This past week Biden gave a major speech about his plan to put fighting #ClimateChange at the center of America's post-Covid recovery.
Foolishly I assumed that the Sunday shows would have discussed this speech today.
How stupid of me. They didn't even mention it.
THREAD
Usually when my research assistant tells me that the broadcast news has failed to cover a climate story, I will do back-channel outreach and then, if that's ignored, @EndClimtSilence will take to Twitter to call out anchors and producers for their climate silence.
2/n
But I'm not going to do that today. I am exhausted. And I am filled with a sense of foreboding, since I've seen this happen before.
When I was first active on Twitter, I wrote a thread about attending a 2015 speech Hillary Clinton gave about climate & manufacturing.👇
3/n
And in this thread I reported that an HRC staffer had said that Clinton had wanted to campaign on #ClimateChange in 2016, but she dropped climate as a focus because it didn't earn her any media.
4/n
I feel like I'm in a nightmare version of Groundhog Day.
Biden gives a speech about an American economic renaissance grounded in climate standards, investments, and justice, and the broadcast news media buries it. Just like they buried Clinton's climate vision in 2016.
5/n
In 2017 I blamed the Democratic party for the fact that "climate messaging" was failing to gain traction. Now I know better.
Now I know that the fault lies with the broadcast news media's climate silence.
6/n
As @davidshor points out in this illuminating interview with @EricLevitz in @NYMag, " Most persuadable voters get their news from the networks’ nightly news broadcasts and CNN."
But polling from @amprog and @DataProgress shows that persuadable voters overwhelmingly disapprove of the GOP position on climate change and fundamentally LIKE climate policy.
@EndClimtSilence is now doing polling which we expect will show that these voters *also* want to hear about climate change in their news coverage. We will bring that polling to the networks and CNN.
9/n
I'm excited to announce that I've restarted the @EndClimtSilence newsletter with a post on the main climate-communications opportunity I see in this difficult political moment: associating Trump's deep unpopularity with his support for coal, oil, and gas development.
🧵
When we have focused on fossil fuels—in the Beyond Coal campaign, via divestment, in pipeline fights, or under #KeepItInTheGround—coal, oil, & gas have been called polluting, toxic, the greatest source of emissions, and profoundly unjust.
And they are all of those things!
2/n
But at the same time, fossil fuels have tended to retain their *cultural* associations with many things Americans like: industry, manufacturing, prosperity, modernity.
3/n
China's State Counsel has announced that provinces will be graded on their efforts to peak emissions before 2030.
"Authorities ranked as making unsatisfactory progress ... could be subject to disciplinary processes if issues aren’t rectified." 💥
🧵
In The Language of Climate Politics, I wrote about how this accountability was enacted in the 2021 "1+N Documents," China's whole-of government, whole-of-society policy to achieve net-zero emissions by 2060.
👇
This is the implementation of this provision in real time.
2/n
As happy as I am by that China (or any nation) might actually create a net-zero economy in time to halt warming at a relatively survivable level, I am also worried that the authoritarian country who controls key global supply chains seems likely to get there first.
3/n
@NoemaMag What is China's climate policy? Called the “1+N” framework, it's an all-of-government, all-of-society blueprint for the country’s decarbonization. Its foundational documents were enacted in 2021.
3/n
🚨Do NOT talk about solar geoengineering as a climate "solution."🚨
1/n
As people start to panic—and as others advance the next phase of the fossil-fuel agenda—we're now seeing a lot of talk about the need to research solar geoengineering (SG).
Fine. I actually agree that SG should be researched systematically.
2/n
But what that research needs to establish is precisely whether solar geoengineering is or is not a solution: if and how much it cools the planet and whether its dangers (or "trade-offs," if you're disingenuous) will allow for deployment or not.