Here’s a fairly extraordinary piece from the Environment and Public Works Committee of the United States Senate, what any objective observer would consider an authoritative source. This should shock even the most global-warming-hysteria-hardened curmudgeons out there.
At a Society of Environmental Journalists convention (we’ve written about them before, not really the most balanced group on the topic themselves), ABC global warming correspondent Bill Blakemore said, “I don’t like the word ‘balance’ much at all” in global warming coverage.
At least we can say for ol’ Blakemore that he’s not alone. In fact, we’ll bet he felt right at home up there in Howard Dean’s home state, speaking to a bunch of enviro-journos. They likely carried him out on their shoulders. You can see from this link that Blakemore clearly confuses the role of journalist and scientist. His job is to report, not to make sweeping conclusions about science over which experts are clearly split. And, therein lies the rub: He refuses to acknowledge the lack of consensus on the issue. Shame on him, shame on ABC, but they don’t really care. They have their own satellite and you’ll believe what they tell you, dammit.
As John Mayer sings,
“When you trust your television
What you get is what you got
Cause when they own the information, oh
They can bend it all they want .”
Like Mayer, we keep on waiting for the (journalistic) world to change — at least in their blatant one-sided coverage of global warming (Or is it cooling?). With folks like Bill Blakemore, there’s slim chance of that.
November 1st, 2006 on 5:18 pm
Gayle, it is a story that lots of folks truly believe. I don’t question their sincerity or yours. We all have a right to our opinions and we all have a right to express them. No one on either side of this debate should attempt to shut down the debate.
Among those scientists who agree with each other, there is agreement about global warming. That isn’t what constitutes a consensus. For there to be a consensus, there would have to be serious treatment of the considered opinion of even those scientists who disagree.
That isn’t what is happening. Scientists who are not part of that so called “consensus” are often attacked viciously. You said that the “only people who dispute global warming are funded by Exxon.” You illustrate one of the ad hominem attacks that is frequently employed. Sometimes their sanity or intellect is questioned as well. Seldom is their argument addressed. We should debate the issues and leave the ad hominem attacks for children on the playgrounds. It has no place in debate among adults.
To me, “balance” means that different points of view should be presented. Limbaugh doesn’t claim to be a journalist. He is clearly presenting is own opinion and makes no bones about it which means it isn’t propaganda. A journalist who would attempt to present only those points of view that parallel his own is not a journalist at all–he is a propagandist.
October 31st, 2006 on 2:09 pm
There is only one story on global warming. It is really happening. Scientists are not “clearly split” on the facts of global warming. The evidence in undisputed among all the leading scientists. The only people who “dispute” global warming are funded by Exxon. Where do you get your “information”/propaganda from Rush Linbaugh?