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, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - 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:
___________________________________