Six New York Times reporters (9/7/20) teamed up to produce more than 1,700 words about how “extreme heat [was] roasting California.” None of those words was “climate.”
The West is on fire, quite literally. A record-breaking heatwave has sparked unprecedented wildfires up and down the coast, turning the sky an apocalyptic, terrifying shade of red. Six of California’s 20 largest-ever fires have occurred this year, over half a million Oregonians have been forced to flee their homes and the destruction from this week’s blazes alone in Washington qualify it as the state’s second-worst fire season in history.
The heatwave and the fires in turn are caused in no small part by human-made global warming. As Scientific American (8/24/20) explains, hotter temperatures, less dependable precipitation and melting snowpack lead to drier soils and parched vegetation, a tinderbox for wildfires. Temperatures have increased by 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit in California since 1980, while rain has decreased by 30% over the same period (Scientific American, 4/3/20).
Yet when discussing the heatwave and the fires, corporate media have been extremely hesitant to even mention climate change, let alone frame the discussion around it. A great many ostensibly in-depth stories discussing the blazes don’t include the words “climate change” (e.g., New York Times, 9/7/20, 9/7/20; LA Times, 9/5/20; NPR, 9/7/20).
Cable news was no better, especially Fox News, where only two of 54 segments on the events discussed climate change, one being a Tucker Carlson monologue attacking the idea, claiming that there was “no evidence” of a connection between climate change and catastrophic fires, and suggesting anyone bringing it up was simply “lying” (Tucker Carlson Tonight, 9/10/20). Meanwhile, 11 of 37 MSNBC and just five of 49 CNN segments included any mention of climate change.
Even the Weather Channel mostly hasn’t mentioned climate change in its coverage of the West Coast fires (e.g., 9/9/20), though it did have one stand-alone story headlined “Will Extreme Weather Keep Getting Worse? Scientists Say Yes” (9/11/20).
A USA Today story (9/8/20) had one phrase reporting that California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the number of wildfires was “evidence of the effects of climate change”—but devoted more space to noting that one fire “was caused by a smoke-generating pyrotechnic device used by a couple to reveal their baby’s gender.”
In fact, media were more willing to blame gender reveal parties for the historic blazes than climate change. A comprehensive 2,300-word report from USA Today (9/8/20), a newspaper with a particularly egregious history with regard to the environment (FAIR.org, 10/21/18, 12/6/18, 1/1/19), included one sentence noting that “California Gov. Gavin Newsom says wildfire count in the state so far this year is far beyond the number last year, evidence of the effects of climate change,” but devoted an entire section of the article to the gender reveal party.
But the USA Today article was among the better examples of media, with countless others pointing the finger at gender reveal parties without even mentioning climate change at all (e.g., Associated Press, 9/7/20; NPR, 9/7/20; CNN, 9/8/20; CBS News, 9/8/20). Unsurprisingly, Carlson also blamed the party.
The world is currently heating at a faster rate than even the worst-case projections of the ’90s and 2000s. Experts agree that anything over a 2 degree Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperatures from preindustrial levels would be catastrophic, threatening organized human survival. Yet many are now expecting a 5 degree Celsius (9 degrees Fahrenheit) increase by the end of the century, barring dramatic changes in energy use, making the planet essentially unlivable. Scientists also warn that increased temperatures will create feedback loops, like melting ice sheets and the release of trapped methane, that will accelerate further warming. Surely this would be more relevant information to include than a stray firework at a gender reveal party?
Worse still, a host of media from across the corporate spectrum illustrated their stories about the terrifying heatwave with pictures of people frolicking in streams or by the sea (e.g., CBS News, 9/5/20, 9/6/20; LA Times, 9/6/20; Fox News 9/6/20). None of these examples mentioned climate change, either. Even in an article entitled “California is dangerously hot this weekend,” the New York Times (9/4/20) chose an image of a crowded Santa Monica beach to accompany it, sending mixed signals about just how serious the situation was.
Even in more sober reporting that did put climate change at the front and center there were serious problems. A New York Times story (9/12/20) on the Oregon fires went into detail about how constantly drier weather is leading to far more wildfires, and how they are spreading to the wetter coastal areas, but treated climate change as an unchangeable fact of life, as if it were the ocean’s tides or the orbit of the Earth, not even mentioning that the phenomenon is caused by people—let alone referring to the actions that could be taken to reverse it, such as removing the trillions of dollars of government subsidies on fossil fuel, a Green New Deal, public transport initiatives or a reduction in consumption.
An LA Times article (9/5/20) described climate change as an “unfortunate reality that Californians will increasingly have to get used to.”
The LA Times (9/5/20) did the same in its article detailing the health implications of a warming California, giving a list of expert recommendations on keeping cool and avoiding heat stroke during heat waves. But at no point did it address what is causing the increase in temperatures—the unsustainable way in which society is organized around ever-increasing fossil fuel use—let alone any discussion on how to combat it. It’s just an “unfortunate reality that Californians will increasingly have to get used to,” the paper reported.
As the most powerful and influential nation in the world, and also the country that has produced by far the most carbon dioxide emissions historically, the United States has a particular responsibility to lead the fight against climate change. Yet Washington, on the world stage, had proven more of a barrier to action than a leader.
Unfortunately, corporate media has been almost as uninterested in the subject. FAIR (6/3/17) found that in a dozen 2017 interviews with the president, journalists failed to ask President Donald Trump a single climate-related question, allowing him to avoid hard questions about his administration’s destruction of international climate accords. And during the 2016 presidential debates, neither candidate was asked a single climate-related question (FAIR.org, 10/19/16). This cycle’s Democratic candidate debates were little better (FAIR.org, 11/27/19).
When extreme weather events hit, when the public is paying the most attention, corporate media have consistently failed to link those events to human-caused climate change (FAIR.org, 8/1/11, 10/23/19, 1/3/20). They also downplay any connection between global warming and the global refugee crisis, spurred by climate disruption’s forced migrations (FAIR.org, 7/30/19). While there is a long term trend in media towards (slightly) more climate reporting, most of these stories, Emily Atkin of Heated (9/8/20) notes, are stand-alone articles, with media still failing to integrate climate change into day-to-day coverage. Corporate media has also given ample publicity to climate change deniers (FAIR.org, 5/1/07, 1/8/14), while undermining or dismissing serious political attempts to address the problem (FAIR.org, 9/6/19, 11/20/19, 1/31/20).
By failing to inform readers about the (human) cause of catastrophes like the West Coast wildfires (as nearly 80% of Americans want them to), the corporate press — often funded by some of the world’s top polluters—are effectively hindering us from organizing around solutions to the most pressing crisis facing humanity. While it is unreasonable to expect all journalists to be familiar with environmental science, the least they could do is make the connection between human activity and the increasingly common catastrophic weather, and stop illustrating stories about dangerous heat waves with people having fun at the beach.
Featured image: NPR depiction (9/7/20) of California’s wildfires.
Fiddling with the facts while our only home burns
Yes, climate change is responsible for creating the conditions for extreme, uncontrollable wildfires. However, there must be a source of ignition, such as a downed power line, tossed cigarette, illegal burn barrel, dry lightening, etc. Wildfires do not start spontaneously regardless of how much fuel is available. Human ignorance, stupidity and negligence (not to mention arsonists) is most often the cause. In our area, which was under a red flag warning, there were several fire dispatch reports of people starting illegal bonfires!
Former firefighter
There’s not really anything that can be done to prevent ignorance, apathy or thoughtless behavior. And there’s certainly nothing that can be done about natural causes for fires. But, as this article states, there’s a lot that can be done to stop adding to the climate change occurring right now
Active duty fire fighters are faced with the reality that putting out a fire caused by a thrown cigarette isn’t the problem, it’s how much faster that fire can spread that is the real concern!
Today’s fire-fighting capacity is prepared for yesterdays fire conditions. And for the time being, having lost boots on the ground due to the various complications such as the pandemic & reduced prison labor is making the situation much more serious than any blame game might indicate
Maybe it’s time to declare martial law & draft people in order to have enough fire fighters?
Its likely from now to the end of our days as a species, the media will choose the incomplete if not false narrative, before they dare tell the honest, complete one. The last thing the media-government-corporations want is for the citizens to know just how bad humans especially the elected ones have put them on a collision course with a terrible destiny.
True
Truth be told, sadly enough even a real lot of really leftist organisations – and not only in the USA – belittled the effects of climate change. Since decades. Climate change is mainly caused by western market-radical countries. The facts are here since 1988/90, as science proved (IPCC 1).
I am not sure if we really should comment on media who pretend anyone lighting a cigarette or making a little fire would be the main reason for such horrors. It is all too bizarre. Trump himself, denying climate change, spoke of “forest management” as the only cause. Absurd. (The wee bit of truth in that otherwise nonsensical idea is: after deforestation in the past – smaller, younger trees burn faster than the very old ones of the past would have burnt down. But that’s all that is to it; the real cause being western greed, and for example manic luxurious-tourism done by 5-10% of all humans being one of them. While 80% of all humans did not participate in that luxurious tourism.)
The real problem is that from 1990-2015 even far left parties and media west-world-wide did not much care. Climate change is one of the first problems in history that would ask for “less greed”. For lesser emitting of fossil fuels by nearly all in the west – the few who acted like it was good were called “do-gooders” or “politically correct”.
The Left is not used to that, to “hey we waste too much!”. Many of us are used to “the others are the culprits!”.
I admit I am a bit tired after so many years to talk to hundreds of left and far left people too who – in fact – do not live quite so differently than their right-wing counterparts do. If people fly, say, 5 times per year throughout the world and find “they want to take it away from me” – they are among those 500 millions of people who emit, each person, some 20-50 tons of CO2 per year. Some far above that. They are not better than their right-wing counterparts in that.
One of the reasons the Left (meaning the people really to the Left of Center democrats like Hillary Clinton or any western leader at the moment) is so weak is because there was no huge group fighting for the climate. If you for example knew the german “Green” party, you would be horrified about their positions… This is a world where all applauded the Paris agreement, of which James Hansen rightfully said – it is not working. As Obama changed the agreement into an “unbinding” one. And, for example: manic western tourism as a problem of capitalism was not even included in Paris…
Now tell your kids – hey we consume another 8 tons of CO2 like millions by “chilling” in Indonesia from Europe, and there are 4 more long distance travels to come – but hey, we are way cool, leftist and green. Chances are that some of the kids will ask you – “how does it work if we all throw away 20-40 tons CO2 and more, and we are supposed to stay under 4 tons, everything included? What does it mean, “we are “leftist, or green”, we are for solidarity”?
These are double moral standards.
At least I was glad to see in “democracy now” a long statement by Gavin Newsom. First he stood somewhere on the ground, I can’t find that link, nearly in tears and shouting – rightfully – against the Trumps and so many other climate-change-belittlers. Then, https://www.democracynow.org/2020/9/10/leah_stokes_west_coast_fires – here (if links are not allowed, simply delete this) jump to around 17 minutes 15.
A last example. All media, with the 1 exception of George Monbiot one day in the Guardian, call Angela Merkel “climate queen”. Please look into details. She is – nothing of the kind. Our fat SUVs, exported to the USA, to take just one of hundreds of examples, are so dirty because Merkel time and again prohibited any stronger regulations in the EU. She is no “climate queen”. This is nearly “newspeek” in Orwell’s sense. The problem is reaching far deeper than even 99% of the Left would admit. But emissions are emissions, if we count them or not.
The problem number 1 being by now – why are the Leftists in all the countries that suffer from our western greed so silent…Well, they got no power…
Well, the German left wing created the Green party. I am not talking about what some imbeciles in the USA consider left wing. Of course today they are establishment. But at least we have political parties. (Both Dems and dumbs are part of the same corporate corruption)
Power companies, downed power lines, leaking gas sites, an unbelievable amount of lightning strikes———-along with sites( prior gas, or testing sites that continue to make people in CA sick——–) Unlike animals humans do specialize in fouling their own nests. It doesn’t help if the media pretends it isn’t happening. Trump and his cronies and Big Oil and frackers all add to the demise of Earth—oh yes, the mines imploding around the planet while the ice is melting as Greenland and Siberia are melting away.It’s almost as if the planet has become George Floyd, and the killer coronations are killing us all—and we truly CAN’T BREATHE. : (
Meanwhile, Wondering Woman types on her computer made from plastic (petroleum), precious metals (mined), and using electricity (coal) while eating food brought to her by trucks (petroleum, mined metals) wearing clothes brought to her by trucks and using a healthcare system highly dependent on all of the things listed above). She does this from comfort only afforded kings in the past not thinking that her demand for products causes these actions she abhors.
Thank you ?why does the press leave out our complicit ly in climate change ? Afraid?//
No comments on environmentalists preventing others from removing fuel?
And not even FAIR is ready to acknowledge that animal agriculture is more responsible for climate change than every other industry including fossil fuels.
According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, “The livestock sector is…responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport.” And animal ag generates far higher shares of worse emissions for warming, such as methane (37% of it), nitrous oxide (65%), and ammonia (64%).
I agree we should not ignore climate change as the cause, however, we can’t ignore what’s causing climate change — raising animals for food.