4) "good" or "excellent" rating. Most also rate industry, government and environmental groups as doing a largely "fair" or "poor" job. Most experts quoted in the national media (73%) asserted that global warming was genuine. Only 2% of experts quoted or cited expressed the opinion that the theory is invalid. In addition, two of three reporters who expressed an opinion supported the theory that humaninduced global warming was real. "The contrast between the actuality of expert opinions and the content of media coverage is of concern," says Mark Mills, CSTM Executive Director. "By following national media coverage, one would not gain an accurate view of the scientific debate over global warming ." CSTM is a nonprofit organization devoted to clarifying the dialogue between scientists and engineers, and the general public. CSTM attempts to point out similarities or difference between expert consensus and the information transmitted by the media. CSTM utilizes expert polls and media analysis on controversial scientific and technological subjects. For further information, please contact: Regina Lapierre, Public Affairs Manager 301/718-9602 fax: 301/718-7806 Global Warming Theory: refers to the theory that the release of various gases from human activities causes the average temperature of Earth's atmosphere to rise unnaturally. Center for Science, Technology & Media Scientific experts are less likely to endorse the Global Warming Theory -- that human activity has created a "greenhouse effect" -- than media reports suggest, according to research conducted for the Center for Science, Technology & Media (CSTM). Most climate experts express uncertainty about the scientific basis for the Global Warming Theory, according to a national random survey of climate experts conducted for CSTM by the Gallup Organization in October and November, 1991. Yet most media accounts support the belief that such a warming trend is real, concludes a study conducted for CSTM by the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) of national media coverage dating back to 1985. To compare expert opinion with media coverage of global warming, Gallup conducted a national survey of 400 experts randomly selected from the leading associations of atmospheric, climate and oceanographic scientists in the United States, the American Meteorological Society, and the American Geophysical Union. Results from the Gallup survey of experts were compared to CMPA's scientific content analysis of global warming coverage in nine leading media outlets from 1985 through mid-1991. CSTM found significant differences between expert opinions and what the media report about global warming. Results of the National Survey of Climate Experts A majority of experts (60%) believe that the global average temperatures have increased over the past century. However, fewer than one in five (19%) believe that this was humaninduced, 44% assert that it was not human-induced and 37% are unsure. Despite the lack of consensus that any historic global warming was human-induced, most scientists (66%) believe that human-induced greenhouse warming has now begun to occur. 2 But only 41% believe that "currently available scientific evidence substantiates its occurrence." Among the remaining group, 21% state that the evidence does not substantiate human-induced global warming occuring, and 4% don't know if the evidence does so. In general, the experts emphasize the uncertainty of current knowledge in this field. For example, 90% describe the study of global climate change as an "emerging science" rather than a "mature science." Nonetheless, about 60% believe that there is a 50% or better chance of obtaining "clear evidence "to assess global warming theories within the next 10 to 20 years. A majority (82%) of experts say that they watch media coverage of global warming issues either very or fairly closely. At the same time, a total of 70% rate the media's performance in informing the public as either "fair" (46%) or "poor" (24%). The other 30%, give the media a "good" (26%) or "excellent" (4%) rating. The majority of experts also give a fair or poor rating to the job done by government, industry and environmental groups. Results of the National Media Content Analysis All articles and broadcasts on global warming were analyzed from January, 1985 through June, 1991 in the New York Times. Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. Time, Newsweek. U.S. News and World Report, and the ABC, CBS and NBC evening news. Among all sources who expressed an opinion, nearly two out of three (65%) asserted that humaninduced global warming was already occurring. Only six percent of sources argued that there was no warming trend caused by human activity. The media frequently presented global warming as a debate between scientists who supported theories of global warming and the Administration, which rejected such theories. Among scientists who expressed opinions in news stories, nearly three out of four (73%) asserted that global warming was genuine; only two percent disputed the theory. Two out of three reporters who expressed an opinion also agreed that global warming theories were valid. Overall, news stories presented scientists as the group least likely to express doubts about global warming. Center for Science, Technology & Media Two Wisconsin Circle, Suite 470, Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815 (301) 718-9602 3 This study suggests that the public is receiving a skewed portrait of the scientific debate over global warming. In news accounts, scientists are presented as relatively united supporters of global warming theory. Yet the Gallup survey reveals considerable debate and uncertainty about global warming theory within the scientific community. CSTM's research also suggests that the public image of scientific opinion on global warming may be influenced by popular media coverage. In December, 1991 the Gallup Organization asked a national random sample of 1,000 Americans whether they believed most "scientific experts" would say that the scientific evidence supports global warming. A majority (56%) responded that most experts would say the scientific evidence supports global warming. Yet the actual Gallup survey of experts found that two in five (41%) believe the theory is substantiated by current evidence, another one in three (31%) don't accept the theory, and 28% don't know. Center for Science, Technology & Media Two Wisconsin Circle, Suite 470, Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815 (301) 718-9602 EDWARD S. RUBIN LESTER B. LAVE M. GRANGER MORGAN Keeping Climate Research Relevant Recent post-mortems of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) confirmed what Congress and other key parties to the acid rain debate already knew: that the 10-year, half-billion-dollar interagency program to guide U.S. The federal policy on acid rain control proved largely irrelevant to the effort to forge the new Clean Air Act last fall. Although NAPAP won praise for its scientific accomplishments, the program failed in its primary mission to provide policy-relevant information in a timely manner. Now, government attempts to deal with the more difficult and far-reaching environmental issues associated with global warming appear to be headed down the same ill-fated path. Global climate change has become the most important environmental issue on the world agenda. The Edward S. Rubin is the Alumni Professor of Environmental WINTER 1991-92 potentially enormous human and ecological implications of global warming-rising sea levels, altered precipitation patterns, and damage to natural ecosystems— have generated concern. But the equally large uncertainties about the timing and magnitude of possible effects, coupled with questions about the costs and impacts of possible abatement measures, have thus far kept policymakers from agreeing on what to do. European nations, especially the Scandinavian countries, have called for immediate, large-scale reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide and other "greenhouse" gases. The Bush administration has rejected such initiatives as hasty and wasteful of resources needed for more pressing matters. Until the global climate problem is better understood, the administration contends, the United States should not be stampeded into taking actions that could have ruinous consequences for the economy. The administration does, however, subscribe to the need for more research, boasting a billion-dollar annual federal research program. Although the government's decision to commit resources to research on global climate change is laudable, the structure of the program and the research |