Media attacked for 'climate porn'

[4dsc]

http://www.energybulletin.net/18867.html

The apocalyptic vision of climate change used by newspapers, environmental groups and the UK government amounts to "climate porn". That is the conclusion of a report from Labour-leaning think-tank the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).

It says that the over-use of alarming images is a "counsel of despair", making people feel helpless.

They analysed 600 newspaper and magazine articles, as well as broadcast news and adverts.

Coverage breaks down, they concluded, into several distinct areas, including:

* Alarmism, characterised by images and words of catastrophe
* Settlerdom, in which "common sense" is used to argue against the scientific consensus
* Rhetorical scepticism, which argues the science is bad and the dangers hyped
* Techno-optimism, the argument that technology can solve the problem

[TheFarseer]

1. What's even more dangerous than

climate change which would cause drought, flooding, famine, heat related deaths and possibly an ice age? Too much media coverage of it. OH MY GOD STOP! The truth hurts too much! Let's bury our heads in the sand and maybe it will leave us alone!

[dipsydoodle]

2. Alarmism, characterised by images and words of catastrophe

Sound familiar. That lot get included in every single one of *'s speeches under the general umbrella of terror even when not in response to a question.

[hatrack]

3. Guess I'd better stop reading Geophysical Research Letters, then . . .

:eyes:

[dwnforthecount]

4. again, the right proves it's worth...

when things get too desperate, when everybody else says the crisis is impossible to resolve, and finally when it's the rights turn to be our nation's guiding light: the right complains about the coverage of the crisis.

[JohnWxy]

5. the second order of disinformation - twist the meaning of the message.

the first aim of a Disinformation Campaign is to call into question the facts being presented by reasonable people (if it might jeopardize your near-term profits stream).

the second order of a disinformation campaign of confusion is to reinterpret or redefine the meaning of the facts presented (this is usually employed as the empirical data is piling up so much that it's harder to deny its validity/ accuracy).


The critics of the media state:

"over-use of alarming images is a "counsel of despair", making people feel helpless."

Information on the implications of Global Warming "will make people FEEL HELPLESS??" This isn't what the fossil fuelies are worried about. The obvious reaction to reports of impending climate catastrophe - when combined with the scientists well founded suspicions as to the cause of GHG build-up (burning fossil fuels) is for the observer to think - "we better DO SOMETHING ABOUT FOSSIL FUEL USE!"

- THAT'S WHAT THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY IS WORRIED ABOUT - NOT THAT PEOPLE WILL FEEL HELPLESS!!

[LSK]

6. these people are beyond disgusting!!!

:puke: