Share this comment
Another issue is that in media outlets and cutbacks, we have lost specialist science reporters whose experiences led them to some levels of appropriate skepticism.plus they had some idea of the landscape of disciplines and whom to call. That expertise seems to have been lost. Also external NGO funding of reporting, which is not particula…
Another issue is that in media outlets and cutbacks, we have lost specialist science reporters whose experiences led them to some levels of appropriate skepticism.Plus they had some idea of the landscape of disciplines and whom to call. That expertise seems to have been lost. Also external NGO funding of reporting, which is not particularly interested in dispassionate looks at scientific controversies or even different narratives.
Agreed. The norms of the "climate beat" seem very different than those of, say, the "politics beat" where (some at least) believe their role is to hold the powerful accountable. On climate it sometimes seems that the climate beat exists to protect the powerful from being held accountable.
Upstream of norms in accounting for the difference in quality of coverage is the nature of the subject matter. There have been plenty of street-smart kids without formal training who started on the police desk and made themselves into perfectly adequate reporters of doings around City Hall and the State House. That's much more difficult to do given the multiple disciplines involved in the claims around climate science. This stuff is hard!