Page 186 - Carbon Capitalism and Communication Confronting Climate Crisis

180 R.A. HACKETT AND S. GUNSTER

to take into account the consequences of their reportage, to consciously tell
narratives in the service of supposedly extraneous values like sustainability,
or to mobilize people in a particular political direction, runs afoul of the
regime of objectivity, with its semi-positivist epistemology, its assumption
that news simply reports the facts as they are, and its illusory notions of
press neutrality and independence (Hackett and Zhao 1998). Pro-climate
framing is more likely to take root in whole new ways of thinking and
doing journalism that challenge the regime of objectivity—in short, dif-
ferent paradigms.

CHALLENGER PARADIGMS
Broader than individual story frames, a journalism paradigm comprises
integrated elements that usually include distinct philosophical and ethical
grounding, an analysis of how media work, a set of methods and proce-
dures. What paradigms, or “corrective journalisms” (Cottle 2009), might
help make journalism more truthful, ethical and adequate to the tasks of
climate crisis? One starting point is to look to the emerging discipline of
environmental communication (Gunster 2017a). American scholar and
environmentalist Robert Cox (2007, p. 15–16) recommends a crisis ori-
entation. Environmental communication should enhance society’s ability
to respond appropriately to environmental signals for the benefit of human
and environmental health. It should make relevant information and
decision-making processes ‘transparent and accessible’ to the public while
those affected by environmental threats ‘should also have the resources and
ability to participate in decisions affecting their individual or communities’
health’, a notion that resonates with the concept of climate justice.
Moreover, environmental communicators could engage various groups to
‘study, interact with, and share experiences of the natural world’, and
critically evaluate and expose communication practices that are ‘con-
strained or suborned for harmful or unsustainable policies toward human
communities and the natural world’.
Could these criteria be transposed to journalism? They could help span
the divide between the ‘objectivity’ standards of conventional reporting,
and the ‘advocacy’ work of alarmed citizens. Their adoption implies a
recognition that journalism is an inherently political practice, that there are
already established models of engaged or advocacy journalism, and that
nevertheless certain precautions would be needed: for example, avoid
evaluating journalism through the single-minded lens of its environmental