Pam Blamey writes: How could the media do a better job of reporting on “climate change”, you ask? Well for a start the media could stop using Tony Abbott’s don’t-scare-the-horses euphemism of “climate change” and call it what it is: global warming. And don’t spin riddles — spell it out! So often I find myself muttering, “Now what is that supposed to mean?”
I suggest ordinary people, such as tertiary-educated grandmothers like me, can’t afford the paywalls of multiple news outlets’ subscriptions that don’t give us what we want anyway, but rather treat us like mushrooms — fed on manure and kept in the dark.
Climate journalists could do better by interviewing credible and trusted climate scientists, like James Hansen, Hans Joachim “John” Schellnhuber, Professor Leslie Hughes, Graeme Pearman and Dr Joëlle Gergis, or NGOs and people supporting communities on the ground, such as First Nations peoples, who are already suffering the impacts of global warming. Reflective, narrative stories from climate activists in different states and territories wouldn’t go astray either; how theatrical or dangerous do protests have to be to get any attention from the media, let alone the government?
Reporters could also tell us what the government might not ever get around to telling us — how bad it is and how to prepare for the worst. Remember the old saying, “forewarned is forearmed”?
And of course, while doing all the above, the media must investigate, identify and expose the nefarious fork-tongued misinformation and disinformation spun by the innocuous-sounding institutes and think tanks of the Atlas Network, which don’t want us to know the truth about global warming, let alone what we can do about it.
Rosemary Jacob writes: I am 88. I am writing this in air conditioning, which costs me nothing as I benefit from NT government assistance with electricity costs for older residents AND I have solar panels on my roof, again with government assistance with purchase costs.
I have paid no electricity costs since the solar power was installed in early 2016.
Why are people allowed to build dwellings without installing access to renewable energy?
All open-air car parking should be under roofs covered with solar panels and backed up by storage batteries. In rural areas, wind generation should be installed wherever possible. And why — given that we are surrounded by tidal waters — are we not using tidal power?
We should be researching the continuing development of ALL forms of renewable energy as well as stringently reducing the ridiculous overuse of plastic.
I grew up in England during World War II and so am really familiar with recycling, yet I now live in a throwaway economy!
We do not need to build faster cars but we DO need to stop using fossil fuels.
The biggest problem is people’s refusal to accept change, and we need an emergency declaration of war on human-induced climate change.
The scientists cannot be ignored any longer!
Kerry Grant writes: Perhaps we no longer read articles, no matter how important they are or what they may reveal, because we all feel we are losing the battle … there is too much noise from naysayers and big business. Plus politicians don’t’ stand up for what is right, preferring to just mouth platitudes.
Julia Bovard writes: Interesting to read your listing of Tony Abbott’s announcements about climate change. Who is actually listening and why? There is a whole sector devoted to disparaging climate change. Abbott is just one person, the Murdoch media another source. Does this mean that any of them actually know anything? No. Why then do the media fight to display climate denial? It is not science just opinion.
It is certainly not much comfort to people and wildlife caught up in the horrific fires and very serious flooding which has recently underlined the insurmountable facts of climate change and environment destruction.
I hope the Liberals do not start to drag out Abbott, as they do John Howard, to illustrate the steadiness of their beliefs.
