With the United Nations climate change conference under way this month in Copenhagen, many journalists face the challenge of covering an extremely complex issue. To help journalists -- and anyone else who is curious -- understand climate change, Tom Yulsman, an associate professor at the University of Colorado's School of Journalism & Mass Communication, has created a free, four-hour, online course titled "Covering Climate Change."

Yulsman, who also co-directs the Center for Environmental Journalism, was hired by Internews, an international media development organization. After five months of collaboration with Internews and the Poynter Institute, "Covering Climate Change" went live just days before the conference in Copenhagen began. Yulsman also blogs about science, the environment, policy and journalism at CEJournal.

The Camera caught up with Yulsman last week to talk about climate change and its coverage in the media.

1. What exactly is the climate change debate?

There is no one debate. Reporters fall into this trap, and readers fall into this trap of accepting that there is just one debate. There's science, and there's policy. Within science, there are dozens of debates about the various risks that we can expect over the future. There's not terribly much debate on the big question whether humans are causing climate change. There's pretty robust agreement on that. Within policy, there are all sorts of debates. There are even debates about how should science inform policy-making decisions.

2. What do you think is the most common misconception that people have about climate change?

I think it's not just a misconception about climate change per se, but about science in general. Many people don't understand that what scientists are saying about climate has to do with risk. If you accept the science and you accept that these risks are real, you are going to be tempted to come to the conclusion that we need to reinvent the whole economy. That's asking people to trust this science to change their whole lives and the way they do business. Maybe they are asking for a little more certainty. So, some people have unreasonable expectations about the certainty with which scientists can make statements about the future. There's a famous saying, "There are no facts about the future."

3. What do you think of the way the media has been covering the climate change conference this month in Copenhagen?

The media is not one thing. We've got broadcast, cable, bloggers, newspapers, etc. So, it's really hard to make one statement about all of those. My sense is that television news is driven by ratings. All that adds up to an inability to show the nuance of what's going on there. For the most part, the approach is to put together two people who disagree violently on the policies being discussed there, have them duke it out, and expect people to learn something from that. In newspapers, we're seriously depleted of specialists who can handle this. So, we rely on a relative handful for our reports from Copenhagen. That's a problem.

4. Other than your course, is there a single study that gives an accurate take on climate change?

It depends on the level interest and willingness to read dense and technical material. I always tell my students, 'Go to primary source documents.' The primary source in this case is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which produces these assessment reports. There are portions of those reports that are written for policy-makers in a more accessible style. Most of the policy that is being argued about in Copenhagen is really based on the information that's in those reports. So, if you're really motivated and you really want to understand things, I think you have to look at that.

5. How can one make sense of climate change and all its complexity?

We're talking about restructuring the whole global economy. This is epical. This is the kind of thing that the human species doesn't go through that much. There are enormous interests involved. Pretty much every sector of the economy in one way or another is affected. All of us are affected. So, the fact that it's going to seem intractable or hopelessly complicated, well, of course it's going to seem that way because of the challenge. People who, for whatever reason, want to derail action are actually pretty skillful at using this situation to their advantage, to sow confusion. It seems intractable, but it may not be. I hope that it's not. I feel pretty optimistic. I don't know why, but I do.

Share |

Original article on the Daily Camera website