Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Red top in the morning, global sheperd's warning

A nice link I have been sent: ‘Ye Olde Hot Aire’*: reporting on human contributions to climate change in the UK tabloid press

Brilliant, but shame it did not have a management summary!

Addendum -

No sooner posted than sorted. A kind addition from a fellow forum member. A lot better, but still, a mouthful:

Environ. Res. Lett. 3 (2008) 024002 (8pp)

This letter explores daily print media coverage of climate change in four United Kingdom (UK) tabloid newspapers: The Sun (and News of the World), Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Express (and Sunday Express), and the Mirror (and Sunday Mirror).

Through examinations of content in articles over the last seven years (2000–2006), triangulated with semi-structured interviews of journalists and editors, the study finds that UK tabloid coverage significantly diverged from the scientific consensus that humans
contribute to climate change. Moreover, there was no consistent increase in the percentage of accurate coverage throughout the period of analysis and across all tabloid newspapers, and these findings are not consistent with recent trends documented in United States and UK ‘prestige press’ or broadsheet newspaper reporting. Findings from interviews indicate that inaccurate reporting may be linked to the lack of specialist journalists in the tabloid press. This study therefore contributes to wider discussions of socio-economic inequality, media and the environment. Looking to newspapers that are consumed by typically working class readership, this article contributes to ongoing investigations related to what media representations mean for ongoing science–policy interactions as well as potentialities for public engagement.

Sorry if I missed it if it was in there. Sadly not always the time to go through all such things in detail, which is kind of the whole problem suggested. Though I suspect many tabloid editors do go through... and then choose to take certain directions anyway.

There is of course the base stance being taken as read as well. I'd also note in passing that though the audience for this is specialist, there may be an argument to try and package key points in a way to get the desired message across a tad more easily.

My old mantra of the fault being not so much with those you don't convince, but with you for failing to convince them.

At a loss for... anything really

For the second time today, I have noted a strange absence of activity where I would have expected... hoped for more.

One was a self-serving piece of tosh from Tony Blair, upon which I decided to make a brief comment if only to highlight that all it warranted was a brief comment (OK, none would have been more eloquent, but I don't believe I was going to be the only one, and so in true Prisoner's Dilemma fashion broke ranks first - at least the consequences of that action will not be as serious as other compromises (that have been) made).

Now there is this: Ten green bloggers

But so far (10.48am, mind-morning)... nothing. Maybe there is nothing to say. I must say I am a bit stumped and so have opted, for now, to write nothing (well, excepting this). But this a big issue, with some big names... in the biggest online UK green media-friendly blog.

It says 'The next stage of the campaign is spreading the word. The blogosphere is already buzzing with the story'. O....k.

Thing is, I guess by sharing I have done a bit, but I am not sure what it is, and without going back or re-reading am not too sure what that might be anyway. Oh... this might help:


Is that the best ways forward? Hmmmn. I noted it more because of how it hadn't been noted. Anyway, it seems worthy enough (though I will need to assess what is being asked. I might sign up for the newsletter, and hope this will not be counted as offering support... yet... for anything that I might not be so keen on, by simply showing an interest). Anyway... enjoy.

I'll pop a note in to come back subsequently to check and see. Maybe it's a slow burner.

CATEGORY - Metering

Usage based charges. What could be fairer? Or better to help reduce consumption?

I have dabbled in the past (check the labels below), but feel this needs be given its own section... and sub-sections.


Guardian - Pay as you glow? - A vexed issue, evidently. And yet again, something superficially simple seems more convoluted between consumer, corporations and those who would govern.

Guardian - Shock tactics



Sharing the love

I stumbled across this from our ex-PM.

Blair: what my charity work taught me

Ignoring, for now, the content, it seemed a pity that, at time of writing, no one had written a thing, I thought I'd add a few words of encouragement and appreciation as only one truly inspired by his words and deeds, past and present, can be: Good luck with all of that.

I am sure it will be money well spent. Well, in know it's charity and all, but there will be expenses, etc, to cover first. And 7 mortgages plus daily global criss-crossing don't cover themselves, you know.