WEBVTT 00:00.666 --> 00:02.366 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% [Scott] Coming up on "Energy Switch," 00:02.366 --> 00:04.633 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% we'll hear from leading climate journalists. 00:04.633 --> 00:05.600 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% - We're often asked, 00:05.600 --> 00:08.100 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% "Well, are you biased against research 00:08.100 --> 00:12.133 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that is saying that climate change isn't that serious?" 00:12.133 --> 00:13.533 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% Well, the answer is absolutely not. 00:13.533 --> 00:15.833 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I mean, we're always eager to have research papers 00:15.833 --> 00:18.133 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that are contrary to dominant narratives 00:18.133 --> 00:20.133 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% as long as they're interesting, important, 00:20.133 --> 00:22.033 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and passed through a peer review process. 00:22.033 --> 00:25.166 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - I think there is a sort of a storied myth 00:25.166 --> 00:26.700 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% of journalists who operate, 00:26.700 --> 00:29.300 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% just completely apart from their personal experience. 00:29.300 --> 00:30.366 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% And that's not real. 00:30.366 --> 00:32.600 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% You should acknowledge that we all are humans. 00:32.600 --> 00:36.500 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% At the same time, it's important to be able to separate that 00:36.500 --> 00:39.633 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% to some degree and really make sure that the work 00:39.633 --> 00:41.966 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that you're doing is searching for truth. 00:41.966 --> 00:43.500 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% [Scott] Next on "Energy Switch," 00:43.500 --> 00:46.433 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% the challenges of communicating on climate change. 00:49.300 --> 00:50.600 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% [Narrator] Funding for "Energy Switch" 00:50.600 --> 00:53.466 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% was provided in part by, 00:53.466 --> 00:56.266 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% The University of Texas at Austin, 00:56.266 --> 00:58.666 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% leading research in energy and the environment 00:58.666 --> 01:00.533 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% for a better tomorrow. 01:00.533 --> 01:03.200 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% What starts here changes the world. 01:05.500 --> 01:06.766 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% [upbeat music] 01:06.766 --> 01:07.933 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% - I'm Scott Tinker, 01:07.933 --> 01:10.333 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% and I'm an energy scientist. 01:10.333 --> 01:11.733 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% I work in the field, 01:11.733 --> 01:12.866 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% lead research, 01:12.866 --> 01:14.600 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% speak around the world, 01:14.600 --> 01:15.700 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% write articles, 01:15.700 --> 01:18.566 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% and make films about energy. 01:18.566 --> 01:20.900 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% This show brings together leading experts 01:20.900 --> 01:23.866 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% on vital topics in energy and climate. 01:24.433 --> 01:26.200 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% They may have different perspectives, 01:26.200 --> 01:29.166 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% but my goal is to learn, and illuminate, 01:29.166 --> 01:32.366 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% and bring diverging views together towards solutions. 01:33.333 --> 01:35.333 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% Welcome to the "Energy Switch." 01:36.266 --> 01:38.200 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% Climate science is complex, 01:38.200 --> 01:40.000 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% and, like every other field, 01:40.000 --> 01:41.766 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% it's full of uncertainties. 01:41.766 --> 01:43.833 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% That's what excites scientists, 01:43.833 --> 01:46.866 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% their research papers explore the nuances. 01:46.866 --> 01:49.566 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% While general audiences want conclusions, 01:49.566 --> 01:51.700 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% sometimes scientists build studies 01:51.700 --> 01:54.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% on extreme or unlikely climate scenarios 01:54.400 --> 01:57.033 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% to make findings easier to discern. 01:57.033 --> 01:59.333 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% When translated to mainstream reporting, 01:59.333 --> 02:02.133 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% those are sometimes confused with reality. 02:02.133 --> 02:03.400 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% We'll hear from experts 02:03.400 --> 02:06.333 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% on the challenges of communicating on climate. 02:06.333 --> 02:09.433 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% Michael White is a senior editor in charge of climate 02:09.433 --> 02:12.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and the oceans for the science journal, Nature, 02:12.233 --> 02:14.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% which publishes leading edge research papers 02:14.733 --> 02:16.300 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% for the scientific community. 02:16.733 --> 02:18.966 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% Justin Worland is the senior correspondent 02:18.966 --> 02:20.800 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% for climate for "Time Magazine" 02:20.800 --> 02:22.566 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and the Visiting Fellow in Journalism 02:22.566 --> 02:26.133 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% at the University of Chicago's Energy Policy Institute. 02:26.133 --> 02:28.266 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% On this episode of "Energy Switch," 02:28.266 --> 02:30.900 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% we'll look at the field of climate journalism. 02:32.000 --> 02:32.966 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% Welcome. 02:32.966 --> 02:34.800 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Sure appreciate you taking the time today 02:34.800 --> 02:37.566 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and look forward to this dialogue 02:37.566 --> 02:40.266 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% on journalism and climate. 02:40.266 --> 02:42.266 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% We always start with the big picture, 02:42.266 --> 02:43.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% which is why would our listeners, 02:43.966 --> 02:46.233 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% why would our viewers even care? 02:46.233 --> 02:49.333 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% - I think you could look at it in at least two ways. 02:49.333 --> 02:51.133 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% We are causing climate change 02:51.133 --> 02:52.666 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% and that there are clear solutions 02:52.666 --> 02:55.166 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% that are within our grasp. 02:55.166 --> 02:56.466 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% And the way I think about it now 02:56.466 --> 02:59.166 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% is instead of a knowledge deficit, 02:59.166 --> 03:01.833 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% we should be thinking about an empathy gap. 03:01.833 --> 03:03.133 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% Scientists are not trained 03:03.133 --> 03:05.866 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% in how to communicate their findings, 03:05.866 --> 03:07.666 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% which are often highly nuanced and complicated 03:07.666 --> 03:09.533 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% and have a lot of uncertainties 03:09.533 --> 03:12.133 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% to people whose lives might actually be affected 03:12.133 --> 03:14.333 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% by these changes. 03:14.333 --> 03:15.633 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% - That's a good way to frame it. 03:15.633 --> 03:17.300 align:left position:40% line:83% size:50% - Justin? - I mean, I agree with that. 03:17.300 --> 03:20.966 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I guess I would say climate change is a huge problem. 03:20.966 --> 03:23.966 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% People do not understand the scale of the problem 03:23.966 --> 03:26.500 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% or perhaps the nuances of the problem. 03:26.500 --> 03:28.700 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% And I think the nuances are important. 03:28.700 --> 03:30.966 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% - How do journals like Nature 03:30.966 --> 03:33.333 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% actually evaluate the research project? 03:33.333 --> 03:35.566 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% What's your protocol, if you will? 03:35.566 --> 03:37.466 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% - So, I think what people may not realize 03:37.466 --> 03:39.066 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% about many journals, 03:39.066 --> 03:42.300 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% but especially journals like Science, Nature, and Cell, 03:42.300 --> 03:44.566 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% is how long the process is. 03:44.566 --> 03:48.233 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% So scientists are submitting papers to me now, 03:48.233 --> 03:51.300 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% particularly in paleoclimate, old climate science, 03:51.300 --> 03:54.133 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% where the cores were taken 15, 20 years ago. 03:54.133 --> 03:57.233 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And I have about roughly a week or so 03:57.233 --> 04:00.800 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% to evaluate the paper in terms of if the paper is true, 04:00.800 --> 04:03.033 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% would it be interesting for our audience? 04:03.033 --> 04:04.933 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And Nature is a wide audience journal. 04:04.933 --> 04:07.133 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And it needs to have a high level of novelty. 04:07.133 --> 04:09.200 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% It can't be a repetition 04:09.200 --> 04:12.066 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% of a different technique on the same topic. 04:12.066 --> 04:13.066 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% So then the paper comes in 04:13.066 --> 04:15.266 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and I tend to decline without review, 04:15.266 --> 04:18.033 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% roughly 70% of all submissions. 04:18.033 --> 04:18.900 align:left position:42.5% line:89% size:47.5% - Wow. 04:18.900 --> 04:21.633 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% - Then for the 30% that go to review, 04:21.633 --> 04:23.966 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% what I do is look at the paper and say, 04:23.966 --> 04:25.133 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% "Oh, okay, I have a paper. 04:25.133 --> 04:29.433 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% It's a straightforward analysis of physical oceanography. 04:29.433 --> 04:32.266 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I'll send that paper to two independent scientists." 04:32.266 --> 04:35.600 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Then the paper is read and evaluated by those scientists 04:35.600 --> 04:37.533 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% primarily for technical merit. 04:37.533 --> 04:40.800 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And if they say, "We see these issues with the paper," 04:40.800 --> 04:42.866 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% then it'll go back to the editors 04:42.866 --> 04:45.400 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and we'll evaluate that whole set of feedback. 04:45.400 --> 04:47.133 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% And then we'll tell the authors, 04:47.133 --> 04:48.566 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% "Well, you know, we're still interested, 04:48.566 --> 04:51.066 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% but we need to see revisions in all these points." 04:51.066 --> 04:52.766 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% And this process gets iterated 04:52.766 --> 04:56.233 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% potentially up to four or five times. 04:56.233 --> 04:57.800 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% Our position is that we want to try 04:57.800 --> 04:59.800 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% and publish papers that are correct. 04:59.800 --> 05:01.933 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% So the process can take anywhere 05:01.933 --> 05:06.100 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% from in the most lightning fast time, one month 05:06.100 --> 05:07.533 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% up to multiple years. - Right. 05:07.533 --> 05:09.466 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - And then the press team at Nature, 05:09.466 --> 05:13.033 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% which is an independent team, writes a short press release 05:13.033 --> 05:15.833 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% for every single paper in Nature. 05:15.833 --> 05:17.800 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% And the idea there is that 05:17.800 --> 05:19.200 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% this gives the journalist time 05:19.200 --> 05:21.366 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% to talk to independent scientists in the field, 05:21.366 --> 05:22.833 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% get independent opinions, 05:22.833 --> 05:25.600 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% talk to that author, for example, 05:25.600 --> 05:26.766 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% all in advance of the day 05:26.766 --> 05:28.300 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% that the paper is actually published. 05:28.300 --> 05:29.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% [Scott] So it's kind of firewalled until then, or... 05:29.700 --> 05:30.766 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% - Yes, exactly. 05:30.766 --> 05:32.466 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% But publication is not the end point. 05:32.466 --> 05:35.600 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% There are mechanisms for post publication review. 05:35.600 --> 05:39.133 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And in cases where there are research flaws, 05:39.133 --> 05:42.700 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% either intentionally or not, there are cases of clear fraud, 05:42.700 --> 05:44.333 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% then the paper can be retracted. 05:44.333 --> 05:45.866 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% - Interesting. 05:45.866 --> 05:47.500 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% Thoughts on any of this? 05:47.500 --> 05:48.866 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - Well, first I would say that was 05:48.866 --> 05:50.600 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% really interesting insight. 05:50.600 --> 05:52.100 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% I resonated in some ways with what you said. 05:52.100 --> 05:54.433 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I mean, you're talking to a wide audience 05:54.433 --> 05:55.666 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% within the scientific community 05:55.666 --> 05:58.800 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% and we're trying to do the same speaking to a wide audience 05:58.800 --> 06:02.266 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% that is interested in a bunch of different issues 06:02.266 --> 06:04.766 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and how do we make climate one of those issues. 06:04.766 --> 06:07.533 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And so, I mean, I think a lot of that process 06:07.533 --> 06:09.900 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% is similar to my process 06:09.900 --> 06:13.366 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and just trying to pick stories to pick research 06:13.366 --> 06:18.733 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% to pick threads that are going to have broad appeal. 06:18.733 --> 06:21.166 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% - How informed are most climate journalists? 06:21.166 --> 06:22.933 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Do they have the background? 06:22.933 --> 06:24.566 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% This is technical stuff. 06:24.566 --> 06:28.866 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Are we even able to communicate this in ways that? 06:28.866 --> 06:30.200 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% - It's a good question. 06:30.200 --> 06:32.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I mean, obviously every journalist is different. 06:32.700 --> 06:37.166 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% It is a diverse set of backgrounds and experiences 06:37.166 --> 06:39.100 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% and time in the field. 06:39.100 --> 06:43.933 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% The idea is that journalists should be able to jump 06:43.933 --> 06:45.600 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% to different things, right? 06:45.600 --> 06:47.933 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% So a lot of people will spend their careers 06:47.933 --> 06:49.066 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% doing a beat for five years 06:49.066 --> 06:51.733 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and just sort of cycling through. 06:51.733 --> 06:54.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Climate really doesn't lend itself to that. 06:54.733 --> 06:57.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% It's just the learning curve is too steep. 06:57.233 --> 06:59.666 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And so I think it poses a big challenge 06:59.666 --> 07:03.433 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% for journalism to figure out as a institution, 07:03.433 --> 07:08.800 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% how do you adjust to have a deep enough bench 07:08.800 --> 07:12.500 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% to really understand, engage in these issues. 07:12.500 --> 07:13.900 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% - Look, I find journalists to be 07:13.900 --> 07:15.800 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% some of the most informed people I know, 07:15.800 --> 07:17.600 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% is really broadly educated. 07:17.600 --> 07:18.766 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% 'Cause you have to be. 07:18.766 --> 07:20.500 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% How about on the editorial side? 07:20.500 --> 07:23.466 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Are you seeing similar challenges, Mike, with that? 07:23.466 --> 07:26.266 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% - I came into Nature in 2008. 07:26.266 --> 07:27.966 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% I was generally informed about climate, 07:27.966 --> 07:29.666 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% but every day for the first year, 07:29.666 --> 07:32.966 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% there would be a topic I had literally never heard of. 07:32.966 --> 07:34.400 align:left position:42.5% line:83% size:47.5% - Yeah. - And then you have... 07:34.400 --> 07:35.666 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% I don't know what it's like for you, 07:35.666 --> 07:37.300 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% but I would have sort of a day 07:37.300 --> 07:38.666 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% to come up to speed on these topics 07:38.666 --> 07:40.666 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% and to reach editorial decisions. 07:40.666 --> 07:43.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Now for most papers, I will know within 10 minutes 07:43.733 --> 07:45.966 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% whether it's a potential paper for us or not. 07:45.966 --> 07:48.266 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% - Interesting. 07:48.266 --> 07:49.733 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% We all have biases. 07:49.733 --> 07:50.600 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% I'm a scientist, 07:50.600 --> 07:52.600 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% I have my own biases. 07:52.600 --> 07:54.100 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% How does that influence your reporting? 07:54.100 --> 07:57.833 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% How do you keep that from influencing your reporting? 07:57.833 --> 08:01.233 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% - You know, I think there is a sort of a storied myth 08:01.233 --> 08:02.866 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% of journalists who operate, 08:02.866 --> 08:05.333 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% just completely apart from their personal experience. 08:05.333 --> 08:06.900 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% And that's not real. 08:06.900 --> 08:09.233 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% We should acknowledge that we all are humans. 08:09.233 --> 08:11.000 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And in some ways that can be helpful. 08:11.000 --> 08:13.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% It can help figure out what questions to ask 08:13.733 --> 08:16.666 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% or give a certain curiosity about things 08:16.666 --> 08:19.366 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% that other people might not have. 08:19.366 --> 08:22.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% At the same time, it's important to be able to separate 08:22.733 --> 08:24.566 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% that to some degree 08:24.566 --> 08:26.366 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% and really make sure that the work 08:26.366 --> 08:28.733 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that you're doing is searching for truth, right? 08:28.733 --> 08:33.000 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% Truth that is apart from your own personal experience 08:33.000 --> 08:34.333 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% or your own personal perspective. 08:34.333 --> 08:36.200 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% - Yeah, interesting. 08:36.200 --> 08:37.633 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Your thoughts on that, Mike? 08:37.633 --> 08:40.633 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - So whenever I go to do a visit to a group of scientists, 08:40.633 --> 08:42.633 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% I'm almost always asked, 08:42.633 --> 08:44.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% "Are you biased against certain lines of research 08:44.966 --> 08:48.033 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% or certain lines of work or countries or individuals?" 08:48.033 --> 08:49.366 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% [Scott] You're asked that by the scientists. 08:49.366 --> 08:50.766 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% - Yes, absolutely. 08:50.766 --> 08:52.866 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And the response I gave was kind of two-part, 08:52.866 --> 08:55.066 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% one of them is, "Well, the problem with having 08:55.066 --> 08:56.366 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% an unconscious bias 08:56.366 --> 08:58.200 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% is that you don't know that you have it, of course, 08:58.200 --> 08:59.500 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% because it's unconscious." 08:59.500 --> 09:02.366 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% But if you give yourself time for introspection 09:02.366 --> 09:04.600 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and thought on given topics and decisions, 09:04.600 --> 09:05.933 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% you can recognize that and say, 09:05.933 --> 09:07.533 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% "Well, am I making this decision 09:07.533 --> 09:11.700 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% because this is an uninteresting paper for Nature 09:11.700 --> 09:14.600 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% or is it because it's from an African scientist 09:14.600 --> 09:17.133 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and we get almost no submissions from Africa?" 09:17.133 --> 09:18.700 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% Those are very different decisions to make 09:18.700 --> 09:20.733 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and you should be aware of them and think about them. 09:20.733 --> 09:23.966 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% We're often asked, "Well, are you biased against research 09:23.966 --> 09:28.866 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that is saying that climate change isn't that serious?" 09:28.866 --> 09:30.400 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% Well, the answer is absolutely not. 09:30.400 --> 09:32.900 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I mean, we're always eager to have research papers 09:32.900 --> 09:34.800 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that are contrary to dominant narratives 09:34.800 --> 09:37.033 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% as long as they're interesting, important, 09:37.033 --> 09:38.900 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and passed through a peer review process. 09:38.900 --> 09:42.066 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And one classic example for me as an editor 09:42.066 --> 09:44.100 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% is a paper I handled many years ago, 09:44.100 --> 09:47.900 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and the title was something like No Trend in Global Drought 09:47.900 --> 09:50.466 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% Over the Past 50 Years. 09:50.466 --> 09:52.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% But over this five decade study period, 09:52.966 --> 09:56.300 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% they couldn't detect any trend in global drought. 09:56.300 --> 09:57.800 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% Not that there aren't regional changes, 09:57.800 --> 10:00.133 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% but as an entire planetary drought system, 10:00.133 --> 10:02.533 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% they saw no change. 10:02.533 --> 10:03.900 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% And it isn't the kind of thing 10:03.900 --> 10:08.033 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that would necessarily have an immediate media appeal, 10:08.033 --> 10:09.800 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% 'cause it is a negative story in that sense. 10:09.800 --> 10:12.366 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Negative meaning a finding of no change. 10:12.366 --> 10:13.366 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% - Right. 10:13.366 --> 10:14.966 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% - But hugely important given the importance 10:14.966 --> 10:16.966 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% of the topic itself. 10:16.966 --> 10:19.966 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And I think just an example of how journals like Nature 10:19.966 --> 10:21.700 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% don't have a predefined narrative 10:21.700 --> 10:24.800 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% of what we want to publish to support the idea 10:24.800 --> 10:27.800 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% that climate change is taking place uniformly 10:27.800 --> 10:29.766 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% in all areas at all times. 10:29.766 --> 10:30.633 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% - Right. 10:30.633 --> 10:33.766 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% If we were to hear the same story 10:33.766 --> 10:35.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% through the lens of different journalists, 10:35.966 --> 10:41.533 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% say Time, Newsweek, The Economist, Mother Jones. 10:41.533 --> 10:42.466 align:left position:42.5% line:89% size:47.5% - Yeah. 10:42.466 --> 10:44.200 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% - They're very different takes on that. 10:44.200 --> 10:48.600 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% Is that the newspaper or magazine driving that 10:48.600 --> 10:50.933 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% or is that the journalist or? 10:50.933 --> 10:52.133 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% - No, I see what you're saying. 10:52.133 --> 10:54.700 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% I mean, I wrote a story several years ago 10:54.700 --> 10:57.566 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% about the narrowing of uncertainty 10:57.566 --> 11:01.866 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% about outcomes for a particular climate phenomenon. 11:01.866 --> 11:06.000 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And I got a bunch of negative feedback from people saying, 11:06.000 --> 11:07.433 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% this makes it look like 11:07.433 --> 11:11.166 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% climate science is a bunch of nonsense 11:11.166 --> 11:13.166 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% because you're talking about the uncertainties 11:13.166 --> 11:14.300 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% within climate science. 11:14.300 --> 11:16.766 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% And I said, "Well, that's-" 11:16.766 --> 11:18.633 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - That's 'cause it exists. - That's 'cause it exists. 11:18.633 --> 11:20.800 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And that's how we talk about things that are real, 11:20.800 --> 11:23.366 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% nuanced, honest way. 11:23.366 --> 11:26.033 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% So that's just one anecdote, 11:26.033 --> 11:28.633 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% whether we would pick up that particular story 11:28.633 --> 11:33.533 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% about droughts that you're alluding to. 11:33.533 --> 11:34.866 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% I mean, I don't know. 11:34.866 --> 11:37.633 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I don't think we would shy away from it. 11:37.633 --> 11:39.200 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% I do know that if we didn't cover it, 11:39.200 --> 11:42.533 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% we would get some negative feedback for sure, for sure. 11:42.533 --> 11:44.333 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - Here's one, I mean, this is kind of real. 11:44.333 --> 11:46.600 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% We've had climate scientists on this show, 11:46.600 --> 11:50.266 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% and they've said RCP 8.5. 11:50.266 --> 11:52.933 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% This is one of the scenarios. 11:52.933 --> 11:55.166 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% It's just really unlikely to happen. 11:55.166 --> 11:57.800 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% Not impossible. 11:57.800 --> 12:02.666 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% But we still continue to see papers on this. 12:02.666 --> 12:04.100 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% Am I out to lunch here? 12:04.100 --> 12:05.700 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% That's what I've heard. 12:05.700 --> 12:07.433 align:left position:42.5% line:83% size:47.5% Are we? - No, you're absolutely right. 12:07.433 --> 12:09.166 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% So the question then editorially is, 12:09.166 --> 12:11.833 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% what did we do with the paper if it comes in 12:11.833 --> 12:14.100 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% and it reports some remarkable finding 12:14.100 --> 12:18.333 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% for what are now called SSP585 12:18.333 --> 12:23.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% or shared socioeconomic pathways in scenario five, 12:23.233 --> 12:24.866 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% which is burned it all. 12:24.866 --> 12:26.266 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Like what do we do with that? 12:26.266 --> 12:28.866 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% It could be quite interesting editorially, 12:28.866 --> 12:30.566 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% but is it realistic? 12:30.566 --> 12:31.866 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% And if it's not realistic, 12:31.866 --> 12:34.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% should we even publish those kind of papers? 12:34.233 --> 12:35.833 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% Because it can create, 12:35.833 --> 12:37.833 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% really, it's some kind of mass hysteria about the way 12:37.833 --> 12:39.733 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% that climate will change in the future. 12:39.733 --> 12:42.100 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% We just had a paper looking at the future recurrence 12:42.100 --> 12:45.033 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% of multi-year La Ninas. 12:45.033 --> 12:47.200 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% So the reverse part of the El Nino, 12:47.200 --> 12:49.366 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% the cool part of the system. 12:49.366 --> 12:54.366 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And the authors came in with an RCP or SSP 8.5 submission, 12:54.366 --> 12:57.033 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and they had done some work on the other SSPs, 12:57.033 --> 12:58.333 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% but then editorially we said, 12:58.333 --> 13:00.166 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% "Look, that needs to be front and center 13:00.166 --> 13:01.400 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% in the first paragraph. 13:01.400 --> 13:04.466 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% We need to clearly signpost to the readers 13:04.466 --> 13:06.233 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% that this is a range of possibilities, 13:06.233 --> 13:09.133 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% that the high end is a high end. 13:09.133 --> 13:11.500 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% It should never be called business as usual." 13:11.500 --> 13:12.466 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% - Right. 13:12.466 --> 13:13.833 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% [Mike] It's an extreme scenario. 13:13.833 --> 13:17.733 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - Interesting, and so does "Time Magazine" 13:17.733 --> 13:20.400 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% still look for the more dramatic things 13:20.400 --> 13:23.500 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% because that's what your readers want. 13:23.500 --> 13:24.966 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% - I do think that there can be value 13:24.966 --> 13:29.933 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% to scenarios that are looking at extremes. 13:29.933 --> 13:33.166 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% I think to Mike's point, signpost, right? 13:33.166 --> 13:38.466 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% If you're going to write about an RCPA 0.5 study, 13:38.466 --> 13:42.066 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% you gotta be very clear that this is an extreme scenario. 13:42.066 --> 13:45.566 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I think the sort of bigger perspective that I try to bring, 13:45.566 --> 13:47.666 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and I think Time tries to bring is, 13:47.666 --> 13:51.466 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% let's think about climate less as the most extreme possibility, 13:51.466 --> 13:53.333 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% which is maybe a tail-end risk. 13:53.333 --> 13:55.633 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And let's not look at the other tail, 13:55.633 --> 13:58.100 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% which might suggest that this is all overblown. 13:58.100 --> 14:00.266 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% Let's look at the sort of base case 14:00.266 --> 14:01.966 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% and the most likely scenario. 14:01.966 --> 14:03.566 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And you still have a lot of really compelling 14:03.566 --> 14:04.800 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% storytelling there. 14:04.800 --> 14:05.933 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% [Scott] Right. 14:05.933 --> 14:09.300 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I've written some stuff and I'll put a title on it. 14:09.300 --> 14:11.333 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% It's never the title it comes out with, 14:11.333 --> 14:12.700 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% there's some other title. 14:12.700 --> 14:14.200 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% And then there's the content 14:14.200 --> 14:18.200 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% and the headline is almost opposite of this three sentence, 14:18.200 --> 14:20.133 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% the actual really important part of the story 14:20.133 --> 14:21.166 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% that's sitting in there 14:21.166 --> 14:22.533 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and it's kind of buried here near the bottom. 14:22.533 --> 14:23.400 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% Are you seeing that? 14:23.400 --> 14:25.900 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% How do you manage that, Justin? 14:25.900 --> 14:29.133 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - I mean, I do think you see this widely 14:29.133 --> 14:32.033 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% where there's a gap between what the story says 14:32.033 --> 14:33.166 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% and what the headline says. 14:33.166 --> 14:36.233 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% And that is an attempt to drive, 14:36.233 --> 14:38.066 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% you know, clicks to drive people to the story. 14:38.066 --> 14:39.166 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% [Scott] Right. 14:39.166 --> 14:42.466 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% - I think it isn't necessarily bad 14:42.466 --> 14:44.866 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% to want people to read your stories. 14:44.866 --> 14:45.866 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% - Right. 14:45.866 --> 14:47.666 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% - Can you find a way to get them to read it 14:47.666 --> 14:49.900 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% by doing a good story, right, 14:49.900 --> 14:52.533 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% rather than doing something that's just- 14:52.533 --> 14:54.300 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% [Scott] Click bait. - Click bait, right. 14:54.300 --> 14:57.400 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Garbage with a good headline that, you know, so. 14:57.400 --> 14:59.400 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% That's an important distinction. 14:59.400 --> 15:03.400 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I'll say though, one thing that we are taught is, 15:03.400 --> 15:05.533 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% I mean, this is like born out in the data 15:05.533 --> 15:08.300 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% is that if you mislead readers, 15:08.300 --> 15:10.866 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% they don't come back. - Right. 15:10.866 --> 15:15.066 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% - And so,I think there's always a fine needle to thread 15:15.066 --> 15:18.366 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% to try to find a headline that is most compelling 15:18.366 --> 15:19.866 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% as it can be while also 15:19.866 --> 15:21.466 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% sticking to the content of the story 15:21.466 --> 15:23.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% because you don't want to turn readers off. 15:23.700 --> 15:26.366 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% - On the research side of things. 15:26.366 --> 15:29.266 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% I'm not engaged with the click universe at all. 15:29.266 --> 15:32.733 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% But we're engaged with the citation universe. 15:32.733 --> 15:33.633 align:left position:42.5% line:89% size:47.5% - Yeah. 15:33.633 --> 15:34.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% So that's the click equivalent almost. 15:34.966 --> 15:36.033 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% - That's the click. 15:36.033 --> 15:37.300 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% So when the paper is published, 15:37.300 --> 15:38.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% another paper in a different journal 15:38.966 --> 15:40.633 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% might make reference to that paper, 15:40.633 --> 15:41.866 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% and that's called the citation. 15:41.866 --> 15:42.866 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% [Scott] Right. 15:42.866 --> 15:44.200 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% - And that will appear in the tracking 15:44.200 --> 15:45.766 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% of the paper in Nature. 15:45.766 --> 15:47.033 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% So I know very well 15:47.033 --> 15:50.233 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% which papers I publish will get a lot of citations, 15:50.233 --> 15:51.600 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% but that is not the main motivation for 15:51.600 --> 15:52.766 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% publishing papers. 15:52.766 --> 15:55.733 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% It's interest, importance, novelty. 15:55.733 --> 15:59.366 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% So I had a paper that I published on episodic deluges 15:59.366 --> 16:00.633 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% and hot house climates. 16:00.633 --> 16:03.100 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% It's a purely theoretical climate paper 16:03.100 --> 16:07.200 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% that has really no direct relevance to our modern world. 16:07.200 --> 16:10.800 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% But the underlying climate dynamics are just so fascinating 16:10.800 --> 16:12.300 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% that we publish papers like that 16:12.300 --> 16:14.033 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% just for the beauty of the science itself. 16:14.033 --> 16:15.133 align:left position:42.5% line:89% size:47.5% - Yeah. 16:15.133 --> 16:18.100 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% How does a short term turn on the news cycle 16:18.100 --> 16:20.133 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% affect the stories that are covered? 16:20.133 --> 16:24.033 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - There's always a focus on what's happening in the next, 16:24.033 --> 16:25.966 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% in the news cycle, 16:25.966 --> 16:28.033 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% which I think sometimes makes it difficult 16:28.033 --> 16:30.000 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% to get into the depth and the nuance 16:30.000 --> 16:31.800 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% that we've been talking about. 16:31.800 --> 16:33.466 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% I mean, I think the other thing is just 16:33.466 --> 16:35.300 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% from a consumer perspective, right? 16:35.300 --> 16:38.500 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Attention spans are shorter. 16:38.500 --> 16:39.666 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% - What'd you say? 16:39.666 --> 16:40.500 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% [laughs] 16:40.500 --> 16:42.333 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% - Oh yeah, there we go! 16:42.333 --> 16:43.933 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I's amazing that we've been able to sit here 16:43.933 --> 16:45.266 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% and have this conversation, right? 16:45.266 --> 16:47.133 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% Because to some degree, 16:47.133 --> 16:49.700 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% like people just don't have the time 16:49.700 --> 16:51.700 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% or they don't feel they have the time. 16:51.700 --> 16:53.166 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% [Scott] And there's a phone in my pocket. 16:53.166 --> 16:54.800 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% - And there's a phone- - Buzzing. 16:54.800 --> 16:57.833 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% - Buzzing and it's gonna push alert you 16:57.833 --> 17:00.533 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% with all sorts of different headlines. 17:00.533 --> 17:01.766 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% [Scott] Yeah. 17:01.766 --> 17:04.066 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - And what you see today is going to be completely different 17:04.066 --> 17:05.900 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% from what you saw yesterday. 17:05.900 --> 17:08.333 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And that just doesn't really provide a great context 17:08.333 --> 17:09.700 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% for going deep. 17:09.700 --> 17:10.966 align:left position:42.5% line:89% size:47.5% - Yeah. 17:10.966 --> 17:15.333 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% - It's a challenging place to be an organization like Time, 17:15.333 --> 17:19.933 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% which particularly in the last 30 years has been 17:19.933 --> 17:23.866 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% a place where there's a lot of long form storytelling. 17:23.866 --> 17:26.366 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% Having said that, I think we focus on topics 17:26.366 --> 17:29.833 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% that are,keep coming up in some ways, right? 17:29.833 --> 17:31.933 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Things that are longer term, 17:31.933 --> 17:34.900 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% that are always sort of simmering in the year 17:34.900 --> 17:37.400 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% or, you know, season, et cetera. 17:37.400 --> 17:39.366 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And so it's going to have a shelf life 17:39.366 --> 17:43.100 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% that's a little bit longer than the churn, right? 17:43.100 --> 17:45.100 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% [Scott] And then there's social media. 17:45.100 --> 17:46.066 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% - Social media. 17:46.066 --> 17:48.433 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% - The great oxymoron. 17:48.433 --> 17:51.366 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% How that contributing to kind of, 17:51.366 --> 17:54.500 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% I'm just gonna use the word confusing climate understanding? 17:54.500 --> 17:57.033 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% - I mean, so much of social media, 17:57.033 --> 18:02.266 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% these algorithms relies on getting people up in arms. 18:02.266 --> 18:07.766 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And so, if you don't believe in climate science, 18:07.766 --> 18:09.500 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% you could easily go down a rabbit hole 18:09.500 --> 18:12.333 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% of social media folks who all believe the same thing 18:12.333 --> 18:15.733 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% and are taking that much further. 18:15.733 --> 18:16.766 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% You also could find people 18:16.766 --> 18:19.733 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% who believe that the world is ending tomorrow. 18:19.733 --> 18:21.266 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And you could take it in that direction. 18:21.266 --> 18:22.766 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% - Half the students in my classroom. 18:22.766 --> 18:26.166 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - You know, this is my view as a journalist analyzing this 18:26.166 --> 18:30.500 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and not so much as it pertains to my own work, 18:30.500 --> 18:33.466 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% but clearly there's some value 18:33.466 --> 18:35.833 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% in getting people to care, right? 18:35.833 --> 18:37.466 align:left position:42.5% line:83% size:47.5% - Yeah. - But it's important that 18:37.466 --> 18:41.966 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% that care is rooted in an understanding of, 18:41.966 --> 18:43.333 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% you know, facts. 18:43.333 --> 18:45.300 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And again, I mean, I don't know, how do you feel about it? 18:45.300 --> 18:46.666 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% I mean, in some ways, it must be good 18:46.666 --> 18:48.266 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% that your students care, 18:48.266 --> 18:50.233 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% but you of course, wish that they were carrying in a way 18:50.233 --> 18:53.266 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% that was a little more grounded. 18:53.266 --> 18:57.933 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% - Yeah, and that didn't cause them to become depressed. 18:57.933 --> 18:59.066 align:left position:40% line:89% size:50% - Right. 18:59.066 --> 19:03.900 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% - Doom is a narrative in many circles in social media. 19:03.900 --> 19:06.333 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% And like Justin was saying, 19:06.333 --> 19:08.400 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% social media encourages tribalism 19:08.400 --> 19:09.966 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% and circling of the wagons. 19:09.966 --> 19:12.000 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And I think it acts as an attractor 19:12.000 --> 19:13.666 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% of those kinds of viewpoints 19:13.666 --> 19:16.533 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% that then get amplified and reinforced. 19:16.533 --> 19:18.166 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% So for young people, 19:18.166 --> 19:20.400 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% getting that understanding I think is very hard 19:20.400 --> 19:24.633 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% because the immediate stories you see are heat waves, 19:24.633 --> 19:28.200 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% floods, hurricanes, extreme events, 19:28.200 --> 19:30.866 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% all of which are getting worse in some parts of the world. 19:30.866 --> 19:32.366 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% [Scott] Interesting. 19:32.366 --> 19:34.666 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - Can I just come in on this one point 19:34.666 --> 19:38.200 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% because I think part of it is like being alarmed 19:38.200 --> 19:39.666 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% about the right things. 19:39.666 --> 19:41.866 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% Things that are maybe more mundane, 19:41.866 --> 19:43.466 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% but actually quite significant. 19:43.466 --> 19:48.466 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% Migration that is clearly going to happen. 19:48.466 --> 19:51.533 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% These are things that are happening in the base case. 19:51.533 --> 19:52.600 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% [Scott] Right. 19:52.600 --> 19:55.300 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - And social media I think does not encourage that. 19:55.300 --> 19:56.233 align:left position:37.5% line:89% size:52.5% - Correct. 19:56.233 --> 19:58.166 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% - And I think broadly speaking, 19:58.166 --> 20:01.233 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% media needs to find better ways to communicate 20:01.233 --> 20:03.366 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% the results of what's happening in the base case, 20:03.366 --> 20:05.733 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% rather than having to rely on the crutch 20:05.733 --> 20:11.533 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% of these extreme things that most likely will not happen. 20:11.533 --> 20:14.000 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% - That's well put. 20:14.000 --> 20:16.800 align:left position:10% line:83% size:80% So what are the other challenges to good climate reporting 20:16.800 --> 20:20.133 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and good climate science publishing? 20:20.133 --> 20:23.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% - We're in a situation where on a regular basis, 20:23.700 --> 20:27.333 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% scientists within a narrowly defined field 20:27.333 --> 20:29.333 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% cannot communicate with each other. 20:29.333 --> 20:30.400 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% [Scott] Yeah. 20:30.400 --> 20:33.400 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% - And I've heard hundreds of scientific talks, 20:33.400 --> 20:36.300 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% and my main takeaway from that 20:36.300 --> 20:38.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% is that scientists think of their audiences 20:38.966 --> 20:42.000 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% as being genetic copies of themselves, 20:42.000 --> 20:45.233 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% people with equal backgrounds and equal interests. 20:45.233 --> 20:48.833 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% And they make usually, for very good cultural reasons, 20:48.833 --> 20:51.833 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% little effort to think about their audience. 20:51.833 --> 20:54.700 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% And I think that empathy question I talked about 20:54.700 --> 20:57.066 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% at the beginning really goes down to the scientists 20:57.066 --> 20:58.366 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% and their audience. 20:58.366 --> 21:00.300 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Who do you think of as being their audience 21:00.300 --> 21:02.133 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% and how can they communicate to somebody 21:02.133 --> 21:04.566 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% who is from a radically different scientific, 21:04.566 --> 21:07.400 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% but also just cultural background? 21:07.400 --> 21:10.466 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And scientists are not trained to do that. 21:10.466 --> 21:13.100 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% There's very little professional reward system 21:13.100 --> 21:15.933 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% to compensate for the effort required to do it. 21:15.933 --> 21:18.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% But that's the only way that we're gonna make progress. 21:18.133 --> 21:19.800 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% - That's a really interesting point. 21:19.800 --> 21:22.466 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And particularly in complex topics like this 21:22.466 --> 21:25.233 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% that cross over so many different field. 21:25.233 --> 21:29.366 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% So next steps, next steps to help scientists in journals, 21:29.366 --> 21:32.600 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% mainstream media, social media, all these things. 21:32.600 --> 21:34.900 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% How do we better communicate on climate? 21:34.900 --> 21:38.600 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% - So the scientists that I work with are deeply interested 21:38.600 --> 21:40.366 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% in the uncertainties in climate science, 21:40.366 --> 21:44.066 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% the interactions that are taking place in the system. 21:44.066 --> 21:45.200 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% All of which means 21:45.200 --> 21:47.966 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% that they are pushing the boundaries of understanding. 21:47.966 --> 21:50.800 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% They're never looking in the rear view mirror. 21:50.800 --> 21:52.033 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% And what they see, 21:52.033 --> 21:54.700 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% if they looked in the rear view mirror, 21:54.700 --> 21:57.366 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% is smooth sailing. 21:57.366 --> 21:59.533 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% We understand the big questions 21:59.533 --> 22:03.133 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% in climate science spectacularly well. 22:03.133 --> 22:06.800 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% Ongoing emission of gases like carbon dioxide, methane, 22:06.800 --> 22:09.833 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% nitrous dioxide will warm the climate, 22:09.833 --> 22:11.033 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% will melt ice, 22:11.033 --> 22:12.200 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% will raise sea level. 22:12.200 --> 22:13.433 align:left position:35% line:89% size:55% [Scott] Yeah. 22:13.433 --> 22:15.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% - Now that kind of narrative gets lost to a certain degree 22:15.266 --> 22:17.700 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% I think within scientific discussion, 22:17.700 --> 22:19.533 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% within scientists themselves, 22:19.533 --> 22:22.466 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% because there are no longer interested in those questions. 22:22.466 --> 22:23.800 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% The interesting questions are out 22:23.800 --> 22:25.300 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% in the realm of uncertainty. 22:25.300 --> 22:27.933 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% So they have to simultaneously be able to reinforce 22:27.933 --> 22:29.866 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% the core understanding 22:29.866 --> 22:32.033 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% while still being able to translate their excitement 22:32.033 --> 22:35.300 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and their interest and the fascinating work 22:35.300 --> 22:37.100 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% that they're doing out on the frontier. 22:37.100 --> 22:38.033 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% - Interesting. 22:38.033 --> 22:39.133 align:left position:45% line:89% size:45% Yeah. 22:39.133 --> 22:43.600 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% How about on your end of things, next steps? 22:43.600 --> 22:46.333 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% - Well, I think the big challenge for me, 22:46.333 --> 22:47.933 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% and I think for media broadly, 22:47.933 --> 22:50.466 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% and I think for anyone communicating on climate 22:50.466 --> 22:53.000 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% is how to take it out of the realm, 22:53.000 --> 22:55.366 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% the academic realm, right? 22:55.366 --> 22:58.000 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% How do you take the very important work 22:58.000 --> 23:01.600 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% that's coming out of journals 23:01.600 --> 23:04.566 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and showed that it's meaningful to people 23:04.566 --> 23:07.100 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% in a way that's grounded. 23:07.100 --> 23:09.533 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And so I think the more that we can continue 23:09.533 --> 23:16.433 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% to find ways to connect climate with people's realities, 23:16.433 --> 23:20.266 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% the more people are going to relate to it and understand it. 23:20.266 --> 23:22.533 align:left position:20% line:83% size:70% - Well, look, I've really enjoyed our discussion. 23:22.533 --> 23:25.433 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% Really, I've learned a lot and hope you have. 23:25.433 --> 23:26.933 align:left position:32.5% line:89% size:57.5% Final thoughts. 23:26.933 --> 23:28.200 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% If you wanted to leave our viewers 23:28.200 --> 23:31.766 align:left position:12.5% line:83% size:77.5% with just a couple key things, Mike, what would that be? 23:31.766 --> 23:33.500 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% - I think there needs to be a better bridge 23:33.500 --> 23:36.533 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% between my world and Justin's world. 23:36.533 --> 23:40.600 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I think there needs to be support for academics 23:40.600 --> 23:45.333 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% who want to be a bridge between research and media 23:45.333 --> 23:46.600 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% and who are good at it. 23:46.600 --> 23:47.666 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% Like, not everyone is, 23:47.666 --> 23:49.500 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% but there are people who are passionate 23:49.500 --> 23:50.566 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% and who want to do it, 23:50.566 --> 23:51.733 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% but they have an incredibly hard time 23:51.733 --> 23:54.033 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% building a career doing so. 23:54.033 --> 23:57.566 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% And I think that a very small adjustment 23:57.566 --> 23:59.233 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% to academic incentive, promotion, 23:59.233 --> 24:01.733 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and tenure structures could support those people. 24:01.733 --> 24:03.400 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% And it could be a hugely effective way 24:03.400 --> 24:05.400 align:left position:32.5% line:83% size:57.5% of making this interaction better. 24:05.400 --> 24:06.733 align:left position:20% line:89% size:70% - That's a neat thought. 24:06.733 --> 24:08.100 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% Yeah, thank you. 24:08.100 --> 24:11.500 align:left position:17.5% line:89% size:72.5% - Well, I'll say, I guess, 24:11.500 --> 24:15.433 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% I oftentimes have this discussion with various people 24:15.433 --> 24:16.700 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% out in the world 24:16.700 --> 24:19.466 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% where they'll complain about the state of climate journalism 24:19.466 --> 24:22.666 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and I'll say, "Well, what publications do 24:22.666 --> 24:23.933 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% you subscribe to?" 24:23.933 --> 24:26.833 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% And they'll say, "Well, I subscribed to this one, 24:26.833 --> 24:28.800 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% I subscribe to the 'New York Times'." 24:28.800 --> 24:32.066 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% "Okay, well, how do you think we're paying 24:32.066 --> 24:33.900 align:left position:35% line:83% size:55% for all this climate journalism?" 24:33.900 --> 24:38.333 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% So I guess I would leave with the message of subscribe, 24:38.333 --> 24:42.266 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% subscribe to media and then shoot a note saying 24:42.266 --> 24:44.566 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% you hope to see some more climate journalism. 24:44.566 --> 24:47.333 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% And hopefully that'll improve the state of things. 24:47.333 --> 24:49.133 align:left position:25% line:89% size:65% - Yeah, interesting. 24:49.133 --> 24:51.333 align:left position:15% line:89% size:75% Well, thanks for your candor 24:51.333 --> 24:53.800 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% and your experience and your knowledge. 24:53.800 --> 24:54.666 align:left position:27.5% line:89% size:62.5% - Thanks very much. 24:54.666 --> 24:55.733 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% - I really enjoyed the dialogue. 24:55.733 --> 24:56.766 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% Mike, thanks for being with us. 24:56.766 --> 24:57.833 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% Justin, thank you. - Thank you. 24:57.833 --> 24:59.433 align:left position:10% line:89% size:80% - Scott Tinker, "Energy Switch". 25:00.333 --> 25:02.800 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% A science journal is still journalism, 25:02.800 --> 25:05.533 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% but it has seasoned scientific editors. 25:05.533 --> 25:09.133 align:left position:15% line:83% size:75% And research papers must pass through a peer-review process 25:09.133 --> 25:10.366 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% where their findings are challenged 25:10.366 --> 25:13.300 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% by other scientists before publishing. 25:13.300 --> 25:15.733 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% These are primarily for a science audience, 25:15.733 --> 25:17.366 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% but then mainstream journalists 25:17.366 --> 25:20.033 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% have to decide which content would be interesting 25:20.033 --> 25:21.533 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% for a general audience 25:21.533 --> 25:24.533 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% and how to translate the findings for them. 25:24.533 --> 25:26.833 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% Some journalists are experienced in this 25:26.833 --> 25:28.200 align:left position:30% line:89% size:60% and some are not. 25:28.200 --> 25:31.000 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% Short news cycles force them to move fast. 25:31.000 --> 25:34.233 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% All are seeking readership and ever smaller niches 25:34.233 --> 25:36.800 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% which can encourage dramatic reporting. 25:36.800 --> 25:38.466 align:left position:12.5% line:89% size:77.5% To improve climate journalism, 25:38.466 --> 25:40.666 align:left position:25% line:83% size:65% our experts recommend better communication 25:40.666 --> 25:42.966 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% between scientists and journalists 25:42.966 --> 25:45.200 align:left position:27.5% line:83% size:62.5% and suggest readers support journalism 25:45.200 --> 25:48.033 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% by subscribing to reputable publications, 25:48.033 --> 25:50.700 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% then requesting better climate coverage. 25:50.700 --> 25:59.333 align:left position:47.5% line:5% size:42.5% ♪ ♪ 25:59.333 --> 26:09.400 align:left position:47.5% line:5% size:42.5% ♪ ♪ 26:09.400 --> 26:19.366 align:left position:47.5% line:5% size:42.5% ♪ ♪ 26:20.466 --> 26:21.766 align:left position:22.5% line:83% size:67.5% [Narrator] Funding for "Energy Switch" 26:21.766 --> 26:24.800 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% was provided in part by 26:24.800 --> 26:27.433 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% The University of Texas at Austin, 26:27.433 --> 26:29.866 align:left position:17.5% line:83% size:72.5% leading research in energy and the environment 26:29.866 --> 26:31.733 align:left position:22.5% line:89% size:67.5% for a better tomorrow. 26:31.733 --> 26:34.933 align:left position:30% line:83% size:60% What starts here changes the world.