C. P. Colum

See my stuff in @theblindsp0t & @envprogress ☘ Made Scaled ☟ ''All art aspires to music'' (Walter Pater via Jack Conrad) 𝄽

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

Our wee solar story has hit the ground running! Pleased to take a bow alongside @LeaBoothJr and @theblindsp0t, with kudos to @enricomariutti for his dogged research and @shellenberger for pulling it all together

[Michael Shellenberger @shellenberger]

People say solar panels don't produce carbon emissions, but they do. And now, a major new investigation by Environmental Progress, drawing on the research of @enricomariutti , finds that solar panels made in China produce at least 3x more carbon emissions than IPCC claims.

[Izabella Kaminska @izakaminska]

The evolution of the FT (based on my subjective experience) went from the situation described above to => slow realization that saying the truth out loud in the internet age bears consequences, and thus it's better to hold back or push the acceptable party line.

Indeed, I would argue it was fine to speak bluntly about what was going on, and the controlling paternalistic role elites played in directing world affairs, for as long as the great unwashed didn't and couldn't stumble upon it, and misinterpret it in sensationalist ways. It was even fine to host a radical subversive blog whose purpose was to test elite assumptions, to ensure they weren't missing a trick or suffering from blind spots.

Social media and modern monetization models changed this balance. For one, premium content intended for elite eyes only began to escape through the paywall, whether via stealth circulation or inadvertent self-promotion (journos mouthing off online). This created intensive blowback for journalists, prompting behavioral and ideological adjustments. This was especially the case in the early days, before we realised much of this "blowback" might be synthetic or intended to influence us to self-censor on issues we might otherwise speak freely to an elite audience about.

Then, not only did the FT stop being resistant to click-bait competition, but its traditional business model (aka we have a small audience but a powerful one that you will want to spend a lot of money advertising to for influence) began to fall apart as political and corporate influence became tied to quantitative metrics. As corporates themselves went woke, it became taboo to shamelessly peddle luxury goods to elites on the pages of How to Spend it — killing a key source of revenue. Corporate advertising budgets turned towards tempering NGOs on the pages of the popular press, with campaigns centered on proving how frugal and responsible they were. And for that, they needed platforms with large distributions, not small elite audiences (who themselves knew the whole thing was a sham).

None of this was helped by poor-quality analytics at the technology level. It took far too long for editors to realise the numbers themselves could be gamed to give a false impression of popularity, and that trusting them could distance the newspaper from reality even further. On the contrary, the teams from "audience engagement" became an increasingly important fixture in morning editorial conferences, influencing the news agenda in a dumbing-down way. I.e. if x did " well online" and y "did not", journalists should do more of x not y, regardless.

And since the audience was already skewed towards one side of the polarized debate, rather than the other, this just entrenched disreality even further. The trap facing editors now was the same that every independent writer who builds an audience based on a specific point of view encounters: audience capture. Telling your readers what they don't want to hear kills clicks, and triggers unsubscriptions. So you either attempt to be everything to all people and still find yourself upsetting everyone (i.e. you become the BBC), or you double down on the audience you know will reward you for that perspective. i.e. you become Fox.

The FT chose the latter path, on the mistaken assumption — I think — that the pro market, pro technocratic, pro globalism path was above politics, and thus the righteous path. This, however, was a mistake because it ignored that the new politics wasn't like the old politics: left, right and markets as neutral observers which go wherever the wind blows. But rather markets vs the populists, both left and right.

In shutting out the populist view, and its effect on markets, the FT became somewhat blinded to reality. Most acutely, it became incapable of reading the room. Hence, the embarrassing array of wrong market calls that have cost plenty of investor readers money.

Indeed, I would argue that as the system became more and more polarized — and the elites and journalists became the target of popular angst — rather than confronting that reality, or their role in it, the elites became convinced that they could bend reality to their preferred world view through sheer perseverance alone. In so doing, they became the institutional equivalent of a narcissist. Unconsciously repressing uncomfortable truths because, in Jungian terms, confronting their own shadow was too painful for them to process. It might shatter their reality and sense of self entirely, and pose a moral confrontation that revealed that, rather than being heroes, they were villains.

Today the polarization is greater than ever. It is as if two realities are playing out at the same time.

What's frightening is that unlike in China, where at least the CCP realised long ago that elites must be exposed to uncomfortable truths even if they don't like them, albeit in a select and guarded way (thus the appearance of two-track journalism: propaganda for the masses, truth for the elite that can handle it) there is no such recognition in the West. And certainly not in written form at the FT. The best we get is Edward Luce interviewing Steve Bannon on a live stage. And even this is performative.

I think it's plausible that the exchange of real truths has migrated away from print and over to events and tete-a-tete gatherings that take place in fully private places. What media characters represent online is increasingly detached from what they are like in person.

That said, the FT is still a great signal in terms of directing those who can see the bigger picture to where the current battle is being fought. Especially when it comes to corporate battles, markets and finance. At the same time, don't kid yourself. It tells us nothing about the truth of what is happening on the battleground. It can't. It's not a neutral player. Too often, like the Economist, it is now a counter indicator.

[Izabella Kaminska @izakaminska]

It’s also worth noting the inefficiencies don’t just relate to subsidies. In 2023, Environmental Progress — in a piece I helped compile (and linked below) — argued that much of the solar industry was effectively taking manufacturer-supplied carbon estimates at face value, without independent back-testing or verification, even as China came to dominate the supply chain.

The article claimed that core life-cycle numbers used by the IPCC, IEA, and major databases rest on opaque, confidential industry surveys and recycled assumptions, rather than auditable, China-specific data, creating a kind of circular validation loop.

It highlighted that energy-intensive steps like polysilicon production are often powered by coal, yet this reality may be underrepresented in standard models, potentially leading to systematic undercounting of emissions.

The piece named institutions and individuals involved in compiling these datasets and argued that confidentiality and data gaps prevent outsiders from stress-testing the results. It was based on the work of @enricomariutti.

Since then, industry bodies and labs have pushed back by updating assessments and reaffirming much lower carbon intensity figures, but largely without opening the underlying data to full public scrutiny, leaving a persistent dispute over transparency rather than consensus on solar’s overall climate value.

[Enrico Mariutti @enricomariutti]

X ha sospesa la traduzione dei tweet in ebraico, perché sono correlati all'incitamento alla violenza e alla diffusione di fake news.
Siamo alla frutta.

[NicolaGSorrentino @NicGSorrentino]

Un lavoro destinato a cambiare il punto di vista di chi guarda e sa vedere.

Onorato di aver visto crescere questo progetto dirompente e meraviglioso.

Grande @enricomariutti 💪🏾💪🏾💪🏾

[Enrico Mariutti @enricomariutti]

1/ After an extended editorial process, the first of a series of articles exploring the limits of the current consensus on the carbon intensity of photovoltaic (PV) energy is now available

https://t.co/ODSpFGOx0z

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@RnaudBertrand He's saying Europe is out-manned and outgunned. Our leaders have been enjoying a little play acting at being warrior kings. They're annoyed about taking their costumes off.

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@CollinRugg A surveillance tactic that has reaped dividends in London, Paris, Magdeburg...

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@stacyliberatore They were all lollipop men in 90s Northern Ireland, and proud men at that

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@stacyliberatore Well done, Stacy!

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

Political storms only

[Greg Price @greg_price11]

Reporter: “What do the states in the storm zone need — after what you saw today?”

Biden: “Oh, storm zone? I didn’t know which storm you’re talking about"

Holy crap

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

Does Helene vote democrat?

[I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 @ImMeme0]

Keep in mind as you watch it that Biden said the states affected by Hurricane Helene are getting everything they need and are “very happy.”

There isn’t a single federal entity in this town helping these people, and they’re already on day six! WTF?!

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@izakaminska Who would accept a wooden horse from the Greeks?

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@AdamWagner1 Did you happen to call any of the experts who find no evidence in support of wearing plastic on your face?

You could at least ask Mr Public Health himself. https://t.co/KjZUz14JBN

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@stacyliberatore @MailOnline I look forward to her Irish brogue

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@AdamWagner1 The opposite of the NYT, Guardian etc's leftward creep and exodus of right-leaning columnists? It's obvious what's happening

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@AdamWagner1 Don't forget to cover up

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

There is growing evidence that fake judge @Alexandre engaged in serious, repeated & deliberate election interference in Brazil’s last presidential election.

Under Brazilian law, that would mean up to 20 years in prison.

And, I’m sorry to say that it appears that some former Twitter employees were complicit in helping him do so.

Anyone with examples or evidence to this effect, please reply to this post.

[Mateus Simões @mateus_simoesmg]

VPN funcionando. Nunca me imaginei praticando e propagando desobediência civil, mas censura não pode ser admitida, jamais.

[Toni @tecnic22]

@Defensa_Israel Según mis estimaciones, el helicóptero se dirige NE de Israel, sombra de los arboles de fondo, triangulación puerta del helicóptero indica dirección descontando 35° por la hora.
Los planos se orientan al norte. Otro dato, el dedo del Comandante del Estado Mayor, Herzi Halevi

[C. P. Colum @cpcolum]

@pprooney2620 @FreemanWSJ @WSJopinion If he doesn't worry the donkeys, why didn't they let him play?

Vis-a-vis Trump, whatever his cognitive state, given he was almost shot in the head the Biden comparison seems a little unfair.