Mass Media Coverage of Environmental Issues: Impact on Disaster Public Policy

Reporting of environmental security concerns links either directly or indirectly to the development of environmental and disaster policies. These policies have impact on larger security concerns in both developing and developed countries. This chapter will examine mass media coverage of environmental issues and the impact of the coverage on environmental security as well as disaster and security public policy. In addition to giving a theoretical framework of mass media and policy making, the chapter will examine various disaster public policies and their relationship to environmental issues and their application to security practice, as well as to the media coverage of the environment particularly in disaster situations. This examination results in a better, more comprehensive view of complex relationships and global interdependencies and the impact of environmental issues and press coverage and their links to environmental security, national security and human security. Both case study and theoretical approaches are used. The chapter also provides possible discussion questions and case studies to promote in-class learning. Learning objectives:  Explain how media coverage confuses rather than clarifies the issues involved in environmental security.  Provide guidelines for working with the media to enhance and improve the message of climate change and its impact on environmental security.  Describe how media coverage is used to influence the development of environmental and disaster public policy. INTRODUCTION Recent happenings in the global warming debate have the potential to change attitudes about whether climate change is human-caused and about the need for U.S. legislation and global climate policy. Among the occurrences are revelations about the integrity of research, harsh weather conditions, a global financial crisis, and polls showing a lack of popular support. Even with these changes many politicians seem to be determined to move ahead with what may prove to be very unpopular and financially devastating legislation. Prior to 2000 Ross Gelbspan and other environmentalists lamented about the stranglehold that the fossil fuel industry had on media coverage. “The fossil fuel lobby has mounted an extremely effective campaign of disinformation to persuade the public and policy-makers that the issue of atmospheric warming is still stuck in the limbo of scientific uncertainty,” wrote Gelbspan. However, advocates of human-caused global warming began their own lobbying effort that won over the press and a majority of the public to what became known as the consensus view (Matthews, 2005; Begley, 2007). The media stopped listening to global warming skeptics, some labelling them as lunatics and corporate hacks. In much of the media, alternative viewpoints are no longer sought nor listened to. Reporters adopted a view that, like the dangers of smoking, global warming is a “reality” caused by human consumption and something must be done. Closure of the press debate on global warming leads to a failure to discuss viable alternatives that might promote economic growth, and policies that discourage industry and competitiveness.