The Press Has a Climate Change Blind Spot

http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-chicago/the-year-s-disasters-prompt-initiative-for-a-weather-ready-nation


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/08/2011-the-year-of-the-billion-dollar-weather-disasters.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2011-08-17-record-weather-disasters_n.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/with-extreme-weather-off-the-charts-national-weather-service-launches-weather-ready-initiative/2011/08/17/gIQA2xjULJ_blog.html

The journalists and reporters of the United States of America have a giant collective blind spot. This spot enables them to report on extreme weather and the extreme costs of that weather without asking the kind of hard-hitting, probing questions we expect of even our most incompetent members of the press these days: “Why is this happening?” “What can be done about it?”
I have linked four articles for your viewing pleasure that report on the economic impacts of 2011’s extreme weather. These articles come from reputable publications—OK, OK, USA Today may not be a paragon of journalistic exactitude, but it is at least somewhat reputable. Neither the national paper nor news outlets in the major cities of Los Angeles and Chicago even mentioned the words “climate change” in their coverage of the costs of extreme weather. And the Washington Post, the newspaper of Bernstein and Woodward, merely says that “some people” point to climate change as a cause. Yes, I know this article appeared on the Post’s online blog, and yes, at least the writer linked to a responsible authority on climate change.
If “Samenow” is truly the surname of the Washington Post writer, it could not more accurately describe his journalistic attitude: stick to the status quo, don’t ask hard questions, don’t follow up, and god forbid, don’t try to actually contact a scientist directly to get an opinion! And stick straight to the Republican Party line that only “some people” believe in climate change. Keep your dismissive and sarcastic tone that suggests that climate scientists are just a bunch of eccentric eggheads. Don’t dare try to actually bring some much needed illumination to an issue of incredible public importance! Don’t try to live up to the investigative legacy of your previously ground-breaking and muck-raking publication.
I could also link many, many pieces reporting on the extreme droughts in Texas that will not go near the term “climate change” with a 10-foot cattle prod.
My big question is, “Why does the press have a blind spot when it comes to climate change?” Some journalists might offer the excuse, “I just report the news. I don’t comment on it.” I understand this perspective and understand that a responsible and ethical reporter cannot offer his or her own opinion on whether climate change is to blame for this or that disaster. However, I cannot understand that a responsible and ethical journalist would not follow up in some manner: ask questions, do original research, ask a climate scientist. Heck, even just mention it as a possibility!
The press’ climate change blind spot tends to disprove the hysterical accusations coming from the Right that the news media has a “liberal bias.” I certainly do not see the liberal bias in my review of weather-related news. And if anybody does detect such a bias in a major media outlet—we’re talking national or first-tier city newspapers and magazines—please let me know so I can post the article here and congratulate the brave and fearless reporter.
Until then, I will continue to point out the lack of discussion of climate change in weather-related reporting.