A Critical Analysis of Fox News' Coverage of Climate Change

This report analyzes an article from Rolling Stone that critiques Fox News' coverage of climate change. The original article accuses Fox News of downplaying the severity of climate change and aligning with the Trump administration's views on the issue. The report examines the article's arguments, including its criticisms of a specific talk show segment featuring climate change skeptics. The analysis suggests alternative perspectives and a more neutral presentation of the issue, focusing on how the article could have been written to avoid pre-conceived judgments and present a balanced view. The report also proposes modifications to the article's title and summary to enhance neutrality, emphasizing the importance of factual reporting in discussions about climate change.

Title: - Fox News Is Desperately Trying to Convince Us Climate Science Isn’t Real
Date: - May 7, 2019
Source: - Rolling Stone
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/fox-news-climate-science-isnt-real-832294/
The article, "Fox News Is Desperately Trying to Convince Us Climate Science Isn’t
Real" by Rolling Stone is an attempt to aggravate readers’ anger toward Fox News and label it as
Pro-Trump in denying the existence of climate change issue. The article uses a catchy title in the
beginning to draw the attention of readers who do not agree with Trump’s Climate change policy
and also disregards Fox news for the agency’s alleged association with the president. It may be
noted that Trump has vehemently denied the existence of Global warming and Climate change
issue labeling it as non-existent for which he is receiving widespread criticism. The chosen title
sentence would also attract readers who have recently heard criticism of Trump regarding his
view on Climate change but have not yet taken stand on the issue. In simple words, the title of
the article is an attempt to heat up anti-Trump rhetoric on his climate change view.
The title of the article is an indication of what lies in the whole article and what readers
would find out in the article. The article, as a whole, lashes out at Fox News network for
allegedly denying the existence of climate change through Bret Baier talk show with Marc
Morano, a known critic of Climate Change theory and Robert Watson, UN Scientific Panel
Chairman. The article uses catchy quotations like, “Yes, pretty much the entire global scientific
community has agreed humanity is destroying the planet at an increasingly rapid rate, but we
were able to dredge up a few quacks to give you permission to go ahead and ignore it.” to allege
that holding such talk show was an attempt to discredit UN findings which alarmed us on rising

impact of climate change. The article's short summary immediately after the title is also an
attempt to label Fox news as advocating Trump's view on Climate change.
Did the Fox News Talk show discredit UN findings and propagated Trump’s view of
Climate change? It requires deep down thinking and thorough analysis to come to any conclusion
regarding the credibility of talk show. Regardless, it is certain that the article went overboard in
criticism of Fox news' Talk Shows with Marc Morano and Robert Watson. The article
throughout is written in a manner that the publisher is acting himself as the judge, jury and
executioner of Fox News. An article should always neutrally present facts and figures and let
readers decide on the issue. To make the article neutral, first of all, I will change the title and
make the title look attractive for people with neutral view. I will title the article as, "Does Fox
News talk show on ‘UN climate report’ wrongly represents Climate change issues"? I will also
change the short summary after title and rather write 'Fox News network seems to have
underplayed the report' instead of 'Trump's favorite Network isn't buying it'. People these days
holds facts and figures in high regard and any pre conceived judgment on any person or network
becomes a disaster recipe. I feel that the two changes in title and short summary sentence will
give some sort of neutral look to the article. I would also recommend few changes in
aforementioned quotation that displays pre conceived judgment on part of the writer.