Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumWhy is the US news media so bad at covering climate change?
Why is the US news media so bad at covering climate change?
The US news media devotes startlingly little time to climate change how can newsrooms cover it in ways that will finally resonate with their audiences?
Kyle Pope and Mark Hertsgaard
Mon 22 Apr 2019 11.59 EDT
Last summer, during the deadliest wildfire season in Californias history, MSNBCs Chris Hayes got into a revealing Twitter discussion about why US television doesnt much cover climate change. Elon Green, an editor at Longform, had tweeted, Sure would be nice if our news networks the only outlets that can force change in this country would cover it with commensurate urgency. Hayes (who is an editor at large for the Nation) replied that his program had tried. Which was true: in 2016, All In With Chris Hayes spent an entire week highlighting the impact of climate change in the US as part of a look at the issues that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were ignoring. The problem, Hayes tweeted, was that every single time weve covered [climate change] its been a palpable ratings killer. So the incentives are not great.
The Twittersphere pounced. TV used to be obligated to put on programming for the public good even if it didnt get good ratings. What happened to that? asked @JThomasAlbert. @GalJaya said, Your ratings killer argument against covering #climatechange is the reverse of that used during the 2016 primary when corporate media justified gifting Trump $5 billion in free air time because it was good for ratings, with disastrous results for the nation.
When @mikebaird17 urged Hayes to invite Katharine Hayhoe of Texas Tech University, one of the best climate science communicators around, on to his show, she tweeted that All In had canceled on her twice once when I was literally in the studio w[ith] the earpiece in my ear and so she wouldnt waste any more time on it.
Wait, we did that? Hayes tweeted back. Im very very sorry that happened.
More:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/22/why-is-the-us-news-media-so-bad-at-covering-climate-change
IndyOp
(15,535 posts)His show with AOC was excellent because he brought in a variety of experts who could comment on different aspects of the crisis.
I am starting to fantasize about Chris and Rachel teaming up - one solid piece on the crisis every week on every MSNBC show would be a start.
LonePirate
(13,431 posts)If the media takes the correct view by science and the left, the right will start howling because they are opposed to the truth. If the media adopts the talking points of the right, they immediately become deniers and factually wrong. So the media straddles the fence and delivers horrible coverage.
abqtommy
(14,118 posts)just like their owners.
Duppers
(28,127 posts)Bad news. They want no personal responsibility for changing their lifestyles in any way.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Need a example,remember how the Andrus Family jacked up PBS after their reporting of price rigging by ADM.
That set the Bar on investigative reporting and lack there of. Tried to watch that so call 60 minutes wet kiss last night. What a serious joke of a report. Lot's of Camera shots of Stahl from different angles,but that was it,just a wet kiss to Donnie of Stupid.
DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)Grass roots organizations (like DU) must be the leaders on all unfamiliar topics. Presumably, such organizations operate on the basis of conscience, not ratings.
However, it does seem that older progressives are less aware of the seriousness of climate change and how it is hurting crops, shorelines and impoverished communities.
Maybe DU's editors will pick up this post?
DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)....or maybe DU's editors can give it an endorsement? Show 'em we're not as oblivious to global warming as the mainstream?
2naSalit
(86,802 posts)BlueWI
(1,736 posts)Bothsiderism is a big part of the problem.