CLIMATE CHANGE TODAY!

From the Mass Communications & Society Journal, I bring your attention to the article, Are Issue-Cycles Culturally Constructed? A Comparison of French and American Coverage of Global Climate Change

To be brief, Yes! In this instance we can conclude that French and US media asserts different angles in the media to gain attention to the topic of Global Climate Change. What is particularly useful is what they find influences these different constructs.

While at first it seems sort of obvious, what’s “hot” for Americans is not necessarily “hot” for French people. Americans love controversy and the bigger the soap opera the better.

In discussing this article with my fellow Cohort at MEEC, one person offered an explanation to the French scheme of reporting, which the articles identifies as more inclined to be relayed in context with international agreements, in consideration of France bargaining for power and co-operation within the European Union.

I would tend to sum up my impression and what I found particularly valuable, by picking up the reference in the first part of the conclusion that states “journalistic culture can be a major influence on the coverage of an international environmental issue such as global warming”. Within the study, the limitations placed on both the French and US journalist practices were noted and it was interpreted that French journalists have “less autonomy from power elites in France than the US.”

I would question here who and what we consider to be the “powerful elites” in both nations. On one hand it is implied that French government is tied to that elite. In the United States, the role corporations play in the development of domestic and international policy poses significant questions when we consider who is behind the scenes, pulling the strings at the puppetry of reporting.

I would be more interested to explore how it is that investigative journalism is supposed to represent both sides, despite the fact that the body of evidence weighs heavier on one side than the other. Such is the case with the IPCC. Here we have a international community of scientists who are dedicated to investigating the various life supporting mechanisms of planet, and consolidating these finding to present a comprehensive, and comprehensible report. On the other side, you have a few “maverick” scientists funded by corporations raising dissent. How is that representative of popular opinion? If the air waves were a country under the parliamentary system, they would not even have a seat in house – they would be the Green Party of Canada!



What I would really like to know, is what journalistic conditions are ideal for reporting global catastrophes?

To this before mentioned articles credit, I think it is an important part of the puzzle in understanding the big picture question posted above.

Interesting Stuff...
Brossard, D., Shanahan, J., & McComas, K. (2004). Are issue-cycles culturally constructed? A comparison of French and American coverage of global climate change. Mass Communication & Society, 7(3), 359-377.