Where is journalism going? The preaching of the “climate emergency”

Where is journalism going? The preaching of the climate emergency »

André Heitz*

New “charters” point to a militant drift imposed on themselves by holders of press cards or imposed on them by editorial staff. This goes beyond traditional editorial lines.

The Munich Charter

Journalists – finally those who have a high opinion of their profession – have a charter, the Declaration of duties and rights of journalistssigned on 24 November 1971 in Munich and adopted by the European Federation of Journalists,

Interesting title in that it puts the homework on your mind. Here are the first four:

1. « To respect the truth, whatever may be the consequences for oneself, and this, because of the public’s right to know the truth.

2. Defend the freedom of information, commentary and criticism.

3. Publish only information whose origin is known or accompany it, if necessary, with the necessary reservations; do not delete essential information and do not alter texts and documents.

4. Do not use unfair methods to obtain information, photographs and documents.

A Charter for journalism at the height of the climate emergency »

On September 14, 2022 – the date was a little hard to find… it is the fruit of a certain form of journalism – was presented a “ Charter for “journalism at the height of the ecological emergency” ».

This charter has/would have been signed by 1,500 journalists in their own name and “ dozens of newsrooms and organizations “. To know what this means, it is best to see the list of signatories. This also includes trade unions or trade union sections, schools of journalism and the Conference of Journalism Schools…

Are we still within the framework of information?

Here are four elements of the charter:

1. Dealing with climate, living organisms and social justice in a transversal way. These subjects are inseparable. Ecology should no longer be confined to a single heading; it must become a prism through which to consider all subjects.

[…]

4. Broaden the treatment of issues. Do not only return people to their individual responsibility, because most of the upheavals are produced at a systemic level and call for political responses.

5. Investigate the origins of the current upheavals. Questioning the growth model and its economic, financial and political actors, and their decisive role in the ecological crisis. Remember that short-term considerations can be contrary to the interests of humanity and nature.

6. Ensure transparency. Distrust of the media and the spread of false information that relativizes the facts oblige us to carefully identify the information and experts quoted, to clearly show the sources and to reveal potential conflicts of interest.

7. Reveal the strategies produced to sow doubt in the minds of the public. Certain economic and political interests work actively to construct statements that mislead the understanding of the subjects and delay the action necessary to confront the upheavals in progress. »

Just the word ” prism “… And the inclusion of the ” social justice » in ecology…

It seems to go without saying that these principles are of differentiated application – according to the general structure of the text.

Thus, the ” potential conflicts of interest will probably not be revealed when the person concerned is in the ” camp of good ».

Similarly, we will not denounce the ” strategies produced to sow doubt “when they make progress” action needed »… An action undoubtedly defined firstnot susceptible to criticism, questioning or contestation.

There are also some ” supports », with a heading « experts and scientists » and a section « members of civil society “. Four occurrences of ” IPCC »… The claim of membership or contribution to an organization supposed to be impartial and factual, in the manifestation of activism, is in my opinion disorderly.

This illustrates the growing drift of this institution towards militancy to the detriment of research and the establishment of scientific facts and the formulation of predictions that are as objective as possible. But this drift has even infiltrated, and how!, in the contribution of working group II to the sixth report, with remarks that are at best ambiguous on the ” social movements and climate protests ».

A charter for West France

It is announced in “Ouest-France adopts a charter for journalism at the level of ecological issues ».

In capo:

« The climate is warming due to human activity and scientists are clear: we must act now. By adopting a charter for journalism on the level of ecological issues and by giving its readers a toolbox of content on the subject, “West France” is committed to making the climate challenge and biodiversity a pillar of its editorial project. »

Extract :

« Officially launched on Thursday February 2, 2023, in the presence of scientists from the IPCC, the charter applies to the 650 editorial journalists who will benefit, in parallel, from an extensive training program. It will allow everyone to take ownership of climate and biodiversity issues, in order to deal with these subjects at the height they deserve and to give readers the keys to better understand, debate and act.

There is no question of being moralist or catastrophist: we will deal with the problem but will also provide some answers, by giving the floor to scientists, to those who act and by highlighting the solutions. »

Certainly ! But what can we conclude from point 1?

« 1. stand on the side of the scientific consensus: human activities are responsible for climate change and the collapse of biodiversity; »

Are we to understand that the newspaper will not deal properly with a subject that does not correspond to the ” scientific consensus or to an opinion presented as a consensus? For example in the case of ” basins » ?

What regarding point 3?

« 3. continue to process any events and informationincluding those that have a negative impact on the environment, to the extent they deserve and with discernment, without ignoring their environmental consequences;

Why only negative » ?

There is also :

« 9. choose relevant vocabulary and iconographywhich do not mislead or minimize reality; »

We place ourselves here, deliberately, in a negative vision, in an ambition to diffuse a distressing vision of reality. In the light of point 1, the ” climate change and […] the collapse of biodiversity “. In a neutral wording, in conformity with the Munich Charter, we would have substituted, for example, ” deform ” To ” they are smaller ».

All-out activism?

Thanks to ” freedom of information, comment and criticism », we have media that display diverse editorial lines, some very clear-cut, on the political, economic and societal level. We can only be delighted. The same applies to sections and programs ” oriented of more neutral media, on the same condition of posting, that is to say as long as things are clear.

Two disturbing signatures…

Problems arise when they are no longer so, when for example one claims or boasts of providing information by taking liberties with the truth.

The message that is broadcast by these news “ charters is that information is in danger of giving way to preaching and proselytism dressed in the tinsel of information.

What is disturbing here is that the ” climate emergency is partly a camouflage for a socio-political project that does not promise us a bright future, or even a future at all. This project will certainly encounter a lot of resistance… but it will result in a society of confrontation rather than cooperation. We can already see the beginnings of this with movements that claim to be ” rebellion ».

What is also disturbing is the individual enthusiasm for a militant approach likely to obliterate the duties of journalism, the conversion of newsrooms that continue to present themselves as news media ” without label and the penetration of this philosophy into schools of journalism.

In fact, when we see the drifts, in particular, of the public audiovisual channels, there is something really to worry regarding.

______________

* André Heitz is an agricultural engineer and retired international civil servant of the United Nations system. He has served the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). In his last position, he was the Director of the WIPO Coordination Office in Brussels.

A version of this article originally appeared on Counterpoints.