Fair and Balanced strikes WashPost Global Warming reporting again

Earlier this week, two Washington Post articles demonstrated, yet again, the Post’s editors’ dedication to modeling Post reporting after Faux News when it comes to Global Warming: “Fair and Balanced” over objective and truthful. In what were otherwise quite interesting and even valuable articles to read, the Post inserted material from Global Warming deniers and skeptics to assure that they had ‘both sides of the story’.

Sunday’s Higher Learning Adapts to a Greening Attitude, two notable skepics each had a paragraph: Donald J Boudreaux and Richard Lindzen (for a bit of my perspective, see Newsweek: J’accuse …). These two are quoted with their serious sounding titles (which make them sound more authoritative than anyone else in the article. Any context provided about how they’re among the normal talking heads brought to the table to provide the “other side” to the overwhelming majority of scientists who have looked at the Theory of Global Warming, tested it, and found that (sadly) it passed the tests? Of course not.

Monday, in an article about Jim Hansen’s 20th anniversary of speaking out publically on Global Warming issues, Turning up the Heat on Climate Issue, James Inhofe (R-Exxon) was given a couple paragraphs to comment. Any indication that Inhofe is the most virulent global warming denier in the Congress and that he has called global warming “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people”. For Inhofe, in essence, Global Warming is the latest Black Helicopter craze of UN conspiracy to take over the United States (and the globe).

Sigh …

Yet again, “Fair and Balanced” Washington Post threw into the trash the concept of objective and truthful reporting when it comes to Global Warming.

 

2 responses to “Fair and Balanced strikes WashPost Global Warming reporting again

  1. Why do so many have their panties in a bunch about warming temperatures?
    It has been a warming trend sense the end of our last ice age.
    Without warming temperatures most if not all of Europe and North America would still be under 100’s of feet of an ice sheet!

  2. Pobept:

    Your comment is truthiness, obscuring fact rather than illuminating.

    What is of great concern is the acceleration of warming due to human activity and the second/third order impacts of that heating.

    In addition, there are second/third order impacts of the fossil fuel pollution, such as the acidification of the oceans and the threats to very basic elements of the food chains in the sea.

    There is a difference between natural and unnatural change.

    And, the impacts are not just due to temperatures.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s