Summary Of The Trump Administration Repealing Obama's Global Warming Policy

People automatically assume that a news organization’s bias is strictly a bad thing, while this does seem like a bad thing, the bias is negated by the sheer quantity of news sites that you can easily visit, this may take some additional time, but it doesn’t have to take a long time, while you’re stuck in traffic you can just pull out your smartphone and look at some news sites. If you find that one site has too much of a bias that doesn’t mean that you should just ignore that site completely, instead you should look for the same news story on a different site that has a different perspective, instead of just looking at the media from one point of view, look at both the left and right point of view. This bias allows for a look into how both sides see an argument, while one side may see something as a good thing, another side may see it as a bad thing. This allows you to get into the mind of the news stations and their reporters. While you're watching the news always maintain a level of skepticism about what the news station is saying. Skepticism is key to watching the news in any environment, without any level of skepticism you quickly become a mindless zombies that just believe something because it was said on Fox NEWS or MSNBC. You should take into account all the things said by the different news stations in order to formulate

Climate change is now being seen as the top global threat and the scariest and biggest additional problem that comes with this truth is that our future President, Donald Trump, doesn’t believe it is real and denies that it is happening. Our President-elect, who will be inaugurated on January 20th, 2017, has made remarks that he does not accept the scientific evidence that climate change is real. This is a surprising comment considering that it is a well-known fact that “97 percent of scientific experts agree that human-caused climate change is real”. It was also revealed that on his campaign website he has nothing about the environment, this means, as of now, he has no plan to improve or combat the global warming/climate change issue. In reply to a question about his position on climate change on ScienceDebate, Trump implied that the U.S

Media bias refers to the bias of news producers and journalists that are in the mass media, reporting on a selection of events and stories and how they are covered. It is impossible to report everything, therefore, selectivity is inevitable. When watching or reading coverage on a specific topic, it is not difficult to detect the sources bias. The media will put their conservative or liberal spin on the information presented to their audience. This has been very obvious in recent days regarding the laws being presented to the Supreme Court regarding same-sex marriages. The coverage on this topic is either for or against same-sex marriage. The New York Times has a more liberal view, marriage is the union of people who love each other, regardless of their sexual orientation have the right to marry. However, CNN’s reporting is that of a conservative bias, marriage is the union of one man and one woman, same-sex relationships violates moral and religious beliefs of millions. According to the Pew Research Center, stories with more statements supporting same-sex marriage outweighed those with more statements opposing it by a margin of roughly 5-to-1. The news media coverage provided a strong sense of momentum towards legalizing same-sex marriage. When reading through articles from The New York Times and CNN, their bias is apparent through omission, source selection, story selection, placement, and spin.

Richard A. Epstein is a frequent contributor to the Hoover Institution, and his piece, “Scott Pruitt And The Environment”, hopes to ease hysteria over President Donald Trump’s selection of Pruitt as the 14th administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Pruitt denies the importance of climate change, he is a pro-industry former attorney general of Oklahoma. Epstein dances around rhetoric on both sides of the polarized climate change debate, creating a discourse which seems unbiased to the casual reader. This rhetorical analysis will strive to keep its proverbial ear to the ground and listen to the elephants hustling in the distance. References leading to right-wing contributors, language that evokes a sense of loss, and taking

All newspaper articles have an author and all authors are human, just like the rest of the people in this world, so they are bound to have an opinion. Therefore the presence of bias, even in the most credible of sources, is inevitable For example, in one article about the repeal of Obamacare it will go on and on about how the repeal is great for those with pre-existing conditions. On another hand other article will be extremely against the repeal because it’s going to really hurt those with pre-existing conditions. Another example, would be the story of the doctor being dragged off a United Airlines plane. Some newspaper will just tell you the fact that he was dragged off the plane in a brutal way and some newspapers will tell you how he was escorted off and then snuck back onto the plane and then resisted to leave the second time he was asked to leave. If someone only hears

News sources carry the persona of giving biased information in the vast majority of cases-whether or not you may consider that as a “good” or “bad” thing. No matter what news source you retrieve your information from, there is almost assuredly a flaw in the way that news is presented to the audience, in order to try and persuade you to follow their bias. Oftentimes the bias is politically based; for instance, Fox News is believed to show bias in favor of the Republican party, professional sports outlets may be biased towards certain teams or players, certain articles or reports may be biased towards a certain race, and so on. The bottom line is no matter how significant (or insignificant) the news may be, or what the subject of the news may

The leaders said in the letter that Pruitt is not a climate change 'denialist,' as claimed in several media reports. They noted that in his comments on climate change science, he had just said that the "debate is far from settled."

Article 1: This article tells about President Obama vetoing Keystone Jobs Bill on grounds that approval of the construction of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline would damage the U.S. effort to curb greenhouse gases. The article frames Obama as an environmental hero, quoting the president in saying, “America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action to fight climate change… And frankly, approving this project would have undercut that global leadership. And that’s the biggest risk we face — not acting.” The authors also cite Secretary of State John Kerry in saying “The United States cannot ask other nations to make tough choices to address climate change if we are unwilling to make them ourselves.” The

Media outlets report in a bias fashion because it causes people to either strongly agree or disagree with what they have to say. If they can get a group of people to rally for or against what they say, they are more likely to share it with others who think the same, who in turn will share it with more people, thus giving them more readers and more money. It does not matter to said media outlets if people agree with what they say as long as enough people read it for them to make a profit.

The news topic I used to evaluate the four different types of news coverage was DACA, or Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals. I chose this topic because it is controversial and something people have many different opinions about, I knew I could find specific bias in its media coverage. DACA is also a very popular topic right now and has been in the news for a while now, so I thought there would be a good variety of news to evaluate. I chose to evaluate a mainstream, alternative, critical, and social media news source. Theses sources were CNN, Reveal, The American Prospect, and Twitter. I found that most of these articles included some sort of political bias, usually leaning in the same way, some having more than others. The news articles also focused on different aspects of DACA and each provided unique

Bias is quite literally impossible to avoid in media and everyday life as every individual has their own personal life experience which alters their preconceived perception of some things. Sometimes financial interests, misunderstandings, or pure hatred create stories driven by a personal or a business agenda. This goes well beyond the normal bias that I stated is unavoidable in our current complicated society. To look into bias in the media I chose a story that has been very alarming to the general population lately, the Zika virus. I listened to and read stories on the Zika virus from Foxnews.com, the Huffington post, and National Public Radio. We will look at the differences and similarities that exist between these stories, how journalistic

The European Union expressed its disagreements with The US (during Bush administration) on cutting emissions of greenhouse gases. Climate change required “clear vision, political courage and an extraordinary effort of international cooperation”, so it’s necessary for Europe and US to hold urgent talks on the issue in the Hague last year. However, the US president’s national security adviser said the process to cut greenhouse gases established in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 was dead which provoked the EU leaders to take action. Bush’s administration strongly oppose the Kyoto Protocol because it exempts 80% of the world (major population centers such as China and India were not exempted) and it would harm to the US economy. He did the opposite of what

The Trump Presidency has lead to major changes in foreign policy, but none sparked as much shock and outcry as the removal of the United States from the Paris Climate Accord. Perhaps the underlying problem is that the accord, which trump described as “draconian”, was seen as a step in the right direction for so many others. At its core, the accord put restrictions on companies all over the world to help decrease the effect of global warming and climate change. More than anything else, it was a symbol of our country's commitment towards protecting the environment, along with it the lifestyle of generations to come. This change in policy shifts America away from international environmental cooperation, and signals Trump’s alignment with American freedom above all else.

It is worth noting that Obama’s administration re-framed threats to the environment as a security issue and his National Security Council communicates to the public how our nation’s security is connected to oil, energy and water resources (Whitehouse.gov, 2014). In addition, his administration has implemented various environmental initiatives aimed at protecting the infrastructure of America. Several environmental initiatives have been enacted such as water projects, clean energy solutions, protection of America’s natural resources, a plan to reduce America’s carbon footprint, as well as preventative measures aimed at mitigating climate change, and reached a climate agreement with China (Magill, 2015; Whitehouse.gov, n.d.).

The total U.S. greenhouse gas emission decreased significantly in 2012. Wind energy production and solar energy has increased tremendously since the president entered the office. As a result, the United States Environmental Protection Agency developed the first carbon pollution standards for all existing power plants in efforts to bring down the amount of greenhouse gas emission.