Forests and the Economy: Pushing conversation on a significant issue
When I sat in a discussion at the What is Journalism? conference in April and listened to Michael S. Laufer speak about the mediocrity in science journalism nowadays, I leaned forward in my seat. In an age where it seems every news outlet is geared toward finding different ways to adhere to the reader’s desire, Laufer’s stance was the opposite.
And he had my attention.
Essentially, Laufer’s biggest problem was this: News organizations were providing readers with what they want, rather than providing them with what they need.
In the realm of scientific and environmental journalism, this is a huge dilemma. Issues like climate change and the drought in California are more pressing than ever. In April, Governor Jerry Brown called for the state’s first mandatory water restrictions.
This problem has been evident to researchers for years, but it’s rarely made the front page until now.
For his capstone project for his master’s degree, University of Oregon grad student Ben DeJarnette has been exploring how journalism can engage communities, both the public and experts, in such stories.
He dives into what rural communities are doing to prepare for this in the first of a three-part series published by Investigate West: “After the Wars, Common Ground in Oregon’s Forests.” He also wants to get people talking about the issue, which will occur at the Forests and the Economy Symposium Wednesday and a town hall in Grants Pass on Thursday.
DeJarnette does not want to be a reporter merely documenting news, such as the harrowing effects forest fires may have. He wants to push for a conversation. It’s an important issue for the state: Oregon has the potential to experience one of its worst fire seasons this summer.
It is different from how environmental journalism has acted recently. The statistics back up Laufer’s claims that news about issues such as a drought in California or forest fires in Oregon take a seat at the back of the bus.
The Project For Improved Environmental Coverage found in 2013 that environmental stories made up just 1 percent of headlines in U.S. media. That number has since risen — environmental topics incorporated into news stories rose by 17 percent in 2014.
But it would be short sighted to say a sweeping push to deliver news on topics pertaining to the environment has been occurring.
On May 1, The Columbia Journalism Review published a story citing the inconsistencies with environmental journalism. The piece dug into the disconnect between what journalists and the scientific community seem to find most significant. Stories about climate change and water scarcity and quality were published the most, and with good reason. They were high on experts’ list of importance, too.
However, ocean health, ranked next to global warming on a level of importance, got one-sixteenth of the coverage.
“Part of the problem may be that editors making coverage decisions don’t see the environment as a much-desired topic, especially when journalistic mainstays like war and the economy have proved equally pressing in the last five years,” Laura Dattaro writes.
Dattaro’s finding matches with Laufer’s sentiment.
But readers want environmental journalism. The PIEC found that nearly 80 percent of Americans believe environmental news coverage could be improved.
The underlying question, though, is how to produce journalism about complicated subjects that the casual reader will digest and understand. How do you start a conversation? At the Forests and the Economy Symposium, we will see how one model, an investigative series and follow-up events to spur discussion, may work.
Our SPJ chapter will be blogging about the conference, so follow along here for coverage of the issue — and the implications for journalism.
