Environmental Coverage On TV News "All But Vanished" In Past 5 Years

[hatrack]

Coverage of environmental news by TV broadcast networks has all but disappeared in the past five years.

An ongoing study shows environmental coverage, after picking up dramatically in the first several months of the Bush administration in 2001, pretty much vanished after the 9-11 terrorist attacks that same year.

The report was presented Friday at a journalism symposium that was sponsored by the Michigan State University environmental journalism program, headed by former C-J reporter Jim Detjen, and attended by current C-J environmental reporter James Bruggers.

EDIT

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060731/NEWS01/60731027/1008/NEWS01

EDIT

That’s not a surprise to me, and if you’re found you way to Watchdog Earth, it’s probably not a surprise to you. But on Friday, at journalism symposium I attended in New York City, seeing the actual numbers was disappointing. The symposium was put on by the Michigan State University environmental journalism program, headed by former C-J reporter Jim Detjen. It was held in conjunction with the summer meeeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists board, of which I am a member.

Andrew Tyndall, of the Tyndall Report, presented a series of tables that track environmental coverage on ABC CBS and NBC dating to 1988. In them, he tracks minutes by year devoted to environmental subjects, as well as the top stories by year. Environmental coverage peaked in 1989, and received minimal coverage during the Clinton years because, Tyndall said, there was little conflict between environmental advocates and the Clinton administration. When George W. Bush came in, and Vice President Cheney started developing energy policies that called for more drilling and more coal-fired power plants, the national network news picked up the pace. But since 9-11, the war on terror has dominated, he said. That’s unfortunate, from a democracy and public policy standpoint, because the Bush administration has been quite aggressive about shaping new national environmental policies.

The network news are also not covering climate change very much, he said “Global warming will only grab headlines when it becomes an issue of political controversy,” he wrote in a summary for the symposium. But only prominent coverage can force it to the forefront of political controversy – “yet attempts to cover global warming per se amount to occasional discretionary features on light news days,” he concluded. One thing that just strikes me as amazing is just how little time gets devoted to the environment. For example, last year, the federal energy plan was on air just 25 minutes at the three networks combined. Climate change didn’t even crack the top 10 last year, which means it was on less than 4 minutes. Considering very credible scientists have been warning about the potential loss of civilization as we know in with a generation or two, that's pretty scary.

EDIT

http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/bruggers/blog.html (full article)

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. No news is good news (for the Junta, that is)

If there is no environmental coverage, people will continue to buy gas-hog vehicles and thus continue to line the pockets of the Junta's puppeteers.

[kestrel91316]

2. This is because the brilliant, patriotic media figured out that

environmentalists hate America.

[phantom power]

3. Except when they hunt and fish! Then it's OK, they are still patriots!

[Boomer]

4. They're just listening to mother's advice

If you can't say anything good about the environment, then you shouldn't say anything at all.