Study Confirms: Fox News Creates Alternate Reality On Climate Science
November 14, 2011 1:00 pm ET by Shauna Theel
A new study confirms that Fox News systematically paints a distorted picture of climate change, with the effect of worsening political polarization. Published by The International Journal Of Press/Politics, the study examined primetime cable news broadcasts from 2007 and 2008, and found that Fox "discussed climate change most often," but "the tone of its coverage was disproportionately dismissive":
According to the study, "Fox broadcasts were more likely to include statements that challenged the scientific agreement on climate change, undermined the reality of climate change, and questioned its human causes."
Since 2008, Fox's climate coverage has only worsened.
As an internal email revealed, Fox's Washington managing editor Bill Sammon directed Fox journalists in December 2009 to cast doubt on the basic fact that the planet has warmed.
That same month, Fox News was aggressively promoting the false claim that the so-called "Climategate" controversy showed scientists "doctoring" data -- a claim that the network continues to repeat to this day.
Fox has also tried to manufacture a number of pseudo-scandals by distorting climate science research, misrepresenting or disavowing the temperature record, and seizing on any opportunity to distract from what the National Research Council has called "a strong, credible body of evidence" supporting manmade climate change.
The study also found that Fox hosted "a higher ratio of climate change doubters to believers as interview guests." These guests often don't know what they're talking about but are presented as climate experts. And Fox, a network that has made an annual tradition out of mocking global warming during winter storms, reveals its bias through both what it chooses to cover, and what it chooses to ignore.
Fox News is a loud, popular, and influential network that is reinforcing its viewers misconceptions about climate science. The study concluded that "to the extent that Fox News presents a different view of reality than does CNN or MSNBC, the knowledge and opinions of the networks' respective audiences will likewise tend to polarize."
Indeed, political party is now one of the strongest predictors of whether an individual thinks global warming is real. And the Republican party's stance on climate change has shifted considerably since 2007, when many prominent Republicans acknowledged global warming and called for government action to address the problem.
But the new study indicates that this polarization isn't hopeless, finding that "some Republicans, who as a group tend to be predisposed toward global warming skepticism, are less skeptical when exposed to information on the reality and urgency of climate change."
The question is: When will other news outlets and Fox's parent company News Corp. -- which claims to be concerned about climate change -- hold Fox News accountable for its well documented pattern of inaccurate coverage?
When we reinstate the Fairness Doctrine!
They'll do so anyway, whether or not the sometimes correct media goes after fox or not, of course. But for what passes for logic amongs the mainstream, it does follow "logical" thought.
Its still completely asinine of course, primarily because Fox will attack no matter what. But it does, in a twisted way, make 'sense.'
I wonder, will they do the same with nutrition now that Michelle Obama has made healthy eating an issue and has brought more attention to the issue? 20 years from now, are we going to see a future version of Fox News trotting out fake scientists telling us that fruits and vegetables don't do anything for us?
I wonder, what would happen if a liberal started promoting education as a--wait, nevermind.
I wonder what would happen if a liberal started promoting clean water as a--wait, nevermind.
I wonder what would happen if a liberal started promoting tolerance as a--wait, nevermind.
Well, EXCEPT when it's doctors on THEIR payroll: an example from this weekend when I was at a "friends"; a devout Fox-GOPTV, "conservative". Actually, she's an unfortunately angry & fearful woman who listened to Beck FAR too long. When I was there, a couple of doctors were talking about the effects of sweets given to children for disciplinary purposes, (as rewards), and how it leads to childhood & adult obesity. Just hours earlier she had been talking about how "liberals" are trying to "scare people" about corn syrup & how we want to FORCE people to stop eating sweets & FORCE children to not eat cupcakes at school as a "reward", "the children NEED these for positive enforcement since you liberals have made spanking a crime"
When I asked her about the show we had just seen on Fox, she said "yes, it's harmful to the kids, but at least they don't advocate taking our freedoms away as Michelle Obama has done". I asked her WHAT "freedoms" has MO taken away? "A BUNCH of them, you should watch Fox, they'll tell you!!"
A Brick Wall. I went home.
They are "THE Balance" which supposedly means they provide the "other side" of the "debate" - a debate that they create by contriving the other side.
The mainstream networks are fully aware of this but either don't want to confront them, or don't know how to do it without stirring up a hornet's nest of trouble, ie: what standards would have to be established to prevent Fox from lying or misleading? Who would enforce these standards? Personally, I don't think it is such a big problem, since the Fairness Doctrine worked fairly well.
But, I am not optimistic, given that the MSM don't even have the courage to point out the crazystupid talk coming from most conservative leaders.
It's not fair and balanced to give both views equal weight if one of the views is bull (expletive deleted) droppings.
Inverted intellectual snobbery is not a new phenomenon, what is new is the way in which FNC has managed to use its medium to harness that element and to proselytise anti-intelectualism a a "Godly" virtue.
Trying to debate with a Fox fan is like trying to have a rational discussion with a religious cult member.
If FNC and its fellow travellers were to shut down tomorrow it would make little difference (particularly as seemingly every half-witted loon has access to a computer terminal) as the celebration of ignorance and stupidity would continue with all its zealotry.
What is needed is for those who are not members of the cult of bigotry and ignorance to fight back - first in the schools and then in the universities - including taking on so-called universities that promote junk science and exposing them for the academic frauds that they are.
Mr. Willard has stated again and again that all of the pictures that you see of the Earth's so-called roundness had been photoshopped. He has a challenge to anyone claiming that the earth is round to produce satisfactory evidence. He has also stated that he will pay $.50 to anyone who will show that the earth is not flat. He has been a regular contributor on Fox news for some months. Burglary or Lies--Making Money as a Paid Fox Contributor.
How much reporting does this issue get on the other networks? Hardly anything--and according to the latest Rasmussen poll, Americans want to know why. "The American people will wake up. President Obama will be a one-term president because he ignores this issue," so say Ann Coulter and Dick Morris, both paid by the Flat Earth Society as consultants, but they would endorse its views even if they weren't paid, they say.
Oh he will not speak in favor of it. Not in public. But he also doesnt condemn it the way others do. He simply does not discuss it at all.
And thats a fantastic example of the rightwing mind set. They disagree a fair bit on certain issues, but dare not speak those issues names.