Jay Rosen is the person best at making sense of modern journalism, especially in America.
He doesn’t usually think of science journalism in particular, but his comments are often strikingly on target for our interests as well.
There’s an excellent interview with Rosen in The Economist
Some of it reflects on the quandary that someone like Revkin faces:
I do not think journalists should “join the team”. [more]
Presumably nobody has missed taking note of Tamino’s rebuttal of Montford on RealClimate, but maybe, like me, some have put off reading the comments. Don’t miss the whole thing; it’s fascinating and one of the best RC threads ever.
In the view of keeping on pressing the press, I will leave you with the concluding part of Deep Climate’s comment #50:
A rare front-page science feature appeared on the front page of the Wall Street Journal in February, 2005. [more]
In a recent essay which is much too long for most blog readers to bother with, “We Are What We Think“, I argued that we need to rethink our relationship to the world. I was somewhat vague as to how to do it. Also for good measure I snarled at Andy Revkin, which I sill usually do given a chance. [more]
Apparently, Tom Yulsman has been on the “climate beat” for quite some time.
Anyway, he has a collection of interesting observations about communicating climate science from various participants. Unfortunately, no compelling position emerges from it. Sometimes I suspect that it is exactly the purpose of conventional journalism, to avoid influencing the reader’s position at all. [more]
It’s time we faced the facts:
The world is overpopulated, near or beyond its long-term carrying capacity for modern humans
Resources are being depleted and environmental supports weakened
Energy usage is getting tangled in supplies of water and fair weather
Economic systems designed for none of the above are misfiring for various reasons including but not limited to the above
We are going to have to think carefully and learn how to decide to make difficult decisions together. [more]
If there is a sidewalk on either side of a busy street, you may argue whether to walk down the east side or the west side, but it’s not a useful compromise to walk out in traffic.
There is more than one question we need to solve, so there are lots of ways of looking at the world. [more]
A really excellent article on geoengineering appears on Andrew Revkin’s Dot Earth in which In It reader RM Reiss has already commented briefly but cleverly. Revkin also points to related NYTimes articles by Cornelia Dean and William Broad.
I’ve been hard on journalists in general and Revkin in particular of late, so let me take this opportunity to emphasize that not all journalism is off base and the NYTimes in particular is usually very helpful, at least in this regard. [more]