“Global climate change” is the hippest buzz phrase for radical environmentalists, dutiful scientists, industry heads, and policy-makers alike. Philosophically, it is proof that the environment is humanity’s connective tissue; whether your life’s work is spent tilling a field, manufacturing steel, or conducting conference calls, global climate change affects you. The gravity of this human-environment issue is highlighted in the headlines of the EPA’s “Science and Policy News”: “Researchers See ‘No Doubt’ of Human Influence on Climate,” “Climate Change May Be Greater Threat to Biodiversity than Habitat Loss,” “Largest Arctic Ice Shelf Breaks Up” (http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/NewsandEventsScienceandPolicyNews.html). To ensure the further sustainable progress of humanity, it is critical that we work to understand our relationship to climate and its changes.
The scientific community is now virtually certain that humans have contributed significantly to climate change, and that our global activity is leading to further drastic changes in the climate system. While this idea has almost universal consensus, the precise mechanisms and extent of our influence are not as certain. The greatest challenge now is identifying hat is affecting the climate most strongly, and in what ways, as well as how these effects will become more important in the future. This brief discusses some of the anthropogenic processes and products that are having significant impact on climate, as well as the varying levels of certainty surrounding each.
The earth has experienced climate change for the entirety of its existence. For billions of years, this change has occurred at a relatively slow pace, with exceptions being caused by events such as large scale volcanic eruptions. Now, humans are the cause for high rates of climate change and damage to the environment. This is beginning to have damaging effects on not only us, but the world around us, and we are only just started to take action. Efforts to reduce climate change would be more realized if not for the resistance of many due to misconceptions, money, and a reluctance to change. Short- and long-term solutions are being developed by the brightest minds, but they will not work without
I say this because there were points in which I personally could not really understand what was going on due to my lack of exposure to this problem that American journalism is facing. More specifically, terminology that was used, especially from business standpoints, and the different companies that were involved made it harder to keep up with the issue at hand. However, with a little editing and better explanation of terminology, I think that this film could extend to a wide audience that would include both digital natives and digital immigrants that are experiencing this transition within American news reporting. This paper will examine the difference between old and new journalism and its new standards, “The New York Times Effect” and its 21st century challenges, important qualifications to be a successful journalist, and the future role of journalism within American society.
The world we live in is one of innovation and growth. Technology has expanded and grown significantly over the past several decades. At the forefront of this evolution is the media. Over the past several hundred years, the media has seen substantial growth. While print media has been a staple of society for many decades, the internet and other forms of media have revolutionized the way we receive information. These range from social media, to television, to movies, among others. Yet, in regards to climate change, the focus is on television. While much of what people see and hear is accurate and valid, one must recognize the underlying purpose of all media outlets; the media aims to convey a message to attract viewers. For many unfamiliar to academic settings, the media represents the primary source of information. The media can use various techniques such as framing in order to convey their message. By definition, framing is the media’s attempt to draw the public’s attention to certain issues. The media decides the stance they want to take, and then structures it in an attempt to influence the perception of the news. Rather than telling the audience what to think about, it tells the audience how to think about it.
The roles of science, the media, and politics greatly influence public opinion and understanding of the world around us. These three spheres of information and action are invariably linked when discussing complex global issues like climate change. However, the presentation and resolution of disagreement within the three spheres is incredibly independent. The many ways that climate change, specifically the debate on the existence of climate change, is portrayed within these spheres can greatly affect public emotion, knowledge, and policy of such an issue. This is particularly evident in the United States (US) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2007). This paper attempts to briefly outline the portrayal and settlement of the debate on the existence of climate change within the three spheres of the sciences, the media, and politics.
Because decisions can be made by governmental agencies concerning actions that reduce human impact on global warming, individuals have a responsibility to seek out factual information to aid them in voting decisions. This is a challenging endeavor; because much of today’s media coverage concerning human effect on global warming and climate change is vague, uses rhetorical devices, and offers fallacious reasoning, which influence society towards making decisions regardless of factual information. Because of this, it is important for citizens to think critically when evaluating media coverage pertaining to human impact on climate change and global warming.
To proceed with an analysis on news coverage on climate change, with a specific interest on coverage on the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, the original Fifth Assessment Report for Policymakers was first consulted. An analysis of this report will be conducted in order to establish what aspects of this report were embellished, highlighted, obscured, or simply ignored in this comparative analysis between mainstream and alternative news coverage. A brief summary of this report is therefore useful to conduct further analysis on news discourse and framing of this subject.
Trager, Robert, J. R. (2010). The Law of Journalism & Mass Communication. Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
The workers of the New York Times share a mutual understanding of what to write about and how they should go about doing it. According to Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, “The quality of the decisions journalists make from day to day is heavily influenced by editors and the culture of the newsroom” (243). Journalists find the facts but each of the editors and culture ...