On 1 December 2011 the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism* released Part One of a two-part study called A SCEPTICAL CLIMATE: Media coverage of climate change in Australia 2011 which confirms what many may have suspected about the state of Australian journalism today.
There are few media stories in which there is such an obvious public interest as that of climate change. There is no doubt that the subject has been well covered by the media.
In 2009 no topic occupied more media attention in Australia (Media Monitors, 2009) and in 2011 climate policy has again been very high on the Australian domestic news agenda. The quantity of the coverage, however, tells us little about the quality of that coverage.
COVERAGE OF CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY
• Overall, negative coverage of the Gillard government’s carbon policy across ten newspapers outweighed positive coverage across ten Australian newspapers by 73% to 27%. (Note: After neutral items were discounted). (See page 32)
• All papers contained some positive and a substantial amount of neutral material. The highest level of neutral articles was found in The Age and The Hobart Mercury, the lowest level was found in The Northern Territory News and The Daily Telegraph. (See page 32)
• After neutral items were discounted, negative coverage (82%) across News Ltd newspapers far outweighed positive (18%) articles. This indicates a very strong stance against the carbon policy adopted by the company that controls most Australian metropolitan newspapers, and the only general national daily. (See page 33)
• By comparison, Fairfax was far more balanced in its coverage of the policy than News Ltd publications with 57% positive articles outweighing 43% negative articles. (See page 33)
• The Age was more positive (67%) rather than negative towards the policy than any other newspaper. The Daily Telegraph was the most negative (89%) rather than positive of
newspapers. (See page 33)
• Headlines were less balanced than the actual content of articles. (See Figures 7 and 9 on pages 29 and 30).
• Neutral articles were more likely to be headlined negative (41%) than positive (19%). (See page 34)
• Readers relying on metropolitan newspapers living in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane received more coverage of carbon policy issues than readers in Perth, Adelaide and Darwin. (See page 25)
• The Australian gave far more space to the coverage of climate change than any other newspaper. Its articles were coded 47% negative, 44% neutral and 9% positive. When neutrals were discounted, there were 84% negative articles compared to 17% positive. (See page 32)
It is hard to influence public policy if you do not have a voice in the media (Thompson, 1990; Ericson 1989). At the heart of journalism is the relationship between journalists and their sources (Ericson, 1990; Cottle, 2003; Roberts & Nash, 2009). The inclusion or exclusion of sources is one significant way in which media exercises power. An analysis of quoted sources is therefore an important way of assessing the nature of coverage.
More than 11% of stories had no source at all and another 30% of the rest of the articles had only one source. This indicates the one-dimensional nature of many stories.
While some will justify a negative approach by appealing to the important role of journalists to scrutinise government, 31% of news and feature articles with no more than one source indicates that many sources are in fact not held to account. This may in part be due to the lack of resources in newsrooms under stress from a loss of advertising. However, as other media research has shown, this opens up possibilities for well-resourced interests to gain high visibility for their views through press releases including commissioned research and consultants reports tailored to the news cycle. Private power as well as government power needs to consistently scrutinised by journalists.
Political values and support for political policies are embedded in journalists’ reporting either implicitly or explicitly. It is clear that The Age is a more progressive than The Australian but there is no evidence in this study that The Age engages in censorship. Indeed it appears to be considerably more balanced than any News Ltd paper. All papers in this study strongly represented business sources and if any sources were shut out of the debate, it was civil society sources and scientists who supported the policy.
To be positive or negative towards a policy does not imply that a journalist loses impartiality, fairness or a critical approach. Columnists such as the News Ltd.’s Mike Steketee, Fairfax’s Ian Verrender and Peter Hartcher wrote a range of incisive pieces making critical points about both sides of the carbon policy debate. The SMH’s Lenore Taylor held Abbott’s policy and the claims of industry up to scrutiny more consistently than nearly all other journalists.
Just twenty years ago, a Parliamentary Select Inquiry investigated the Australian print media and found that while the media was highly concentrated and this had an impact on diversity, the Inquiry could find no evidence that the media, in particular News Ltd was biased.
Yes, this report has established that the reporting of climate change in sections of the Australian media has been far from impartial, fair or balanced. Is it in the public interest for a media organisation that dominates the market to ‘campaign’ as The Daily Telegraph and The Herald Sun have done, on an issue which a huge majority of the world's scientists have found threatens the lives of millions? In what circumstances does a lack of diversity and balance, represent a threat to democracy?
Evidence in this report suggests that many Australians did not receive fair, accurate and impartial reporting in the public interest in relation to the carbon policy in 2011. This suggests that rather an open and competitive market that can be trusted to deliver quality media, we may have a case of market failure.
* The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism’s research work on climate change is part of the Global Environmental Initiative (GEJI), a partnership of nine tertiary institutions in Australia and Europe working on research and teaching about the environment and media.
No comments:
Post a Comment