Warmist Mark Neuzil: "I think the objectivity standard that U.S. newspapers apply has probably outlived its usefulness on this particular issue"

Unfair and balanced: Is U.S. reporting too soft on climate skeptics? | Grist

For Peter Vandermeersch, editor-in-chief at the traditionally conservative daily NRC Handelsblad in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, there is no debate about climate change.
...
"There's almost no discussion about it," agreed Wouter Verschelden, editor-in-chief at the progressive daily De Morgen in Brussels, Belgium. "The nonbelievers have been marginalized, and they aren't taken seriously anymore. We don't have to convince our readers anymore of the fact that there is climate change, and that it's caused by humans."

"He said, she said" journalism

According to Vandermeersch and Verschelden, who are both alumni of Columbia University's vaunted School of Journalism in New York, American news media still make the mistake of giving climate skeptics a disproportionate voice, and perpetuating a debate that has long been settled among scientists.

"In a sense, you're lying to your readers," says Verschelden. "You're creating a 'he said, she said' story, and looking for an argument that just doesn't always exist."
...
"I think the objectivity standard that U.S. newspapers apply has probably outlived its usefulness on this particular issue," said Mark Neuzil, a professor of environmental communication at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota.
...
The tipping point came in 2005, said Boykoff, with Hurricane Katrina, and the release of former Vice President Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth.
...
[Cristi Kempf] Ice is melting, animals are dying -- that kind of thing.

University of St. Thomas : Mark Neuzil

mrneuzil@stthomas.edu