…with the open mind of a critical thinking educated person, and try to understand why I get so agitated by “mainstream corporate cable and network medias” role in perpetuating false equivalence “debate” on such topics as this one but also the Trumpian Rise from the 18 month Republican dog and pony show leading up to Cleveland’s RNC celebrations… http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/articles/14522/
A falsely balanced discourse between public opinion and climate science in the US has allowed decision-makers to take little action in addressing the very real dangers of climate change, says Emily Lundberg, a Ph.D. communications researcher. Here, she charts this issue from its origins, taking a close look at the media’s role in propelling doubt and stalling change.
Crucially, Hughes downplayed the way these three fronts of opposition used a compliant media and its norm of objectivity to look far more popular, scientifically sound, and influential than they actually were. Attempting to abide by the industry norm of “objectivity,” the American press has until only a few years ago presented climate change within a “he said”/“she said” framework whereby opposing views of supposedly equally-weighted arguments clashed. As a result, a contrived two-sided “balance” was strategically used to muddy the public’s perception of the clarity of scientific understanding and to downplay the strength of the scientific community’s consensus. As climate change media scholar Simon Cottle describes it: “For too long the shrill voices of a minority of powerful voices and lobbies framed public debate and debilitated political action in some of the world’s worst polluting countries, led by the United States.”