The debate on climate change can be pretty polarised at times with the sceptics and environmentalists dominating the two main camps. So it’s probably the media’s job to maintain the balance. But Media Lens (ML), a critic of the mainstream media, argues that there is no balance in either the portrayal of the crisis or its solutions.
Let’s have a look at what it says.
How real is climate change?
The baseline consensus, of course, is that it is real. But there are still some that refuse to acknowledge this. And the extent of the climate crisis has never really been acknowledged.
ML makes the point that we are facing the Earth’s sixth mass extinction in four-and-a-half billion years of geological history. And it is the only one that humans themselves will have caused. It is also arguably accelerating, as the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved its symbolic Doomsday Clock forward thirty seconds towards apocalypse.
In addition, studies have reported ‘extraordinarily hot’ Arctic conditions that “could trigger uncontrollable climate change at global level”. Global warming could raise global sea levels to heights that may wipe out coastal cities and settlements.
And some even think we are at a point of no return.
Politicians didn’t get the memo
The international commitment is to keep global warming below 2°C, which is still dangerous enough to threaten some life on Earth. This may be too ambitious. The climate may now be so sensitive to greenhouse gasses that we could be looking at a 7°C temperature lift within a human lifespan.
At a time of manufactured fear by ‘mainstream’ media about ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ politics, how divorced from reality is the government when it would rather ignore such an important report, far less address seriously the urgent truth of climate chaos?
It’s perhaps apt that it’s Donald Trump’s outrageous policy initiatives consuming the media. Thus detracting from other ludicrous things going on with his administration. The environment isn’t getting off scot-free from Trump’s rampage, for example. He has appointed oil and coal men to senior positions. Men like Rex Tillerson, former ExxonMobil chairman and CEO, and now US Secretary of State.
But that’s not to say Obama’s legacy was something to write home about. Leading climate scientist Jim Hanson said that Obama uttered the right words, but missed the boat:
When he had control of both houses of Congress and a 70 percent approval rating, he could have done something strong on climate in the first term – but he would have had to be a different personality than he is. He would have to have taken the FDR [Franklin D Roosevelt] approach of explaining things to the American public with his “fireside chats,” and he would have had to work with Congress, which he didn’t do.
But the media never told us that
But if we don’t have an actual understanding of the extent of climate change, how can we get a balanced assessment of how it’s being tackled? ML says that media outlets do OK on the science. But they don’t tackle the “serious and radical measures” needed. This includes an in-depth look at how corporations and co-opted governments muffle progress on climate change. Or what we can do about it.
The silence is deafening on the threat of climate change. National security threats dominate the media, distorting where the real priorities lie. When politics, big business, and media all interlink, we need to work extra hard to bring out the facts. And the need has never been more urgent.
– Read more Canary articles on Climate Change.
– Play your part in the ongoing media revolution by reading and supporting new media organisations that do better.
Please add more that you like in the comments.
The Canary, Media Diversified, Novara Media, Corporate Watch, Common Space, Media Lens, Bella Caledonia, Vox Political, Evolve Politics, Real Media, Reel News, STRIKE! magazine, The Bristol Cable, Manchester Mule, Salford Star
Featured image via Flickr
We need your help ...
The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.
Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.
We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.
Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?