Here’s a question to ponder after reviewing the video of melting penguin ice sculptures above shot at the glitzy New York City celebration of the American production of “Frozen Planet.”
How can Discovery Communications, the same giant media company that has brought the world the one-sided, and popular, “Whale Wars,” say it excluded any substantial mention of human-driven climate change in its wildly popular “Frozen Planet” series on the basis of objectivity?
I’ve been in overload mode, so I just caught up with Brian Stelter’s remarkable piece in which the series producer, Vanessa Berlowitz, offers a contorted explanation for the lack of focus on this issue. Read the relevant excerpt excerpt below, again considering some other Discovery offerings as you do so:
The vast majority of scientists agree that human activities are influencing changes to the climate — especially at the poles — and believe that the situation requires serious attention. That scientific consensus is absent from “Frozen Planet,” for reasons that shed light on the dilemma of commercial television, where the pursuit of ratings can sometimes clash with the quest for environmental and scientific education, particularly in issues, like global warming, that involve vociferous debate.
Including the scientific theories “would have undermined the strength of an objective documentary, and would then have become utilized by people with political agendas,” Vanessa Berlowitz, the series producer, said in an interview.
She added, “I feel that we’re trying to educate mass audiences and get children involved, and we didn’t want people saying ‘Don’t watch this show because it has a slant on climate change.’ ”
This approach — anticipating criticism and tiptoeing around it accordingly — is a reflection of the political and ideological fury that infuses many conversations about climate change. Some scientists say that the politicization of the subject has succeeded in causing governments, corporations and media outlets to shy away from open discussion about it.
Of course, the decision to sharply limit the discussion of climate change, despite the fact that the Arctic climate is changing in ways that almost assuredly have a human contribution, could be seen as producing the ultimate slant in the show. This is particularly germane this week, as a couple thousand scientists and others focused on polar change have gathered in Montreal for a large conference (Twitter feed here) reviewing the enormous body of work produced under the recent International Polar Year initiative.
