Posted on 09/23/2015 8:23:36 AM PDT by Twotone
The Associated Press made quite a notable change today in how it refers to individuals with skeptical views about climate change science.
The AP announced the change on its blog today, explaining the changes:
Our guidance is to use climate change doubters or those who reject mainstream climate science and to avoid the use of skeptics or deniers.
(Excerpt) Read more at nation.foxnews.com ...
I guess that is better than “damned to hell idiotic numbskulled neanderthals.”
The pope and the Democratic party can’t be wrong.
...those who reject mainstream climate science...
That’s ok, I’m changing my term for the climate change crowd to “government funded parasites”.
I have my doubts about this story.
"DOUBTER!"
You have stated that deniers these days are automatically unconsciously linked to holocaust deniers. You have hit the nail on the head, the choice of words is critical to the opinions formed by the readers and AP is a master of this art. This change by AP in this case is simply elegant. Slanted writing is not hard to do because these days I don’t think it is even taught in schools.
:)
Instead they are going to get right to the point and refer to them as THOSE EVIL HATERZ THAT WANT YOU TO DIE FROM POLUTION!!
This is happening solely because the words skeptic and denier have become labels of respect for those honest men who reject the MMGW agenda. And it makes the AP sick to its stomach to call them anything that “might give them legitimacy”.
It wants to publish nothing that is not derogatory, demeaning, and insulting to those who dispute “the settled science”. If “the agenda” says day is night, cold is hot, and calm is storm, the AP will embrace it despite all evidence to the contrary.
The AP is the Goebbels wing of the left.
The AP could start referring to skeptics as ‘scientists’. It could start referring to people who want to use a gun to the head of actual scientists to accept the notion that people are making the planet hotter, or that CO2 can actually levitate as ‘scientifically religious zealots’.
For me, let’s make a hypothesis, design an experiment to test it, do it again to make sure the results are good, come to some conclusions, publish the results, verify them, and then establish a THEORY.
It’s what we did when we banned CFCs. Nobody had a problem with it because anybody could replicate the experiment and get the same results.
Well, if you can’t do math or science, and you have the moral disposition of a prostitute, you can be a journalist and comment on math and science issues.
“OK, I’ll bite, what new term are they going to cook up this time?”
Enemies of the State or Criminals....
I’m kind of partial to skeptic. It implies undecided, but leaning away.
I’m surprised they’re not using “Heretics”!!
Maybe they’re just preparing for their swing back to global cooling.
You apparently did not seek or find since it is right there in the 3d line of the extracted text.
And what’s the opposite of doubter? Believer!
Whether or not they know it, AP has pushed the question into a distinctly “religious” realm. This isn’t to deny that there are things worth believing in, but at least they deserve some sort of defense, not just dogma pulled out of mid air.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.