Aug 9, 2017 · 1 min read
Your survey of supporters said they are very interested in seeing coverage of climate change, and in an interview, you said you expect your reporting on that topic to be “based very strongly on the science.” What does this mean, exactly? Some specific questions honing in on what I’m trying to get at:
- Will you be sure to define what is meant by “climate change” and distinguish it from “catastrophic climate change”? Climate change is certainly a fact—the climate is always changing, and right now it’s getting mildly warmer. But this is rarely what is meant when people discuss “climate change”.
- Will you treat “science” as a monolithic entity that speaks the truth at all times? Or will you recognize that “science” has often gotten things very wrong, most dangerously when that science is used to justify public policy. For example, eugenics.
- Would you ever do what the New York Times did today in a headline: “Science or His Base? Climate Report May Make Trump Choose”? I.e., (1) conflate “science” with “government scientists” and (2)imply that “science” calls, ineluctably, for certain political policies?
