...
On December 30, I posted the following Twitter riff: Check this diagram of the year’s news. Find climate? Climategate? Copenhagen? http://j.mp/noCO2news.
The diagram, drawn by compiling weekly news summaries from Journalism.org, contains not even a postage-stamp-size space for coverage of climate — or the environment as a whole, for that matter. While Joe Romm recently published a list of journalists who had moved furthest from what he considers excellence in climate coverage in 2009 (yours truly included), the absence of coverage didn’t make his cut.
[UPDATE, 1/14: Max Boykoff at the University of Colorado, has posted a chart showing a sharp spike in media coverage of climate change in late December. I've asked him if he can parse out how much was "Climategate" compared to the climate talks. I'll post an update if I hear more.]
The crew at Journalism.org, which is run by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism, had already noted in a year-end wrapup that environmental coverage, including climate, was down somewhat from 2007 and 2008, representing 1.5 percent of overall coverage. (An important note: That analysis used data through Dec. 6, capturing the burst of news about the stolen climate files but missing the tumultuous climate talks in Copenhagen. Also, the weekly analysis for Dec. 14-20 showed a climate spike.) The picture has been very different online, with the same analysts noting sustained heat around climate on blogs.
There are many out there who blame the news media — either for ignoring global warming or mishandling it — for the failure of the public to engage in an energy revolution to limit climate risks. But my sense is such critics have inflated expectations of what media coverage, without a direct punch from nature, can accomplish. Mind you, media coverage of incremental, yet important, issues remains vital, to my mind; it’s just not sufficient (which is one reason I’m branching out). ...
No comments:
Post a Comment