Carlin Economics and Science

With emphasis on climate change

The Extreme Politicization of the News Media May Have Started on Climate, but Is Now Spreading to Larger Political Subjects in the US

In recent decades it has become increasingly evident that the mainstream/liberal press has become more and more sympathetic towards the so-called “consensus” viewpoint on climate change. They have become less and less sympathetic to skeptic viewpoints and now hardly mentioned them. I became very conscious of the huge changes in American journalism in recent decades when I became interested in climate change.

Good journalism involves reporting events and observations rather than selecting a general viewpoint and trying to persuade readers that the viewpoint is correct by carefully selecting and interpreting only observations and events supporting that viewpoint, whether the observations actually support the viewpoint or not. I fear that more and more news media have gone beyond misrepresenting various aspects of the evidence for climate change, reporting only observations and events supporting “consensus” climate change, and engaging in ad hominem attacks on people who hold other viewpoints.

The Spread of the Same Propaganda Techniques to Other Political Issues

Major news media now appear to be increasingly using many of the same techniques for reporting other controversial news areas, particularly politics. One reason for this is that ever larger sums are being spent by partisans to pay for this. This may reflect in part the rise of wealthy liberal high tech industries that seek to use their money and control of some aspects of news transmission to shape the news that the the less aware reader receives.

Now there has always been propaganda disguised as journalism, but it has usually been limited to a few publications and a few subjects, but not on the present scale involving many if not most newspapers, many magazines, and most television news programs.

The differences in the selection and treatment of Democratic and Republican Party viewpoints in the news media have become increasingly pronounced. As in the case of climate change issues, the mainstream liberal media can immediately be identified by their political orientation without reading actual content, since it is all very similar. It is as if the basic Democratic Party viewpoint is carefully coordinated among the news media, and it probably is, just as it appears to be in climate “news.”

In brief, American news media are now being polarized and politicized on Democratic/Republican Party issues just like started earlier on climate change. To experience the differences between the two viewpoints, readers may wish to watch say a CNN and a Fox News broadcast on the same evening.

In many cases, climate change articles use ad hominem arguments to attack scientists on the “consensus” side rather than directly questioning the viewpoints of climate skeptics. Liberal news media are headed in the same direction on major political issues, but so far less clearly than in the case of climate “news.”

All this threatens the usefulness of the news media to accurately portray different viewpoints on controversial political issues. The news media are increasingly acting like captive propaganda organizations for particular groups and viewpoints. As a result they are becoming ever more biased and less useful for the general reader. I fear that this may be partially the result of the bitter war over climate change, which may have been the proving grounds for the political party propaganda wars now being waged on many issues such as alleged Russian collusion and the Mueller report, and immigration. I believe that this is definitely an unfavorable development for American democracy where public opinion on critical public issues plays a very important role and can determine public policy even in highly technical issues such as climate change.

Larger and Longer Term Implications for Democracies

Increasing politicization and polarization of politics and climate “science” do not bode well for the ability of democracies to reach sound decisions on political and particularly scientific issues in an optimal manner. But there are no real alternatives. If groups are willing to spend enormous sums to promote their preferred biased “news media,” who are trying to influence public policy rather than providing useful news and information, major errors may be made by the voting public. This is what has been happening in the area of climate change for several decades.

The cost of backing the climate scam as desired by the climate-industrial complex is clearly enormous, but less than the cost of making bad political judgments that could change the whole political direction of the United States. But the two are actually related. The climate scam is what the “Democratic Socialists” want to promote–have the government determine what is to be done–even if it does not need to be done in the first place. The important thing seems to be that this is to be done top down by government, not bottom up by a democratic political process.

Share this Post:

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
7 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Richard Greene

This is an excellent article on a very important subject.

My only regret is waiting several weeks to read it.

And now I’m saving a copy.

Just beau

The Russian collusion hoax is usefully understood as a filibuster to hinder Trump working on his agenda.

The President needs to focus on his agenda and leave the Russian collusion hoaxers to Barr. Barr can follow the evidence where ever it leads and prosecute.

It’s a compliment to Trump that the democrats only want to fight him. They feel the pain that he inflicts on them.

Justbeau

Doctor Carlin has been impressed, negatively, by the madness of climate alarmism. And by the politization of much else, even topics outside the unfriendly confines of ecoscience.

What accounts for some of the things we deplore?

The decline of newspapers owing to loss of advertising.
Leftist intolerance of free speech and debate. Al Gore and company have hidden from debate about climate. Intolerance on college campuses.
Also leftists have a great lack of practical ideas to offer to society. open borders, hiding illegals, disrespect for law and for American citizens is not a good place to be at.

Yet elections get held and socialist candidates have to babble something to voters. Pack the court. Lower voting age. Open borders. Tax business. Save the world from nonexistent climate changes. Get rid of private health insurance. On and on. The March leftwards is a sign of idea impoverishment. And in their desperation to compete, untruths or silly ideas get over sold.

There is a remarkable imbalance between the two sides. Only the right has any commitment to honesty. Fox News reporting will sometimes be wrong, but it’s not intentionally wrong, on a multitude of topics. That owes to left wing reporters serving as shameless propaganda advocates for their politicians.

Democrats have nothing useful to contribute in Washington these days. They need to find new values, like supporting economic growth, tolerance and free speech, lowering government spending or taxes, defending the US, respecting science rather than using it dishonestly, respecting democracy rather than trying to subvert elections. Until they can Undergo an ethical revival and develop a few good ideas, they will remain in bad shape and the country will be hurt whenever they win office.

Just beau

Environmental science is particularly vulnerable to political biases, because environmental advocates seek political support.

Consider mathematics. Nobody argues some theorem is crucial to life on earth so spend trillions. Math is less amenable to political forces that is eco science.

It is disappointing the New York Times has been deeply biased in favor of climate alarmism. This is a choice made by this paper.

This bias has invited Trump to brand the Fake News and teach Americans that some news is dishonest. A positive outcome from the dishonesty of the Times.

It is to the credit of Fox News that it hires a few left wing reporters and opinion people.

It behooves readers to seek a diverse range of online opinions. One paper or news source should not be expected to know everything about everything. The web is a big place and can encompass thoughtful opinions. The web is a battleground for ideas.

It was much better for the loony left when the Times and Post were more respected. Now happily we can read the climate thoughts of Doctor Carlin on the web and become better educated.

JCalvertN(UK)

From elsewhere in today’s news. ” . . .the words of the late Udo Ulfkotte, a German journalist who revealed that he had published fake material fed to him by the CIA, claiming that this was common amongst mainstream journalists:
“Non-official cover occurs when a journalist is essentially working for the CIA, but it’s not in an official capacity. This allows you to create a partnership between your partner and your partner. The CIA will find young journalists and mentor them. Suddenly doors will open up, rewards will be given, and you know it, you owe your entire career to them. That’s essentially how it works. I was publishing articles under my own name written by agents of the CIA and other intelligence services, especially the German secret service. I was taught to lie, to betray and not to tell the truth to the public.”

Or we could mention the great Robert Perry:
“This perversion of principles – twisting information to fit a desired conclusion — became the modus vivendi of American politics and journalism. And those of us who insisted on defending journalistic principles of skepticism and even-handedness were more shunned by our colleagues, to hostility that first emerged on the right and by neoconservatives but eventually sucked into the progressive world as well… The demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia is just the most dangerous feature of this propaganda process — and this is where the neocons and the liberal interventionists most significantly are together. The US media approach to Russia is now virtually 100 percent propaganda.”

Steven H Yaskell

Seems as if the Euro-based leftist attacks on the USA – ongoing since the Cold War – are reaching the apotheosis of insanity and – as the Babyboomers who preach it age, a hoped-for end. The last of the evil blooms – environmental security (acid raid, COs, ozone layers etc.) – afoot since Kruschev, is unfolding into evil branches of the rest of the puke dreamed up by the Neo Left: sixteen sexes and their government-needed bathrooms, equal pay for doing nothing, “free” healthcare that will lead to Finland’s recent troubles,etc.

It’ll all die out here in the continuation of the Iroquois Confederacy known as the American federal republic.

Scroll to Top