
George Marshall
Sometimes, it's simple. Sometimes, a newspaper editor gives their coal-baron buddy a column from which to repeatedly deny the climate science whose conclusions threaten his wealth. Or they imply the dubious claims of a report from a dodgy anti-science 'think-tank' are 'peer-reviewed'. Or they launch a smear campaign against climate scientists, trying to 'prove' that normal statistical techniques amount to 'doctoring data'.
Usually, though, the way that the media influences our understanding of climate change is more complex. Usually, newspapers and broadcasters in Britain accept the basics of the science. It's what they then say about it, how they frame it, which shapes our collective understanding of one of the biggest problems we face. And to understand that, there's one person above all who it seemed most sensible to talk to.