Critical Thinking and the Media

How well does the media do in reporting environmental issues in terms of the 7 criteria for critical thinking? (clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, breadth, depth, and logic)



The media fuels much of the public perception of environmental issues. It is the only source of information most people rely on. Since our democratic government should reflect the will of the people, it is crucial that the population is well enough informed to prioritize their thoughts, values, and beliefs on environmental issues...which must eventually be reflected in governmental policy- locally and globally.



I have found the clarity of most forms of media to be quite good. There is usually no ambiguity about what the issue is. The sentance/paragraph structure is well put together, as something that has been edited should. The accuracy, precision and relevance of media reporting sometimes seems quite doubtful. I've noticed that often when statistics are used they do not report the non-response rate, sample size, or method of sampling used. These values are crucial when assessing how relevant a statistic is to the issue. Without them we cannot be at all certain whether we are being led to believe the whole truth, whether more details are needed, or whether the statistic is relevant at all (it could be due to other lurking variables). Also we are rarely given the source materials that are used or consulted in the preparation of the report. How can the accuracy of a report be assessed if we have no idea where the information came from? The breadth of environmental issues reported is often too broad. For instance, two scientific experts on an issue (such as global climate change) are equally represented during a news report. This may seem good, but in reality it may give the public the false impression that the scientific community is equally divided on the issue, when in reality the majority of scientists agree that global climate change is indeed happening. It seems virtually impossible for the depth of a news report to show the true complexities of environmental issues. For example, I recently read a news report stating that the orca population is on the rise this year because of a decrease in salmon fishing. In reality, this could be due to a myriad of other factors, or even be a statistical fluke! All in all, I doubt the overall logic of media reports. The facts from individual "experts" may very well be accurate, but the way the "story" is put together seems suspect. The position or side of the story put forth is usually of the most interest/debate which equals profit.

As responsible citizens we must demand more from our media sources. We require more detailed information...about statistics, where the source material came from, whether the "experts" cited are actual relevant authorites on the matter at hand- to name a few! A better educated public will lead to more informed decisions and conscientiousness about the environment. Our world truly needs it.