comedy, politics

How all “debates” on things that are actual facts should be conducted

John Oliver demonstrates with this debate on climate change:

Incidentally, I still remember Bill Nye from the great Seattle sketch show Almost Live.

journalism, politics

Three sides on climate change? Can’t have that!

Andrew Sullivan rounds up a bit of legitimate right-wing concern about climate change.

The problem is that having conversatives bringing forth their climate-change ideas will confound the media, which can’t handle more than two “sides.” The two “sides” on climate change are currently defined as “please do something about this before the planet goes phhhht” and “this is all just a liberal tax-raising conspiracy.”

journalism

Scientific ignorance: Partially the fault of us journalists

Though I’d also blame the English department for foisting postmodernist crap on us:

Something has happened with the last generation of journalists, who have been taught the postmodern idea that there is no such thing as objective reality. But there is such a thing as objective reality – and we can measure it, and by measuring it we’ve doubled our lifespan, multiplied the productivity of our farms by 35 times, and totally changed the world. By not acknowledging that, reporters end up creating something called, “false balance,” essentially reporting on two sides of a story and letting the audience decide what they think is the objective truth or who is right. That’s really shirking their responsibility to dig and inform people what’s really going on.

via How Ignorance, Greed and Ideology Are Warping Science and Hurting Democracy | Julian Brookes | Rolling Stone.