United States news media and climate change in the era of US President Trump

Park, David J.

doi:10.1002/ieam.2011

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The distinctive patterns of US media coverage of climate change have also been noted elsewhere. 129 Methods and data sources are described in full in the 2017 Lancet Countdown report 2 and in the appendix. The analysis has been enhanced both by the addition of a third national newspaper (the NYT) and by examining media engagement in health and climate change in the context of the wider coverage of climate change; further analyses are also presented in the appendix.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2018 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: shaping the health of nations for centuries to come

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decreasing labour productivity, increased capacity for the transmission of diseases such as dengue fever, malaria, and cholera, and threats to food security provide early warning of compounding negative health and nutrition effects if temperatures continue to rise. Adaptation, planning, and resilience for health Global inertia in adapting to climate change persists, with a mixed response from national governments since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015. More than half of global cities surveyed expect climate change to seriously compromise public health infrastructure, either directly, with extremes of weather disrupting crucial services, or indirectly, through the overwhelming of existing services with increased burdens of disease (indicator 2.2). Globally, spending for climate change adaptation remains well below the $100 billion per year commitment made under the Paris Agreement. Within this annual spending, only 3•8% of total development spending committed through formal UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) mechanisms is dedicated to human health (indicator 2.8). This low investment in Panel 1: Progress towards the recommendations of the 2015 Lancet Commission on health and climate change In 2015, the Lancet Commission made ten policy recommendations. Of these ten recommendations, the Lancet Countdown is measuring progress on the following: Recommendation 1: invest in climate change and public health research Since 2007, the number of published articles on health and climate change in scientific journals has increased by 182% (indicator 5.2). Recommendation 2: scale up financing for climate-resilient health systems Spending on direct health adaptation as a proportion of total adaptation spending increased in 2017 to 4•8% (£11•68 billion), which is an increase in absolute and relative terms from the previous year (indicator 2.7). Health-related adaptation spending (including disaster response and food and agriculture) was estimated at 15•2% of total adaptation spend. Although this national-level spending is increasing, climate financing for mitigation and adaptation remains well below the US$100 billion per year committed in the Paris Agreement (indicator 2.8). Recommendation 3: phase out coal-fired power Coal consumption remains high, but continued to decline in 2017, a trend which is largely driven by China's decreased reliance and continued investment in renewable energy (indicators 3.2 and 3.3). The Powering Past Coal Alliance (an alliance of 23 countries including the UK, Italy, Canada, and France) was launched at the 23rd Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in December, 2017 (COP23), committing to phase out coal use by 2030 or earlier. Recommendation 4: encourage city-level low-carbon transition to reduce urban pollution In 2017, a new milestone was reached, with more than 2 million electric vehicles on the road, and with global per-capita electricity consumption for road transport increasing by 13% from 2013 to 2015 (indicator 3.6). C...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2018 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: shaping the health of nations for centuries to come

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the latter case, media's provision of so-called 'false balance' not only provides avenues for unsupported contrarian opinions, but also obscures the degree to which genuine expert consensus exists on phenomena like climate change (Koehler 2016;Merkley 2020;Park 2018). For example, a significant driver of the Covid-19 infodemic seems to have been that the overwhelming majority of Trump's baseless claims were not presented in a context where fact checking took place (Evanega et al n.d.), obscuring the degree to which expert consensus was aligned against Trump's unfounded claims, creating an environment where Trump's claims seemed more reasonable than they objectively were.…”

Section: The Media's Effect On Epistemic Nihilismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Response to Epistemic Nihilism

Wright

2021

Postdigital Science and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter develops an account of epistemic nihilism-roughly, the rejection of truth's intrinsic or instrumental value in favor of statements that reject or obscure truth to secure an advantage for the speaker-by examining three instances of such nihilism: lying, bullshit, and trolling. It further argues that epistemic nihilism, exacerbated by changes in the media landscape, can pose a significant threat to liberal democratic institutions and ideals by undermining the democratic ideal of good faith engagement on a level playing field, while also encouraging undemocratic actions (e.g., terrorism) among interlocutors who take the nihilist's claims seriously. Finally, this chapter argues that in extreme cases, we are justified in denying epistemic nihilists a platform from which to speak by drawing a parallel with vexatious litigant laws that deny individuals the right to petition courts for redress on the grounds that abuse of that right results in significant harm to both individuals and the legal system itself.

show abstract

“…Increasingly, expertise is denigrated and treated as though it is of no greater value than any other point of view, with science denialism and the use of anti‐intellectual rhetoric by elites to win popular support becoming more common in many parts of the world (Grundmann, ; Hansson, ; McCarthy, ). It has now become commonplace to see politicians and policymakers, and the media that supports them, challenging independent scientists’ motives and actively denying and mocking scientific evidence, something exemplified by the Trump administration in the USA, which continues to ignore climate scientists’ warnings that anthropogenic climate change will hurt the US economy and risk lives (Allen, McAleer, & Mc Hardy Reid, ; Fredrickson et al., ; Park, ).…”

Section: Science and Ecology Under Attack?mentioning

confidence: 99%