
Climate change is a hot topic for media. With each new findings and experts opinions varying on the subject, it becomes difficult for media to put the issue in proper perspective. Often media has to face backlash for misinforming public.
Large number of scientists all over the world are engaged in research related climate change. Their research findings are published in scientific journals and they are picked up journalists and filed as news reports. The chances of misinterpretation and missing out nuances are high. And discordant findings add more to the confusion.One study may say warming has strengthened hurricanes and other may put forth findings suggesting no such link.
Interestingly, it is only one view which gains more media coverage. The flip side goes unreported. The media houses are blamed for backing a view which has more acceptance from industries and politicians. The general popular perception is that human activities are to be blamed for climate changes. But there is a opposing camp which doesn’t link the two. No one has a final word about climate change. The observations and studies make climate change a evolving story. Thanks to internet revolution, some scientists are taking their message straight to the public through their websites.
Media’s role should be restricted only to inform people about the new developments. It is people’s responsibility to sift through all the news and studies to look deeper into the issue and form an opinion.
source: nytimes












Comments
It’s media that’s muddling the issue, trying to outscoop one another.
Most media love to toe the populist line. So if Al Gore is in vogue they focus only on one side of the story.
And once he gets tossed out they smartly toe the opposing viewpoint. Science reporting is not same as political and current affairs reporting.
Why can’t media just restrict to reporting the findings of both camps?