A number of major news organizations worldwide, ranging from Scientific American and The Columbia Journalism Review to The Guardian and Al Jazeera, have signed a pledge to begin referring to “climate change” as a “climate emergency” in their reporting.
“Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using the term ‘climate emergency’ in its coverage of climate change,” the publication announced Monday in a tweet to its 3.9 million followers touting “the impact we hope it can have throughout the media landscape.”
“We Are Living in a Climate Emergency, and We’re Going to Say So,” the headline of a Scientific American commentary published Monday declares. Claiming that that climate change is “the biggest environmental emergency to beset the earth in millennia,” the piece announces the name change:
“Given the circumstances, Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using the term ‘climate emergency’ in its coverage of climate change.”
Scientific American reports that the media organizations have signed a statement “coordinated by Covering Climate Now, a global journalism initiative with more than 400 media partners.”
Signatories include:
- Scientific American,
- Columbia Journalism Review,
- The Nation,
- The Guardian,
- Noticias Telemundo,
- Al Jazeera,
- Asahi Shimbun, and
- La Repubblica
“Why ‘emergency’? Because words matter. To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately,” the statement says.
“The media’s response to Covid-19 provides a useful model,” the statement advises, noting how media were able to control the narrative and compel Americans to comply with safety mandates by referring to the pandemic as an “emergency.”
While the statement does not expressly forbid the use of the term “climate change,” it requires that it be referred to as being a “climate emergency.”
Climate Coverage Now’s full statement of agreement to coordinate climate coverage is presented below:
COVERING CLIMATE NOW STATEMENT ON THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY
Journalism should reflect what the science says: the climate emergency is here.
It’s time for journalism to recognize that the climate emergency is here.
This is a statement of science, not politics.
Thousands of scientists—including James Hansen, the NASA scientist who put the problem on the public agenda in 1988, and David King and Hans Schellnhuber, former science advisers to the British and German governments, respectively— have said humanity faces a “climate emergency.”
Why “emergency”? Because words matter. To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately. Failure to slash the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will make the extraordinary heat, storms, wildfires, and ice melt of 2020 routine and could “render a significant portion of the Earth uninhabitable,” warned a recent Scientific American article.
The media’s response to Covid-19 provides a useful model. Guided by science, journalists have described the pandemic as an emergency, chronicled its devastating impacts, called out disinformation, and told audiences how to protect themselves (with masks, for example).
We need the same commitment to the climate story.
We, the undersigned, invite journalists and news organizations everywhere to add your name to this Covering Climate Now statement on the climate emergency.
Read more at NewsBusters
I think that they should start offering human sacrifices, themselves first. Self immolation by volcano, eg. Only if they are sincerely concerned, of course.
I like “The Climate Bogeyman” picture. I think they’re try to copy this … https://newtube.app/user/RAOB/aGqDEVt
Post an alarming picture of a disaster and claim its “Climate change”
Wearing a bit thin methinks.
Why not post a volcano or a nuclear mushroom cloud and claim that its climate change.
Why not ? a few years ago we were treated to an idiot CNN reporter stating “Two hurricanes and an earthquake (in Mexico) what more will it take to get President Trump to reverse his denialism of climate change !”
I understand the scientific ignorance of journalists in general – it was never part of their curricula.
But I don’t understand their ignorance of words that they use.
My favorite being “unprecedented” which they habitually use with reckless abandon whenever they write about climate change.
“To use the word ‘unprecedented’ shows you have expunged history and geology from your knowledge.” Prof. Ian Plimer.
A quick fact check will demonstrate that almost any such “unprecedented” value has occurred before.
I have seen reporters say things like
“this is unprecedented – we last saw temperatures like this in the 30’s”
or some such oxymoronic disambiguation.
Perhaps I have been too generous – maybe they really are simply ignorant on all counts and the profession simply attracts BA dropouts.
You just skewered a ton of people who richly deserve it. Ever notice how often million, billion and trillion get disrespected? If they can’t count, science? Forget about that.
Just like if everything is racist then nothing is racist, if every event is unprecedented then nothing is. Either these “journalists” are ignorant of climate history or they are lying and hope we are. Either way this is journalistic malpractice.
These A-Hole outfits afirm Joe Obiden andthemselves are utilizing the word “science” as a prop, and a tool, as morons!
‘Joe Obiden’ – good one! But you’re giving him too much credit. Joe is transparent, a mile wide and a sixteenth of an inch deep. Shame on the fools who thought that he was the one. They voted for a bigger stinkier swamp.
The cooperative effort of making their reporting the same shows a conspiracy. It also shows those involved in the conspiracy know it is necessary because the facts are not on their side. Otherwise all they would have to do is honestly report what is going on.
From the article, “To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately.” This is exactly what was being said in the 2002 and 2003 time frame. At that time it was the very last chance to save the planet.
Quite often, Fox News runs a bunch of leftist media pieces, the coordination is so obvious. Who is the coordinator?
Perhaps these news outlets and their journalists could have a look at the real science and they would then know that there is no emergency. Warmer periods not long ago, eg. Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Warm Period achieved with many fewer period and less CO2. Still we must understand that alarmist drivel sells news.
I’ve been seeing the climate emergency phrase for a few years. Here is an example.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/12/23/climateemergency/
Is this the same as the fake pandemic emergency? The only climate emergency is that in which you find your life threatened in the moment…tornadoes, blizzards, hurricanes, floods, lightening storms, etc. Otherwise, it’s all guesswork by people with agendas and the express desire to destroy mankind.