Global Warming? But They Said It Wasn’t Real!

Climate Change has been a largely debated topic for quite a while, and it’s always seen in the media. It’s usually one scientist offering statistics and evidence, against a sceptic basing his views on false information and general ignorance. Climate change is a tricky topic to cover in the media, because to be ‘fair’, they need to show both sides of the argument.

This is called ‘superficial balance’, telling ‘both’ sides of the story can actually be a form of informational bias. It allows a small group of global warming sceptics to have their views greatly amplified. It’s because of these sceptics, that there is so much misinformation in the public sphere about what it is, where it’s going, and what we can do about it.

Here’s a short video explaining all the misconceptions about global warming and climate change. It also explains what it is, and rebuts arguments that sceptics usually bring up.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson explains that there “is historically a saying in the scientific community that every scientific truth goes through three phases, first people deny it, then it conflicts with the bible, and then they say they knew it all along.” So I don’t think we will come to a general consensus about global warming until the media finds a way to fairly tell the truth about the issue, without planting misconceptions along the way.

World News: Old Man Yells At Cloud

The global media is a very powerful tool; it promotes the news about one country, all across the world. It can shine countries in positive or negatives lights, and affect international relationships. Today however, I wanted to talk about one of the sources I get my news from. Reddit, and how people argue what is counted as ‘world news’, especially as it is a very Americanised website, with most of it’s users being American citizens.

Reddit is made up of ‘sub-reddits’, so there are so many different forums, for just about anything you could think of. Several people depending on how many people regularly use it moderate each forum, and they have rules to govern what can be posted, which is essentially used to keep the forum filled with content that is intended, and to maintain ‘peace’ between users.

The ‘sub-reddit’ I frequent for my global news, is ‘worldnews’, and one of the rules they enforce, is ‘no internal US news’. This has been a pretty controversial rule this past year, because it’s a forum most users also look at, and because the users are largely American, they post local news quite often. There have been cases were large internal news events have been posted and debated, to be later removed by the moderators because they are not ‘global issues’.

Not everything is considered Global News

It’s sparked the debate many times on what can and should be considered as global media, and I think this can happen with any country. Local events are considered a ‘big deal’ where it occurs, but it may not necessarily concern other nations and their citizens. I think it’s an issue that we can’t really define, because news is so broad, but it rather has to be consider whether it’s global news or not by the people reporting on it.

“You Just Don’t Get It”

Television series can become very contextualised in its local community’s easily, and it makes it harder for a global community to relate to the series as well as locals do. This is because of small cultural differences, in almost everything. The best examples to examine these differences are comedies. Every nation and its unique culture have very slight differences in comedic preferences, so when a show is ‘Americanised’, it loses it’s comedic value with other countries, because they may not be able to relate to the comedy as well. Comedy doesn’t always translate well between cultures; a recent example of this would be Jonah from Tonga. Australian humour doesn’t always translate well overseas, because there’s too much historical context that other countries would have to understand, and this is why Chris Lilley is so good at making comedies. American’s reacted badly to this television series, because they don’t understand what’s happening the same way we do.

Sometimes however comedy can translate well, and the perfect example of that would be The Office. It started out as a UK series, before producers in the US quickly saw it’s potential and ported it over to the US, re-casting for their own series. The series wasn’t an instant success in the US, because they had to allow the comedy to develop and grow into what it was. One of the reasons The Office managed to translate the comedy so well to American audiences, is their characters and actors. They chose culturally specific characters that would extend their audience, and they cast actors to perfection to fit these roles. That’s why I love The Office personally, because the actors are believable for the roles they play. It makes the contexts of all their jokes seem so much more real and believable, and context is everything in comedy. Here’s a video with Stephen Fry talking about the comedy differences between the British and Americans.
But what about how people show Australia in television? Stereotypes are used frequently in the media industry to quickly label and identify a specific culture to extend it’s audience. They’re instantly recognisable, and sometimes hated by their ‘own culture’ for being too forced. For example, plenty of people hate the Australian stereotypes because the accent is too forced and not natural.  So television series act on two levels, locally, and globally. Both are just as important as the other, because they both extend the reach of their audience, and allows the show to be more diverse. A global television series has to be able to translate jokes well across cultures and borders, otherwise it will fall and crumble into the pit where many shows have fallen.