What About Pearce?

By Keith Kloor | June 15, 2010 2:55 pm

I’m surprised Tobis didn’t include Fred Pearce in his little Broderite grouping. BTW, I’m just a piker compared to Revkin (and Pearce), both who are far more distinguished than me.

Speaking of Pearce, a Bishop Hill reader provides a nice dispatch of a recent Pearce lecture at the Royal Institution. As for the Jay Rosen meta post (which he is famous for) that Tobis references, count me in the This is complicated! camp.

MORE ABOUT: Journalism
  • http://twitter.com/mtobis @mtobis

    Um, so Rosen says he's got your number. I say it fits the evidence pretty well. It's an elaborated and plausible theory of difference-splitting. I say the whole ugly phenomenon of climategatemongering is due to the press refusing to check out a story and refusing to examine its own role. You respond by changing the subject to Fred Pearce!

    So can I take it that Rosen is right, then?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/keithkloor keithkloor

    Um, Michael, Rosen's theory is about political journalism. Science journalism is a different animal (yes, of course, there are similarities).

    As for Pearce, how was that changing the subject related to your post? I was merely pointing out, that by the logic of your argument, he's someone that should be thrown in that Broderite group, esp since he more than all journos covering climate matters, took climategate seriously.

  • Steve Bloom

    Errors are not what makes the Broderist, Keith. Also, don't forget that what seems to have lit Pearce's fire was his being fingered as the one responsible for the 2350 to 2035 transposition (not to imply that he had anything to do with the 2035 business ending up in the AR4).

  • http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/ Tim Lambert

    Keith, Rosen seems to have described you perfectly. For example, “Regression to a Phony Mean” is precisely what I’ve been saying about you here. Which of Rosen’s six terms do you think don’t describe you?

  • http://twitter.com/mtobis @mtobis

    Climategatemongering is political journalism about science, not science journalism, in my opinion. Much reporting on climate is only peripherally or symbolically about science. This is why Rosen's description is so surprisingly apt.

  • dhogaza

    Michael Tobis beat me to it. What he said.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


Collide-a-Scape is an archived Discover blog. Keep up with Keith's current work at http://www.keithkloor.com/

About Keith Kloor

Keith Kloor is a NYC-based journalist, and an adjunct professor of journalism at New York University. His work has appeared in Slate, Science, Discover, and the Washington Post magazine, among other outlets. From 2000 to 2008, he was a senior editor at Audubon Magazine. In 2008-2009, he was a Fellow at the University of Colorado’s Center for Environmental Journalism, in Boulder, where he studied how a changing environment (including climate change) influenced prehistoric societies in the U.S. Southwest. He covers a wide range of topics, from conservation biology and biotechnology to urban planning and archaeology.


See More

Collapse bottom bar