<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Reality Base &#187; journalism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/tag/journalism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase</link>
	<description>A blog about science, politics, and how to let each help the other without compromising them both.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:00:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Say It Ain&#8217;t So: New Yorker Publishes Misleading Climate Piece</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2009/04/01/say-it-aint-so-new-yorker-publishes-misleading-climate-piece/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2009/04/01/say-it-aint-so-new-yorker-publishes-misleading-climate-piece/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:19:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Melissa Lafsky</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[journalism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2009/04/01/say-it-aint-so-new-yorker-publishes-misleading-climate-piece/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We&#8217;d expect this sort of thing from the New York Times Magazine perhaps, but the New Yorker? Last week&#8217;s issue features an opinion piece by staffer David Owen titled &#8220;Economy vs. Environment,&#8221; in which he bemoans the apparent contradiction between our economy and the environment, and warns of the economic &#8220;abyss&#8221; that awaits us all [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;d expect this sort of thing <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2009/03/26/new-york-times-magazine-on-freeman-dyson-climate-change-skeptic/" target="_blank">from the <em>New York Times Magazine</em></a> perhaps, but the <em>New Yorker</em>? Last week&#8217;s issue features an opinion piece by staffer David Owen titled &#8220;<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2009/03/30/090330taco_talk_owen" target="_blank">Economy vs. Environment</a>,&#8221; in which he bemoans the apparent contradiction between our economy and the environment, and warns of the economic &#8220;abyss&#8221; that awaits us all if we keep encouraging/demanding that people stop buying gas-guzzlers and commuting 80 miles each way. With not a scrap of cited evidence, he discounts alternative energy with a flick of the hand:</p>
<blockquote><p>American dependence on fossil fuels isn’t going to end any time soon: solar panels and wind turbines provided only about a half per cent of total U.S. energy consumption in 2007, and they don’t work when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing.</p></blockquote>
<p>and poo-poos the entire green jobs initiative with an argument that makes little to no sense:</p>
<blockquote><p>Creating &#8220;green jobs,&#8221; a key component of the agenda, is different from creating new jobs, since green jobs, if they’re truly green, displace non-green jobs—wind-turbine mechanics instead of oil-rig roughnecks—probably a zero-sum game, as far as employment is concerned.</p></blockquote>
<p>Luckily, over at Grist, Joseph Romm, the editor of <a href="http://climateprogress.org/">Climate Progress</a> and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, has taken up the gauntlet, delivering a <a href="http://beta.grist.org/article/2009-03-25-new-yorker-says-denier-TPs/" target="_blank">righteous smackdown</a> that addresses many of the problems with the piece.</p>
<p><span id="more-433"></span></p>
<p>But the trend of major publications tossing out oversimplified, under-proven information and faulty analysis is troubling, to say the least. As just about any climate change scientist will tell you (possibly in a hysterical shriek) the time for action—not endless debate, not rehashing talking points—is now. Making sure the public has access to the most accurate and up-to-date information should be a priority for the media—not spewing apocalyptic prophecies about how we&#8217;ll all be sucked into an abyss. Inaction will <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127003.400-new-york-will-bear-brunt-of-uneven-sea-level-rise.html" target="_blank">bring that result</a> whether we like it or not—so we may as well try action.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/realitybase/2009/04/01/say-it-aint-so-new-yorker-publishes-misleading-climate-piece/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>957</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
