Target: Gerard Baker, Managing Editor of The Wall Street Journal
Goal: Urge The Wall Street Journal to acknowledge the facts about man-man climate change
An educated population can not rely on science-doubting newspapers for accurate information. Yet The Wall Street Journal recently, once again, published editorials denying man-made climate change. Editors refuse to accept the facts presented in numerous scientific journals and within the environmental research community. By irresponsibly disregarding this information The Wall Street Journal misinforms its many readers and gives more weight to speculation than science.
More than 97% of scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans. Joseph Bast and Roy Spencer, who wrote the recent editorial denying the existence of man-made climate change, intentionally or unintentionally misconstrued a recent IOP Science article. In their editorial they also referenced Christian Monckton, who has drawn wide, well-placed criticism for comparing environmental activists to “Hitler youth.”
This blatant disregard for conclusive research is indicative of a dangerous trend in conservative reporting: misinforming the public due to conflicting interests. Bast is the president of the Heartland institute, backed by the climate change denying Koch brothers. The Wall Street Journal has a duty to report accurately, to disclose obvious conflicts of interest, and to correctly review scientific papers. Without such a commitment it can hardly remain a leader of serious journalism.
Encourage The Wall Street Journal to amend its previous editorial and admit error in denying man-made climate change, or at least to balance such reporting by disclosing bias and giving comparable coverage to respected environmental scientists.
Dear Mr. Baker,
I respect The Wall Street Journal‘s well-researched and high quality articles, but was shocked and disappointed to learn that editorials frequently denounce the 97% of scientists who agree that climate change is driven by humans. By focusing on inconsequential, incorrectly analyzed data you refuse to acknowledge the larger issue: climate change itself. Ignoring the realities of climate change runs dangerously counter to the scientific consensus.
The newspaper has long been seen as a beacon for preeminent journalism. To protect this hard-won reputation you must ensure that articles and editorials are meticulously researched and composed, even when dealing with politically divisive topics. Conflicts of interest should not taint the writing and must be fully disclosed. The Wall Street Journal carries much weight, and brushing aside global warming and pollution will have a negative impact on readers, their actions and the health of the environment.
I urge you to more accurately acknowledge the issue of climate change in your newspaper. Admit to ongoing bias in denying the fact that human activity contributes to climate change, and ensure that your paper commits at least as much coverage to the work of respected environmental scientists as it does to heavily-biased and inaccurate editorials.
[Your Name Here]
Photo credit: Steve Rainwater via Flickr