[MCN] Journalism and climate change

[Lance Olsen]

Columbia Journalism Review Oct 12 2018

Yes, Hurricane Michael is a climate change story
https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/hurricane-michael-climate-change.php <https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/hurricane-michael-climate-change.php>

1st 2 paragraphs

THE FEROCITY OF HURRICANE MICHAEL came into view on Thursday as images of devastation filtered out of the Florida panhandle. Stories on the storm’s trail of ruin appear on the front pages of today’s New York Times <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/us/hurricane-michael-florida-assessment.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage>, Washington Post <https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/floridas-forgotten-coast-devastated-by-historic-hurricane-michael/2018/10/11/ef9d127a-cd6f-11e8-a360-85875bac0b1f_story.html?utm_term=.d9b973effb16>, and Wall Street Journal <https://www.wsj.com/articles/now-a-tropical-storm-michael-leaves-devastation-in-florida-1539260209>. In a helicopter above Mexico City, Florida, CNN’s Brooke Baldwin captured footage of a city flattened <https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/10/11/brooke-baldwin-hurricane-michael-damage-helicopter-view-vpx.cnn> by Michael’s powerful winds.

Reports on the immediate aftermath are vital to understanding the storm’s impact, but all of those mentioned above failed to include any mention of climate change. This is particularly disappointing because, just days before Michael made landfall, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a report with a dismal assessment of current global conditions and a warning that the future, soon approaching, is much more dire than previously feared <https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/climate-change-report.php>.

Closing paragraphs

As our understanding of the impact of climate change expands, some journalists have taken up the challenge of bringing the topic into the discussion of storms like Michael. “Hurricane Michael isn’t a truly ‘natural disaster,’ <https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/10/health/sutter-natural-disaster-hurricane-michael/index.html> John D. Sutter, a CNN investigative reporter, wrote. “Neither was Harvey in Houston. Nor Maria in Puerto Rico. Yet we continue to use that term. Doing so—especially in the era of climate change—is misleading if not dangerous.” 

In Thursday’s Times, Henry Fountain, a climate reporter, explained the “triple threat from climate change: more rain in larger storms on rising seas. <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/10/climate/hurricane-michael-climate-change.html>” The Atlantic’s Robertson Meyer explained how Michael’s sudden growth could be tied to rising sea levels and warming waters, writing that “scientists won’t formally know whether climate change played a role in Michael’s rapid intensification for several months. But local weather experts have already said Michael is exactly what they would expect to see in a climate-changed world. <https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/10/hurricane-michael-florida-panhandles-worst-case-scenario/572671/>”

Writing on the UN report, the Post’s Margaret Sullivan argued that “when it comes to climate change, we—the media, the public, the world—need radical transformation, and we need it now. <https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-planet-is-on-a-fast-path-to-destruction-the-media-must-cover-this-like-its-the-only-story-that-matters/2018/10/08/f806a7f0-caea-11e8-a3e6-44daa3d35ede_story.html?utm_term=.50edaf454226>” That transformation could include reporting on climate changes impact on any number of issues, from the economy to immigration to warfare. With the country focused on coverage of Michael’s destruction, the opportunity to bring climate change into the discussion is there for the taking, and it shouldn’t be ignored.

++++   ________________________________________________________++++
 
“Research suggests that the scale of human population and the current pace of its growth contribute substantially to the loss of biological diversity. Although technological change and unequal consumption inextricably mingle with demographic impacts on the environment, the needs of all human beings—especially for food—imply that projected population growth will undermine protection of the natural world. 

"Numerous solutions have been proposed to boost food production while protecting biodiversity, but alone these proposals are unlikely to staunch biodiversity loss. An important approach to sustaining biodiversity and human well-being is through actions that can slow and eventually reverse population growth: investing in universal access to reproductive health services and contraceptive technologies, advancing women’s education, and achieving gender equality.”
 
Eileen Crist, Camilo Mora, Robert Engelman. The interaction of human population, food production, and biodiversity protection. Science 21 April 2017

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bigskynet.org/pipermail/missoula-community-news_bigskynet.org/attachments/20181012/8b32b72e/attachment.html>