So?

As usual, when surrounded by copious amounts of noise, I don't really get it.

Data stored on floppy disks no one can read anymore was thrown out over 20 years ago. However, the corrected data still exists and with the correction factors known, the original numbers can be reconstructed. That will make the debate about the appropriateness of the use of those particular correction factors. Possibly a huge waste of time, but hardly a Copenhagen deal-breaker.

Scientists decided to stop sending manuscripts to a journal that publishes crap. The scientific editor probably was hoping for a higher impact factor since everyone who would want to spend the time refuting the papers involved would have to site them. In response the scientists decided to send a message of their own. But in a day and age of open-source publications where editors and reviewers are explicitly instructed not to make value-judgements about the work, this is hardly akin to conservatives' long-held disgruntlement with the "liberal MSM".

Could it be that there's a concerted effort to manipulate the public's perception of science and scientists in order to manufacture a greater scandal than actually exists? And all this right before a climate conference in which even a small baby-step towards emissions reductions is going to be seen as a huge advance?

Probably not. I'm sure it's all about the science and making sure we don't get too alarmed about climate change. Except for the TRILLIONS AND TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS WE INDIVIDUALLY STAND TO LOSE!