Who would have thought the future of the environment was some kind of joke? It turns out comedians actually seem to care more about climate change than the people who produce real news programs do.
Think Progress came out with an infographic yesterday (7/1/13) showing that the Sunday chat shows didn’t so much as mention President Barack Obama’s June 25 speech outlining a new climate change policy at Georgetown University. But a few late-night comedy shows and the Daily Show, a fake newscast on Comedy Central, found some time to cover the news.
But let’s give the networks a fair shake, shall we? A better comparison with a fake nightly news show is a real nightly newscast. So we looked at ABC, CBS and NBC‘s 30-minute nightly newscasts to see how they covered the president’s speech.
The comedians still took global warming far more seriously than most of the supposedly serious newscasts. ABC World News (6/25/13) and CBS Evening News (6/25/13) each dedicated a whole 19 seconds of coverage to the speech.
To its credit, NBC Nightly News (6/25/13) had a 2-minute-12-second segment on the climate speech, including soundbites of President Obama and an explanation of the possible implications from NBC environment correspondent Anne Thompson. Thompson also mentioned how she spoke with a CEO of a power company as well, ending the this portion of the show on a (kind of) positive note:
Now, as you can imagine, the coal lobby is not very happy, Brian, because they say that this is in effect declaring war on coal; that’s what the president is doing. But I spoke to one power CEO today, a power company CEO, Tom Farrell from Dominion Resources. And he says that with enough time and the right technology, he thinks the power industry can make this work.
Good for NBC. Its report was only a minute shorter than the one on the fake newscast.
Doug Latimer
Before you start buying the NRDC line that Dear Misleader’s dog and pony show is something to get wet about, you might want to have a look at this
Energy Chief Confirms Critics’ Fears: Obama Still Loves Coal
Secretary Ernest Moniz continues to tout myth of ‘clean coal’ as foremost in energy strategy
by Lauren McCauley, staff writer
Common Dreams
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/07/01-4
As for the “flowery rhetoric”
Hemlock has flowers.
So, yeah … I imagine an energy CEO might have reason to think the “industry can make this work”
While we get jobbed.
Jack Y
Of course Obama will “love coal” if it will feed his political power with more revenue…he is a politician folks. I find it strange I would have to remind people of this but for whatever reason there is a reactionary element in this country who just wants to believe anything a Democrat or Republican says whether they admit they are party affiliated or not.
He and other politicians on both sides are holding out to see which energy producer “supports their cause” the most. This isn’t cynicism, this is realism gained over decades of watching and studying politics and economics…and now the media.
We have so many opportunities with resources in this country that we should be dancing in the streets and working out ways in which we will pay off the massive sums of debt we are instead electing to burden younger (and yet born) of Americans with. Instead, we get emotionally attached to dicey “scientists” on both sides of this issue. Are Climates Changing? Of course they are…they always have. How much of an impact we play in that is of course the most important question followed by what kind of a plan can we create to mediate the impacts of those changes in a rational manner. Starving the world of energy or out pricing it through crony monopolization schemes (usually presented politically as “regulations”) will devastate poorer populations around the globe. Cap and trade and the resulting increases of prices for energy will lead to certain death for millions globally every year. How is that a rational plan?
How to eliminate coal? Allow for the export of natural gas thus increasing infrastructure internally to allow it to replace coal since it is so much more efficient, cleaner and cheaper. Right now the government doesn’t allow it…or any export of energy from the US…claiming some national interest when in reality it is only in the interest of the politicians to be able to hand out favors and artificially keep the price high by limiting the market. Who cares if the MSM would have covered his speech…it was a worthless presentation full of logical fallacies meant to stimulate Obama’s base and convince them he might actually keep a promise he made. He won’t…if he and his party can make money off of doing the opposite. Sorry folks…those are the realities of the matter. Nothing happens in a vacuum. If you think the “Climate Scientists” aren’t self-interested in maintaining their grants as much as big energy is self-interested in keeping prices for their products artificially high and limiting their competition you are naive.
Mirza
It is pointless to criticize people who falsely criticize Obama’s speech since his speech itself is very thin on substance. In that speech obama gave very few actual steps and you have to hunt for them to find them. Other things that Obama called steps were not actually steps but Goals. People don’t disagree with Goals, but they hate steps needed to achieve those goals. Rest of the speech was nausiating simbolism and obama telling you that global warming is important.
Mirza
I cannot critize major networks for not covering Obamas speech. There is really nothing in that speech to cover.
michael e
Well it sure as hell IS a joke.The best played Obama saying he was not moving to hurt coal companies,then later….. a tape of the nights speech saying exactly the opposite.I call it pre and post campaign reality.Or just a continuation of the Obama lie machine.His press secretary simply blew it off with a flippant line that that was then…. “simply politics” and this is now.As for the global warming hoax he returns to whenever he needs political cache….We are not buying it.he should pay attention to the scandals he refuses to address.Benghazi.Fast and Furious.IRS.AP And the rising cost and destruction that is Obama care.Instead he goes back to his well for his frothing base.Warming ended long ago.The models are all falling like Dominos.Yet this man still wants to yell chicken little and ask to be given more power ….to save us all from our selves.No one wants to give any more power to this government.
Tom Saltsman
Californians don’t have a hard time believing in global warming. We can see our own brand of it called smog, a brown fog that hovers in the sky and can be seen for miles. It comes from all the cars. Magnify that several times around the world and we can believe the movie “Chasing Ice” with all its time-lapse photography of melting glaciers.
michael e
Tom pollution exists without a doubt.Since the sixties we have been working on that and we are doing by the way a great jobPollution already is harshly regulated.Its still bad and that can’t be good.Global warming on the other hand is an attempt by our government to co opt a failed scientific model to control and tax all things in our economy.Fog in the valley(shows localized pollution) does not denote global warming.Anymore than a snowstorm does in Phila..So far the GW models are failing across the board.It is in fact getting colder at 3x the speed even the worst perveyors of GW were warning about it getting hotter.Even if it did exist- short of demolishing our economy there is little we could do about it..And China has a big middle finger for you if you want their opinion.Must we invade them for the sake of global warming addherence?
Kimbelry
Check out “Randy By Nature” – Fast, Fearless and Funny Environmental Comedy! http://www.youtube.com/randybynature2012