Talk:Paul Ingrassia

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The facts about Reuters climate coverage...PJosephI (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

       The facts, as opposed to the opinion of a disgruntled ex-staffer, are that "Reuters led the pack in climate change coverage" in 2013, reported The Daily Climate, an independent, foundation-funded news service that has aggregated climate coverage since 2007. Reuters' total of nearly 1,100 stories on the topic during that year outstripped the Associated Press, the Guardian and The New York Times.

        Even during the period of supposed "suppression" of climate coverage, from mid-April to mid-October 2012, Reuters ran an average of nearly two stories a day on the topic.  While the number of Reuters stories on climate issues did drop during 2011, it also dropped at The New York Times, the Guardian and virtually every other major publication -- partly because carbon-emissions trading failed to evolve into a broad market, as had once seemed likely.





From The Daily Climate, Jan. 2, 2014

More ink in 2013 Most major outlets gave climate and energy issues far more ink in 2013 than 2012: Bloomberg News was up 133 percent, the Globe and Mail doubled its reporting, USA Today boosted its effort 48 percent and stories in the Wall Street Journal, Sydney Morning Herald and the Financial Post each were up 40 percent, according to The Daily Climate's archives. Of the world's news outlets, Reuters led the pack in climate change coverage, with almost 1,100 news stories. Associated Press was second, with 1,030, followed closely by The Guardian, with 1,025. The New York Times, having dismantled its "green desk" in early 2013, was the only major publisher to see coverage drop in 2013 The New York Times, having dismantled its "green desk" in early 2013, was the only major publisher worldwide to see coverage drop in 2013, dipping 10 percent from 2012's level to 883. The Daily Climate is an independent, foundation-funded news service that has aggregated climate coverage since 2007. The aggregation is meant to provide a broad sampling of the day's coverage, not a comprehensive list.


From Powerline: July 29, 2013 The climate campaign has gone to DefCon1 over the tergiversations of Reuters, where alarmist news stories about climate change have fallen by nearly 50 percent following the hiring of an editor (Paul Ingrassia, formerly of the Wall Street Journal) who harbors some skeptical views. Media Mutters is all over the case, producing the chart below showing the decline in climate change coverage pre- and post-Ingrassia:

There’s a full-scale media outrage under way to purge the heretic. The Guardian, Mother Jones, and other outlets are all on the chase, proving 1) the dependence of the climate campaign on a media monopoly, and 2) that the environmental version of the Brezhnev Doctrine lives—what’s there is theirs, and don’t dare change your news coverage. But maybe they buried the lede on this story. The Columbia Journalism Review’s account of this matter notes down toward the bottom that climate coverage is declining at other media outlets (just as Power Line predicted it would): It’s worth noting that most newsrooms around the country have reducedcoverage of climate change-related issues since 2010. In 2011, Environment & Energy Publishing, which produces Greenwire, ClimateWire, and four other news services, estimated they reduced climate coverage by about 13 percent. According to an assessment published by The Daily Climate, The New York Times cut its global warming article count by 15 percent, and the Guardianslashed coverage by 21 percent that same year. (Reuters, too, dropped its climate coverage by 27 percent in 2011, before Ingrassia came aboard.) Losers.

Water’s Edge, a Reuters series on rising sea levels world-wide based on in-depth data research, was finalist in 2015 NY Deadline Club Award and in Global Editors Network Data Journalism Awards.

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Paul Ingrassia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Paul_Ingrassia"