Difference between revisions of "2007-08-05 Newsweek's Climate Editorial Screed Violates Basic Standards of Journalism"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (fixed broken internal link in short text)
(converted to v3; munged chars fixed)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<hide>
 
<hide>
<let name=data index=Date>2007-08-05</let>
+
{{page/link|article}}
<let name=data index=Author>Marc Morano</let>
+
[[title/short::Newsweek's Climate Editorial Screed Violates Basic Standards of Journalism]]
<let name=data index=Source>US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee</let>
+
</hide>
<let name=data index=Topics>\global warming denial\Newsweek</let>
+
* '''when''': [[when posted::2007-08-05]]
<let name=data index=URL>http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=38D98C0A-802A-23AD-48AC-D9F7FACB61A7</let>
+
* '''author''': [[author::Marc Morano]]
<let name=data index=Title>Newsweek's Climate Editorial Screed Violates Basic Standards of Journalism</let>
+
* '''source''': [[site::US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee]]
<let name=data index=TitlePlain>Newsweek's Climate Editorial Screed Violates Basic Standards of Journalism</let>
+
* '''topics''': [[topic::global warming denial]] [[topic::Newsweek]] [[topic::objectivity]] [[topic::global cooling]]
<let name=data index=Text><blockquote>
+
* '''link''': [[URL::http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=38D98C0A-802A-23AD-48AC-D9F7FACB61A7]]
<p>''[[Newsweek]]'' cover story of August 13, 2007 entitled, Truth About [[global warming denial|Denial]]contains very little that could actually be considered balanced, objective or fair by journalistic standards. (<s>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20122975/site/newsweek/page/0/ LINK]</s>)</p>
+
* '''title''': [[title::Newsweek's Climate Editorial Screed Violates Basic Standards of Journalism]]
 +
* '''summary''': [[Summary::&ldquo;''[[Newsweek]]'' Magazine's cover story of August 13, 2007 entitled, "The Truth About [[global warming denial|Denial]]" contains very little that could actually be considered balanced, [[objective]] or fair by journalistic standards.&rdquo;]]
 +
 
 +
<blockquote>
 +
<p>''[[Newsweek]]'' Magazine's cover story of August 13, 2007 entitled, "The Truth About [[global warming denial|Denial]]" contains very little that could actually be considered balanced, objective or fair by journalistic standards. (<s>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20122975/site/newsweek/page/0/ LINK]</s>)</p>
  
 
<p>The one-sided editorial, masquerading as a "news article," was written by [[Sharon Begley]] with [[Eve Conant]], [[Sam Stein]] and [[Eleanor Clift]] and [[Matthew Philips]] and purports to examine the "well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change."</p>
 
<p>The one-sided editorial, masquerading as a "news article," was written by [[Sharon Begley]] with [[Eve Conant]], [[Sam Stein]] and [[Eleanor Clift]] and [[Matthew Philips]] and purports to examine the "well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change."</p>
  
<p>The only problem is -- ''Newsweek'' knew better. Reporter Eve Conant, who interviewed Senator [[James Inhofe]] (R-Okla.), the Ranking Member of the [[US Environment and Public Works Committee|Environment & Public Works Committee]], was given all the latest data proving conclusively that it is the proponents of man-made global warming fears that enjoy a monumental funding advantage over the skeptics.  (A whopping $50 BILLION to a paltry $19 MILLION and some change for skeptics Yes, that is BILLION to MILLION - see below)</p>
+
<p>The only problem is -- ''Newsweek'' knew better. Reporter Eve Conant, who interviewed Senator [[James Inhofe]] (R-Okla.), the Ranking Member of the [[US Environment and Public Works Committee|Environment & Public Works Committee]], was given all the latest data proving conclusively that it is the proponents of man-made global warming fears that enjoy a monumental funding advantage over the skeptics.  (A whopping $50 BILLION to a paltry $19 MILLION and some change for skeptics &ndash; Yes, that is BILLION to MILLION - see below)</p>
  
<p>This in Newsweek follows the October 23, 2006 article which admitted the error of their ways in the when they predicted dire [[global cooling]]. (See: Senator Inhofe Credited For Prompting Newsweek Admission of Error on 70's Predictions of Coming Ice Age [http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Facts&ContentRecord_id=616FD8F4-3292-44B9-BAE4-422E8C8E2DF9 LINK])</p>
+
<p>This week's "news article" in Newsweek follows the Magazine's October 23, 2006 article which admitted the error of their ways in the 1970's when they predicted dire [[global cooling]]. (See: Senator Inhofe Credited For Prompting Newsweek Admission of Error on 70's Predictions of Coming Ice Age &ndash; [http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Facts&ContentRecord_id=616FD8F4-3292-44B9-BAE4-422E8C8E2DF9 LINK])</p>
 
</blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
 
* '''To investigate''':
 
* '''To investigate''':
 
** Where did they get those dollar figures from? (How much do you want to bet they're trying to claim the entire budget of the UN as "global warming advocacy"?) The only backup for this claim seems to be [http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21920043-27197,00.html an article] by noted Australian [[global warming denial|denial]]ist [[Bob Carter]], which makes the claim without any backup, and a $30 billion figure from an [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249598,00.html article] on the [[Fox News]] web site which cites that amount for "climate- and alternative energy-related research" &ndash; as if all such research is automatically advocacy of global warming (are they admitting their awareness that true research does in fact show the validity of GW, so any scientific research is essentially advocacy?) and as if ''research'' on any topic could be equated to ''advocacy'' of that research's findings.
 
** Where did they get those dollar figures from? (How much do you want to bet they're trying to claim the entire budget of the UN as "global warming advocacy"?) The only backup for this claim seems to be [http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21920043-27197,00.html an article] by noted Australian [[global warming denial|denial]]ist [[Bob Carter]], which makes the claim without any backup, and a $30 billion figure from an [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249598,00.html article] on the [[Fox News]] web site which cites that amount for "climate- and alternative energy-related research" &ndash; as if all such research is automatically advocacy of global warming (are they admitting their awareness that true research does in fact show the validity of GW, so any scientific research is essentially advocacy?) and as if ''research'' on any topic could be equated to ''advocacy'' of that research's findings.
</let>
+
{{page/link/footer}}
 
 
 
</hide><if not flag=including><let name=docat val=1 /><noinclude>{{:project:code/show/link}}</noinclude></if>
 

Latest revision as of 20:51, 9 November 2019

Newsweek Magazine's cover story of August 13, 2007 entitled, "The Truth About Denial" contains very little that could actually be considered balanced, objective or fair by journalistic standards. (LINK)

The one-sided editorial, masquerading as a "news article," was written by Sharon Begley with Eve Conant, Sam Stein and Eleanor Clift and Matthew Philips and purports to examine the "well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change."

The only problem is -- Newsweek knew better. Reporter Eve Conant, who interviewed Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the Ranking Member of the Environment & Public Works Committee, was given all the latest data proving conclusively that it is the proponents of man-made global warming fears that enjoy a monumental funding advantage over the skeptics. (A whopping $50 BILLION to a paltry $19 MILLION and some change for skeptics – Yes, that is BILLION to MILLION - see below)

This week's "news article" in Newsweek follows the Magazine's October 23, 2006 article which admitted the error of their ways in the 1970's when they predicted dire global cooling. (See: Senator Inhofe Credited For Prompting Newsweek Admission of Error on 70's Predictions of Coming Ice Age – LINK)

  • To investigate:
    • Where did they get those dollar figures from? (How much do you want to bet they're trying to claim the entire budget of the UN as "global warming advocacy"?) The only backup for this claim seems to be an article by noted Australian denialist Bob Carter, which makes the claim without any backup, and a $30 billion figure from an article on the Fox News web site which cites that amount for "climate- and alternative energy-related research" – as if all such research is automatically advocacy of global warming (are they admitting their awareness that true research does in fact show the validity of GW, so any scientific research is essentially advocacy?) and as if research on any topic could be equated to advocacy of that research's findings.