Cleavage vs. Climate
What if the sun rose one brilliant morning and never set?
Just stayed up in the sky, blazing brilliant, melting the polar ice cap into blue nothingness, erasing the coastlines into a Dali-esque reconfiguration of nature’s win over man?
Would it dawn on the media about that time to begin questioning the presidential candidates about global warming as an ever-present sun liquefied our world?
As analyzed by the League of Conservation Voters–
As of Jan. 25, these five prime-time journalists–CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, MSNBC’s Tim Russert, Fox News’ Chris Wallace and CBS’s Bob Schieffer–had conducted 171 interviews with the candidates.
Of the 2,975 questions they asked them, only six mentioned the words “climate change” or “global warming.”
To put that in perspective: three questions mentioned UFOs.
The Democratic and Republican candidates both have positions on global warming.
All three top U.S. presidential contenders tout their environmental credentials, with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton cast far more “green” votes in Congress than John McCain.
So, what’s the deal? What is the media waiting for? As further reported by the League of Conservation Voters, “doing nothing about dependence on foreign oil and global warming” was cited as one of top five reasons Americans feel this country is heading in the wrong direction.
It doesn’t take an Einstein to ask one simple question.
Why are top reporters ignoring this issue?
Is it a Cleavage vs. Climate race for ratings?
If that’s so, cleavage might be the only floatation device keeping our heads above water as we–either through ignorance or nonchalance–hurry our planet along towards a premature Ice Age Eight.
Global warming followed by global cooling.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically each day to your feed reader. If you don't have a feed reader, you can always have these articles delivered to your email inbox every day. Click here to sign up.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Comments
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
We know what sells in a competitive media environment, and its not fact driven policy analysis. This is a sad reality, but nothing new. Pulse raising issues of unfair identity politics, implied extra-marital dalliances (McCain) are above the fold, page one material. Global warning, Telecom Immunity, and details complicated foriegn policy initiatives just don't "pop," and require more than a superficial understanding of whatis a very complicated Election year. Beyond the media myopia, the candidates themselves (McCain and Obama) have taken to safe and obsequios equivication on important issues. <a href="http://thelindenrow.blogspot.com/2008/02/sorry-ch...target="_blank">Those hoping for a straight talker or Messiah are likely to be dissappointed</a>
Under reporting of an issue as important as those you have listed may be a "sad reality", only if we continue to allow the press to choose the issues of importance. As far as the practice of obfusaction, Ms. Clinton has found her very specific, very documented comments regarding many issues, uh let's say–kicking her in the old NAFTA–and then chooses to lie about it. Now, that's sad.