After 30 years with no debate and one predictable, repeated lecture the audience is switching off
Scott Whitlock at Newsbusters reports that one climate-worrier journalist revealed in a tweet that climate change kills the ratings. Another tweeter had prodded Liberal MSNBC journalist Chris Hayes to cover more on climate change. “Acting like there is nothing to be done is not excusable.”
In reply Chris Hayes lamented:
“almost without exception. every single time we’ve covered it’s been a palpable ratings killer. so the incentives are not great.”
Those crashing ratings would change overnight if news networks threw open the doors and pitted skeptics against believers in a real televised form of debate. The spectators would suddenly be able to pick sides — may the best person win. There would be genuine controversy. Sacred cows would be slaughtered, and for a while at least, climate change would rate well.
What stops the media doing this? Most editors are too scared of being called climate deniers if they dare allow the other side to speak. Look at the pushback when the BBC allowed Professor Bob Carter to do one interview:
The BBC betrayed its values by giving Professor Carter this climate platform
— John Ashton, The Guardian
MPs accuse BBC of creating ‘false balance’ on climate change with unqualified sceptics
– Tom Bawden, Independent.
BBC staff told to stop inviting cranks on to science programmes
— Sarah Knapton, The Telegraph
Cowards.
h/t David E.