Media Criticism

This is a common convention of the “extreme weather” genre as climate chaos makes these destructive events more and more common: simply report the human suffering and sensational images, and make no mention of the human causes of the horrors people are seeing on their screen. Strip what is fundamentally a political story of all politics, and index the trauma squarely into the Oh, Dearism genre of passive reporting.

These devastating wildfires are not random acts of God. They are fueled and made far more likely by human-made climate change, a dynamic that will only get worse if those in power fail to act and reverse the US’s record fossil fuel production. But why would politicians and CEOs feel any pressure to respond to these catastrophic events when so few in the media center the role of fossil fuels in the destruction and death? Given the extremely high stakes and the limited timetable, in a sane world, wouldn’t every story about extreme weather events not only mention, but make central, carbon emissions’ role in fueling the destruction?

Connecting the human stakes of out-of-control climate chaos and the often dry science of climate models has been an almost impossible task for climate activists and scientists. Corporate news media—with its focus on one-off human interest and sensationalist images, rather than the why of the story—seems dead-set on making sure it’s a connection that remains largely abstract and impossible to make in the public’s mind.