FOR THE WEEK OF JULY 21, 2008

Some environment 'news' can pollute your brain

Now that you read with a more critical eye, try to spot buzzword clichés or questionable statements in environmental coverage.

Length limits can lead reporters to oversimplify complex issues or omit clear explanations of scientific topics. Do you have unanswered questions after reading a selected article on the environment or another technical subject?

Balance is important in all news coverage. See if you sense a tilt toward one side in an article about an environmental risk, cleanup or trend.

Our planet's big environmental issues are deeper and more detailed than newspaper, magazine or TV reports typically can address in a meaningful way. But that doesn't stop reporters and editors from typing - and from possibly confusing or misleading news consumers.

Even some insiders are concerned about "whiplash journalism," as New York Times environment reporter Andrew Revkin recently described the back-and-forth volleys of optimistic news and dire warnings. A media journal published by Columbia University quotes Revkin as criticizing this cycle of "new hope" and "no hope" stories - such as reports that we'll see more hurricanes because of global warming, followed by studies saying we won't.

A related problem, according to critics of quick-hit environmental journalism, is the popularity of buzzwords like "inconvenient truth," "green," "clean coal" and "tipping point." Overuse, including by companies that embrace "green" for image polishing, can make readers cynical and numb to actual news, Columbia Journalism Review suggested this summer. Its article is headlined "Five Inconvenient Truths of Environmental Journalism."

Reporter says: "The never-ending search by some editors and reporters for 'bad guys' or villains to explain environmental problems is simplistic." -- Tim Wheeler of The Baltimore Sun, president of the Society of Environmental Journalists

Article writer says: "Deadline pressure can lead editors to push through a story with a sexy hook like the imminent danger of chemicals in the water supply, without discussion of how little we know about environmental chemical exposure." - David Downs, author of Columbia Journalism Review study

Reader says: "I'm confused and a little fed up with the often contradictory messages out there on how to live lightly on the earth. I'm a little overwhelmed." -- Mary Burnham, quoted in New York Times article on "green noise"

Front Page Archive

Some environment 'news' can pollute your brain

On your mark, get set . . . for the Summer Olympics

Gulp 'n go light breakfast may backfire with weight gain

Look where some teens get alcoholic drinks

Mars discovery brings out of this world excitement

Click to play: Online videos attract viewers of all ages

Summer fun goal: Fewer trips to gas pump

Bloggers may get a health boost, researchers say

Is there a learning gap between boys and girls in school?

:-( TXT TLK uncool 4 skul

Do we need government 'baby-sitters' for health?

New game draws familiar fire: Grand Theft Auto series targeted again

World Press Freedom Day spotlights an essential right

Earth Day brings reminders of environmental gains and challenges

Scrabble F-U-N turns into F-I-G-H-T over Facebook version

British magazines draw flak over 'enhanced' photos that give models 'perfect' bodies

Cyber censors block web news and videos in some nations

Lights will go dark during Earth Hour this Saturday

Online gender gap separates girls (No. 1) from boys in three areas

For many music fans, CDs are so last century