From http://letters-environmentvictoria.nationbuilder.com/
Keep climate denial on the editing room floor
In October the world's leading authority on climate science released its latest report, finding that the science on climate change was now 'unequivocal'.
In response, the LA times and now the Sydney Morning Herald have stated that they would no longer publish factually inaccurate letters denying climate science.
We call on The Age, the Australian and the Herald Sun newspapers to follow the leadership of their peers and stop publishing factually incorrect letters from so-called climate sceptics.
ADD YOUR SIGNATURE TO THE LETTER TO THE EDITORS OF THE AUSTRALIAN, THE AGE AND THE HERALD SUN
Dear Editor,
Following the Sydney Morning Herald’s decision to purge misinformation about climate science from their opinion pages, will The Age/Herald Sun/Australian do the same?
Opinion pages are among the most read of any paper. So they should be governed by the same standards of journalistic integrity applied to news reporting.
In short, errors of fact should not be published. As LA Times editor Paul Thornton put it, ‘saying there's no sign humans have caused climate change is not stating an opinion, it's asserting a factual inaccuracy.’
This is not a question of censorship but of accuracy.
On newspaper opinion pages climate change deniers have been allowed to hijack the public discourse on climate - hiding behind the mantle of ‘balance’ - and frustrating meaningful debate about how to tackle this global threat.
Enough is enough. With experts now as certain of the danger posed by anthropogenic climate change as that posed by smoking, the debate is over.
In recognition of the grave threat posed to Australians lives and property by rising sea-levels, temperatures and extreme weather events, and of the important role newspapers play in informing the public, please apply a ‘factual test’ to letters published in your paper on climate change.
Signed
Thank you for signing!
 |
No comments:
Post a Comment
This blog does not take Anonymous comments. Experience shows that comments cluttered with "Anonymous" are boring and people don't know whether "Anonymous" is one person or many. This is not a decision about freedom of speech. It is a decision about boring or unwillingness to be known by even a pseudonym.