[LINK] Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

[Eleanor Lister]

Jan Whitaker wrote:
> At 01:56 PM 3/02/2007, Rick Welykochy wrote:
>> (B) The survey of popular media (newspapers, magazines, TV) found that
>>     approx 56% of the articles examined disputed the veracity of the
>>     global warming (and also tended to use the term climate change
>> instead --
>>     spin). The reason for this discrepancy? An active campaign funded
>>     by vested interests (Big Oil) to discredit the theory through
>> popular
>>     culture and media.
>
> Or is this nearly 50% alternative view an example of MSM (blog speak
> for mainstream media - had to look it up myself recently and decided
> to use it more often) trying to be 'unbiased'? The concept of having
> 'equal time' does nothing for showing the public that there is
> weighting toward one view or another.
>
> The global warming v climate change language is a Bush White House
> thing. I heard somewhere that the US administration always changes it
> to 'climate change' because 'global warming' was seen to be too
> alarming. Change is thought to be a neutral word.
>
> Jan
>

many people say "climate change" because it needs to be emphasised that
warming is not the only effect that is at hand, things like hurricanes,
earthquakes, changed ocean currents and many other effects have various
linkages beyond greenhouse.

some of these are caused by the massive pollution and overfishing of our
oceans, which for most people is out-of-sight, out-of-mind, the hole in
the ozone layer, clearfelling of forests, mass extinctions of wildlife,
and so on.

to just say "global warming" narrows the debate to a scale the Exxon
spin-doctors can handle fairly easily, and allows them wiggle room to
propose bandaid solutions like Nucular Powa, with the insanity that
follows it.

regards,
    EL

------------
Eleanor Ashley Lister
South Sydney Greens
http://ssg.nsw.greens.org.au
webmistress at ssg.nsw.greens.org.au