The Lack Of Quantitative And Qualitative Coverage Of Global Climate Change Essay

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

The problem that the pro- global warming theorists have created is that of social standing and little else. While there may be scientific backing to support some of the theory, the media presents the problem with great sensationalism. Global warming and energy conservation has thus become a trend and losses some of its validity through this. The scare tactics used by the media to “promote awareness” are just that, a linguistic ploy to gain favor. “Awareness of this global threat reinforced public concern and environmental problems and thereby provided environmental activists, scientists, and policy makers with new momentum in their efforts to promote environmental protection.” (McCright, 2000) This statement draws line to the potential benefits that would be received if the pro-global warming theorists were to draw enough attention to the issue. Driven by social empowerment and conviction to environmental protection, these activists misrepresent the actual threat and paint it as being much more

Climate change has been a subject of discussion in the media for many years, supported with the use of arguments against oil polluting the environment and extreme scare tactics of Polar ice caps flooding civilians backyards. The issue has been ignored by the majority of lay people as seeming too complicated, and with all the conflicting information in the media in the past, who can blame them? However, scientifically, climate change and what perpetrates it is fairly simple to understand and society as a whole is beginning to come to a clear consensus on climate change. Thanks in part to more readily available forms of media and information, people have become cognizant of the fact that climate change is a legitimate problem which requires immediate amelioration. While this may seem melodramatic, society is realizing that climate change is an issue which can no longer be denied if the human race wishes to continue.

Climate scientists have come to the deduction that human activity is responsible for the Earth’s surface temperature rising at a very rapid rate over the past thirty years and the very serious implications that could result. The purpose of this paper is to answer why there are an astounding number of Americans that deny global warming despite the overwhelming consensus in the scientific community. The hypothesis of this paper is: due to America’s shift from a functionalist perspective to a postmodern perspective; the population is more susceptible to information released by self interest groups attempting to sway public opinion. The study was a compilation of diverse methods. Using qualitative as well as quantitative research, the author came

With the rise of calamitous news regarding extremists groups taking over certain states, countries threatening to go to war, and viruses spreading throughout the world; the outlook of humanity does not look good. In addition to these dire headlines is the matter of climate change, which, unfortunately, is not as alarming to the public eye. Nonetheless, climate change is a pressing matter as it will impact every facet of society from economy to even human survival. Perhaps the general public find climate change as a vapid subject because of its nature to react belatedly to human activity, and how it is often represented with numbers, graphs, and projections; things that are not compelling to those that do not understand its importance. Even

These last two election cycles have demonstrated the importance of climate change in relation to politics and the american people. What is unfortunate is that what seems to be a very crucial and real problem in our human survival, according to scientists, is being debated by people who do not have the scientific credentials to even discuss the science behind the reality of climate change. Those behind the skeptics, have funded a successful campaign against the reality of the facts and have introduce doubt into the sciences.

In 2007, 85% of Americans were convinced that global warming was happening. Ever since then numbers have been steadily lowering (Stanford University). Each year, less Americans have become aware of climate change although climate change has become a bigger threat to animals and humans. About 50% of Americans believe that action to prevent global warming should be taken right now (Yale University). However, a great deal of people do not believe that climate change is ruining the environment. They are just letting the environment get destroyed until it is too late. Americans should be aware and believe in global warming. The history and supporting information relates to the

Throughout this article, most of it pertained to how the environmental community has shown that global warming is a social problem, while the public determined that global warming is a legitimate problem and supports policies that work against it. However, during the 1990s, the United State’s policies and beliefs on global warming were put into question. This is a result of the conservative movement challenging the notion whether or not climate change and global warming are social problems. The conservative movement pushes this further by using the media, creating policy forums, and sponsoring press conferences for policy makers in order to emphasize their point on how global warming is not a serious social issue.

Often, the public and “political debate over what to do about global warming is far different from the scientific debate surrounding the issue” (Taylor) as the media publishes discourse relating to global warming which asserts a rhetorical influence through the ideological screen by which such information is subjectively presented to the public. In the example of a New York Times article on the topic of climate change, the author’s decision to discerningly highlight the fact “that concentrations of major greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continue to increase to record levels […] [and] that Arctic sea ice remain[s] at very low levels” (Chan) reflects a selective rhetorical emphasis and dissemination of information that does not include or illuminate other data suggesting a contrary or skeptical perception of global warming. As such, the public depends primarily on the media’s capricious determination of salience and rhetorical delivery to inform personal understanding and opinion regarding the validity and imminence of climate

It is possible that the moral stance taken by the media is important not only because it is a reflection of public opinion, but also because it may help shape it. This is especially true when media serve as a conduit that summarizes and explains complex scientific research that is difficult to understand with little or no relevant knowledge. In debates around climate change, the public often relies on reporters to provide them with a reliable analysis of the subject matter. For instance, Brulle et al. (2012) found that media coverage was a major factor that affected the level of public concern about the climate change.

Fumento, Michael. “The Cooling Off on Global Warming.” The Washington Times 8 July 1999: 15. LexisNexis Academic . Academic Universe. W. I. Dykes Lib., University of Houston-Downtown. 20 Feb. 2010 http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy.uhd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/

Media propaganda is abound with the announcements of a “Mini Ice Age” in our mist. We are constantly inundated with Hollywood movies depicting global destruction with an onslaught of rapid global climate changes. Is all this news media accurate and depicting true and accurate events covering our planet and solar activity? As a reader begins to look deep into the rhetoric, they will notice that there is very little – if any – scientific data to support the coming of a “Mini Ice Age” (Mann) as indicated by the multiple media corporations. As many scientists have pointed out, we are experiencing global climate change – they just have not confirmed that is a “Mini Ice Age.”

After reading the article, I found it very valid and legitimate. Shafer discusses how over the past few years our perception of the seriousness of global warming has decreased, and that this decline is due to the lesser volume of media coverage. The statistic that, "2,286 pieces mentioned global warming in 2006, compared to 1,353 in 2013", was very eye-opening. Over the past few years more immediate national problems have taken place, and have taken the media's and the nation's attention away from global warming. Shafer also goes on to say that because global warming is a more long term problem, we tend to loose interest. I agree with Shafer's argument that the media's decline has led to a less severe perception of global warming. I feel that

97% of climate scientists agree that such increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration are man-made (Global Climate Change: Consensus). Why then is it that the news media treats such widely held views by experts as debate rather than consensus? The answer may lie in the media’s current and skewed standards of what constitutes “objectivity” and “balance”.