United Kingdom

4108 readers

165 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

tom

GreatAlbatross

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

Daily Mail events firm is given £500k government contract to run UK COP28 events (leftfootforward.org)

submitted 11 months ago by Syldon to c/unitedkingdom

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The government is using public money to finance its own media platform.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mannycalavera 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I see....

[–] Syldon 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Mate what do you think they are doing for £500k. They are supplying a table and a couple of bodies for support. They are not paying for transport, or even hotel room hire. If they were having to pay for the lease of the event office, which is unlikely, how much do you think this is? It is not a great deal. Someone is pocketing a few hundred thousand from this.

The tender was not allowed to go to any other supplier. That in itself raises questions of why they are refusing to follow accepted guidelines. They have very close links to oil companies, which means the oil companies will have an influence on position and effectiveness of each group. Energy companies do not want an effective COP event.

All of this and yet you want to throw in inuendo and derision. Defending these scumbags is a pitiful hill to die on.

[–] mannycalavera 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I think you need to provide more than just hyperbolic speculation if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise derision it is.

You're literally asserting that an events company is not allowed to work for COP if it has in anyway in the past worked for an oil company. What exactly do you think they're doing for "big oil"? Destabilising governments via secret backroom deals? Please.

“The government told DeSmog that dmg events was providing “logistical support” for all countries represented at COP28, suggesting that officials were not allowed to open the contract to competition.”

I have no means to confirm this statement but neither do you and neither does the article. It tried to connect two different events (COP 28 and an oil event listed in their annual report) and claim some sort of nefarious link. This is really poor journalism. Really poor. At the very least they could have compared this spending to other country's spending on a similar event spend at COP 28.

So cut out the hyperbole and provide some actual facts rather than hysterical gossip.

Edit: This is actually how bad left foot forward is. They're rehashing an article by desmog which, in my opinion, is much better. They at least provide some context, something that left foot forward fails to do probably deliberately because it's readers don't care about context.

Some highlights:

Nearly a third (30 percent) of the Daily Mail’s online editorial comment pieces, expressing the newspaper’s views, published this year contained climate scepticism, DeSmog found.

There is no evidence of a link between the Daily Mail’s editorial stance towards green issues and the commercial interests of dmg events.

And interestingly the full quote that left foot forward editorialised:

A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said: “dmg events are providing logistical support for all countries represented at COP28 and they have no role in the design of the UK pavilion events programme. The cost of the contract is covered entirely by private sector sponsorship.”

I wonder why left foot forward would choose to omit the last bit 🤣?

So again, basic... basic.... journalism is missing from your post. And not even a five minute Google to try and find out more context.

You're right to be sceptical with this government. You're absolutely wrong to not even try to seek the truth.

[–] Syldon 0 points 11 months ago

You’re literally asserting that an events company is not allowed to work for COP

BS I am repeating what is stated in the article. They are using public funds to pay a subsidiary of the Daily Mail. Which is an ardent Tory media machine. They are enforcing this payment without public scrutiny. If there is a valid reason for doing this, then be open about it. But like all Tory theft, they like to hide the details.

It tried to connect two different events (COP 28 and an oil event listed in their annual report) and claim some sort of nefarious link.

The fact also remains that there has been a lot of unanswered speculation regarding the president Sultan al-Jaber, who has major links to DMG events LLC. DMG events LLC hired Johnson to host a speech Singapore. Failing to allow for scrutiny in the tender process is not absolute proof of wrong doing, but it raises eye brows from anyone with a brain.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/15/cop28-host-uae-oil-plans-data

Sultan Al Jaber is the chief executive of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (Adnoc) and president of the Cop28 summit, which begins on 30 November. The researchers behind the new data said Adnoc’s huge planned expansion of oil and gas production was a clear conflict of interest and they said his position was “ridiculous”.

they have no role in the design of the UK pavilion events programme. The cost of the contract is covered entirely by private sector sponsorship.”

I never stated that DMG had anything to do with the presentation side of the event. I do not see a point here.

You’re right to be sceptical with this government. You’re absolutely wrong to not even try to seek the truth.

Here we both agree. This government is an abomination. There is nothing to be gained from pushing a lie, because once a lie is found out, then all other queries regarding this government can have their validity questioned. I am happy to admit I have made an error if there is one. I am fairly confident that this will be another item that Labour will put under the spotlight after the next GE. Time will tell.