

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Though numerous media surveys and studies have shown that mainstream news outlets have consistently ignored or underreported the crisis of climate change over the last two decades, a new analysis released Monday shows that even when the top cable news channels do cover the issue, they consistently misinform their viewers on the facts.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the scientific accuracy of climate change coverage varies significantly across the three major cable news networks--CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC.
Of the three--not surprisingly--Fox News was the least accurate in its coverage of global warming and climate change issues during 2013, in which 72 percent of the segments contained misleading statements.
CNN came in second in terms of accuracy, with about a third of segments featuring misleading statements. And MSNBC beat them both, with only eight percent of segments containing misleading statements.
"Sometimes, it's like the networks are covering different planets," said Aaron Huertas, a science communications officer at UCS who led the analysis. "Unfortunately, too many politicians, interest groups, and pundits continue to dispute established climate science and cable shows sometimes give them a platform to do so."
The problem, according to Huertas and his colleagues, is that scientific and factual inaccuracies cripple the society's ability to have a rational debate on the subject, because even if "hosts, guests, and audiences express varying attitudes, beliefs, and values around questions of climate policy," the facts should remain sacred in terms of informing their viewers.
""Climate science can be complex and difficult to cover," the group admits, but "each of the major cable news networks, regardless of its overall performance, has shown that it can get the science right. Each can -- and should -- do more to achieve higher levels of accuracy."
From the UCS analysis:
___________________________________
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 |
Though numerous media surveys and studies have shown that mainstream news outlets have consistently ignored or underreported the crisis of climate change over the last two decades, a new analysis released Monday shows that even when the top cable news channels do cover the issue, they consistently misinform their viewers on the facts.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the scientific accuracy of climate change coverage varies significantly across the three major cable news networks--CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC.
Of the three--not surprisingly--Fox News was the least accurate in its coverage of global warming and climate change issues during 2013, in which 72 percent of the segments contained misleading statements.
CNN came in second in terms of accuracy, with about a third of segments featuring misleading statements. And MSNBC beat them both, with only eight percent of segments containing misleading statements.
"Sometimes, it's like the networks are covering different planets," said Aaron Huertas, a science communications officer at UCS who led the analysis. "Unfortunately, too many politicians, interest groups, and pundits continue to dispute established climate science and cable shows sometimes give them a platform to do so."
The problem, according to Huertas and his colleagues, is that scientific and factual inaccuracies cripple the society's ability to have a rational debate on the subject, because even if "hosts, guests, and audiences express varying attitudes, beliefs, and values around questions of climate policy," the facts should remain sacred in terms of informing their viewers.
""Climate science can be complex and difficult to cover," the group admits, but "each of the major cable news networks, regardless of its overall performance, has shown that it can get the science right. Each can -- and should -- do more to achieve higher levels of accuracy."
From the UCS analysis:
___________________________________
Though numerous media surveys and studies have shown that mainstream news outlets have consistently ignored or underreported the crisis of climate change over the last two decades, a new analysis released Monday shows that even when the top cable news channels do cover the issue, they consistently misinform their viewers on the facts.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the scientific accuracy of climate change coverage varies significantly across the three major cable news networks--CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC.
Of the three--not surprisingly--Fox News was the least accurate in its coverage of global warming and climate change issues during 2013, in which 72 percent of the segments contained misleading statements.
CNN came in second in terms of accuracy, with about a third of segments featuring misleading statements. And MSNBC beat them both, with only eight percent of segments containing misleading statements.
"Sometimes, it's like the networks are covering different planets," said Aaron Huertas, a science communications officer at UCS who led the analysis. "Unfortunately, too many politicians, interest groups, and pundits continue to dispute established climate science and cable shows sometimes give them a platform to do so."
The problem, according to Huertas and his colleagues, is that scientific and factual inaccuracies cripple the society's ability to have a rational debate on the subject, because even if "hosts, guests, and audiences express varying attitudes, beliefs, and values around questions of climate policy," the facts should remain sacred in terms of informing their viewers.
""Climate science can be complex and difficult to cover," the group admits, but "each of the major cable news networks, regardless of its overall performance, has shown that it can get the science right. Each can -- and should -- do more to achieve higher levels of accuracy."
From the UCS analysis:
___________________________________