George Monbiot exposes Starmer’s hollow victory
Reports on Heat Waves and Flooding Usually Neglect to Explain Why They’re Happening: Study
Original article by OLIVIA RIGGIO republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
This month brought yet another record-breaking spate of flash floods and deadly heatwaves across the US. Yet, as a new study by Heated (6/27/24) reveals, despite ample reporting on these events, a majority of news outlets still did not link these events to their cause: climate change.
Emily Atkin and Arielle Samuelson, writers for the climate-focused, Substack-based outlet, analyzed 133 digital breaking news articles from national, international and regional outlets reporting on this month’s extreme weather. Just 44% mentioned the climate crisis or global warming. Broken down by weather event: 52% of stories that covered heatwaves, and only 25% of stories that covered extreme rainfall, mentioned climate change.
As Atkin and Samuelson write, by now we know that climate change is the main cause of both extreme heat and extreme flooding. And we know the biggest contributor of climate-disrupting greenhouse gasses: fossil fuels, which account for about 75% of global emissions annually.
Still, the study’s authors found, only 11% of the articles they studied mentioned fossil fuels. Only one piece (BBC, 6/24/24) mentioned deforestation, which scientists say contributes about 20% of annual greenhouse gas emissions. None mentioned animal agriculture, which the FAO estimates contributes about 12% of global emissions.
Stark omissions
The omissions were laughably stark: A New York Post piece (6/21/24) ended with a New Yorker and former Marine who said he’d been in “way hotter conditions”—in Kuwait and Iraq. An AP article (6/4/24) quoted the “explanation” offered by a spokesperson for the Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management: “It does seem like Mother Nature is turning up the heat on us a little sooner than usual.”
Heated recognized some outlets that consistently mentioned climate change in their breaking coverage of heat and floods this month. That list included NPR, Vox, Axios, BBC and Agence France-Presse (AFP).
Then there were the outlets whose breaking coverage never mentioned it: ABC News, USA Today, The Hill, the New York Post and Fox Weather. When questioned, many of these outlets pointed the study’s authors to other climate coverage they had done, but this study’s focus on breaking news stories was deliberate:
Our analysis focused only on breaking stories because climate change is not a follow-up story; it is the story of the lethal and economically devastating extreme weather playing out across the country. To not mention climate change in a breaking news story about record heat in June 2024 is like not mentioning Covid-19 in a breaking news article about record hospitalizations in March 2020. It’s an abdication of journalistic responsibility to inform.
Explaining isn’t hard
A crucial takeaway for journalists and editors in this piece is that explaining the cause of these weather events isn’t hard. It’s often a matter of adding a sentence at most, Atkin and Samuelson write. They provide examples of stories that successfully made this connection, as with BBC (6/24/24):
Scientists say extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and intense as a result of human-caused climate change, fueled by activities like burning fossil fuels and cutting down forests.
Or the Guardian (6/23/24):
Heatwaves are becoming more severe and prolonged due to the global climate crisis, caused primarily by the burning of fossil fuels.
Notably, the Guardian piece was a reprint of an AP article that did not originally include that sentence; Heated confirmed that it was added by a Guardian editor.
AP, however, was sometimes able to provide appropriate context, as in a June 21 piece:
This month’s sizzling daytime temperatures were 35 times more likely and 2.5 degrees F hotter (1.4 degrees C) because of the warming from the burning of coal, oil and natural gas—in other words, human-caused climate change.
More denial than acknowledgment
During last summer’s apocalyptic orange haze on the East Coast, caused by record Canadian wildfires, I conducted a similar study (FAIR.org, 7/18/23) on US TV news’s coverage. Out of 115 segments, only 38% mentioned climate change’s role. Of those 115, 10 mentioned it in passing, 10 engaged in climate denial and 12 gave a brief explanation without alluding to the reality that climate change is human-caused. Only five segments acknowledged that climate change was human caused, and just seven fully fleshed out the fact that the main cause of the climate crisis is fossil fuels.
When there are more segments denying climate change than acknowledging fossil fuels’ role in it, you know there’s a problem.
This year, I noticed coverage of worldwide coral bleaching that did make the appropriate connections (FAIR.org, 5/17/24). As Atkin and Samuelson emphasized, the difference between careless and responsible reporting on this issue is often just a few words.
Original article by OLIVIA RIGGIO republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Doctor Who 60: show has always tapped into political issues – but never more so than in the 1970s
Jamie Medhurst, Aberystwyth University
Doctor Who hit television screens at a key period in British television history. It launched on Saturday November 23, 1963, at 5.15pm, being somewhat overshadowed by the assassination of US president John F. Kennedy the previous day.
Set firmly within the BBC’s public service broadcasting ethos of informing, educating and entertaining, Doctor Who quickly became a mainstay of Saturday-evening viewing. By 1965, it was drawing in around 10 million viewers.
Throughout its history, Doctor Who has tapped into political, social and moral issues of the day – sometimes explicitly, other times more subtly. During the 1970s, when the Doctor was played by Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker, there were a number of examples of this.
Doctor Who in the 1970s
The 1970s were a period of political and social divisions: relationships between the government the unions in the first part of the decade was strained, exemplified by the miners’ strikes of 1972 and 1974. The political consensus that had dominated since 1945 was under pressure with talk of a break-up of the UK in the form of Welsh and Scottish Assemblies.
In his cultural history of Doctor Who, Inside the Tardis, television historian James Chapman argued that the 1970s painted “an uncomfortably sinister projection of the sort of society that Britain might come”.
It was never clear if Doctor Who storylines during this time were set in the present or at some point in the future. The fact that one of the lead characters, Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart of the United Nations Intelligence Task Force (UNIT), calls the prime minister “Madam” in a telephone conversation in one episode suggests the latter.
As for some of the more politically engaged stories, The Green Death (1973), or “the one with the giant maggots” as it is known by fans, certainly pulled no punches. Described by Chapman as an “eco disaster narrative”, it pitted corporate greed and capitalism against environmental activists (portrayed here as Welsh hippies) and their concerns for the planet.
In the episode, Global Chemicals, run by a faceless machine, is tipping waste from its petrochemical plant into a disused mine in the south Wales valleys (cue awful Welsh stereotypes). The green sludge not only kills people, but creates mutant maggots which also attack. As fears grew and the green movement gained momentum in the early 1970s, this story would have resonated with large parts of the audience.
When the Doctor visits the planet Peladon in The Curse of Peladon (1972), the planet is attempting to join the Galactic Federation. There are those on the planet who argue for joining, while opponents are just as vociferous, arguing that joining the Federation would destroy the old ways of the planet.
Sound familiar? This is the time that Britain was negotiating to join the European Economic Community, as it did in 1973. Interestingly, the serial was broadcast during the time of the 1972 miners’ strike (leading to many viewers missing later episodes due to power cuts).
The follow-up story, The Monster of Peladon (1974), is set against a backdrop of industrial strife and conflict involving miners.
Tom Baker’s Doctor
In what many consider to be one of the best classic serials, Genesis of the Daleks (1975) Tom Baker’s doctor continued the tradition of raising complex political, social and moral issues.
Sent back in time by the Time Lords to change the course of history, the Doctor at one point has an opportunity to destroy the mutations which form the “body” of the Dalek (inside their metal casing) and destroy the Dalek race forever. Holding two wires close to each other, about to create an explosion in the incubation room, he asks himself and his companions: “Have I that right?”
Having the ability to see the future, he says that future planets will become allies in fighting the evil of the Daleks. Had he the right to change the course of history? Given the symbolism used in the story (salutes, black outfits, references to a “pure” race) this was a clear reference to the rise of the Nazis.
The political allegories didn’t end in the 1970s. One of the most blatant can be seen in the 1988 serial, The Happiness Patrol. The main antagonist, Helen A (played by Sheila Hancock), a ruthless and tyrannical leader is said to be modelled on Conservative prime minister, Margaret Thatcher. The fact that Hancock appears to be impersonating Thatcher lends a certain degree of credence to this belief.
Anybody who argues that the revival of Doctor Who in 2005 saw a more political edge to the storylines need only look back over 60 years. Now that we can do this thanks to the BBC uploading more than 800 episodes onto iPlayer, it will become clear to all.
Doctor Who – especially during its Golden Age in the 1970s – has always been political.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Jamie Medhurst, Professor of Film and Media, Aberystwyth University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
World breaches key 1.5C warming mark for record number of days
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66857354
The world is breaching a key warming threshold at a rate that has scientists concerned, a BBC analysis has found.
On about a third of days in 2023, the average global temperature was at least 1.5C higher than pre-industrial levels.
Staying below that marker long-term is widely considered crucial to avoid the most damaging impacts of climate change.
But 2023 is “on track” to be the hottest year on record, and 2024 could be hotter.
“It is a sign that we’re reaching levels we haven’t been before,” says Dr Melissa Lazenby, from the University of Sussex.
This latest finding comes after record September temperatures and a summer of extreme weather events across much of the world.
- Climate change played major role in Libya floods
- Antarctic ice at ‘mind-blowing’ low alarms experts
- UN calls for radical changes to slow warming
…
Just Stop Oil disrupt the BBC Proms
Two Just Stop Oil supporters disrupted the first night of the BBC Proms. They are demanding that the UK government halt any new licensing or consents for oil, gas and coal extraction in the UK.
At around 8:40pm, two Just Stop Oil supporters ran onto the stage at the Royal Albert Hall, sounding whistles, whilst holding a banner which read ‘Just Stop Oil.’ The pair attempted to address the audience before being quickly removed.
One of those taking action today, Kate Logan, 38, A mum of two from London, said:
“Many years ago I sang with a youth choir at the Albert hall, never imagining I would one day disrupt a performance here to draw attention to the planetary crisis we find ourselves in. But that’s what this has come to. Our leaders and the press have failed us for decades and now it’s up to ordinary people to demand the changes we need.”
“We cannot afford to fiddle while Rome burns, our children need us to drop everything and act like this is the emergency it truly is. We need the BBC and the wider media to change their tune, tell the truth and connect the dots. The BBC is there to serve the public, it cannot be a mouthpiece of this corrupt government and its big oil pals.”
Also taking action this evening, Pia Bastide, 29, a community worker from London, said:
“I’m sorry to harp on about it, but business as usual isn’t working anymore. We can no longer ignore this crisis, when extreme temperatures are scorching Europe right now. Last week, the Secretary General of the United Nations said that the climate crisis is ‘out of control’.”
“I refuse to accept that my future is being sold away, one new oil licence at a time, and do nothing. The government is undertaking actions that will kill millions and the BBC is not doing enough to hold them to account. It’s the same old song and dance of false balance, the downplaying of the emergency and repeating government lies.”
Tonight’s action comes in response to the BBC’s underwhelming coverage of the climate emergency. In recent weeks the BBC has been accused of ‘false balance’ as well as uncritically regurgitating government and oil company propaganda. [2]
A Just Stop Oil spokesperson said:
“Humanity is at risk, and so is everything we have ever created. Our works of art, our music and our traditions – we’re terrifyingly close to losing everything. Our cherished institutions like the BBC, are failing us. Along with the billionaire owned press, the BBC has failed to communicate the perilous urgency of our situation and they have failed in their fundamental duty to identify and hold to account those who are responsible.”
“We are calling on the BBC to do better. You cannot remain ‘neutral’ on the breakdown of civilization. You cannot see both sides of extinction. You are either fighting for human survival or you are complicit with genocide.”
“It is immoral for cultural institutions to stand by and watch whilst our society faces inevitable collapse. We call on everyone involved in media, arts, heritage and culture to join us in civil resistance.”