I løbet af det seneste halvår er spørgsmålet om ‘falsk balance’ i mediernes klimadækning endnu en gang dukket op, efter at der nu stilles tvivl om klimaforandringerne blandt højtrangerende i den amerikanske præsidentadministration. Og det har atter en gang skabt splid mellem journalister, rapporterer Michael Blanding for NiemanReports.
“Det har gjort det mere afgørende end nogensinde, at journalister er i stand til at adskille fakta fra mening,” siger Emmanuel Vincent, projektforsker ved University of California, Merced, til NiemanReports. Vincent lancerede hjemmesiden Climate Feedback for tre år siden som et forum for videnskabsmænd, der holder øje med nøjagtigheden i mediernes dækning af stofområdet.
“Coverage is nowhere near where it should be for something that is so central to understanding how we can live, work, play, relax in a 21st-century society.”
~ Michael Blanding
False balance
The issue of false balance has once again reared its head in the last six months, as the presence of climate change deniers in high positions in the current American presidential administration has once again put journalists in a quandary.
That has made it more crucial than ever that journalists are able to separate fact from opinion, says Emmanuel Vincent, a project scientist at the University of California, Merced, who launched the website Climate Feedback three years ago as a forum for scientists to weigh in on the accuracy of media coverage.
“When considering climate issues, newer journalists will make the mistake of pitting scientists against political experts or think tanks. That is like the doctor telling you you have cancer, so you go to the dentist for a second opinion.”
~ Seth Borenstein, a veteran beat reporter on climate change for the Associated Press
» NiemanReports – 28 August 2017:
Covering Climate Change, with Urgency and Creativity
A look at news outlets bringing innovation, urgency and new audiences to stories on climate change
