[ad_1]
This story was published in collaboration by the Los Angeles Times Climate Coverage NowA global journalism collaboration that strengthens coverage of the climate story.
TCalifornia’s third weekend in August 2020 was chaotic. The third weekend of August 2020 was a busy time for California. There were wildfires, smoke filled the air, power shortages forced state officials into rolling blackouts. This meant that hundreds upon thousands of homes had no air-conditioning during a heat wave. I was scrambling to cover the aftermath that Monday, writing about Blaming one state agency for anotherfor the power shortage. I ran to report the story on clean energy technologies the next day. California needs your support to keep the lights onI am here to help in times of despair. I was physically and mentally exhausted by Wednesday. I also wrote about it.
In that week’s edition of Boiling PointThe e-mail newsletter I wrote for the Los Angeles TimesI discussed climate despairI shared my strategies for dealing with it in the hope that others who feel similarly fatalistic might find it helpful. I described what it was like for me personally living through those hellish few days, and offered some Jewish wisdom from an ancient rabbi that had helped me keep perspective: “It is not your responsibility to finish the work of perfecting the world, but you are not free to desist from it either.”
The next summer, during another period of intense heat and fire, I hiked Wyoming’s Teton Crest Trail. The mountain peaks were obscured at times by wildfire smoke, but the landscape as a whole—brimming with alpine lakes, deep canyons, and wildlife—helped remind me why a safer planet is worth fighting for. Boiling Point’s next edition will feature me once again. We urged readers to not lose heart, writing, “The future is not preordained. It’s not written. We can still stem the climate crisis.”
There was a time in my life when I worried that words like this could damage my credibility as journalist. Here, I was expressing both my own fears and my desire to find climate solutions. Wouldn’t that make me look biased? Wouldn’t I be better off sticking to the facts, explaining the scientific consensus in a traditional, third-person newspaper voice, and leaving the politics to climate activists?
After eight years of writing about energy, I’ve come to see my responsibilities in a different light.
Journalists should be comfortable decrying systemic racism and pushing politicians for homelessness reform, but we must also be comfortable decrying the horrors caused by climate change and demanding solutions.
Unprecedented research has shown that global warming poses a threat to humanity as we know it. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Last year that much of the damage from rising greenhouse gas emissions is “irreversible for centuries to millennia, especially changes in the ocean, ice sheets, and global sea level.” And the more the planet warms, the greater the suffering. If journalists don’t communicate that reality, and state unequivocally the need for immediate climate action, we’re not doing our jobs.
It’s great that so many reporters have ditched the damaging “both sides” approach to climate coverage—quote a denier on one side and a scientist on the other. But acknowledging that carbon emissions are heating the planet isn’t enough anymore, if it ever was. We have a responsibility as citizens to tell stories that encourage businesses and governments to reduce their emissions quickly and effectively. We can do that by holding politicians and industry accountable when they fail to act, and by using plain language to describe the political and economic realities—without worrying about bad-faith critics.
That’s why I’ve written Again Again about the far-too-slow pace of California’s climate plans. It’s why I’ve explored energy technologies from geothermalTo HydrogenTo Pumped storage. It’s why I partnered with Floodlight The GuardianTo reveal that a firm employed by the natural gas industry had Residents of heavily polluted communities are paidto lobby for gasoline-powered trucks. It’s why, after a major oil spill in Southern California last year, I Write that the incident “offered a stark reminder that the damage to human health and the natural world from powering society with fossil fuels is far greater than just a warming planet.”
I’ve been transparent with LA Times readers about where I’m coming from—that I find climate change very scary, and that I care about speeding up the clean energy transition. This hasn’t hurt my credibility, or my ability to tell these stories. On the contrary, it’s helped me do my job better.
Nearly every day, I hear from readers expressing gratitude for climate coverage that resonates with their lives. Boiling point, in particular, has been an effective tool for blending fresh reporting with timely analysis and personal reflection. I’ve never received a greater volume of positive feedback than I did after writing that newsletter about climate despair. One reader thanked me for “a much-needed dose of wisdom and humor.” Another wrote, “As we opened the windows to our house in the Bay Area this evening for the first time in many days, I read your reflections to my family. I wanted them to hear your words as we struggle to come to terms with what it means to live with climate change.”
Clearly stating the need for climate action, and occasionally writing in the first person, hasn’t stopped me from pursuing hard-hitting newspaper reporting. My editors trust me to investigate corporate malfeasance, unearth political scoops, and jump on breaking news because they know I’ve got no allegiance to any advocacy group or political faction, and no vendettas—except the one against heat-trapping emissions.
This is also what my sources and readers have understood. I’ve frustrated the solar industry, for instance, by writing about the environmental harms that can be caused by Solar farms spread out across the desertConservationists were angered by this. highlightingThe potential benefitsHydropower. Climate is a complicated story with no easy answers, and I’m not going to pretend otherwise. Not all strategies to reduce emissions are created equally, and it’s my job as a reporter to evaluate the trade-offs.
But that’s the benefit of being up-front about my point of view. Anyone who reads my stories knows I’m biased toward climate solutions, and my reporting flows from that. It’s an approach that has persuaded a significant number of people to subscribe to the LA Times, and that I’m proud to say is recognized within the company as an example of high-impact journalism.
For journalists worried that their editors might not approve of this type of approach to climate coverage, know that for every angry reader who sends an e-mail, there are many others who appreciate you telling it the truth. ResearchIt is clear that a growing number of Americans are concerned or alarmed about climate change. Your editors should know this.
For editors: Trust that your expert reporters know what they’re talking about. Don’t be part of the Two-thirds (33%) of newsroom leaders are femaleIf they think their climate coverage has improved, it is not. You should also pay attention to reporters who write about non-environmental beats like politics and health. If they’re not writing about climate at least occasionally, it may be time to connect them with Climate reporting resources.
Non-journalists, who want to make the media better: Let your local news station know what type reporting you are interested in. If you can, show them you’ll pay for that work with a digital subscription, or a donation if they’re a nonprofit.
I’m not calling for reporters to cross the line into advocacy, or to abandon basic fairness. If we want to earn the public’s trust and support, being honest brokers is just as important as showing that we genuinely care about solving the climate crisis.
None of us will look back in 20-years and wonder if our climate stories are a little too radical. If we’re lucky, we’ll be living in a world where out-of-control fires, floods, and heat storms haven’t completely upended human life, and where journalism is still an economically viable pillar of democratic society. This future is possible with fearless climate coverage.
[ad_2]
