What Gives? Climate Warnings Up, Corporate News Climate Coverage Down
Study shines light on failure of major news outlets to adequately cover global warming

"We are more than aware that major fossil fuel companies spend significant amounts of money advertising on your networks. We hope that this is not influencing your decision about the subjects discussed or the guests who appear on your network programming."
That's according to a new analysis by news watchdog Media Matters, released Thursday, which shows that news coverage by ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX peaked in 2009 but has flat-lined since even as the scientific case and evidence of global warming has significantly raised the threat level of the problem over the last five years.
As the group states in their report, though they did better in 2013 than in 2012, the largest corporate media news channels "offered tepid coverage" of climate change despite a major report by the IPCC, a presidential speech by Obama focused on the issue, and a serious scientific milestone on global warming as the carbon concentration of the atmosphere hit 400 parts per million for the first time in human history.
Despite all that, "broadcast news' climate coverage remained relatively low" compared to other years.
According to the study: "Altogether, ABC, CBS and NBC reported on global warming for nearly an hour and 42 minutes during their nightly newscasts in 2013, compared to a combined total of less than an hour in all of 2012. The majority of this coverage -- 58 percent -- was driven by stories on climate change's relation to extreme weather or impacts on wildlife, while 19 percent was driven by scientific findings, another 19 percent by political stories related to climate change, and 4 percent by other stories."
And on the networks' political weekend shows? "Out of a year's worth of coverage, the Sunday shows focused on climate change for 27 minutes, the most aired since 2009."
By the numbers:

And citing Media Matter's study, a group of U.S. senators, led by Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, sent a letter (pdf) to executives from these news outlets asking why there has been "shockingly little discussion" about global warming on their Sunday morning shows and other highly-watched programs.
"Given the widely recognized challenge that climate change poses to the nation and the world, this is an absurdly short amount of time for a subject of such importance," the senators said in the letter.
And not avoiding the gorilla in the room when it terms of the chief possible reason for the poor coverage, the senators continued:
We are more than aware that major fossil fuel companies spend significant amounts of money advertising on your networks. We hope that this is not influencing your decision about the subjects discussed or the guests who appear on your network programming.
___________________________________________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

"We are more than aware that major fossil fuel companies spend significant amounts of money advertising on your networks. We hope that this is not influencing your decision about the subjects discussed or the guests who appear on your network programming."
That's according to a new analysis by news watchdog Media Matters, released Thursday, which shows that news coverage by ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX peaked in 2009 but has flat-lined since even as the scientific case and evidence of global warming has significantly raised the threat level of the problem over the last five years.
As the group states in their report, though they did better in 2013 than in 2012, the largest corporate media news channels "offered tepid coverage" of climate change despite a major report by the IPCC, a presidential speech by Obama focused on the issue, and a serious scientific milestone on global warming as the carbon concentration of the atmosphere hit 400 parts per million for the first time in human history.
Despite all that, "broadcast news' climate coverage remained relatively low" compared to other years.
According to the study: "Altogether, ABC, CBS and NBC reported on global warming for nearly an hour and 42 minutes during their nightly newscasts in 2013, compared to a combined total of less than an hour in all of 2012. The majority of this coverage -- 58 percent -- was driven by stories on climate change's relation to extreme weather or impacts on wildlife, while 19 percent was driven by scientific findings, another 19 percent by political stories related to climate change, and 4 percent by other stories."
And on the networks' political weekend shows? "Out of a year's worth of coverage, the Sunday shows focused on climate change for 27 minutes, the most aired since 2009."
By the numbers:

And citing Media Matter's study, a group of U.S. senators, led by Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, sent a letter (pdf) to executives from these news outlets asking why there has been "shockingly little discussion" about global warming on their Sunday morning shows and other highly-watched programs.
"Given the widely recognized challenge that climate change poses to the nation and the world, this is an absurdly short amount of time for a subject of such importance," the senators said in the letter.
And not avoiding the gorilla in the room when it terms of the chief possible reason for the poor coverage, the senators continued:
We are more than aware that major fossil fuel companies spend significant amounts of money advertising on your networks. We hope that this is not influencing your decision about the subjects discussed or the guests who appear on your network programming.
___________________________________________________

"We are more than aware that major fossil fuel companies spend significant amounts of money advertising on your networks. We hope that this is not influencing your decision about the subjects discussed or the guests who appear on your network programming."
That's according to a new analysis by news watchdog Media Matters, released Thursday, which shows that news coverage by ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX peaked in 2009 but has flat-lined since even as the scientific case and evidence of global warming has significantly raised the threat level of the problem over the last five years.
As the group states in their report, though they did better in 2013 than in 2012, the largest corporate media news channels "offered tepid coverage" of climate change despite a major report by the IPCC, a presidential speech by Obama focused on the issue, and a serious scientific milestone on global warming as the carbon concentration of the atmosphere hit 400 parts per million for the first time in human history.
Despite all that, "broadcast news' climate coverage remained relatively low" compared to other years.
According to the study: "Altogether, ABC, CBS and NBC reported on global warming for nearly an hour and 42 minutes during their nightly newscasts in 2013, compared to a combined total of less than an hour in all of 2012. The majority of this coverage -- 58 percent -- was driven by stories on climate change's relation to extreme weather or impacts on wildlife, while 19 percent was driven by scientific findings, another 19 percent by political stories related to climate change, and 4 percent by other stories."
And on the networks' political weekend shows? "Out of a year's worth of coverage, the Sunday shows focused on climate change for 27 minutes, the most aired since 2009."
By the numbers:

And citing Media Matter's study, a group of U.S. senators, led by Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, sent a letter (pdf) to executives from these news outlets asking why there has been "shockingly little discussion" about global warming on their Sunday morning shows and other highly-watched programs.
"Given the widely recognized challenge that climate change poses to the nation and the world, this is an absurdly short amount of time for a subject of such importance," the senators said in the letter.
And not avoiding the gorilla in the room when it terms of the chief possible reason for the poor coverage, the senators continued:
We are more than aware that major fossil fuel companies spend significant amounts of money advertising on your networks. We hope that this is not influencing your decision about the subjects discussed or the guests who appear on your network programming.
___________________________________________________

