They have several new buzz phrases
How to close the gap between public opinion and public policy on the climate crisis?
Introducing the concepts of “finite pool of worry” and “fear vividness”
This is from the National Catholic Reporter, which should probably be more worried about Catholic stuff and governments eroding religious freedom
As the country deals with the crises of pandemic, police brutality and racism, the ongoing climate crisis continues to loom directly overhead. Despite the temporary easing of pollution in many parts of the world as a result of the lockdown, the long-term outlook will remain grim unless and until public policy catches up with public opinion.
When it comes to public opinion, there is some reason for modest optimism. The Yale Program on Climate Change Communication found in a survey conducted April 7-17 that a majority of registered voters (61 percent) believe global warming is caused mostly by human activities.
What I found most interesting about the program’s report, titled “Climate change in the American Mind,” was its discussion of “the finite pool of worry.” Social scientists describe it as the tendency for worry about one issue to decrease worry about other issues. Despite a pandemic killing a staggering number of people, the survey found concern about the climate crisis as high as or higher than earlier findings.
Of course, it all breaks down when it comes to actually paying and losing freedom and choice. This is all theoretical, not in practice.
But there remains the critical question of how best to talk about climate change – and, for journalists, the challenge of how best to report the issue – in ways that result in significant change in public policy.
That was the topic of the first story I wrote as NCR’s climate editor a year ago. A new book by Australian researcher Rebecca Huntley, How to Talk about Climate Change in a Way that Makes a Difference,” explores the relevance of “risk vividness” to the actions we take or don’t take as a result.
That’s not journalism: that’s activism. That’s blogging. Journalists simply report a story. This piece is advocating for spinning their beliefs. I bet “journalists” wouldn’t be so gung ho if they knew all the policies would hit their own businesses, eh? Let them practice what they preach by Government force.
