This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/02/facts-need-backing-up
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| The readers' editor on... when unattributed facts need backing up | The readers' editor on... when unattributed facts need backing up |
| (about 20 hours later) | |
| A marked-up cutting from the Guardian arrives in the post with a letter from a reader. The story is headlined "CO2 at its highest level for more than 3m years", which was published on 11 May 2013. The reader is David Lipsey, who sits on the Labour benches in the Lords. He is chair of the parliamentary group on statistics and a member of the board of Full Fact, a non-profit fact-checking organisation. | |
| He says: "... I know the Guardian tries hard to defend the contested frontier between news and opinion. But in the case of environmental stories, the natural passion of your reporters tends to erode this crucial divide." | He says: "... I know the Guardian tries hard to defend the contested frontier between news and opinion. But in the case of environmental stories, the natural passion of your reporters tends to erode this crucial divide." |
| While making clear that he is not a climate change sceptic, Lipsey takes issue with the way the concentration of carbon dioxide passing 400 parts per million (ppm) was reported. In the first sentence the event is described as a "milestone". The story goes on to say that the last time so much greenhouse gas was in the air "the Arctic was ice-free, savannah spread across the Sahara desert and the sea level was up to 40 metres higher. "These conditions are expected to return in time…" | While making clear that he is not a climate change sceptic, Lipsey takes issue with the way the concentration of carbon dioxide passing 400 parts per million (ppm) was reported. In the first sentence the event is described as a "milestone". The story goes on to say that the last time so much greenhouse gas was in the air "the Arctic was ice-free, savannah spread across the Sahara desert and the sea level was up to 40 metres higher. "These conditions are expected to return in time…" |
| In the seventh paragraph, the story asserts "the world's governments have agreed to keep the rise [in global average temperatures] to 2C – the level beyond which catastrophic warming is thought to become unstoppable". | In the seventh paragraph, the story asserts "the world's governments have agreed to keep the rise [in global average temperatures] to 2C – the level beyond which catastrophic warming is thought to become unstoppable". |
| Lipsey writes: "In what sense is 400 parts a million a milestone and what does the word add, save opinion, to the intro? By whom are these conditions 'expected to return in time' and who says the consequences will be 'devastating'? By whom is catastrophic warming 'thought to be unstoppable' at 2 degrees (and does this mean that at 1.99 degrees it is stoppable)? …it may well be that everything in this piece is true. But it is not enough for the reporter to assert that on his own authority without citing sources". | Lipsey writes: "In what sense is 400 parts a million a milestone and what does the word add, save opinion, to the intro? By whom are these conditions 'expected to return in time' and who says the consequences will be 'devastating'? By whom is catastrophic warming 'thought to be unstoppable' at 2 degrees (and does this mean that at 1.99 degrees it is stoppable)? …it may well be that everything in this piece is true. But it is not enough for the reporter to assert that on his own authority without citing sources". |
| Damian Carrington, the Guardian's head of environment, wrote the story. He said: | Damian Carrington, the Guardian's head of environment, wrote the story. He said: |
| • "It's a 'milestone' because it is a round number | • "It's a 'milestone' because it is a round number |
| • 'expected to return in time' - this is completely uncontroversial among climate scientists – the last time we had 400ppm CO2, both temperature and sea level was far higher, but it takes time for the planet to adjust | |
| • 'unstoppable at 2C' – the entire world's governments, via the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, agree that 2C is the safe limit." | • 'unstoppable at 2C' – the entire world's governments, via the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, agree that 2C is the safe limit." |
| At the heart of this complaint is the question of how much a journalist is entitled to rely on a fact being undisputed and so widely accepted that authority for the fact doesn't need to be cited every time it is used. For example, British newspapers are unlikely to state that David Cameron is the "prime minister of great Britain and Northern Ireland" every time they write about him. When it comes to the environment, however, a lot of ground is contested, which often angers scientists in the field who believe the facts are incontrovertible. | At the heart of this complaint is the question of how much a journalist is entitled to rely on a fact being undisputed and so widely accepted that authority for the fact doesn't need to be cited every time it is used. For example, British newspapers are unlikely to state that David Cameron is the "prime minister of great Britain and Northern Ireland" every time they write about him. When it comes to the environment, however, a lot of ground is contested, which often angers scientists in the field who believe the facts are incontrovertible. |
| To avoid assertions without support, the Guardian reported a survey on 16 May of thousands of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals. This survey found that 97.1% of those papers agreed that climate change is caused by human activity. The survey, published in Environmental Research Letters, considered the work of 29,000 scientists in 11,994 academic papers. Of the 4,000-plus papers that took a position, on the causes of climate change only 0.7% (or 83) of those thousands of academic articles disputed the scientific consensus that climate change is the result of human activity, with the view of the remaining 2.2% unclear. | To avoid assertions without support, the Guardian reported a survey on 16 May of thousands of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals. This survey found that 97.1% of those papers agreed that climate change is caused by human activity. The survey, published in Environmental Research Letters, considered the work of 29,000 scientists in 11,994 academic papers. Of the 4,000-plus papers that took a position, on the causes of climate change only 0.7% (or 83) of those thousands of academic articles disputed the scientific consensus that climate change is the result of human activity, with the view of the remaining 2.2% unclear. |
| Specialist reporters feel freer to use unattributed fact than general reporters because of reputations established over time and an understanding of what is acceptable to their audience. | Specialist reporters feel freer to use unattributed fact than general reporters because of reputations established over time and an understanding of what is acceptable to their audience. |
| Carrington said: "The question it raises for me is who are the people contesting the facts? Every government, every science academy and 97% of research do not contest these facts." | Carrington said: "The question it raises for me is who are the people contesting the facts? Every government, every science academy and 97% of research do not contest these facts." |
| I wouldn't quibble with the use of "milestone". Two leading scientists used the word later in the piece, as well as Edward Davey, the energy and climate change secretary. However, I do think care should be taken especially in this area to attribute more often in such contested areas, especially in print. Online it's easier because links can be used to lead to supporting material. | I wouldn't quibble with the use of "milestone". Two leading scientists used the word later in the piece, as well as Edward Davey, the energy and climate change secretary. However, I do think care should be taken especially in this area to attribute more often in such contested areas, especially in print. Online it's easier because links can be used to lead to supporting material. |
| • This article was amended on 3 June 2013 to correct CO² to CO2. |