Broadcast Networks & Climate Change In 2016
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1294) 2 months ago
"In 2016, evening newscasts and Sunday shows on ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as Fox Broadcast Co.'s Fox News Sunday, collectively decreased their total coverage of climate change by 66 percent compared to 2015, even though there were a host of important climate-related stories, including the announcement of 2015 as the hottest year on record, the signing of the Paris climate agreement, and numerous climate-related extreme weather events. There were also two presidential candidates to cover, and they held diametrically opposed positions on the Clean Power Plan, the Paris climate agreement, and even on whether climate change is a real, human-caused phenomenon. Apart from PBS, the networks also failed to devote significant coverage to climate-related policies, but they still found the time to uncritically air climate denial -- the majority of which came from now-President Donald Trump and his team." . . . .

"As was the case in 2015, ABC aired the least amount of climate coverage in 2016, covering the topic for just six minutes, about seven minutes less than in 2015. All the other major networks also significantly reduced their coverage from the previous year, with NBC showing the biggest decrease (from 50 minutes in 2015 to 10 minutes in 2016), followed by Fox (39 minutes in 2015 to seven minutes in 2016) and CBS (from 45 minutes in 2015 to 27 minutes in 2016)."

Read more at:

https://www.mediamatters....016/215718

https://www.theguardian.c...-to-cut-it
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+13210) 2 months ago
Reply to Mary Catherine Dunphy (#372561)
Mary Catherine Dunphy wrote:
"In 2016, evening newscasts and Sunday shows on ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as Fox Broadcast Co.'s Fox News Sunday, collectively decreased their total coverage of climate change by 66 percent compared to 2015, even though there were a host of important climate-related stories, including the announcement of 2015 as the hottest year on record, the signing of the Paris climate agreement, and numerous climate-related extreme weather events. There were also two presidential candidates to cover, and they held diametrically opposed positions on the Clean Power Plan, the Paris climate agreement, and even on whether climate change is a real, human-caused phenomenon. Apart from PBS, the networks also failed to devote significant coverage to climate-related policies, but they still found the time to uncritically air climate denial -- the majority of which came from now-President Donald Trump and his team." . . . .

"As was the case in 2015, ABC aired the least amount of climate coverage in 2016, covering the topic for just six minutes, about seven minutes less than in 2015. All the other major networks also significantly reduced their coverage from the previous year, with NBC showing the biggest decrease (from 50 minutes in 2015 to 10 minutes in 2016), followed by Fox (39 minutes in 2015 to seven minutes in 2016) and CBS (from 45 minutes in 2015 to 27 minutes in 2016)."

Read more at:

https://www.mediamatters....016/215718

https://www.theguardian.c...-to-cut-it


I've stared at this post for nearly a week and can't figure out the point of it.

-First of all, it is apparently a surprise to you that ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, etc. are in most interested in returning a profit to their shareholders. They report whatever generates advertisement revenue, clicks, likes, etc. They don't really care what they talk about as long as it is profitable. In 2016, there were many issues more profitable than "climate change".

-I personally am glad that the "climate change" phraseology is dying. The words "Climate Change" were focus-grouped by GOP pollster Frank Luntz. When one thinks of "climate" it evokes a balmy palm springs feeling. The weather is always changing. Luntz created this word pair for GW Bush to downplay the anthropological causation of the desertification phenomenon which has been occurring for the last century.

-The Trump Administation has banned the words "climate-change" from use. There are many people right now rewriting EPA grants to avoid using those words.

-There is actually a silver-lining here. The currently favored terminology is "climate resiliency". I like this term because it allows us to move forward with actions which can actually help the planet. Unfortunately, there are too many progressives with there heads up the ass of the causation argument who have failed to recognize the opportunity at hand. We have an opportunity to reframe the discussion.

My guess is the average Gianforete voter in Eastern MT would be skeptical about the causes of desertification aka "climate change". And there are too many progressives who seem to think that issue has to be settled before we can do anything meaningful or effective. I say balderdash. Let's seize the opportunity to move the ball forward.

Those same Gianfrote voters would also likely relate to the importance of covering the earth with vegetation, care of the earth, building soil organic matter, increasing the water-holding capacity of the soil, and so on. It can be easily demonstrated how these actions to increase landscape resiliency also increase long-term profitability. There are values shared by both the political left and right here which can foster cooperation. We'd be a hell-of-a-lot better off if we would pursue this kind of cooperation, rather than the devisisve augments of 2008. It's time for progressives to pull there head out of the anthropological causation argument, embrace climate resiliency, and actually accomplish something meaningful.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1294) 2 months ago
Currently it is 105 degrees in Miles City, Montana, July 14, 2017 at 4:21 p.m. And, this year, 19 counties in eastern Montana are experiencing a severe drought emergency which has ruined 45% of Montana's spring wheat crop. Other crops are adversely affected as well. Western North Dakota is experiencing drought as is north-central South Dakota.

I don't call ruined wheat crops "climate resilience." I call it a disaster brought about by human caused climate change. Severe drought is just one of the many adverse and less "resilient" impacts of climate change predicted by 97% of the Nobel Prize winning climate scientists.

For other effects of climate change, see:

https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/
Top
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1294) 2 months ago
Trump Plan Would 'Reduce or Eliminate' Important Data Access, Federal Science Official Warns: A USGS email alert to international scientists says a wide range of research areas would be hit, including work on flood risks, wildfires and climate change.

https://insideclimatenews...-327521661

I guess the Trump Administration's thinking about climate change is "if there is no data, it doesn't exist."
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+13210) 2 months ago
Yup, it's hot and dry. It was hot and dry in 1954 and 1988. Another 30 hours of know-nothing's yakking on the boob-tube isn't going to cool it off or make it rain I Miles City.

That said, there are things people can do to mitigate the extreme impacts of the current weather. You can build resiliency into your soil.

Again, I think we should focus on solutions to adapt and become more resilient. If you want to sit around and whine, and sputter on in your irrelevance, that's your prerogative. I'm going to focus on positive solutions.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+2
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-122) 2 months ago
Mr. BONINE
Both your posts are relivent and well constructed. It's great too see, Rather than the sky is falling and we are surely doomed with a conservative party in the white house.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+9547) 2 months ago
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1294) 2 months ago
Okay, we all know it's hot in Montana! Damn hot! So hot it makes me think I'm living in Nevada instead of Montana! It's not yet 2 degrees below hell yet but getting closer.

So hot (and dry) in Montana that last week Governor Bullock declared a drought emergency in 19 counties. This week the drought is even worse which necessitated Governor Bullock to issue an executive order declaring a drought disaster in 28 counties and 5 reservations in Montana. That means half the counties in Montana are in a drought disaster. And, it's only July! Stay tuned!

In the meantime, a former head policy adviser at the Interior Department is accusing the Trump Administration of reassigning him to a lesser position for speaking out about the dangers of climate change.

Read more at:

http://ypradio.org/#stream/0
Top
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-122) 2 months ago
SO MCD, An Obama appointee Joel Clement screams FOUL because Trump budget cuts, effects his job and he gets bumped too a lesser job that likely has requirements of regular duties and responsibilities. Maybe even a pay cut.But what would you know about having a REAL JOB, You probably haven't been able too hold down a regular job for long the last 20 years.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
-4
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1294) 2 months ago
Here's some news!

Take a look at the climate change denier, Sam Clovis, who Trump just appointed to be the Department of Agriculture's Undersecretary of Research, Education and Economics -- the USDA's top science position.

Oh, and did I forget to mention Trump's pick is not a scientist! Oh yes, and he also does not have any policy experience with food or agriculture. But he sure looks like he enjoy eating lots of carbohydrates!

I wonder if Clovis will be interested in saving Fort Keogh from the Trump budget cuts? Is he the guy at USDA who will be in charge of the drought disaster relief for the farmers and ranchers here in Montana?

Read more at:

https://www.washingtonpos...e21a6cbf11

https://www.dailykos.com/...=emaildkre

https://thinkprogress.org...7be4ffb1a8
Top
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1294) 2 months ago
Today on NPR's show, "To the Point", there was an informative discussion about climate change, and the author, David Wallace-Wells' was interviewed about his article, "The Uninhabitable Earth" published in New York Magazine. Here are the links to the article and the interview.

http://nymag.com/daily/in...umans.html

http://www.kcrw.com/news-...2017-07-21
Top