Truthout: When Climate Message Is Strong, Attack the Messenger!

[marmar]

When Climate Message Is Strong, Attack the Messenger!
By Joe Brewer
t r u t h o u t | Guest Contributor

Monday 19 March 2007

An article published March 13, 2007, in the New York Times clearly demonstrates the importance of framing when discussing important political issues. William J. Broad's article, "From a Rapt Audience, a Call to Cool the Hype," in the science section already ranks as one of the most popular articles of the day. This article is filled with misuses and abuses of language designed to undermine the credibility of Al Gore as a messenger for global warming.

As an individual trained in both the atmospheric sciences (I have a master's degree from the University of Illinois) and cognitive sciences, my skills are well-suited to the task of demonstrating Broad's misrepresentation of human-caused climate change through clever manipulations of language. Through the analysis that follows, we shall see that he has worked very hard to spread doubt and skepticism about one of the most important issues humanity must face in the days and years ahead.

Before jumping into the offensive assertions plaguing the article, it may be helpful to elucidate Broad's agenda, which is to undermine Al Gore's message by attacking the credibility of the messenger. In chapter three of Thinking Points: Communicating Our American Values and Vision, George Lakoff discusses the message frame as an important way of structuring information. Common elements of all message frames are certain semantic roles: messengers, audience, issue, message, medium and images. Crucial to the message is the messenger. The messenger must have both integrity and credibility. People will not give merit to messages that come from dubious sources, even when the message itself is trustworthy.

Plant Seeds of Doubt and Watch What Grows

As we shall see below, William J. Broad has worked long and hard to cast shadows over Gore's credibility. I suppose when the message is this firmly grounded in truth, albeit an inconvenient one, the only way to discourage people from taking action is to redirect attention away from the facts. Broad starts by stating that part of Gore's "scientific audience is uneasy." This is his central claim, which we shall see does not correspond well with reality. He goes on to say that "Mr. Gore's central points are exaggerated and erroneous" (emphasis added) and that many scientists are "alarmed ... at what they call his alarmism." He sets the whole thing off in this way to establish a basis for concern that Gore is not supported by scientists. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/031907F.shtml

[Uncle Joe]

1. Most excellent analysis from Joe Brewer

Thanks for the thread marmar

Kicked and recommended