Vox contradicts itself within the same week
June 10, 2022
We’re thinking that we might club together to buy Vox a subscription to Vox. Fortunately, it’s free, which is possibly more than it’s worth. Our reasoning is that they don’t seem capable of reading their own output.
Today Vox treats us to another jeremiad about how climate change is going to scour the Earth of everything that’s good and holy:
Action matters more than ever because the world needs to take aggressive action to avert the worst of climate change. The planet is fast approaching the catastrophic global temperatures that countries have promised to avoid. Every fraction of a degree beyond that will wreak havoc on the livelihoods of millions of people, potentially destabilize economies and political systems…
This not being entirely and wholly true. As Vox told us Thursday, in fact:
“What it won’t do, however, is make the Earth unlivable, or even mean that our children live in a world poorer than the one we grew up in. As many climate scientists have been telling us, the world is a better place to live in — especially for people in lower-income countries — than it has ever been, and climate change isn’t going to make it as bad as it was even in 1950.”
In that piece Vox had it right. Climate change – as climate change always does for it’s changed many a time in the past – might well mean that the world will not be quite as good as it could be. But there’s absolutely nothing in any of the actual science which says that it’s going to make the world worse than it currently is. In fact, all of those scientific models are based on the idea that the world continues to get richer – that’s where all the extra emissions come from, folk getting richer.
We do think that’s impressive, refusing to even read your own magazine to be informed on the subject being discussed.
Vox advertises itself as “explaining the news” and ranks within the top 100 of U.S. media outlets. There’s a significant video and podcast operation, the website itself gains some 20 million visits a month.
This leads us to our suggestion. As Vox explains the news – and even sometimes gets it right – perhaps the writers for Vox should read Vox to have the news explained to them?