In the Guardian today, the above and a report which, of course, does not tell you how well, relatively, Scotland is doing with restoring the natural environment.
In Scotland:
At present, only 18% of Scotland’s landmass met the 30% restoration target that the Scottish and UK governments agreed to in the Kunming declaration on tackling the biodiversity crisis in 2021. 1
In England, for example?
Government draft 30×30 criteria and mapping published in December 2023 concluded 8.5% of English land counted towards the 30% target. 2
Not in the (our) public interest?
Sources:
- https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jan/19/we-are-resting-on-our-laurels-scotland-faces-significant-challenge-to-protect-its-environment
- https://www.wcl.org.uk/30×30-press-release-october-2024.asp#:~:text=Government%20draft%2030×30%20criteria%20and%20mapping%20published%20in,of%20English%20land%20counted%20towards%20the%2030%25%20target.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
So a highly experienced journalist with the Guardian – its Scotland editor no less – demonstrates how to manufacture a negative frame for a news story. As you read on, is the editor revealing that it’s OK for journalists supposedly serving the public in Scotland to mis-report – to manipulate – the content of an interview in order to create a damning headline? As it’s well know that headlines impact readers, is this a blatant example of seeking to influence by deception?
Note the headline (from January 19, 2025): ‘We are resting on our laurels’: Scotland faces significant challenge to protect its environment – Francesca Osowska, the outgoing chief executive of NatureScot, says more needs to be done for Scotland to hit target of restoring 30% of natural environment by 2030. (my emphasis)
The intended negative connotation of the phrase ‘We are resting on our laurels’ can be in no doubts. Various dictionaries give the following meanings: ‘to be satisfied with your achievements and not to make an effort to do anything else ‘; ‘to be satisfied with the things they have achieved and have stopped putting effort into what they are doing’; to exhibit complacency! Given use of the word ‘We’ and juxtaposition with a negative reference to Scotland, the message being put across here is crystal clear.
Later in the article, which is based on an interview with the Guardian by the CEO of Nature Scot, we learn what was actually said.
First from the article, some context: ‘World leaders have generally been too slow to address the scale and severity of the nature crisis, she said, which puts the security of people across the global south at risk.’
Then immediately following this sentence, we are told more of what Ms Osowska actually said in the interview: ‘The 30 by 30 goal was “totemic” and “trips off the tongue”, she said. Yet “it feels as if globally we’re resting on our laurels. Where are the global funding initiatives to support the delivery of 30 by 30, to go beyond, effectively, what is a recovery program into restoration?”
Sleekit wordsmithing on display to devise a headline for a purpose – or worse?
Later in the article we’re told: ‘Osowska said she was broadly optimistic about the Scottish government’s direction of travel.’ She also told the Guardian journalist about the Scottish Government’s ‘spending £65m by next year on nature restoration, £5m on Atlantic rainforest restoration, a new national park and marine conservation’.
Optimism and positive facts relayed to the Guardian by its interviewee were not enough to overcome the lure of a negatively framed headline about Scotland and the Scottish Government. A more powerful motivation than maintaining public trust in journalistic standards?
LikeLiked by 1 person
As the great journalist Jon Pilger said the Guardian is a ‘pretendy lefty’ paper. It’s certainly anti SNP and anti Scottish, and that is why my pals in NE England are so anti SNP and ridicule Scotland so much, they read that pretendy lefty rag, they hate that Scotland is doing so much better than England on so many levels.
LikeLiked by 2 people