Media 's Interpretation Of Global Warming

In his essay titled “Climate of Denial”, Al Gore, a well known environmental advocate and former vice president, verifies the reality of climate change and global warming. The piece is an attack on corrupt companies and news outlets that attempt to persuade the public that global warming is not a critical issue. Gore also earnestly conveys our environment’s current state and offers possible solutions that would increase awareness about global warming and begin to revert the planet back to a healthier, more sustainable state. The overarching purpose of Gore’s work is to call attention to the widespread climate change that is occurring. However, he also focuses on the corruption and bias within the media, and their attempts to conceal the truth about global warming. Writing to those who are conflicted about who to believe, he makes a valid argument that defends the beliefs of he and his fellow activists and encourages others to become more active in the climate change issue.

In modern America few problems prove to be as fundamentally problematic as the theory of human induced global warming. Its repeated coverage from within the media and political arena are influencing people worldwide, putting those who think differently in an outcast shadow. The truth of the matter is, to not believe in human induced global warming has become politically incorrect and unacceptable in the public eye. The theory of human induced global warming can be defined as the rise in temperature through human pollution of greenhouse gases resulting in catastrophic alterations in the earth 's environment. However, human pollution of greenhouse gases is so minor that it is not a contribution to the

Most people believe that the controversy of the existence of global warming stopped long ago. In fact, that is very untrue. The common belief is that, yes the earth is warming, the glaciers are melting, and our atmosphere is being polluted, all due to man-made green house gases. What’s new? Shockingly there are still some scientists who disagree. Global warming; a very controversial phenomenon that is still happening, which already is not being handled sufficiently enough, is being argued that it does not exist whatsoever. This causes the general public to believe that they are being educated on the falsehoods of modern science, when in fact that they need to be educated on when to distinguish misinformation for themselves. These

In the news report “Climate of Doubt”, PBS FRONTLINE investigates the reasoning behind the relationship climate change and politics has been fluctuating over the past few decades. In 2006, An Inconvenient Truth, a film that called for action against climate change, gained mass attention from the American Public. However, this rally for environmental sustainability created some undesirable consequences. There is a growing movement for anti-climate change by various CEOS, scientists, politicians, etc. that have been marketing against green movements. They claim that climate change was developed out of scientific malpractice, has no scientific backing, and the bad weather we experience is no more abnormal than it was a century ago.

The roles of science, the media, and politics greatly influence public opinion and understanding of the world around us. These three spheres of information and action are invariably linked when discussing complex global issues like climate change. However, the presentation and resolution of disagreement within the three spheres is incredibly independent. The many ways that climate change, specifically the debate on the existence of climate change, is portrayed within these spheres can greatly affect public emotion, knowledge, and policy of such an issue. This is particularly evident in the United States (US) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2007). This paper attempts to briefly outline the portrayal and settlement of the debate on the existence of

For years, global warming and climate change has been a topic of debate. It is a subject so controversial, that it has divided our nation despite factual, scientific evidence that global warming is real. In his essay, Hollywood and Climate Change, Stephen Rust details the history of climate change and media’s role in the climate change debate.

In the words of the great Herclitus “the only constant is change,” this is true regarding anything in life, including climate change. From our own experience, temperatures have been increasing year by year and snowfall has slightly diminished as the year’s progress. The portrayal of global warming by the media and the government has been over-exaggerated due to a lack of concrete evidence to back up their claims. Our planet shows evidence of climate change beginning approximately 4.6 billion years ago, when the earth was first formed. The Earth hasn’t been experiencing a constant rise in global warming, but an unpredictable change of warming and cooling periods. The media’s depiction of global warming does not exist, rather a pattern of unpredictable

Moving on from this, Miller helps discuss one of the side issues that leads to confusion; medias’ portrayal of events. Because the media (“New York Times,” “Los Angeles Times,” etc.) wants to “show both sides of the story,” they allow deniers of the issues, less reputable scientists, and advocates for non-environmental friendly companies to essentially blow off the issue of global warming, and publish their opinions, when in reality, the problem is only becoming ever more present. From the increasing amount of fossil fuels burned, deforestation taking place, and emission of pollution (from electricity generated, transportation, etc.) scientists and researchers have been able to collect data of the global climate’s rise, as well as

Alleged Global Warming has been a hot topic and been widely reported in the American media since the 1970s. In March 2014, TED, a nonprofit committed to expanding ideas with short talks, gave a powerful presentation of the alleged current consequences of Global Warming in Gavin Schmidt’s (2014) talk: The emergent patterns of climate change. His claims are stark and he implores his audience to take the grave predictions of Global Warming seriously and not just write it off as insignificant. While Google Trends (2014) shows (graph 1) that search terms for global warming in the United States (red) have decreased while worldwide (blue) interest (image 1) fluctuates with India showing the most curiosity. Yet, not everyone agrees that Global

Global warming has been a long standing scientific argument. As Minnesotans just experienced this past winter, winter can be very real and harsh at times. Following this recent winter, many people dispel the reality of global warming as just a myth simply because of what they have experienced, without looking at the real data, the facts behind the topic. Global warming is also a highly contested topic within our political landscape, dividing parties and raising or losing elections based on climate change. “The source of a climate change message is also very important – if the audience trusts the communicator, they are more likely to trust their arguments.” (Why are people still skeptical about climate change? n.d., para. 10) Some believe climate change can threaten our trade and industry sector, harming our economy as well as international relationships.

Climate change has been the topic of debate on the international stage for decades now. Although, in the last 30 years climate change has become a very controversial topic in the world of politics and business. This topic has went from scientist observing small changes in the weather, to a multi-billion dollar campaigns ran by the world’s governments and private industries. The topic of climate change has influenced everything from business decisions to new laws being put into place. The debate in climate change is usually found on the worldwide political stage. Rarely does one see two political parties agree on this subject. There is always a side that says climate change is destroying the world and it has to be stopped at all costs. Then there is a side that yells hoax whenever the topic is brought up. Both sides have logical explanations to their arguments, but bias and agendas always seems to taint the evidence so to speak.

According to Johnson (2010), the issue of climate change has been hotly debated from two main viewpoints: that global warming has resulted from human activity on the one hand; and that it is a myth resulting from flawed research and unverified scientific findings. Those who hold the former view accuse those of the latter persuasion that they are concerned more with perpetuating the fossil fuel industry than creating a safe environment for future human generations. The other side, in turn, are of the opinion that the public is far too susceptible to believe whatever they are told as soon as the scientific label is placed on it. Because of these two widely divergent opinions, the issue has been shrouded in uncertainty for many, with a third group believing that global warming does exist, but that human activity is not necessarily the main culprit. This opinion holds that natural events such as volcanic activity creates far more heat and greenhouse effects than human activity could hope to achieve. Hence, this group holds that there is little that can be done about what is essentially a natural process.

To this day, climate change has been one of the major concerns of many researchers, scientists, and environmentalists. Many believe that there is a dramatic increase in the average temperature of the earth’s atmosphere, a problem that is referred to as ‘global warming’. Even though global warming is a worldwide issue, the actual effort put into understanding its risk is very minimal. Haydn Washington and John Cook claim that often climate change denial arguments are used to hide the obvious truth about global warming causing misunderstanding among people about the issue (43). Global warming affects the environment in various ways causing untimely disasters, an unbalanced ecosystem, and costly health impacts which in turn

In 2006, former senator Al Gore created an academy award winning documentary on global warming entitled “An Inconvenient Truth” . The movie earned several awards including an academy award for best documentary and gore later received a noble peace prize. The movie discussed several different topics of great concern to global warming; such as permafrost, climbs in temperature, extinction of species, drought, and fatigue to name a few. Four writers in five different articles discussed the three topics of greenhouse gases, climate change, and causes of global warming. These writers are writer and scholar Bill McKibben in “Think Again: Climate Change” and “How Close to catastrophe”; William J. Broad, writer for the New York Times in “From a Rapt audience, a call to cool the hype”; writer for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Kevin O’Brien, in “Global Warming? I won’t be losing any sleep over it”; and Alan Zarembo, staff writer for the the Los Angeles Times, in “Game over on global warming?” All though the articles explain some different topics from one another, only one of them disagree with gore on the causes for global warming being humans, they all agree that there will be impacts to the environment, and all of them believe that greenhouse gases are one of the primary causes for global warming.

The public has begun to believe that global warming, if it exists at all, is natural. The news, radio and magazines portray global warming as something you should not be afraid of. Why, you may ask is because there have been scares in the past that have resulted to extreme caution, death and catastrophe. So the media covers up the truth due to how they think the general public will respond. Since our country is one of the most censored societies out there it is easy to keep the public unaware of what may happen. Scientists on the other hand believe that global warming is a debacle that needs to be handled immediately.