last year.
Next, Ineos – a rapidly growing player in the chemicals’
market – declared its intention to become a major player in shale in the UK,
setting aside more than £500m for that purpose. Ineos bought the rights to
explore fracking for shale gas in a 127 square mile area around Grangemouth and
the Firth of Forth. This has made the company, and the area, the focal point of
anti-fracking protests, and hundreds of people participated in a protest march
from Falkirk to Grangemouth this month. Without being specific it appears to be
willing to back, or even lead, fracking-based exploration. The company has
embarked on a major propaganda campaign to promote its enthusiastic embrace of
shale gas. That latter move is at the root of concerns about possible fracking
in Scotland. Protestors are wary that Ineos may use its clout – as it did so
successfully during that union dispute – to force through planning decisions.
It is likely that outside of the environs of Grangemouth refinery , there will
be little benefit but significant risks to communities in the Central Belt.
When fracking – or “hydraulic fracturing” – was first
discussed in the UK, the media focus fell on communities in England, where
companies are already involved in putative exploration of onshore oil and gas
from shale. Protests at Cuadrilla’s test drilling in the Home Counties raised
the profile significantly. Chancellor George Osborne proposed in his Autumn
Statement to create a “sovereign investment fund” to benefit northern England if
fracking is successful there and the Coalition government appears determined to
issue licenses. The Scottish Government has kept its public response low-key to
date. This may be on the assumption that the problem will go away because of
Scotland’s geology, although some opponents suspect that Ministers may be swung
by the emergence of some new oil or gas bonanza to be realised onshore. The
crash in global coal and oil prices may delay this activity in Scotland.
His view of the media as a corporate channel that publishes
or broadcasts only corporate “news” is underlined in his research. He comments:
“Those who lead the media are part of those inter-locking elites revealed long
ago by people like Noam Chomsky, who work daily in their own interests which in
turn are the interests of those same elites – employers, industry executives,
senior civil servants, speculators, military chiefs, government ministers,
lawyers and, uniquely in Scotland, the Labour Party leadership”. He adds:
“Further closing off any opportunities for alternative voices is the reliance
of hard-pressed reporters on press releases from the corporations that come to
dominate the news.”
PS The BBC Scotland’s environment correspondent David Miller
has confirmed via Twitter that he starts work on a fracking documentary January
5th. No transmission date given yet.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
