Kyoto Protocol

1
Portrayals of Climate ChangePart 1
2

• Module Learning Outcomes
• Be aware of developments in climate change as
  they arise, and interpret them in their
  socio- economic and political context

• Develop key research skills

3

• By the end of this session, you should
• Have a different attitude towards information
• Be able to better identify bias inaccuracy and
  factors leading to them
• Be able to identify all main info sources for CC
  evaluate their reliability
• Understand the peer-review process, with its
  benefits and drawbacks
• Have experienced real-life examples of bias and
  inaccuracy, and the factors leading to them
• Be able to assess how different portrayals of
  climate change may affect science and society
• Be more familiar with the assessment criteria

4
1 Brainstorm Information sources for climate
change
5

• Which sources are reliable?
• Would you be more likely to believe them if two
  or more experts had vetted them first?
• Peer review the best guide weve got
• Whats peer reviewed?
• Fill in white-board

6
The culprit
7
Topic formulation
Original angle, well focused and new
Well targeted
Headline
Short, snappy (and witty)
Intro/ first paragraph
Concise
Summarises article well - breath prioritisation of material
Main Content
Well integrated into up-to-date context
Coherently written and well prioritised
Style
Easy to understand
Appropriate length of sentences and paragraphs
Notes to Editors
Appropriate breadth of relevant material

• 3 Media Stunt
• Write a short article for Leeds Student
  newspaper
• What happened
• Detailed description of suspect

• Compare stories
• Two possible reasons for differences

8
Whats peer reviewed cont
4 Benefits and drawbacks of peer review

• Need qualified, contentious reviewer
• Rivals can exploit
• Delays publication leaks may occur
• Author may not agree with reviewer
• When this happens, some resubmit until published
  somewhere

• More objective
• Represents academic community
• Improves quality
• Guides readers

-

9

• Homework
• Read and mark the two essays for Thursday
• Use Research Report assessment criteria
• Refer to Climate Change Glossary for technical
  language

Jump to 13?
10
Portrayals of Climate ChangePart 2
11

• Essay marking exercise
• Compare marks with neighbour
• Concensus
• Which is the better essay?
• Essay 1 Schlesinger (1999) published in

• Essay 2 by Wojick (1999), published on the
  internet by the Greening Earth Society

• Assessment criteria useful to evaluate published
  lit
• Research author credibility or rely on peer-review

12
Test this?
Rely on this?
13

• The Media Newspapers
• Earlier this year the Royal Society asked the
  public if they agreed that
• The media present science in a responsible way
• Do you?
• What was the response?

39
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
From Common (2000)
18

• Tabloids
• Stories about personalities that could be linked
  to European politics
• Fuel duty not linked to carbon dioxide emissions
• The idea that carbon dioxide emissions cause
  global warming is wrong (a Distinguished
  Science Writer)
• Failure of the Kyoto Protocol will 'doom
  mankind'
• It was revealed that Mount Everest was MELTING
  because of global warming

19

• Broadsheets
• More consistent
• Before, during and after the conference
• But
• Conspiracy theories little review of real
  issues
• Real subtext' to transfer jobs prosperity
  from USA to Europe and the developing world
• Unbalanced representation of scientific
  consensus
• A 'significant number of experts' deny the link
  from human activity to climate change.

20

• What influences media portrayals?
• Need to sell newspapers
• Fit readers views
• Subtle differences between UK US headlines

UK
IIASA-CLIMATE CHANGE 'WILL HIT THE HUNGRY' (BBC)
UK 'HIDING SCALE OF CLIMATE THREAT' (BBC,
Guardian, Scotsman)
HEAT IS ON IN GREECE (BBC News)
PRESERVING THE SPIRIT OF KYOTO (Financial Times)
DON'T DEBATE, DO SOMETHING ON CLIMATE CHANGE
(Financial Times)
KYOTO CENTRE BOOSTS UK DRIVE TO CURB GREENHOUSE
GASES (DETR)
BUSINESS CHIEFS THROW WEIGHT BEHIND KYOTO
(Financial Times)
21
USA
G8 TASK FORCE-US OPPOSES PLAN FOR CLEAN ENERGY
(NY Times)
MALDIVIANS KEEP EYE ON CLIMATE CHANGE, SEA LEVELS
(NY Times)
UTILITY PLANS TO PUT LIMITS ON ITS PLANTS (NY
Times, WSJ)
US-SEN. MCCAIN CRITICAL OF GLOBAL WARMING (NY
Times)
BUSINESS GROUPS READY FOR FIGHT OVER ENERGY
(Chicago Tribune)
NUCLEAR POWER'S NEW DAY (NY Times)
THE WORLD DOESN'T GET THE SCIENCE RIGHT (LA
Times)
22

• The Media TV news and documentaries
• More reliable?

23

• Internet
• Powerful tool
• Be wary little is peer-reviewed
• Internet sources least likely to contain bias and
  inaccuracy
• Online peer-reviewed journals (Web of Science)
• Information from University websites
• www.scirus.com
• Government and institute websites?

24

• Internet sources most likely to contain bias and
  inaccuracy

25
The Small Print A nonprofit arm of the Western
Fuels Association
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28

• Identifying reliable internet content
• Is the author named?
• Is the author credible (trace CV other work)
• (Use this information to reference it properly!)
• Is the information sourced properly?
• Evidence of peer-review (credits in
  acknowledgements, publication policy)
• Does it contradict information from other sources
  I know to be reliable?

29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35

• Books
• Often pre-reviewed - book concept
• Only positive reviews appear on book sleeve
• Negative reviews may abound in journals

36
Example Lomborgs The Skeptical
Environmentalist This is one of the most
valuable books on public policy - not merely on
environmental policy - to have been written for
the intelligent reader in the past ten years The
Skeptical Environmentalist is a triumph. The
Economist
37
His account offers nothing new or insightful,
and readers would do far better to read the IPCC
reports themselves and reach their own
conclusions. Science It is a mass of poorly
digested material, deeply flawed in its selection
of examples and analysis. . . It is like a bad
exam paper . . . The bias towards
non-peer-reviewed material over internationally
reputable journals is incredible. An industry has
arisen debunking this book chapter by chapter. At
present, it includes a website a series of
essays planned for Scientific American a guide
for journalists documenting Lomborg's worst
errors being assembled by the Union of Concerned
Scientists and various published pamphlets. We
have provided only a sampler. Nature
38

• Journals
• Difference between science magazines (e.g. New
  Scientist Scientific America) and peer-reviewed
  journals with primary research
• Top flight versus up-and-coming

39

• Implications of different portrayals for Science
  and Society
• Discuss
• What information sources influence public opinion
  most?
• In a democracy, what should set government policy
  and spending agendas?
• Who funds most climate-related research in
  Britain?
• How do researchers prioritise their research?

40

• Summary
• You should (in theory!) now
• Have a different attitude towards information
• Be able to better identify bias inaccuracy and
  factors leading to them
• Be able to identify all main info sources for CC
  evaluate their reliability
• Understand the peer-review process, with its
  benefits and drawbacks
• Have experienced real-life examples of bias and
  inaccuracy, and the factors leading to them
• Be able to assess how different portrayals of
  climate change may affect science and society
• Be more familiar with the assessment criteria