Environmental Reporting - Literature review Example

Literature Review Literature Review Environmental Reporting The effect of the media in influencing the perception and subsequent reaction regarding a reported issue is magnanimous. The media offers a platform for unifying and consolidating ideologies concerning a particular issue. Environmental reporting is aimed at generating and sustaining an informed perception on issues related to the environment. According to Lacy and Coulson (2000, p. 14), environmental journalism entails the presentation of ideas, information and results regarding the environment. By doing this the journalist aims to inform and educate the society on environmental issues (Rademakers 2004, p.2 8). This means that the journalist wields the power to influence the society on environmental issues thereby impacting the future significantly. The importance of the environment seems to be an obvious comprehension to all but an assessment on the individual sacrifices and commitments directed to its well being undermines this assumption (Detjen, et al., 2000, p. 4). All human beings are connected to the environment both socially and economically and thus an impetus is required to initiate environmental obligation in the society. Environmental journalists have the power to initiate this process through objective reporting on issues concerned with the environment (Lacy and Coulson 2000, p. 15). The media has the power to alter people’s thoughts, decisions and even lifestyles through various tools such as agenda setting. Considering that everyone has a role to play in improving and sustaining the environment, environmental journalists are mandated to cultivate a global sense of environmental accountability. Lacy and Coulson (2000, p. 17) suggest that environmental reporting demands an alliance between the journalist and the scientists. This enhances the credibility and validity of environmental news and makes them relevant to the public. Environmental reporting is one of the most important elements in achieving environmental awareness and the inherent practices associated with it (Detjen, et al., 2000, p. 3). Environmental journalism is logically intertwined with the communication of science and risk in context (Rademakers 2004, p. 35). Environmental journalism like all other fields of journalism is mainly involved with information dissemination, and hence it is involved in the gathering and reporting of information related to science and risk in relation to the environment. This constitutes environmental communication and it reflects traditional features of communication such as criticisms, challenges and improvements (Detjen, et al., 2000, p. 7). Challenges Facing Environmental Reporters Environmental reporters are mainly faced with ordinary professional challenges of journalism but their task is complicated further by their field of operation. Ordinary professional challenges for journalists are usually related to objective and event reporting and reporting about response instead of initiative. Environmental journalists are challenged by other issues such as: time and financial constraints, information scarcity, management policy, information source credibility and advertising pressure (Rademakers 2004, p. 42-47). According to Detjen, et al. (2000, p. 5), the main challenge in environmental reporting is that it covers almost all other fields of journalism. For example, many business decisions are bound to affect the environment in one way or the other, same case for political outcomes and their effect on environmental policy. This means that the quality of reporting in environmental journalism is subject to other occurrences and the decision on what to report and what to ignore is difficult. On the other hand, the most appropriate sources of information for journalists present another challenge. The most favorable source of environmental information is from scientists and in practice the relationship between scientists and journalists is difficult. Scientists and journalists contradict on a number of issues revolving around time, organization and also their way of reporting information. According to a research by Maillé, Saint-Charles,and Lucotte (2009, p. 1-14), to study the gap between scientists and journalists, the researchers’ concluded that journalists and scientists are incompatible professionally. The research which was conducted through interviews on a group of Canadian scientists and journalists, the scientists objected to frustration when dealing with journalists (Maillé, Saint-Charles and Lucotte 2009, p. 4-11). The scientists cited inaccuracy and time differences as their main issues of contention with the media. Although scientists appear to direct a substantial amount of blame on journalists, it is important to consider the compromising situation that environmental journalists operate in. Comprehensive environmental journalism involves reporting current practices and issues coupled with their repercussions both socially and politically (Lacy and Coulson 2000, p. 18). Scientific reporting offers another challenge of uncertainty to environmental reporters. The reporters are unsure of the issues surrounding a particular research and innovation and the subsequent long -term implications on the real world. According to Detjen, et al. (2000, p. 10), the public demands that the environmental reporter should inform it of the meaning of new scientific developments and their effect on the society as a whole. Inaccuracy, arguments and theories contained in scientific declarations complicate the work of environmental journalists to the point of making it ineffective if not impossible. Detjen, et al. (2000, p. 9) suggests that one of the main constraints in scientific reporting is that it requires time and patience, and these two elements are not easily afforded in journalism. That is, for an environmental reporter to address a certain scientific issue conclusively he has to build the case from its inception which involves defining and translating complicated words until he arrives at the conclusion. Rademakers 2004, p. 54) suggests that media audiences easily lose interest in prolonged complexities and due to the high number of competing media today, the environmental reporter risks losing the audience to more “catchy” presentations. In addition to all these challenges, environmental reporters face the personal challenge f inadequate education or knowledge regarding scientific or environmental studies. Environmental reporting is not considered a prime field in the journalism world and hence many media lack professional environmental reporters. Although even for professional environmental reporters, some of the scientific information is bound to be challenging. This is because the reporter is mainly trained on the principles and etiquettes of journalism and hence lacks the technical adeptness to address complicated scientific issues. Finally, environmental reporting is also faced with the challenge of media management policy regarding environmental reporting. Many media houses do not appreciate environmental because frankly speaking environmental reporting does not constitute headline material. According to Lacy and Coulson (2000, p. 21), media houses are concerned with the commercial aspect of journalism. The main issues of consideration in commercial journalism are consumers, advertisement and marketable content and this dictates that editor choose exciting, stimulating and colorful stories to harness the audience. This was observed in a study to assess environmental coverage in mainstream news by Miller and Pollak (2012, p. 2-12). The study obtained data from a Project for Excellence in Journalism by Pew Research Center which ranked the content on various media over a 17-month period (Miller and Pollak (2012, p. 2). The study found that environmental stories were tripled by entertainment news in terms of coverage. According to Miller and Pollak (2012, p. 3), environmental news was greatly outranked by crime stories regardless of their geographical occurrence. Criticism and Failures of Environmental Reporting Environmental reporting becomes the subject of criticism because of problems entrenched in environmental journalism; these do not conform to the traditional practice of journalism. Environmental journalism lacks the following qualities that are the operating doctrines of traditional journalism; proximity, timeliness, consequence, human interest and in other cases conflict (Lacy and Coulson 2000, p. 23). Environmental reporting becomes ineffective and distorted if it tries to implement these doctrines because they are inapplicable in environmental journalism. This was observed in a research conducted by Rogers (1999, p. 188-195) on AIDS and global warming. He used focus groups to collect data and one of the limitations he encountered was complaints by the participants regarding the information that was used for the research (Rogers 1999, p. 192). They complained of information inadequacy, distortion, irrelevancy and contradictions in the environmental information availed (Rogers 1999, p. 194). In another study to assess reporting of environmental risks and hazards by Singer and Endreny (1993, p. 150-158), the researchers found out that the reported story differed from the actual research report in various ways. These were as a result of errors by reporting journalists and they included the omission of vital information from the reported story and also that the reporter differed in their emphasis concerning the research report (Singer and Endreny 1993, p. 157). The researchers were concerned with these differences and observed that when they were presented to the public then the whole research would appear inaccurate (Singer and Endreny 1993, p. 158). According to Lacy and Coulson (2000, p. 24), environmental reporters fail because they offer insufficient information, include traditional news attributes to environmental journalism such as entertainment, focus on crisis, present events instead of issues, lack long-term coverage and deviate from facts or reality. Improvements The basic improvements to environmental journalism include; identifying suitable sources, focusing solely on environmental issues, being thorough in environmental reporting, understanding the needs of the audience, improve their training ion environmental issues (Singer and Endreny 1993, p. 158). Specific improvements include; refrain from crisis-oriented reporting, simplify environmental reporting by translating and explaining complicated issues and also acknowledge uncertainty regarding scientific findings and risk (Lacy and Coulson 2000, p. 22). Environmental reporting constitutes an important element in environmental conservation and sustenance. Environmental reporters should implement these improvements and hence enhance the effectiveness of environmental reporting. This will ensure that they fulfill their professional obligation to create and sustain environmental awareness in the society. Environment as a policy issue The environment offers the basic requisites for life and it is mandatory to treat it as a policy issue. The environment is a socio-economic resource which faces a vast number of hazards which are inherently related to societal malpractices. According to Dalal-Clayton and Bass (2009, p. 2), Treating the environment as a policy issue demands integrating the environment into the global development institutions and decisions. Dalal-Clayton and Bass (2009, p. 3) refer to this process as mainstreaming the environment in their report on the same. Dalal-Clayton and Bass (2009, p.3) assert that the importance of mainstreaming the environment is based on the interdependency relationship that exists between the environment and economic and social development. The management of political, social and economic institutions affects the environment in various ways and thus translates in that a sustainable and quality environment is essential to the enhancement of political, social and economic institutions in a society (Dalal-Clayton and Bass 2009, p. 5). Traditionally, environment mainstreaming is a practice that has been in existence. In the 1960s and 70s environmental mainstreaming was highly advocated and relevant measures were instituted. However, with the increased concentration on short term productivity and profitability, the environment has been demoted to lower echelons in the global and regional policy frameworks. The current state of the environment has captured the interest of many observers due to observable effects that have accrued from environmental degradation. These include climate change, unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, loss of soil fertility, floods, droughts and the overall destruction of biodiversity (Dalal-Clayton and Bass 2009, p. 6). This has forced various government institutions to participate in the environmental conservation campaign. Private institutions have also reacted commendably by embracing proposed recommendations on environmental conservation such as the use of renewable energy. Treating the environment as a policy issue or mainstreaming the environment involves a number of activities. The first is to adopt and implement all sustainable environmental practices. This can be done procedurally over a period of time. According to Dalal-Clayton and Bass (2009, p. 7), this involves adopting energy solutions, climate change solutions, land management solutions, efficient planning practices and technological innovation. This process also involves improving societal productivity and adaptability and engaging in objective policy debates (Dalal-Clayton and Bass 2009, p. 8). In order to achieve these prescriptions the society has to engage in collaboration between all the stakeholders in the society. The stakeholders can be divided into two groups composed of the crucial players and the ordinary players. The crucial players include leaders, political institutions, catalytic organizations and development cooperation agencies (Dalal-Clayton and Bass 2009, p. 9). Catalytic organizations refer to those organizations that can enhance environment mainstreaming by influencing the society to address all the issues proposed for environmental conservation. The media is one of the catalytic organizations that are tasked with influencing and enhancing environmental mainstreaming. The media is a powerful tool whether used positively or negatively. This is because it shapes the public’s perception regarding a given issue. The media plays the role of educating and informing the public on various issues. The media can mainstream the environment by portraying it as a policy issue by using its agenda setting strategies (Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007, p. 11). Agenda setting means that the media uses a variety of strategies to influence the opinions, beliefs and attitudes of the public regarding a certain issue. These tools include framing which refers to the content composition and presentation by the media in a bid to increase or decrease its importance as perceived by the audience. Another agenda setting tool is called priming and it also involves creating a mental impression of a certain issue or person on the public through repeated displays or other similar media effect strategies (Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007, p. 14). According to Weaver (2007, p. 143), several studies have been conducted to evaluate the effect of the media on the audience in setting the agenda of a particular issue. McCombs and Shaw (1972, p. 178-186) conducted a research to this effect by interviewing participants in a political survey. They found that most of the participants reflected the views that were portrayed on the media regarding various issues that were previously addressed by politicians (McCombs and Shaw 1972, p. 180-184). The researchers concluded that the media was capable of shaping the public’s opinion on various issues (McCombs and Shaw 1972, p. 185). Other studies have been undertaken with the specific interest of assessing the effect of the media inn influencing the public’s perception regarding environmental issues. Shanahan, et al. (2008, p. 115-135) conducted a study to ascertain the role of the media in policy change. This study is directly connected to this proposition and the results will offer a suitable insight ion the role of the media in this case. The four researchers were mainly interested in the agenda setting effect of the media on the public regarding the Greater Yellowstone Area environmental issues between 1986 and 2006 (Shanahan, et al., 2008, p. 115). They wanted to find out whether the media acted as only a conduit or channel of information or if it contributed to the information passed and thereby influenced the public. They content analyzed one hundred and seventy five newspapers (Shanahan, et al., 2008, p. 115). They used both local and national newspapers in a bid to garner substantial data for the analysis. The researchers wanted to identify all the agenda setting strategies that were included in the papers which were included in the narratives to convey desired beliefs using narrative framing strategies (Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007, p. 14-17). In this research, the media was considered using three perspectives, namely; contemporary policy theory, media effects theory and also the narrative policy analysis (Shanahan, et al., 2008, p. 120-128) According to previous analysts considered in his research, the media was mainly a contributor in policy change. Shanahan, et al. (2008, p. 126) considered the Advocacy Coalition Framework which suggested that the media played both the role of a contributor and conduit but in a rather insignificant way. The findings of the research depicted the media as both a contributor and a conduit in the policy change. The newspapers contained narrative framing effects in the form of source cues, powerful adjectives and thematic frames (Shanahan, et al., 2008, p. 128). However, the content analysed papers did not have episodic frames which reduced the effect of on the public. According to Shanahan, et al. (2008, p. 132), the constructions and content analysed proved that most of the papers were composed to reflect their ideological contentions regarding the issue. This shows that the media can be used effectively to influence the public on issues related to the public. Maceviciute (2000, p. 20-60) conducted a case study to evaluate the influence of the media on the public’s environmental consciousness. This study also focused on the agenda setting power attributed to the media and the researcher content analyzed newspapers in Lithuania to assess their reporting on the Baltic Sea Crisis (Maceviciute 2000, p. 23-38). The researcher also distributed questionnaires in order to compare the public’s consciousness and opinions with the reported content (Maceviciute 2000, p. 38-43). Finally, the researcher consulted experts to compare and contrast their views on the environmental issue with what was reported and what the public perceived. The researcher found that the media played a big role in influencing the participants in the study who were mostly students (Maceviciute 2000, p. 42-48). The researcher concluded that the media had a significant influence on the public through agenda setting and framing strategies. Maceviciute (2000, p. 64) also noted that the press failed to report adequate and fulfilling information regarding the crisis thereby affecting the overall perception of the issue by the public. Although these studies are limited in one way or the other, their consensual findings prove that the media has considerable power to mainstream the environment. The media needs to portray the environment as a newsworthy item by including environmental issues in its prime reporting. According to Scheufele and Tewksbury (2007, p. 15), the media can use a variety of agenda setting strategies to enhance the public’s perception regarding the importance of the environment. For example, the media can combine priming and source cues to maximize the effect of this issue on the public thereby promoting the environment as a policy issue. Weaver (2007, p. 145) suggests that when evaluating the intended effect on the public, the researcher only needs to content analyze media content to acquire data for analysis. Global Media Global media refers to all media activities, systems and practices that enhance international communication. Global media or international media is a powerful tool of communication whose efficiency and effectiveness is based on technological development. Global media evolved after the invention of satellite communication which led to international dissemination of information through radios and televisions. In recent times, global media has become the basic source of information after the internet evolution. Global media traverses political and cultural boundaries and hence forms the basis for cross-cultural or intercultural communication and transnational communication (McChesney 2001, p. 6). According to Chan-Olmsted and Chang (2003, p15), global media has been spurred by the internet evolution which has resulted in the elimination of time and geographical barriers in journalism. Global media form part of globalization and they constitute the global village described by the internet (McChesney 2001, p. 9). Global media includes media giants like CNN, BBC and Al-Jazeera and they have developed an international journalistic model that covers global issues. Global media has been criticized by some scholars on the basis of their effect on stability and other underlying issues associated with globalization. Hafez (2009 p. 329) suggests that global media has not yet been realized due to the fact that global media such CNN still has national roots and attributes. Hafez (2009 p. 3230), basis this argument on the media terms that are used to refer to foreign issues such as “them” and “us” used to refer to the country of origin. He claims that these media are only rooted locally and nationally. The main skepticism regarding global media arises from the apparent domination of Western media in this context. Skeptics argue that global media does not apply to media conglomerates such as CNN because their global reach is only for businesses advances and not for content delivery (McChesney 2001, p. 9; Hafez 2009 p. 331). By considering their ownership and their business practices these scholars refute the claims that these media represent the actual definition of global media (Chan-Olmsted and Chang 2003, p. 13). According to McChesney (2001, p. 8), even when the media tailor their products for local markets, they do not qualify as global media and that because of their massive influence and resources end up setting the agenda for other media. This approach dictates a different cultural impact by the cross-cultural characteristic of international media which results in the creation of a hybrid culture. However, many scholars agree that the premise for global media is based ion transnational occurrence (McChesney 2001, p. 11). Global media has also been defined in terms of content by Olausson (2011, p. 136). He suggests that global media should not necessarily refer to international media in terms of geographical cover, but is should also refer to coverage (Olausson 2011, p. 137). This means that any media that contains international information can also be considered as global media based on in his they of discourse interpretation (Olausson 2011, p. 140). The author asserts that for a media to be classified as global media it must be able to connect various geopolitical segments. According to Wark (1994, p.35), the invention and development of mobile phones and smart phones combined with internet growth has accentuated this analysis further because these technological tools have converted almost all media to global media. This is because nowadays almost all the media in the world operates a website which contains their media material and it can be accessed from any place in the world (Wark 1994, p.37). Global media has power to generate different effects in the public depending on its use. Several scholars have tried to study the effect of global portrayal of crisis or issues on the audience. An illustrative example of this argument is described in the discussion by Chouliararki (2006, p. 24) regarding the media depictions of violence. In her study, Chouliararki (2006, p. 24) she classifies three types of media depictions to show the effect generated by repeated media content on global media namely; empathy, contemplation and denunciation. All these effects witnessed in global media after the repeated presentation of issues such as the catastrophic Asian Tsunami. The main issues facing global media today are related to the common journalistic challenges in regional and national fields (Chouliararki 2006, p. 22). They include; information exaggeration which includes distortion, inaccuracy and fabrications, subjectivity and propaganda (McChesney 2001, p. 13). These issues undermine the effectiveness of global media in addressing global issues. Another issue that has plagued the media in general is media manipulation (Chan-Olmsted and Chang 2003, p. 16). Media manipulation involves the selfish provision of distorted material to media by organizations or governments. Media manipulation affects global media by limiting its acquisition and dissemination of facts regarding various issues. Wark (1994, p.39) states that technology is a major influence in global journalism. Advocates for global media maintain that technology is the main driver of global media and that the success of global media is based on its effectiveness. Technology is used to solve some of the challenges facing global media, where reporters are able to acquire and upload information at high speeds. In environmental issues, media manipulation has been a common practice for governments and large organizations. This involves the commitment of massive resources to various media to discredit existing facts regarding issues such as climate change, pollution effects and global warming. The effects of these actions are observed later when some of these organizations change sides and become advocates of environmental conservation. References Chan-Olmsted, S. M. and Chang, B. H., 2003. Diversification strategy of global media conglomerates: Examining its patterns and determinants. The Journal of Media Economics, [pdf] 16(4), 213-233. Available at: http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/ogandy/Gandy%20Comm534/chan-olmstead%20-%20diversification%20strategy%20of%20global%20media.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Chouliararki, L., 2006. The Spectatorship of Suffering, Sage, London, United Kingdom. Dalal-Clayton D. and Bass S., 2009. The challenges of environmental mainstreaming: Experience of integrating environment into development institutions and decisions. Environmental Governance No. 3. International Institute for Environment and Development. [pdf] London. Available at: http://www.unpei.org/sites/default/files/publications/17504IIED.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Detjen, J., Fico, F. Li, X. and Kim, Y., 2000. Changing work environment of environmental reporters. Newspaper Research Journal, 21(1), 2-11. Hafez, K., 2009. Let’s Improve “Global Journalism”! Journalism, Vol.10, No.3, pp. 329–331. Lacy, S. and Coulson, D.C., 2000. Comparative case study: Newspaper source use on the environmental beat. Newspaper Research Journal, [pdf] 21(1), 13-25. Maceviciute, A., 2000. The influence of the media on the development of publics environmental consciousness: case study of Lithuanian press. [pdf] Master’s thesis, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Available at: http://www.lumes.lu.se/database/Alumni/99.00/theses/maceviciut e_ausra.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Maillé, M. È., Saint-Charles, J. and Lucotte, M., 2009. The gap between scientists and journalists: the case of mercury science in Québec’s press. Public Understanding of Science. [pdf] Available at: http://www.geotop.ca/pdf/lucotteM/Maille_et_al_PUS_2010.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. McChesney, R. W. (2001). Global Media, Neoliberalism, and Imperialism. MONTHLY REVIEW. [pdf] Available at: http://www.designingasociety.org/evergreen/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Global-media-neoloberalism-imperialism.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. McCombs, M. E. and Shaw, D. L., 1972. The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public opinion quarterly, [pdf] 36(2), 176-187. Available at: http://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/teaching/PLSC541_Fall06/McCombs%20and%20Shaw%20POQ%201972.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Miller T. and Pollak T., 2012. Environmenmtal coverage in the Mainstream News: We Need More. Project for Improved Environmental Coverage (PIEC), [pdf] SEE Innovation. Available at: environmentalcoverage.org/ranking [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Olausson, U., 2011. Explaining global media: a discourse approach. The Systemic Dimension of Globalization. InTech, [pdf] 135-148. Available at:http://cdn.intechweb.org/pdfs/17420.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Rademakers, L., 2004. Examining the handbooks on environmental journalism: A qualitative document analysis and response to the literature [pdf] (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida). Available at: http://skripsi-raw.googlecode.com/svn-history/r62/trunk/EBOOK-REFERENSI-ALL/Examining_the_Handbooks_on_Environmental_Journalism.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Rogers, C.L., 1999. The importance of understanding audiences. In S.M. Friedman, S.Dunwoody,and C.L. Rogers Eds. Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science (pp. 179-200). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Scheufele, D. A. and Tewksbury, D., 2007. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of communication, 57(1), 9-20. Available at: http://www.davidryfe.com/here/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/scheufele.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Shanahan, E. A., McBeth, M. K., Hathaway, P. L. and Arnell, R. J., 2008. Conduit or contributor? The role of media in policy change theory. Policy Sciences, [pdf] 41(2), 115-138. Available at: http://www.montana.edu/polisci/Faculty/Shanahan/PS_conduit.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Singer, E. and Endreny, P.M., 1993. Reporting on risk: How the mass media portray accidents, diseases, disasters, and other hazards. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Wark, M., 1994. Virtual geography: Living with global media events. [pdf] Indiana University Press. Available at: http://www.nla.gov.au/openpublish/index.php/jasal/article/viewFile/2868/3281 [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Weaver, D. H., 2007. Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming. Journal of communication, [pdf] 57(1), 142-147. Available at: http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/thoughts_on_agenda_setting_framing_and_priming.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2014]. Read More