Extremely revealing comments from Andrew Revkin

Andrew Revkin: The Public Divide over Climate Change

February 4, 2010 — The first of three Shorenstein Center/Belfer Center seminars on news coverage of climate change, "The Public Divide over Climate Change: Scientists, Skeptics and the Media," was itself a lively debate...Audio recording

[Around the 1:35:20 mark, Revkin says: "...Just lask week, I was talking to some top IPCC scientists who said some of their peers still think this is like a one-week story, that this is... a little glitch and everyone will kind of just come back to the mountain in 2013 and worship our findings... I think that's pretty naive...I didn't tell Susan Solomon that she was great and I didn't tell Jim Hansen that he's a fool."

Around the 1:45:13 mark, Revkin says: "One thing that's interesting to note...in this administration shift is that all the coverage that I did of all those obfuscations, editing, censorship and stuff that the Bush administration got involved in was a no-brainer getting that on the front page of the New York Times...Now, theoretically, should I be just as aggressively writing about these revelations? [nervous laugh]. There's total..complete differences between what was going on then and some of the things you've heard about recently in terms of the scientific integrity of the IPCC...The bottom line is , there was a predisposition at my newspaper to say hey, that's a great get; there's a major front page story...when Phil Cooney...editing climate reports and all that stuff...it fit a very comfortable theme that all environmental stories for the longest period of time had, which is there's bad guys and good guys. Shame on you, shame on you."]