Here’s what the Times ‘forgot’ to mention about its list of scientists who want to allow bigger fracking earthquakes

fracking site and The Times logo
Tracy Keeling

The Times published a letter from “almost 50 geoscientists” on 9 February. As the outlet explained in a further article, the scientists are calling for a relaxation of the rules on earthquake levels in fracking.

But actor Sam Haygarth wasn’t buying it. So he looked into the 50 people behind the call. Haygarth’s digging unearthed a startling discovery that puts the Times to shame.

The missing piece

As the Times explained in its article on the letter:

Start your day with The Canary News Digest

Fresh and fearless; get excellent independent journalism from The Canary, delivered straight to your inbox every morning.

Almost 50 geoscientists have urged the government to commission an urgent review of the fracking earthquake limit, which they suggest should be raised to allow the industry to expand.

They say that the scientific rationale of the 0.5 magnitude limit before fracking must cease is debatable. They call for a “realistic regulatory framework”.

Continue reading below...

The outlet also noted that two fracking companies, Ineos and Cuadrilla, have recently called for the same.

That synchronicity isn’t surprising though. Because Haygarth claims that almost all the people who signed the letter appear to have links to the dirty energy industry itself:

Haygarth also posted the notes he made while researching the people behind the letter. For example, he explained that one of the letter’s coordinators, professor Quentin Fisher, has attracted “considerable research income from industry”. Fisher also established an industry project that was “sponsored by Aurelian Oil and Gas, BG, BP, EBN, Shell and Wintershall”. Meanwhile, Fisher’s fellow letter coordinator professor Ernest Rutter is on the Task Force on Shale Gas. As Haygarth points out, this task force is funded by “Centrica, Cuadrilla, Total and The Weir Group”.

Propaganda not news

Nonetheless, nowhere in the Times article on the letter does it acknowledge such links. In fact, the geoscientists are more honest than the outlet. At least in the letter they admit to ‘supporting the development’ of fracking. The Times doesn’t even declare that in its article. As Haygarth says, it doesn’t say much for the UK media:

It is indeed worrying that the media reports on biased interventions like this without the appropriate context. Because it holds a huge sway over the formation of public opinion. And only with the full facts can people make an educated choice on what position to take on different issues.

If the media doesn’t provide that, it’s failing the public it’s meant to serve.

Featured image via Lawrence D’Silva/YouTube

Since you're here ...

We know you don't need a lecture. You wouldn't be here if you didn't care.
Now, more than ever, we need your help to challenge the rightwing press and hold power to account. Please help us survive and thrive.

The Canary Support
  • Show Comments
    1. I’m sure these honest scientists fully intended to declare an interest (at least, those 39+ who had an interest to declare). But in the rush to catch the last post to Mr Murdoch, the final paragraph kinda fell off the back.
      Could happen to anyone, especially when writing to that nice, co-operative Mr Murdoch.

    2. Rupert Murdoch personally invests in fossil fuels with Cheney, Rothschild and Woolsey. In other words major players from Banking, Media, Politics and the CIA.

      No wonder we’re rill toxifying our planet when all key players are hell bent on profiting from lethal fossil fuels.

      And hardly surprising The Times ‘forgot’ to report more accurately. As ever follow the money to find out the truth. And following the money is exactly what these men are doing. It’s their passion apparently.

      1. For those interested the company these powerful men have invested in is called Genie Energy.

        We have all noticed that Government has never really come out for green energy 100%. It’s always equivocal. It’s surely because Government is intimidated by these men and others like them. But I know a man who isn’t intimidated by them and has never taken their shilling. Clue: he has a beard and makes jam.

        Ref: https://www.nationofchange.org/2017/01/15/cheney-rothschild-fox-news-murdoch-drill-oil-syria-violating-international-law/

    3. Most sensible people want a “mix” of power generation and don’t rely totally on renewables.
      Shale gas is fairly safe and plentiful, and the jobs would be welcome in some of the areas in the North.
      Also, please differentiate between an “earthquake” and an “earth tremor”.You would struggle to feel a minor tremor caused by fracking and no damage has been noted.
      If coal mining was still as popular as in the 70`s would you be calling for all the mines to be closed with the resultant destruction of communities and jobs?

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.