<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FAIR Blog &#187; Climate Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fair.org/blog/tag/climate-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fair.org/blog</link>
	<description>The national media watch group</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:57:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Illegally Obtained Info Is a Big Scoop--or a Non-Story</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/24/illegally-obtained-info-is-a-big-scoop-or-a-non-story/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/24/illegally-obtained-info-is-a-big-scoop-or-a-non-story/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:41:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jim Naureckas</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Revkin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chiquita]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cincinnati Enquirer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Boehner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Gallagher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newt Gingrich]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Times' reporter on the climate beat, Andrew Revkin, had a front-page story this weekend (11/20/09) detailing the contents of climate scientists' private emails discussing global warming.  Predictably, the emails are being taken out of context by climate change deniers--but more interesting to me is the fact that the focus is on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <strong>New York Times</strong>' reporter on the climate beat, <a title="Climate Progress: NYT’s Revkin pushes global cooling myth (again!)" href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/09/22/new-york-times-andrew-revkin-suckered-by-deniers-to-push-global-cooling-myt/" target="_blank">Andrew Revkin</a>, had a front-page story this weekend (<a title="NYT: Hacked Email Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html" target="_self">11/20/09</a>) detailing the contents of climate scientists' private emails discussing global warming.  Predictably, the emails are being <a title="Climate Progress: Let’s look at one of the illegally hacked emails in more detail" href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/11/21/hacked-emails-ncar-kevin-trenberth/" target="_blank">taken out of context</a> by climate change deniers--but more interesting to me is the fact that the focus is on the content of the emails, not on the fact that they were illegally obtained.</p>
<p>That's not the way corporate media handled the <a title="The Stranger: The War on Jim McDermott" href="http://elisanders.net/mcdermott.html" target="_blank">illegally taped cell phone call</a> between Newt Gingrich, John Boehner and other Republican congressmembers in which Gingrich violated the terms of a ethics sanction by strategizing about how to minimize the charges against him. In that case, they focused on the <a title="AllPolitics: Potentially Illegal Gingrich Tape Turned Over To Criminal Investigators" href="http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/01/13/tape/index.shtml" target="_blank">illegality of the taping</a>--and the unauthorized leaking of the tape by Rep. Jim McDermott (D.-Wash.).</p>
<p>That's also not how the press handled the case of  <strong>Cincinnati Enquirer</strong> reporter <a title="AJR: The Chiquita Aftermath" href="http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=537" target="_blank">Michael Gallagher</a>, who illegally listened to voicemails at the Chiquita corporation in pursuit of a <a title="Chiquita Secrets Revealed" href="http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/chiquita/index.html" target="_blank">series of stories</a> that charged the company with involvement in bribery, fraud and the abuse of workers. Again, the wrongdoing that was considered newsworthy was the reporter's, not the target of his investigation.</p>
<p>It's hard to imagine what ethical code would tell journalists to ignore information about corporate skullduggery or congressional ethics violations if it was obtained through illicit means, but if it concerns the academic politics of climate scientists--dig in!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/24/illegally-obtained-info-is-a-big-scoop-or-a-non-story/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>False Balance Alive &amp; Well in Environmental Coverage</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/05/22/false-balance-alive-well-in-environmental-coverage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/05/22/false-balance-alive-well-in-environmental-coverage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 09:49:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gabriel Voiles</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Gore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ClimateDepot.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jonathan Hiskes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marc Morano]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=9163</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jonathan Hiskes of Grist--who recently exposed "The NYT's Favorite 'Climate Change Denier'"--has now (5/13/09) caught Fox News giving airtime to Marc Morano's charge of Al Gore "profiting off global warming campaign" :
Say you're a harried cable news producer with 24 gaping hours to fill with finished material every day of the week. Say you're constantly [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan Hiskes of <strong>Grist</strong>--who recently exposed <a href="http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/04/28/the-nyts-favorite-climate-change-denier/">"The <strong>NYT</strong>'s Favorite 'Climate Change Denier'"</a>--has now (<a href="http://www.grist.org/article/2009-05-13-memo-marc-morano-wants" target="_blank">5/13/09</a>) caught <strong>Fox News</strong> giving <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/22207436/gore-s-cash-cow.htm#q=gore">airtime</a> to Marc Morano's charge of <a href="http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/19/george-will-bringing-you-climate-data-disinformation-since-1992/">Al Gore</a> "profiting off global warming campaign" :</p>
<blockquote><p>Say you're a harried cable news producer with 24 gaping hours to fill with finished material every day of the week. Say you're constantly in need of articulate guests to offer a diversity of viewpoints. How do you do it?</p>
<p>One way is to take up offers like this one from the PR folks representing Marc Morano. Refresher: Morano was formerly an aid to climate-change-denier-in-chief <a title="see Glenn Beck" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3418">James Inhofe</a> (GOP senator from Oklahoma), now heads misinformation clearinghouse ClimateDepot.com, and is still the chief supplier of talking points to the climate-denial camp.</p></blockquote>
<p><!--preview-break--><br />
Hiskes' quotes from the PR release are enlightening for how skillfully they play into the false balance so key to corporate reportage:</p>
<blockquote><p>Here’s your anti-Gore Global Warming Expert who offers the science to counteract partisan and ideologically driven Environmental entities and issues....</p>
<p>If you believe most, or all, of the global warming dogma, you may use Marc as your "counter guest" to offer a lively, fair and balanced discussion to your audience.  If you are a skeptic of the current doctrine, Marc can aid your program by clearing up the deception with the facts.</p></blockquote>
<p>The really troubling part comes in the release's list of news organizations that have fallen for this nonsense, boasting that Morano "has made international news" on "<strong>CNN</strong>, <strong>Fox News Channel</strong>'s the <strong>O'Reilly Factor</strong> and <strong>Hannity &amp; Colmes</strong>, <strong>BBC TV</strong>, the <strong>New York Times</strong>, the <strong>Washington Post</strong>, <strong>USA Today</strong>, the <strong>Wall Street Journal</strong>, the <strong>New York Post</strong>."</p>
<p>See FAIR's magazine <strong>Extra!:</strong> "Journalistic Balance as Global Warming Bias: Creating Controversy Where Science Finds Consensus" (<a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1978">11-12/04</a>) by Jules Boykoff and Maxwell Boykoff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/05/22/false-balance-alive-well-in-environmental-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The NYT&#039;s Favorite &#039;Climate Change Denier&#039;</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/04/28/the-nyts-favorite-climate-change-denier/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/04/28/the-nyts-favorite-climate-change-denier/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:12:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gabriel Voiles</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bjorn Lomborg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Nemtzow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E.O. Wilson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jonathan Hiskes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Skeptical Environmentalist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Schneider]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=8397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An April 24 New York Times op-ed from "Skeptical Environmentalist" Bjorn Lomborg contends "that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a hopeless cause and that public money is better spent on research and development of renewable energy"--which Jonathan Hiskes of Grist calls (4/27/09) "a classic Lomborg argument--deliberately provocative and presenting several worthy goals as an either/or [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An April 24 <strong>New York Times</strong> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/25/opinion/25lomborg.html?_r=1" target="_blank">op-ed</a> from "<a href="http://astore.amazon.com/gristmagazine/detail/0521010683/102-1183543-3665742" target="_blank">Skeptical Environmentalist</a>" Bjorn Lomborg contends "that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a hopeless cause and that public money is better spent on research and development of renewable energy"--which Jonathan Hiskes of <strong>Grist</strong> calls (<a href="http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-27-a-false-choice-from-a-famil/" target="_blank">4/27/09</a>) "a classic Lomborg argument--deliberately provocative and presenting several worthy goals as an either/or choice. Choose either emissions caps or R&amp;D, he proposes. <em>You can't have both.</em>" Pointing out that Lomborg "makes no mention of the tremendous potential that carbon regulation has to raise money for clean energy R&amp;D," Hiskes gives us some background:</p>
<blockquote><p>Lomborg made his name in 2001 by publishing <em>The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World</em>, a 540-page attack on conventional green wisdom. It suggested that supposed environmental crises--including global warming--were "phantom problems" drummed up by the environmental old guard to serve its own ends. That prompted Grist to respond with A <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/of1" target="_blank">skeptical look</a> at <em>The Skeptical Environmentalist</em>, a special series in which experts scrutinized Lomborg's claims in their fields.</p>
<p>Did much debunkery ensue? <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/bjorn" target="_blank">Oh</a> <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/for" target="_blank">yes</a> <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/hammond-argument" target="_blank">it</a> <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/infamous" target="_blank">did</a>. Nobel-winning Climatologist Stephen Schneider <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/hostile" target="_blank">exposed</a> Lomborg's selective use of statistics in his climate analysis. Energy expert David Nemtzow <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/to1/" target="_blank">called out</a> Lomborg for knocking down a straw man of fossil fuel scarcity. Biologist E.O. Wilson <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/point/" target="_blank">blasted holes</a> in Lomborg's "stop worrying" analysis of species extinction. <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/of1" target="_blank">And more</a>.<br />
<!--preview-break--><br />
As Schneider <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/hostile/" target="_blank">complained</a> eight years ago, the most vexing question might be how Lomborg keeps getting such high-profile attention. And that prompts a question about the <strong>New York Times</strong>'<strong> </strong>rationale for going to Lomborg for this essay. He is, basically, a climate change denier. Granting him space on the <strong>NYT</strong> op-ed page is yet another example of the media treating a scientific matter as just another political topic fit for debate.</p></blockquote>
<p>By way of comparison, Hiskes "wonders, would they grant the same privilege to the wackos who think HIV doesn’t cause AIDS?"</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/04/28/the-nyts-favorite-climate-change-denier/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NYT Slams Gore for Relying on NYT</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/27/nyt-slams-gore-for-relying-on-nyt/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/27/nyt-slams-gore-for-relying-on-nyt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 05:36:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gabriel Voiles</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Revkin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Will]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matthew Yglesias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=6408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Think Progress blogger Matthew Yglesias (2/25/09) hits the Washington Post for "standing behind the claim that up is down if George Will says that is"--and then spreads some of the blame around:
Meanwhile, one of the Post's main competitors in the world of papers with potential to attract a national audience is the New York Times. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Think Progress</strong> blogger Matthew Yglesias (<a href="http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/02/the_george_will_scandal_and_the_decline_of_great_american_newspapers.php" target="_blank">2/25/09</a>) hits the <strong>Washington Post</strong> for "standing behind the claim that up is down if <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3722">George Will</a> says that is"--and then spreads some of the blame around:</p>
<blockquote><p>Meanwhile, one of the <strong>Post</strong>'s main competitors in the world of papers with potential to attract a national audience is the <strong>New York Times</strong>. So faced with a humiliating abrogation of basic responsibilities by its competitor, does the <strong>Times</strong> take the opportunity to pour some salt in the wounds? No! Instead, out comes <a title="see ''Odd culprits''" href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1058">Andrew Revkin</a> with a false-equivalence <a title="NYT: In Climate Debate, Exaggerration Is a Pitfall" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/science/earth/25hype.html" target="_blank">article</a> painting Will with the <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/02/25/revkin-dead-wrong/" target="_blank">same brush</a> as Al Gore. <!--preview-break--> Will's sin is to say that the world is not getting warmer when, in fact, it is. <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3418">Gore's sin</a> was to say that warming is happening (it is) and to illustrate the problems with this trend by referring to a chart that Revkin deems unduly alarmist but that Gore <a title="NYT: Farewell, Fair Weather" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/31/opinion/31blow.html?_r=1" target="_blank">found</a> in the <strong>New York Times</strong>. Hm.</p></blockquote>
<p>See <strong>Extra!:</strong> "Journalistic Balance as Global Warming Bias" (<a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1978" target="_self">11-12/04</a>) by Jules Boykoff and Maxwell Boykoff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/27/nyt-slams-gore-for-relying-on-nyt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
