Biting the hand that feeds, Newsweek columnist Robert J. Samuelson blasts his own publication for last week’s cover story on “climate change deniers.”
Samuelson ends the piece this way:
As we debate it, journalists should resist the temptation to portray global warming as a morality tale?as NEWSWEEK did?in which anyone who questions its gravity or proposed solutions may be ridiculed as a fool, a crank or an industry stooge. Dissent is, or should be, the lifeblood of a free society.
What a refreshing change of pace.
1:55 p.m. update: Meanwhile, Samuelson’s column has prompted a defensive response from Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, who protested last week that the global warming cover story was not an example of “lefty cant”:
[Samuelson] argues that solutions are elusive in any case. Perhaps, but that observation is unconnected to the cover’s central argument that interests skeptical about global warming have waged a long battle against the scientific consensus that the world is getting warmer because of the emission of greenhouse gases linked to human activity. Such doubts make it harder than it ought to be [emphasis added] to create a national context in which possible solutions can be debated responsibly and soberly.
From what I’ve been told, any change that would have even a remote impact on global warming would require a “wrenching transformation” of our lives. (I’m quoting Joel Schwartz quoting Al Gore.)
If that’s true, then there’s no compelling reason to try to make this debate any easier. Why ought we worry about how “hard” the debate is if we’re considering public policy with immense worldwide ramifications?
Why would we not want to exhaust all other possibilities before deciding we’re going to turn back the clock of progress?
