Whoever constructed this question has an issue of “balance as bias” so it's no surprise you find it a little confusing.
Most people tend to forget that the media is a business. They compete against each other. They are not a perfectly objective source of information at the service of the public.
More than ten years ago, the media totally hyped a scientist talking about an iceberg breaking off in Antarctica. No mention from others that this is a regular occurrence. Instead just trying to scare the public. In your choices, D implies B, so the answer can't be D. I think there are lots of people here including some of those who answered already would say that C implies B as well. C would be a better choice to have, as it is clearly a political issue. Instead we have people like Michael Mann who seek to sue people into silence.
Totally unbalanced in favor of AGW and Climate Propaganda.
Quote by Stephen Schneider, Stanford Univ., environmentalist: "That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have."
Quote by Ross Gelbsan, former journalist: “Not only do journalists not have a responsibility to report what skeptical scientists have to say about global warming. They have a responsibility not to report what these scientists say.”
Quote by Charles Alexander, Time Magazine science editor: “I would freely admit that on [global warming] we have crossed the boundary from news reporting to advocacy.”
If you read that honestly you can scrap your choices C and D.
Joseph Goebbels,
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
This lie of AGW and Climate Change has been perpetuated by the press. Only those people like Al Gore, Bill Nye and James Hansen, who is now a full time communist agitator, are ever hear of. All others who are real scientists are deliberately silenced.
Quote by Will Happer, Princeton University physicist, former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy: “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism....I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect....Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth's climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past.”
How often have you heard of Will Happer? How many times have you seen him on TV or in the newspapers? Now compare that with how many times you have seen Al Gore.
Which of the following would best describe the issue of “balance as bias” in the
media?
A. Overly abstract presentations of scientific information to the public
B. Giving climate change scientists too little exposure
C. Giving equal time in debates to climate change deniers and climate change scientists
D. Giving environmental NGOs (non - government organizations) and climate change deniers more than their fair share of exposure
This question is in regards to climate change and how it is represented in the media.
I found the options to be a little confusing but I narrowed it down to either C or D, though I might be wrong.
