Eisbär im Arctic National Wildlife Refuge | Foto: Susanne Miller/USFWS, Lizenz: CC BY 2.0

Climate, as if! – scientific journalists dispute

Published on ndr.de the  21.11.2018. | By: Daniel Bouhs & Carsten Pilger

Undifferentiated and dangerous reporting when it comes to climate is alarming and criticized more and more even by journalists.

» more

Note: Journalist Axel Bojanowski explains ” If you differentiate between reporting and reporting, you immediately get adversity from colleagues”. “In Germany the same five or six experts, from thousands of researchers, get quoted over and over again. As journalist you often get asked: Why don´t you quote them?” And if you by chance do, you run the risk of being painted as someone who denies climate change. Michael Miersch, our council member, had reported his experience on this:

Michael Miersch: “Wie ich zum Klimaleugner wurde”

Alarming and undifferentiated reports are a problem as they make it very difficult for reputable organisations and people, who don´t proclaim the threat of the apocalypse, to get through to people. They then find themselves forced to jump on the wagon. Those who go in the opposite direction – the AfD in Germany and Trump in the USA – have also played their part in the radicalisation. Its important not to go into either of the extremes, but to find a differentiated position.

For modern zoos and aquariums this is important too because only with a differentiated, public discussion, on the topic nature conservation, is it possible to tackle the projects facing the coming threat of species and their habitats´extinction or eradication.

Share this post