BBC Complaints did actually reply to my protest, seen in the 8/15/25 Addendum section at the end of my July 25, 2025 Part 2 blog post, with an open invite to take my complaint to their next level-up “Stage 2” BBC Executive Complaints Unit (ECU). I’ve done so, as seen in what follows. At the rock-bottom level of explanation, the BBC system renamed their online podcast report for their August 2020 “How They Made Us Doubt Everything Episode 6 ‘Reposition Global Warming as theory, not fact‘ ” with the shorter-worded title, “The Tobacco Playbook: 6. From Fact to Theory.” It sure looked like they were burying the core fault about how the “reposition global warming” memos were not actually viable evidence to prove the fossil fuel industry ran disinformation campaigns. My complaint concerned that very ‘burial’ appearance. Their 8/12/25 reply was that the shorter title was for ‘saving text space,’ and my rebuttal to that said they needed to re-examine their 2021 final decision because the entire report – in original title form or retitled – was based totally on unsupportable evidence. Neither their ‘title piece’ smoking gun ‘evidence’ was ever implemented anywhere, nor was the secondary “victory will be achieved” memos ever implemented anywhere. Thus, their original ECU final decision must be revisited now, before their credibility implodes on this situation later.

For new readers needing a backstory summary on this whole situation, please see my July 14, 2025 blog post containing links to my prior steps getting through the BBC / ECU / Ofcom complaint process. Verbatim as follows is what I sent to BBC ECU on 10/15/25 via their online form, except in this blog post I have the luxury of adding clickable links to screencapture images to drive particular points home:

I am unsatisfied with your decision on my Stage 1 complaint because the core fault here is still not resolved. I complained that the original August 2020 “How They Made Us Doubt Everything Episode 6 ‘Reposition Global Warming as theory, not fact’ ” podcast report was reworded two years AFTER my original complaint on the matter ( CAS-6241179 ) in a way that seemingly validated my original complaint concerning how the report was based on literally worthless industry memos – namely, the “reposition global warming” memo and the “victory will be achieved” memo supplied to BBC for its report by ex-Greenpeace guest Kert Davies. It looked to me like BBC had privately acknowledged my claim was true how both memo sets were never implemented in form, and was burying this fault of theirs out of public view. BBC responded to say the report was reworded ‘to save space in the series titles.’ Whether the podcast report is reworded or not is irrelevant.

I’ll repeat the fictional example I offered in my original 2020 complaint to hammer what the unresolved core problem is here:

” — BBC staffer creates a memo on a plan to broadcast a disinformation message simply as an experiment to gauge public reaction to such material. BBC administrators reject the memo plan outright, but the memo gets leaked to the U.S. Fox News outlet, and outrage ensues how it serves as proof that the BBC knowingly puts out material it knows is disinformation. Of course, accusations against the BBC for such a maneuver based solely on that REJECTED memo plan are baseless. — ”

It follows, by default, that when both the ‘industry’ memo sets presented to the BBC by Kert Davies were NEVER implemented – a fact that BBC journalist investigators can prove independently – then the entire BBC Radio 4 report was totally without merit. False accusations were conveyed to BBC’s listening audience worldwide, whether the report is titled as it is now or how it was in August 2020.

In my prior August 2021 lengthy email exchange with ECU’s Colin Tregear, he essentially sidestepped my specific complaint and suggested “the editorial justification for drawing attention to the undeniable [industry] efforts” were proven by the mere existence of the “Information Council for the Environment” (“ICE”) public relations campaign. I never said that campaign didn’t happen; I said it was provable that the memo plan sent unsolicited to ICE officials to “reposition global warming” was rejected outright by the ICE officials, and thus CANNOT serve as evidence that the campaign sought to deceive the public. It is a matter of public newspaper record that the campaign officials instead wanted to tell the public about aspects of the issue they were not hearing from Al Gore and the IPCC. A basic free speech situation. The one-day summary of the “victory will be achieved” plan was also never implemented, as it only concerned a brainstorming session on how to counter arguments favoring the U.S. Senate ratification of the Kyoto Treaty, which became moot because everyone realized the Senate would never ratify the treaty. The memo’s strategies/suggestions were thus never implemented and therefore CANNOT serve as evidence for the BBC Radio 4 podcast report that the industry ran disinformation campaigns.

If the assertion is that such industry disinformation campaigns occurred, then the BBC must show the public some other evidence to back that up. PERIOD. BBC must revisit how they did not vet their original August 2020 podcast report guest Kert Davies to be sure accusations offered by him were valid.

Whether someone big over in the UK decides to deeply examine it, no matter who puts it out, and where it appears, or if a re-examination of it under the auspices of the new Pope Leo in Italy happens if he realizes there may be a problem with info the prior Pope may have gotten, or if it is someone here in the U.S. looking into how the accusations are promulgated in lawsuits, the accusation that “Victory will be achieved when we pay Dr Wei-Hock Soon $1.2 million to reposition global warming as theory (not fact) via deceptive newspaper advertorials” will sink. It is a mathematical certainty. It is simply a matter of time before someone who is a big enough iceberg will capsize that whole character assassination angle of the climate issue.

Imagine how monumental of an event it would be if the BBC itself took that lead and openly acknowledged to the world how they failed to check the veracity of an accusation that’s a cornerstone for keeping the climate issue standing. A day where they were forced dump everything they are currently built on upon finally running into the brick wall of reality, in order to survive and start anew. A day when the total collapse of the “science is settled” / “don’t listen to industry-paid skeptic scientists” issue happens.

When it happens – and it will somewhere, somehow . . . . .