By AUDREY WINKELSAS<\/p>\n
Being fair and balanced is a dogma of journalism. But in an attempt to offer balanced reporting, journalists may in fact introduce inaccuracy and deception.<\/p>\n
There is a consensus amongst scientists about climate change. According to climate.nasa.gov<\/a>, 97 percent of scientists believe that global warming trends are the result of human activity.<\/p>\n If journalists feel they must have balance in their stories, who does that leave them to turn to for the opposition? Well, not scientists.<\/p>\n Quoting politicians on the scientific evidence surrounding climate change is committing the fallacy of inappropriate expertise. Rick Santorum remarked that scientific evidence cannot even withstand common sense, sarcastically saying, \u201cman-made carbon dioxide — a gas that humans exhale and plants need to live, a gas that represents less than 0.1 percent of the atmosphere — is a dangerous pollutant threatening to overheat the world.\u201d<\/p>\n The truth is that although in terms of percentages the amount of CO2 <\/sub>in the atmosphere is small, it is very potent and even trace amounts can have disastrous effects.<\/p>\n So let\u2019s leave it to the experts. We wouldn\u2019t ask Albert Einstein for commentary on comparative politics, would we?<\/p>\n It is completely acceptable to consult and quote politicians on policy issues and economic issues surrounding global warming. But our discussions with them should stop there.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By AUDREY WINKELSAS Being fair and balanced is a dogma of journalism. But in an attempt to offer balanced reporting, journalists may in fact introduce inaccuracy and deception. There is a consensus amongst scientists about climate change. According to climate.nasa.gov, … Continue reading