At New Scientist Live, arms and oil companies are buying credibility from science

The sponsorship by Shell and BAE Systems of this weekend's New Scientist Live festival crosses an ethical red line, writes Chris Garrard, a campaigner and member of the Art Not Oil coalition

In the past month we have witnessed record-breaking storms, provoking pressing questions about our changing climate, while the Cassini probe concluded an almost 20-year journey in space which has shaped our understanding of the solar system. It is perhaps the ideal moment for the New Scientist to be hosting "the world's most exciting festival of ideas" - New Scientist Live - an event which is "rooted in the biggest, best and most provocative science" and "will touch on all areas of human life". But ahead of the festival's opening, it is not the science that has been provocative. Instead, it is the choice of the oil corporation Shell and the arms company BAE Systems as sponsors.

Museums and galleries have come under mounting pressure over the ethics of their fundraising. In 2015, the Science Museum faced tough scrutiny when it was revealed how Shell had attempted to influence the climate science exhibition it was sponsoring. While it normally produces news articles, not exhibitions, New Scientist also needs to demonstrate that is accountable and ethical in how it operates. Today, the importance of fair, balanced and accurate journalism - particularly science journalism - is becoming ever more important. Just last week, respected researchers Myles Allen and Richard Millar felt called to speak out as sceptics in the media misrepresented their research into how much carbon dioxide we can emit into the atmosphere and still hope to achieve the goals set out in the Paris climate agreement.