- Feb 2022
Blau, W. (2022, February 14). Climate Change: Journalism’s Greatest Challenge. Medium. https://wblau.medium.com/climate-change-journalisms-greatest-challenge-2bb59bfb38b8
- climate change
- climate science
- climate journalism
- COP Climate Summit
- newsroom management
- peer review
- news media
- Oct 2021
The fossil fuel industry helped to create the PR industry, and publicists came up with disinformation and manipulation tactics that they deployed for oil, tobacco, and chemical companies for decades.
This is the missing curriculum in design education.
- Oct 2020
Health signals der Erde, permanente Seite des Guardian
- May 2017
Did the writer engage with anyone who disagrees? Did they call a senator whose legislation bugs them? Did they try to grasp what the president-elect was doing, or merely repeat one of his more outrageous statements? If it's a broadcast interview, was the guest presented with genuine opposing views and challenged to answer? Those who wrestle with opposing arguments do you a service and often improve their own arguments.
This is a double-edged sword in traditional media - the need to get both sides of the argument. It is important for balanced and factual reporting, but it can also be problematic as it frames both sides as having equal importance in an issue. Think of the debate about climate change. In the name of journalistic fairness, a mainstream reporter may often feel obliged to get the opinion of a climate change denier to balance the story. This often gives the impression that the deniers are of equal weight on the issue. Could lead the general public to believe that climate change is a devisive issue since there are 2 sides, despite the fact that 99% of the science and research is weighted towards climate change. Should both sides be given equal weight in journalism? Could this actually help to create an environment of skepticism about facts? Making all facts seem debatable?