Although the North American mainstream media has recently jumped
on the green bandwagon, its coverage of climate change has been
lambasted for contributing to a culture of doubt and debate
by covering an issue of fact as one of opinion.
Journalists often covered climate change stories using a traditional
notion of objectivity – by giving equal weight to the
views of the contrarians and the believers. But this practice
meant that journalists continued to tell both sides of the story,
even when there was no legitimate scientific “other side”
to tell.
During UBC’s Celebrate Research week, the UBC School of
Journalism and the DeSmogBlog.com
hosted a panel discussion on media treatment of the climate-change
issue entitled “The State of the Media on Climate Change.”
The panel was comprised of some of the best-known journalists,
editors, academics and activists following the issue.
Panelists included Hadi Dowlatabadi,
UBC Professor Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability;
Chris Mooney, Washington correspondent for
Seed Magazine and author of The New York Times bestseller,
The Republican War on Science; Ross Gelbspan,
Pulitzer Prize winning editor and author of the groundbreaking
book The Heat is On; Kirk LaPointe,
Managing Editor of the Vancouver Sun; and Jim Hoggan,
president of James Hoggan & Associates and founder of
DeSmogBlog.com
Throughout the presenters’ five-minute
presentations and the discussion afterward, a consensus emerged
– that journalists have contributed, willingly or unwillingly,
to fogging and fueling the debate on climate change.
Jim Hoggan, a self-proclaimed “PR guy” explained
to the audience the function of PR and spin. He told the story
of S. Fred Singer, who some might remember from his previous
efforts to allay public fears about the dangers of secondhand
smoke, who became a spokesperson for big oil and climate change
contrarians. Singer’s ability to get his views published
and cast doubt on climate change, he said, is a perfect example
of how the journalistic commitment to balance can be manipulated
by spinsters, despite their pursuit of balance.
Ross Gelbspan highlighted the differences in the climate change
coverage between the mainstream media and scientific journals.
“Why is it that in a study of over 1,000 peer reviewed
articles on climate change, not one refuted its occurrence
or that humans contributed to it, yet the mainstream media
still presents the issue as if it is contested,” he
asked.
SUNNY FREEMAN
HADI DOWLATABADI
CHRIS MOONEY
ROSS GELBSPAN
Hadi Dowlatabadi founded offsetters.ca
to provide travelers with a way to pay to offset their carbon
emissions. Dowlatabadi, like many of the other panelists,
highlighted the sensationalist nature of the mainstream media
by referencing the exorbitant amount of coverage of Britney
Spears shaving her head and the controversy over Anna Nicole
Smith’s death.
“What are the media’s priorities?
Like scientists, it is to turn a profit, meaning that neither
the scientists nor the media are completely objective in their
self-interested pursuits,” he said.
Chris Moonely elaborated on the sensationalist
drive in the media.
“During the week the IPCC report was
released, it was one of the top issues in the media, according
to Pew’s statistics. However, the week after it had
fallen off the agenda, replaced with coverage of the Super
Bowl and Anna Nicole Smith’s death,” he said.
This sensationalist drive produces a drive
in journalism toward covering conflict and controversy because
they get ratings and coverage of more long-term issues suffers
as a result.
Kirk LaPointe anticipated being the “human
piñata,” because he was the only representative
of mainstream media in the panel group. And that is exactly
how the audience treated him. Although he acknowledged that
the media had done the issue a disservice in its previous
coverage, he expressed his hope that the media have a renewed
opportunity to earn respect for its coverage over the coming
decades.
“I think mainstream news organizations
are finally starting to get it, thanks to a tipping point
in 2006 fueled by coverage of extreme weather, Al Gore’s
movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ and the nomination
of Stephane Dion,” he said.
While the panelists and the audience disagreed
about certain aspects of the media’s role in the climate
change debate, they agreed on one front – that the media’s
commitment to balance has obfuscated their climate change
coverage, and that the mainstream media need to play a more
responsible role in covering climate change by asking tough
questions and verifying the answers instead of clinging to
the journalistic standard of balance.
