 |
| pn192 |
Good morning, and welcome to The Bulletin, by Alex Braae and supported by Vector.
We're going to lead off today with something a bit different to the usual – we wouldn't normally start with a story about media coverage of a story. I like to think that this publication is generally pretty positive about the quality of NZ journalism. But today I want to talk about a series that in my opinion surpasses everything else published in this country over the past year.
It comes from Stuff, and it's about climate change. So far you might be thinking it all sounds a bit dry, but it's anything but. The series has the urgency and clarity of the best factual writing, but more importantly, it is deeply humane in how it addresses what will be social, economic and political problems. And it's not just a one and done thing either – it's going to be a major thing they keep following from here on in. That represents a real shift in media mindset around climate change that I'll unpack a bit further down.
I shared the story yesterday about Lower Hutt and Petone being within decades of going beneath the sea, but that was before I had a chance to read the rest of the series. And that's a great piece of work for sure, but the highlight by far is this one about Beach Road.
Which Beach Rd, you might ask? All of them. In every coastal town, city and suburb around the country. The rising sea levels are coming, and in some parts of the country entire communities will have to leave. As the journalist Charlie Mitchell points out, we have absolutely no framework currently for how we're going to deal with the consequences of that. Where will those people go? And how could these disruptions further divide us? These are questions that we absolutely must be asking, so that real plans can be made.
Here's another thing they've got going – Stuff are calling for submissions from people who are already making plans for how they're changing their lifestyles to lower their carbon footprint, and adapt to a changing climate. It's a great idea, and will be a valuable resource of ideas to keep checking back in with.
Finally, what about the misinformation that gets put out about climate change? Bookmark this article to deploy in any of those situations. They've compiled a selection of experts to bust myths that are entirely within their expertise. You or I might not necessarily be able to know the exact scientific details to rebut a particular climate change denying argument. But with this, you won't really need to – just refer back to it as necessary.
There are legitimate debates to be had around climate change policy. But the science is entirely settled on two very simple points: The climate is changing, and the cause is largely greenhouse gas emissions produced by human activity. We have some idea about what a changing climate will mean, but a lot of the full horrors won't reveal themselves until its too late to do anything about it. Therefore, emissions simply have to be cut now, and cut hard, unless we want to find out what it's like to live on a planet becoming steadily less liveable. I really don't want to find out what that's like – do you?
That's why this Stuff series is so important. A few might accuse them of abandoning impartiality, or pushing an agenda. But the idealised version of balance in reporting on climate change so often ends up simply putting misinformation out there. What Stuff have really done here is demonstrate the highest possible principle of journalism. They have told the truth, without fear or favour, even if that truth is hard to read. It is long past time for all media to do the same.
Forget the doom and gloom, it's time to be positive.
Four other inks to the Stuff articles:
- Quick !Save the Planet.
- Coastal Maori among the most vulnerable.
- Millions sick.
- Ten small steps for families to take.
... BUT WHALEOIL CAMERON SLATER ATTACKS STUFF. saying the media should for balance give equal attention to climate change deniers.
ANOTHER CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER IS MIKE HOSKING'S who, on a quite different tack, this week lowered his horns at Simon Bridges who will invite the public to make suggestions on National Party policies. No ideas of your own, Simon? Isn't that what we pay you for. Hosking is a far right-winger who would appear to be an expert on almost everything. He prefers another right-winger Judith Collins as leader.
Type "mike hosking on simon bridges" in Google to see his his three recent attacks. With Bridges having no right of reply.
Once again, I wonder why Hosking has free stage to influence the public? I know he has a large public following, but that is all the more reason for NewsTalkNZ and others like The NZ Herald that publish his views, to show more social responsibility. The public has a right to know, but knowing is about knowledge, not near-hysteria. Have a word with him, promote another journalist with more reasoned views, or if you can't do either, close him down.
No comments:
Post a Comment