Recently the Guardian which is both a newspaper and online chose to change the terminology it uses to report on climate and the imminent threat of catastrophic change. It has updated its style guide to introduce terms which it feels more accurately describe the environmental crises facing the world. Instead of “climate change” the preferred terms are “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown” and “global heating” is favoured over “global warming”, although the original terms are not banned.
In the Guardian's release about the new style guide editor-in-chief, Katharine Viner says that " We want to ensure that we are being scientifically precise, while also communicating clearly with readers on this very important issue. The phrase ‘climate change’, for example, sounds rather passive and gentle when what scientists are talking about is a catastrophe for
humanity.”
I saw this last week, then this morning CBC Metro Morning interviewed a climate reporter from the Guardian about this, as well as a professor from the University of Toronto who supports the changes in language. She offered that terms such as global warming sound rather comforting like a plate of fresh-baked cookies rather than a threat to humanity and all other creatures. We heard that the CBC is now open to using similar terminology in its reporting.
While we know that there are plenty of deniers and minimizers in the political realm, including the premier of this province, the United Nations secretary general, António Guterres, talked of the “climate crisis” in September, adding: “We face a direct existential threat.” The climate scientist professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, a former adviser to Angela Merkel, the EU and Pope Francis, also uses “climate crisis.”
2 comments:
I actually had never given much thought to the terminology, but how true. We need to change the terminology to reflect the magnitude of the emergency and urgency of the situation. Using words like "emergency" and "threat" are much more appropriate and will hopefully lead to more meaningful action - although I'm not sure much will get through to certain politicians who just keep denying, denying, denying.
Right now, Bill Nye the Science Guy is especially in my good books for being so blunt about the seriousness of this threat.
Yes, Bill has been direct, F-bombs and all. Thanks for your thoughts Roger. Well said.
Post a Comment