What gives with the Wall Street Journal? It seems like it is suffering from a bad case of journalistic schizophrenia. The paper’s news section has recently featured several important and factually accurate articles about global warming and the spreading of false information by ExxonMobil.
But last week the paper ran a lead editorial so filled with lies, misstatements, and moldy, long-discredited theories it’s like the Journal was running a reprint from the early 80s. You could park an elephant in the credibility gap. It’s beyond embarrassing. It feels desperate -- one last favor for their oil company advertisers. Why would the editorial board of a prestigious national newspaper risk appearing marginalized and insignificant as the world's leaders, scientists, and citizens come to the opposite conclusion? Let me cite just one of the many distortions. In reference to global warming, the Journal editors wrote: “The scientific case looks weaker all the time.” That is truly bizarre coming, as it does, on the heels of the latest US National Academy of Sciences report (pdf) -- which says "there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring" -- and USA Today's front page story declaring, “The debate’s over: Globe is warming”.
There are dozens of out and out inaccuracies throughout the Journal editorial. But don’t take my word… go to www.realclimate.org (yes, even climatologists are blogging now) where they dissect and disprove the editorial point-by-point. Wall Street Journal -- what gives?
Follow Laurie David on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Laurie_David