In case assistant professor Perry Parks of Michigan State missed it, most journalists who write about the climate scam are completely biased, as they are on most issues
Why journalists shouldn’t be neutral on climate change
The immediacy and the stakes of human-driven climate change have never been clearer. Yet journalists reporting on climate-driven disasters are still pulling punches in their coverage. They often don’t explicitly invoke climate change in their reporting and even more rarely do they identify the primary culprit behind it: the human consumption of fossil fuels, egged on by oil and gas companies that have long known better.
Journalists cherish their performance of neutrality when reporting on controversial issues. But this commitment to appearing “balanced” — even when one side relies on evidence and the other is making things up — has come at a profound cost. It’s led major news outlets to cover what should be the science story of our time through the lens of politics, resulting in a delayed, diminutive planetary response to the once slowly, and now rapidly, accelerating climate emergency.
Journalistic neutrality posits that it’s possible to approach a news story without filtering choices through some system of values: about what’s right and wrong, true and false, important and trivial, “normal” and deviant. But this long-held reporting norm is a fallacy. Contemporary media critics such as Jay Rosen and Lewis Raven Wallace have aptly argued that all communication originates in “a view from somewhere”: We are inevitably influenced by our experiences, our families, our peers and our moral commitments, and it’s more productive to recognize and acknowledge these commitments than to delude ourselves or (as journalists often do) overrepresent views we find harmful just to demonstrate impartiality.
This is what students are treated to in journalism school. They are taught to be biased. Impartial. Advocates. Activists. Hence why we see what we see in the news. How few treat the climate crisis (scam) as something to question.
There’s only one way for journalists to minimize harm around climate change — and that’s to fight it.
They are no longer journalists at that point. But, then, most journalists/reporters has stopped being such decades ago.
Read: Professor Of Journalism Says Journalists Shouldn’t Be Neutral When It Comes To Climate Doom »
What was supposed to be Donald J. Trump’s triumphant return to a social-media platform central to his presidency was marred by glitches on Monday night, when a livestreamed conversation on X between Mr. Trump and its owner, Elon Musk, was significantly delayed by technical issues.
As the impact of climate change on communities increases, 
On the morning
You probably have been hearing phrases like “climate crisis,” “climate emergency” or “climate justice” more often lately as people try to get across the urgent risks and consequences of climate change. The danger is real, but is using this language actually persuasive?
Vice President Kamala Harris has displayed greater empathy for the people of Gaza than both President Joe Biden and Former President Donald Trump, according to Salima Suswell, the founder and chief executive of the Black Muslim Leadership Council Fund. In a recent interview with NBC, Suswell praised Harris for her calls for a ceasefire and her efforts to ensure aid reaches Gaza, noting, “She has repeatedly called for a ceasefire and has shown deep empathy toward civilian life.”
Stirring the leaves of a shrub on his farm in Kyparissia, western Greece, Panos Adamopoulos spied the first soon-to-be-ripe mangoes — his share of a state experiment against climate change.
Vice President Kamala Harris told Las Vegas, Nevada, she will copy Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s “no tax on tips” campaign promise, but the Trump campaign is exposing Harris for hypocrisy on the issue — not just the theft of it.
