Why is the media so biased on this subject?

Z

Zythos

New member
Seriously, basically every media outlet takes it for scientific fact and automatically shoots down anything that is against it. The fact is, there is just as much scientific fact to the contrary, and extraordinary proof against human cause is scene in the formation of the great lakes. Why does the media just ignore facts like this?
Basically 90% of the coverage on the subject of global warning on MSNBC, CNN, and sometimes even stiff conservative Fox News affirms it. And I know this through experience (the 90% figure is generalized)
 
Because fear sells, what would the media report on if we didn't have the fear of Global warming....real news!!??...Remember Y2K and this 2012 bull crap? There are people making millions off of selling books about how to survive both...Also just look to the media's record.

I bet you if I took every paper created in the last 25 years.... if I could use the media as a reliable source, I can effectively prove that every object in the room you are sitting in will give you caner.

Look at global warming...companies will make millions by selling green products, because people want to feel like they are taking care of the planet.

I feel that it is nice that we take consideration of the planet, but I feel that doing it by harsh accusations (every scientist who is a skeptic gets payed by Exxon) is not the way to go.

EDIT: Gerard's second point is very very good.

and after Dana's comment... I don't think I can take Dana seriously anymore...you really think the media is biased towards skeptics? That's beyond words.
 
every scientific and every government world wide as well as 99% of all Scientific opinion supports that global warming is real and caused by man made activity

there is no credible dispute or alternatives

it isn't a question of democracy or opinions it either exists or it doesn't, your opinion isn't as good as anyone else's
 
The mainstream media is all for it because it's controlled by people who wish you to believe it.

Don't believe everything you read.
Don't believe everything you hear.
Don't believe everything you watch.
Critical thinking will save you at the end of the day.
 
The media are a bunch of stupid people who could not explain what they are reporting. Kind of like Obama and his statement about adding air in our tires.
Here are some of the brilliant things I have heard on the TV media over the last 40 years.
"Bubble memory may soon be in every computer in the country."
"Women will be outrunning men in marathon long distance running by 2000"
"The next ice age may be 5 years away"
"baby boomers will return to communes to retire."
"AIDS could spread to 25% of the US population by 1990."
" TV is just like reality."

My advice is don't watch that crap and anyone who believes half the crap on the networks is a moron.
 
Follow the money... Media lives by circulation or viewership. Old newspaper axiom is "if it bleeds, it leads", meaning that sensationalism and fear will sell papers, magazines and sell air time.

Compare "We think there may be some warming going on, but we can't identify its cause, but we are working on it" to "NASA scientist Hanson and Vice President Al Gore predict end of the earth by next Thursday if we don't fix global warming".

You can bet your @ss that the second headline will add more to circulation than the first...

Throw in the useful idiots in Congress who can't pass up a microphone or news camera, and there is a nonstop source of headlines.
 
Many reasons, I think they took sides too quickly because catastrophes make great headlines and sell much more, also for political reasons and influential interest groups pressuring them (environment activists).

If they cover the skeptical side, they know they could be accused of being biased for what they've done in the past, so basically they are protecting themselves and their own careers....
 
You want the real honest truth? The madison avenue ad agencies pay the bill to keep the subject hot. Why, because Dow Chemical pays them well to make people think co2 is some kind of a pollutant and keep R744 refrigerant off the market so their new Freon products will do better in the market place and generate bigger profits. Yes, sad to say the whole entire AGW panic is just a chemical company ad pogrom promoting a more expensive chemical refrigerant over a cheaper natural one.
 
Michael is tired, but still Ninga: Dana is from San Francisco area, California. University of California at Berkeley. Does this give you a clue? Hey you asked the question.
 
Back
Top