1. Papers for Seminar 2  Balance as Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004)  Improving How Scientists Communicate About Climate Change (Hassol, 2008)  A Suggestion to Climate Scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Akasofu, 2008)

2. ‘Balance ’ is a complex term beyond its conceptual departing point of ‘ fairness ’. For example, challenges arise when grappling with the introduction of new and complex ideas into the discourse. These ideas take more time to explain than old ideas that support the status quo, so in this sense, equal time falls in favor of people proffering easily digestible, not ideologically contrary, viewpoints.

3. Some Questions 1.How do other sources of information play a role here? 1.- Talk radio3. - Local TV news 2. - National TV news4. - Other TV (e.g. “The Daily Show”) 2.Internet “information”? 3.How can we help promote the idea of being objective, rather than emotional or “closed-minded”, in the public with regards to global change? 4.Does getting the central message across to the general public intact start with the IPCC going straight to G8 and maybe spreading the word that way or by educating the reporters of the findings before sending them to Alaska? 5.How should we go about effectively “un-doing” what has already been done to give people pre-conceived notions on human-caused climate change? 6.Perhaps a third-party position is needed here, to be the mediator between the scientists and the public? 7.What if disbelievers begin to question the knowledge of scientists who are trying to ‘dumb’ down climate change because they’re not speaking in the technical language that most people expect?

4. Some Responses 1. Stop making overly simple statements – educate the reporters on the nuances. 2. Third party – public education showing the evidence for the conclusion. Data availability? Does that promote skepticism? Develop emotional appeals to thinking about climate change, not just give people a bunch of data. Work through local broadcast meteorologists? That is, trusted sources. Media will misinterpret scientists based on their particular biases.