Apparently, Climate Change Mitigation Is Controversial
Most Americans (62%) say the news media is biased, though there is a ton of variability in that. In favor of what? Of whom? Why is this happening? What can we do about it?
Here’s a video on the reporting of climate change, where a scientist presents how seldom reports of hurricanes, droughts, and floods mention that climate change is super-charging all these events.
It would be very interesting to know why this is occurring. I speculate that climate change mitigation, something that our scientists are passionately begging us to engage in, has sadly been associated with the political left, and news outlets, especially local television stations whose viewers tend to be older, don’t want to offend conservatives.
How it’s possible that a scientific datum has a political slant I can’t say. Metallurgy, organic chemistry, quantum physics and molecular biology seem to have escaped political labeling, but climate science and socialism are closely connected. I’ll be damned.
Craig,
Oh c’mon, you’re not really that naive ! The “green” left are rightly called “watermelons”.
(Green in appearance, but red all the way through).
The rapid development and deployment of social media has totally eroded the profitability, power and influence traditional Western media outlets once enjoyed. In this new, and chaotic, marketplace journalists scramble to feed a voracious 24 hour news cycle, in the fight to remain relevant journalists must choose ‘sides’ and devote themselves to being propagandists instead of thoughtful, impartial, accurate observers and reporters of events.
Thus, if President Trump walked across the Potomac River, Fox news would record the event as the President also turning the water into wine, while the WP, NYT and CNN would head “Once Again Trump fails to swim across the Potomac River ” !
Climate science is complex and not very interesting to the average person. The intensity of fierce debates and preaching by advocates with deep ideological/political commitments, but little scientific knowledge has wearied the general public.
For years I’ve been trying to counter the extravagant and outrageous claims by wild eyed environmental activists and eco-pests who always blend pseudo-science with political dogma, regardless of the damage done.
I’ve warned such activities would result in a lack of credibility and a backlash of popular rejection. I’m afraid my efforts have been in vain. It gives me no joy to witness the backlash occurring on a global basis, but the left will always prefer to fight among themselves about doctrinal purity than actually accomplish anything practical.
In the Western world, moderates are becoming an endangered species as the bitterness of leftist extremists becomes increasingly frustrated by the intrusion of reality into their flights of fantasy.
I couldn’t agree more with this! For some reason, people think climate science is just trying to steal their money. The other day, I was talking to my friend about Trudeau’s carbon tax. She thinks that it wont do anything but make money for the government. She doesn’t seem to realize that, a) it encourages people to emit less carbon by making it more expensive, and b) it gives the government more money to start projects that reduce carbon emissions. Some people only care about money and about nothing else.