The following is a guest article by Russell Cook.
From all the news of ‘raging wildfires’ / ‘melting glaciers / ‘increasingly extreme weather’ / ‘hottest month ever recorded,’ it’s no surprise how that morphs into news of ‘climate anxiety’ affecting youths ranging from children to young college students. Supposedly well-intentioned journalists then add articles to their repertoire about ‘coping with the climate crisis.’ On top of that, the Christian community is implored to act on the ‘religious moral imperative to save the planet’ from an evil, profit-seeking. planet-destroying fossil fuel industry.
Legacy news media reporters never question any of this, including clarion calls from environmentalists that the public must be educated about fossil fuel usage perilously heating the planet. That call is in the demands of the latest “ExxonKnew” lawsuit, where Big Oil is being sued for causing the heat wave which supposedly killed a woman. The woman’s daughter not only demands a damages award, but also for “a public education campaign to rectify Defendants’ decades of misinformation.”
Regarding the need for public education, I agree completely . . . but entirely in the opposite direction.
I’ll set up my point using an amusing scene from the 1997 science fiction film “Men in Black,” where the aggressive MIB agent fires explosive blasts at a fleeing space alien on the belief that this particular creature must be stopped at all costs. His supervisor admonishes him,
“There’s always an Arquillian Battle Cruiser, or a Corillian Death Ray, or an intergalactic plague that is about to wipe out all life on this miserable little planet, and the only way these people can get on with their happy lives is that they do not know about it!!“
Ignorance is bliss there. Back in the real world, the public could get on with their happy lives after being fully informed of all facts of the climate issue. People suffer from ‘climate anxiety’ because they do not know about science-based assessments from skeptic climate scientists!
Consider how the PBS NewsHour news outlet has completely excluded skeptic climate scientists from its program to rebut any assessments from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Cornwall Alliance’s Director of Research and Education, PhD climate scientist Dr David Legates could authoritatively rebut and potentially embarrass IPCC / NASA / NOAA scientist guests on the NewsHour. It’s why scientists like him are shunned there.
An especially ridiculous news media assertion I’ve heard for years is that the public isn’t more alarmed about the ‘climate crisis’ because reporters have adhered to the ‘equal balance’ tenet of journalism – giving too much balance to skeptic scientists. But when was the last time anyone has seen that kind of treatment for skeptic scientists or other expert speakers on the topic? The PBS NewsHour has violated their own guideline on balanced reporting for over 25 years.
Therein lies the actual crisis in the climate issue. It’s not the runaway climate itself. It’s the legacy news media’s malfeasance on the issue from not reporting all of the facts.
High school / college students could polled nationwide, asking how many have heard of the 1970s global cooling craze, and then asking how many have never heard anything in depth about it before hearing the first poll question. They could be asked for their reaction to a 2016 Fox News video clip of ClimateDepot.com’s Marc Morano, who brought in an armadillo to illustrate how that animal was reported in the ’70s to be fleeing south from global cooling.
The critical question for anyone to ask is how how on Earth could “Exxon Know” as far back as the ’50s / ’60s / ’70s that their products caused catastrophic warming, in the face of all the news headlines speaking of impending cooling.
Among all the news reports about “ExxonKnew” lawsuits being filed, no reporter ever poses that hardball question. It’s a sure bet that the PBS NewsHour would never allow Marc Morano onto their program to reveal how legions of pre-1980s reports about the global cooling crisis were so widespread that it even was featured in a 1977 episode of the “Barney Miller” sitcom.
That’s only one of the major faults with the “ExxonKnew” lawsuits. These claim the industry not only ‘knew’ about the harm of global warming from the use of petroleum, the accusation continues by saying the industry then duped the public into believing there was no harm via deceptive public relations campaigns designed to undercut the ‘scientific consensus’ about the certainty of fossil fuels driving global warming.
At my GelbspanFiles blog, I detail at huge length how the central accusation elements seen in the lawsuits are totally without merit; the two separate sets of ‘leaked industry memos’ concern plans that were never implemented anywhere; the scientist they say was paid a million dollar+ bribe by Exxon never received any such payment nor was he directed to write science reports meeting the approval of any fossil fuel company leaders; specific copies of ‘newspaper advertorials’ offered as direct evidence of industry deception campaigns were never published anywhere.
Journalists have not done that.
They would never ask self-proclaimed ‘expert on industry disinformation campaigns’ Naomi Oreskes what information she conveyed to the late Pope Francis that enabled her to write the Introduction to his 2015 Encyclical on Climate Change; the Encyclical’s biography paragraph for her all but insinuates that skeptic climate scientists lied to the public about the issue.
That’s one of the more insidious angles of the climate issue — how enviro-activists try to exploit the goodness of Christians by portraying the climate issue as ‘a moral imperative to save the planet from evil Big Oil Execs and their ‘liars-for-hire’ skeptic scientists.’ The critical question right there is elemental:
Which is the bigger sin, failing to take action to stop global warming, an issue increasingly being exposed as being based on dicey science pronouncements . . . . . or breaking the commandment against bearing false witness concerning particular people who point out the problems with those dicey pronouncements?
The climate issue is still alive today because the legacy news media long ago abdicated from their responsibility to tell the public all of the facts about it. The issue can die of a death of a thousand cuts when the public fully comprehends how they have the opportunity to pose tough questions to the authorities they encounter — teachers, journalists, policymakers. I’m old enough to remember when the bad guys used to flee from reporters asking them questions they could not answer. The public needs to flip that same image against the legacy news media.
They want to sequester your carbon.
“Legacy news media reporters never … bla … bla … bla”
________________________________________________
Nice article, but really, did you have to buy into the so-called main stream media’s attempt to rebrand itself as The Legacy News Media?
The actual legacy of ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, NPR, PBS, New York Times, Washington Post, Scientific American, National Geographic, Time Magazine, The Guardian etc, is a legacy of slanted news, propaganda, yellow & gotcha journalism, dogma, character assassination, and outright lies.
My friends and I thought your definition was the original definition of Legacy Media. Almost pure propaganda from the Left: DNC, socialists, communists, with fascism thrown in for good measure.
Any new name you come up with will be reinterpreted by leftists. That’s one way they confuse the masses. The other is outright lying – which became quite fashionable during Walter Cronkite’s reporting.
The Legacy Media are not your friend, and the truth is not in them.
Do they call themselves that? Isn’t that a polite way of saying obsolete?
Watts Up With That doesn’t have a [signature/tag line] input box on user’s profile page. Maybe that’s just as well that they don’t, but here’s my current one for some sites that do:
The so-called main stream media now trying to rebrand itself as
“The Legacy Press” is in its tenth year of bashing Donald Trump.
Good! Let them bash away, Trump just keeps getting more popular and succeeding the louder they screech&caterwaul. Even their fake polling can’t change Americans’ support for America First.
I don’t know why the Cornwall Alliance didn’t put in a tag line for me at the bottom of my guest post there. They could have linked to my About page at my blog, while mentioning that – among other examinations – I quantify just how biased one particular ‘news’ outlet actually is on the climate issue.
Off the top of my head, I’m not aware of any of the news media propagandists labeling themselves as such. See my comment just above to Steve Case, “legacy” is implied to be a subtle insult since the legacy of traditional straight-up news reporting is to do that work honestly and objectively.
Both ABCs.
I call them the “legacy news media” in my Cornwall Alliance guest post because the name “mainstream news media” connotes normal proper everyday news media … or at least it did back in the pre-internet / pre-cable TV days. ‘Mainstream traditional news’ work, in other words. I disagree that the lamestream profession ‘rebranded’ themselves as “The Legacy News Media” — I forget where I heard it, but several years ago on one of the conservative cable news programs or on Rush Limbaugh’s / Sean Hanitiy’s / Mark Levin’s radio show or on other such program, the host said the ‘mainstream news media’ no longer deserved that title because their propaganda certainly did not fit the ‘mainstream’ label; the suggestion was that we instead call the mob “the legacy news media” only because they had a long ago (looong ago!) legacy of actually doing their jobs right. The host further implied that the new label was meant to be demeaning, but since the propaganda news mobsters aren’t especially smart, they’d never understand the insult. It’s the most polite name I can assign to them right now, where I don’t run the risk of of having my pieces rejected at places like the Cornwall Alliance for being too strident.
They have been crying wolf and warning of ACC destruction since I can remember (I’m 48). Lamestream media and scientists have been pounding this issue for so long, and now they wonder why no one cares. It’s consistently at the bottom of a list of concerns among Americans. For some reason, Europeans have bought into it, as they still seem to be bothered by a threat that will never materialize.
There’s actually no real mystery here. All European nations have a greater propensity for socialism. All AGW measures require greater government intervention in the economy than is desired in the United States. Thus even heavy-handed AGW measures and policies have greater resonance in socialist Europe.
48 puts you just starting school when “Global Cooling” morphed into “Global Warming”
I am no friend of the IPCC, but not even the IPCC assessments support the most lurid media coverage we see. The IPCC doesn’t talk of boiling oceans or climate crises or death-tolls in the many thousands. That is all the invention of the media and the activists to whom the media attend.
I would be delighted to see skeptical scientists’ views widely published. But if even the IPCC—whose job it is to make the strongest case for AGW—is ignored for the sake of stoking alarm, you know the media has no interest at all in anyone’s science-based assessments.
As on so many other subjects, the media has gone rogue when it comes to the climate. I try not to be cynical but I no longer believe a thing I see in the media; if I can’t see an obvious lie then I always wonder, “What is the real story here?” I never think, “Well that’s interesting. I did not know that.” Which is worse than sad.
This is not, and never has been about, scientific accuracy. It’s always been about increasing social and political control. Implementing any AGW programs requires this. This was stated overtly by Maurice Strong in his opening address to the Rio 93 conference.
As for this, “I try not to be cynical but I no longer believe a thing I see in the media;” remember Goebbels principle. “Any lie repeated often enough will be taken eventually as the truth.”
These are laid out here in the eleven principles of Nazi propaganda.
The 11 principles of Nazi propaganda by Joseph Goebbels | by Anonymous OPLegions | Medium
“…social and political control…..” nah…far too assumption of a societal goal…
I think it’s just about getting a quick cheap scary sounding story to float out on the top of that vast sewage lagoon accessible by Everyman’s laptop….click income per story cost is the name of the game….
The legacy media has been in bed with the environmentalist movement since at least the early 1960’s, with uncritical acceptance of “Silent Spring”.
There were and are real issues, but the Blob consistently overstates the risk, and never considers the benefits. This is exaggerated by the nature of the Green lobbies, which are apparently run by fundraisers and liability lawyers, neither given to careful considerations. It is an adversarial relationship, but their tactic is to censor the opposition.
The Legacy Media has been in bed with the radical Democrats/Leftwing Narrative since the 1960’s.
The Truth is not in them. They pose a great danger to the Republic and to our personal freedoms.
People cannot govern themselves properly if they are not given the Truth, and they won’t find the Truth in anything the Leftwing Media says. The Leftwing Media has a Leftwing Agenda, and they are not going to change, since they think they are on the winning side of all issues.
There are a lot of deluded people out there in the world and the Leftwing Media just makes things worse by lying to them and distorting reality.
If lies about the climate and the “human-caused” extreme weather events were all we had to deal with, that would be bad enough. Anyone glued to the lamestream media for the past couple of weeks is also convinced that dead bodies will be piling up on the streets as the impact of the new tax and spending legislation kicks in, with millions starving and millions more dead of disease with no “health care.” This followed a couple of weeks of obsession trying to discredit the damage done by a squadron of B-2s and a swarm of cruise missiles, combined firepower that exceeded a large WWII raid by hundreds of B-17s or B-29s. Why? Just to try to prove Trump’s use of the word “obliterate” was hyperbole. Yes, Trump speaks in hyperbole, always has. I started my working life in a newsroom with summer jobs more than 50 years ago. Now it is all just propaganda.
No matter how much you hate the media, it isn’t enough.
Well, we can at least take some joy in the fact that almost every media pundit can and probably will be easily replaced by AI. Regurgitating input without applying reason and following code makes them expendable.
Jim Quinn called this the Lefts’ War On Certainty. Make people doubt A,B,C,D,E,,,,, and you can begin tearing at the underpinnings of society by convincing people to accept fantastical crap instead of verifiable facts and reality. It is a multi-tentacled attack and has been going on for decades.
Add journalism to the ash heap along with Hollywood, TV, radio, magazines, most institutions, nonprofit foundations, and newspapers. These were self inflicted casualties every step of the way.
Remember when students learning reporting and journalism were taught that the basics were Who, What, Where, When, How? Find the facts, report the facts, ALL the facts. Never plagiarize. Never make up stuff from thin air. Don’t speculate. Ethics.
There were always muckrakers who followed none of that but these days that seems to be the vast majority of them.
There needs to be serious consequences for lying by the news media, and methods of implementing them and making them stick.
I read an article in Vanity Fair about the judgement against CBS/Paramount over their deceptive editing of that Kamala Harris interview. Not a single mention of how unethical their actions were or even that it was in any way wrong or deceptive.
What really shifted their lying by editing and omission was when George Zimmerman’s case against CNN got dismissed. They got away with lying about him by selectively editing and rearranging his 911 call.
Don’t forget Why.
Those directing the “Legacy Media” have been all in for “The Cause” for decades.
They covered for Biden and now try to claim his WH staff lied to them.
The “Climate Crisis” had been a useful tool for “The Cause”.
As long they think it still has some leverage left, they’ll promote it.
When it has no leverage left, they’ll claim the “climate scientist” lied to them.
All to try to regain the credibility they’ve lost.
Essentially, the lamestream media lost any semblance of its essential function when it descended into being a mouthpiece for, and promoter of, one extreme end of the political spectrum.
Anyone worthy of the title “journalist” should have torn the climate agenda to shreds decades ago, among many other things.