Media Coverage of Extreme Weather Stories

What is good practice in media coverage of climate impacts — in particular, of extreme and disrupted weather?

As I’m in the UK and I’m left-leaning, my ‘go-to’ broadsheet provider is The Guardian. In the digital era, it’s become an innovator in data visualisations, podcasts and videos while still printing daily. In the past two weeks, they have sent regular emails showcasing their climate coverage and requesting support. I want to support them by highlighting the quality of their recent stories and summing up the features of good reporting. A caveat here is that I’m not 100% a Guardian fan as I find some of their content a bit trite and consumerist, or too embedded in the dominant culture of economic growth. Guardian stories are regulars in my collecting project, Everyday Ecocide, noting when they fail to get to the ecological roots of a story or when they express blindness to our sources of energy or well-being.

However, compared to others, their environmental coverage is diligent and evidence-based. For example, see Jonathan Watts’ report on the unprecedented number of heat records broken around the world this year. There has been a lot to write about this year, with heatwaves exacerbated by El Nino and climate disruption.

They are looking not just at current weather events but looking back into history. For example, Oliver Milman’s deep dive into historical heat with intricate research by Tural Ahmedzade.

Their range of stories shows that The Guardian is concerned about injustice for the Most Affected People and Areas.

• Nina Lakhani and Thalia Juarez captured the struggles of outdoor workers in Florida and the failures to protect them
• Isabella Kaminski and Jonathan Watts reported on Heat Inequality, about how poor people and outdoor workers are dying from extreme heat but these deaths are going unreported.

They are exploring the conundrums and challenges of urban development combined with climate impacts. For example, Gabrielle Canon went to Las Vegas and found that concrete construction is growing as more people flock to the City and need to be indoors, consuming more and more energy, while outdoor temperatures are increasingly unbearable.

They are also — to a certain extent — covering ecological injustice, with some stories on how climate impacts affect animals and biodiversity. For example, Ajit Niranjan has covered how animals are suffering with climate breakdown, including both mammals we can empathise with and the biodiversity of life in coral reefs.

They are exploring unthinkable uncertainties which helps us face the truth that climate breakdown is worse than mainstream media and international negotiations would have us believe. For example, Jonathan Watts reports on how top climate scientists have posited the alarming possibility that global heating may be moving beyond the ability of experts to predict what happens next.

They have also been covering misinformation by ‘pollutocrats’, exposing how media owners like Elon Musk provide a platform for the stupidity, greed, racism and ecocidal fanaticism of Trump and others like him. In their report on a Twitter/X-broadcast with Musk and Trump in conversation, The Guardian noted that Trump thought rising sea levels would offer benefits of creating “more oceanfront property” and that he raised the threat of “nuclear warming” (a concept new to science).

In response, Musk tweeted (or, ‘X-ed’?) “My little finger nail knows more about climate issues than the entire staff of The Guardian”.

When Elon mentions his little finger, this comes to mind (Dr Evil from Austin Powers).

When The Guardian asked 380 climate scientists to share their experiences, their mental health and views on effective action, their most cited action is to vote (for pro-planet politicians). Climate reporting IS political. Climate scientists have been attacked for sharing their views on policy and politics, but the media should treat scientists with humanity as individuals who have freedom of expression.

I created the graphic below as one of many (126+) tools for my new course and book, Earth Talk. A key part of literacy for democracy is to understand how the Earth Crisis is the result of deliberate and knowing actions in order to pollute and profit. There are of course many individuals entangled and compromised in this degenerative system. I don’t want to see a media that perpetuates culture wars between ‘greenies’ and ordinary people, or that creates any other kinds of binary tribes in this field. I do believe that we need fearless and independent media that can identify individual players responsible for ecocide and predatory delay.

In conclusion, good coverage is:

• Diligent and science-based — using data to convey information well and doing justice to original research by scientists.
• Taking a historical approach, looking deeper into time and not just covering current weather events.
• Includes coverage of injustice for Most Affected People and Areas, including poor people living in the Global North as well as the South.
• Acknowledges complexities of meeting immediate human needs and taking measures for more long-term safety.
• Includes Ecological Injustice — reflecting on the impacts on animals and the rest of the more-than-human world.
• It does not shy away from reporting on the most alarming projections and uncertainties in the future.
• Takes a political perspective — analysing the machinations of power and control of media, culture and democracy, including exposing the very few individuals that are most culpable.
• Treats climate campaigners, land defenders and scientists with respect and humanity, giving space to their emotions, and shining a light on harsh protest laws, death threats and bullying that are hampering their work.

What could The Guardian do more and better, with more support? Perhaps the key thing is to address their coverage of economics and finance, so that there is more join-up across to the regenerative economics that will help slow down consumption, pollution and climate breakdown.

You might feel that this is a one-sided article. I haven’t had time to go into a comparison of other media platforms but if you are interested, you can find a wealth of critical coverage — with daily analysis of climate coverage in the right-wing media — by Jon Fuller. The Telegraph is particularly poor for promoting fossil fuel interests and denying climate science. Jon’s ‘Tell The Truth’ campaign will see a conference this September.

We are keen for more voices on this platform. If you would like to write an article here in Extreme Weather Stories — whether about media coverage of this issue, or a witness account of extreme weather, or anything relevant and interesting, please get in touch on climatemuseumuk@gmail.com