It’s clear The New York Times has its mind made up about climate change and the debate is over — at least in their newsroom.
Speaking on a journalism panel on April 30, International climate change reporter Somini Sengupta boiled down scientific dissent on the subject of climate change to the insulting and loaded phrase “three climate deniers.”
“What we don’t do is engage in a false debate. We don’t turn to the three climate science deniers on every story. And no one has ever asked me as a reporter to do that. We don’t categorically do that,” she said.
Sengupta was one of several journalists participating in Columbia Journalism Review’s event demanding the media “transform” coverage of climate change.
She said the job of the “Times climate team” was “to make it compelling, to make it rich, to make it personal. That is what we do on our team.”
“We try to make personal connections. We try to move people. Into identifying with someone on the other side of the world or the other side of the country, feeling the human toll of climate change. And that’s principally what I do,” Sengupta continued.
Sounds like propaganda.
Before she was introduced, panel moderator Mark Hertsgaard of the far-left Nation magazine complimented her and the Times for doing climate reporting well. The Nation, The Guardian, CJF and WNYC were listed as sponsors for the event.
Although she claimed the paper covers “real debates that happen in the science [and policy],” her admission made it clear the Times censors dissent on the issue as it deems fit.
Promoting journalistic activism in this way (as the entire conference was designed to do), is a far cry from the unbiased, fair-minded and objective reporting it should be.
Conference speakers also included representatives from The Washington Post, MSNBC and activists like anti-capitalist Naomi Klein.
Read more at NewsBusters
The very use of the terms “believers” and “Deniers” speaks not to science, but to a Cult. And if I am labeled a Denier regarding a Cult, I will wear that label proudly.
You ar right they are not journalists but activists,and there is a big different.
The NY Times is over . How many tree’s have been turned into the NY Times and disposed of within 12 hours of purchase ? All the propaganda worth printing is where they have fallen .
I feel sorry for the people who currently work there .
These people don’t understand that the global temperature hasn’t gone up in 21 years. They seem to ignore the increased snow. Just answer this question “If we are experiencing global warming why hasn’t the temperature gone up? Don’t quote me that 2015 or 2017 were the hottest years on record because they were spikes during those years and can be accounted for by a strong El Nino. Today is cooler than it was at the peak of the global warming in 1998. Think Eddy Grand Solar Minimum and at the end of the year ask why food prices are rising?”
Food prices rising, and food production. I know, let’s cut CO2 plant food from the atmosphere. CO2 = bad. Unless you want to live and eat. But nevermind that.
Journalists that label dissenters as “deniers” and exclude their viewpoint are not journalists. Scientists that do the same are not scientists.
She knows what her job is, and she wants to keep it.
AGW is ripe for public scientific debate. When Al Gore declared that the debate was over, curious minds should have asked why.
The real question is, should users of fossil fuels be financially punished, taxed, and the proceeds distributed to unspecified causes?
The New York Pravda and All the Lies that’s Fit to Print more proof of the leftists bias of the M.S. Media this is the same liberal rag that failed to ever tell its readers that Stalin,Mao and Castro were mass murderers and Mao was the worst