More on Today's Revkin Article

Earlier I published a post about an interesting article by Andrew Revkin in today's New York Times about industry's willful ignorance of global warming science. There was an interesting quote in there that I didn't mention earlier about how journalistic practices enabled this campaign of misinformation:

George Monbiot, a British environmental activist and writer, said that by promoting doubt, industry had taken advantage of news media norms requiring neutral coverage of issues, just as the tobacco industry once had.

Will Bunch of Attytood already has some good commentary about this quote as it relates to the practice of "he said, she said" journalism.

This is an issue that particularly affects American journalism, and it's one side effect of having more intensive journalist training courses that stress objectivity particularly strongly (and, of course, it's also a natural result of time-strapped journalists just trying to meet deadlines). But, this is an issue that's become much more pronounced in the era of 24-hour cable news. Whereas Americans once received much of their news and analysis distilled through trusted media figures that strived to be objective, nowadays people are more likely to just be exposed to a series of talking heads speaking from opposite sides of the political spectrum. Although, in this case it's more of a "he yelled, she yelled" phenomenon.

Want to do a story about global warming? Just pit a climate scientist against a fringe global warming denialist, and your work is done! Is there really a scientific controversy there? No, but one guy says this and the other says that, so the perception of the viewer is that the truth must be somewhere in the middle, even when it couldn't be further away.

So, given the recent rise of cable news punditry, it's hard to be optimistic that this "he said, she said" type of journalism (or its louder cable TV cousin) is going anywhere in the near future.


Hat tip to Bora of A Blog Around the Clock.

Categories

More like this

Scibling Bora has expressed his wish "to end once for all the entire genre of discussing the "bloggers vs. journalists" trope," and tried to do so with perhaps the most massive science-journalism-Web2.0 post evah. Bora says, the whole "bloggers will replace journalists" trope is silly and wrong. No…
The idea stated in the title of this blog post is not novel--far from it, in fact. We have known for a long time that the auto industry, the oil industry, and others with a vested interest have engaged in a long-running campaign of misinformation to discredit the science behind global warming.…
Ed Yong has a great blog post up asking Should science journalists take sides? He rightly answers: yes, "a commitment to the view from nowhere has many problems." Among those problems, this opinions-on-shape-of-earth-differ style is "a disservice to journalism," reflective of "laziness" and "a…
Just when I was wondering why there hasn't been more mainstream coverage of the Jared Diamond/New Yorker lawsuit I blogged about at the beginning of this month, Columbia Journalism Review has an update. And in a recent article in Science, Diamond commented, saying "The complaint has no merit at all…

This smells a bit like whining. Try not to demonize a healthy trace gas and you will do OK. Renewable energy developed via a capitalist ideology is OK. Convince people to buy clean renewable energy. Otherwise... shut up. Totalitarian socialist invocations shall never be acceptable in the US.

By larrydalooza (not verified) on 24 Apr 2009 #permalink

Laryy,

Are you arguing that the current energy infrastructure was developed without govt interference?

By winnebago (not verified) on 24 Apr 2009 #permalink

Evidence, larrylakooka, or GTFA. The smell isn't whining, it's crap at comment #1.