Starting from what Alex Kirby has recently mentioned in his speech "What are climate correspondents for?" during the Climate Action Conference in Brussels I would like to ask all of you interested in climate change to share your ideas on how important is to cover the science aspect when covering climate change?
Is there sufficient science reported or is too scientific perhaps for the general public?
How do you achieve a fair and balanced approach in that limited space allocated to climate change stories?
In our TV Newsroom (and in everyone else's , I guess...) when we decide to produce a story for the environment we always ask for scientists' interviews. But , usually, scientists talk too much, use 'difficult' language and a huge amount of numbers... Then we're looking for just-a-simple-answer for our audience or readers.... So it's up to us, reporters, editors or correspondents, to make our stories documented and understandable at the same time... Not so easy, don't you think?
The science is the basis for all reporting on climate change; the challenge is to communicate the science in everyday language so that the audience understands the basics - and hopefully some of the nuances and intricacies too - without losing interest or getting turned off by jargon. Therein lies the essence of good reporting.
There is no single answer to this. I agree with Catalin that we have to differentiate between media type and format. The real challenge at the moment is to keep the subject in the news and in the public eye. As we get ready for Cancun, there is a striking difference between the mood this time last year and the mood now. The other question is whether focussing on science doesn't give people who are reluctant to take any action or make any changes to their lifestyle an "excuse" to carry on business as usual, hiding behind the claim that nothing is really proven and hoping there might be some scientific results that will give them justification to stay complacent.
By the way, do you colleagues in this group blog? Maybe there would be some interest in linking our climate blogs. Mine is at http://blogs.dw-world.de/ice-blog also to be found on our dw environment page www.dw-world.de/environment.
"Our media has a responsibility to educate the public on issues affecting the planet. Covering the climate crisis only as a political issue shields from public view the vital scientific and moral elements of the debate", he concludes.
Another politician blaming "the media"? Sure, Mr Gore, we have a huge responsibility. But the politicians who rule the world have got to get things moving on this. And PLEASE differentiate. "The Media" are very diverse. I agree, the debate has huge and vital scientific and moral elements. But that can't be allowed to distract attention from the urgent need for political action.
India and China agreed yesterday to make a fresh push to resolve a long-running border dispute in a remote Himalayan region, on the second day of Chinese premier Li Keqiang's visit to New Delhi.Mr Li, making his first foreign trip since taking office, said Beijing was determined to build up trust with New Delhi as he and a team of ministers signed a series of agreements with India.His host, Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh, also stressed he regarded a good bilateral relationship as crucial…See More