Exploring the intersections of advocacy, objectivity, and solutions reporting in environmental journalism

Abstract

The field of environmental journalism has oscillated between the poles of advocacy and objectivity throughout its evolution. In its beginnings in the 1960s, environmental reporting was often viewed as closely associated with the environmental movement. Years later, partly in an attempt to remain "objective" while covering one of the most pressing issues of our time, works of environmental journalism often promoted a "false balance" in climate reporting by giving climate deniers a platform to promulgate their scientifically-unfounded claims. This study investigates how advocacy and objectivity are currently valued within the field of environmental journalism through the use of one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with eight environmental journalists. In addition, this research explores in what ways, if any, the emergence of solutions journalism has led these journalists to transform their perceptions of advocacy and objectivity as related to their work. Findings show that the environmental journalists interviewed readily express a personal passion to find solutions for environmental problems and share a deep desire to ensure the planet remains habitable. Most articulate a strong belief that environmental reporting should be fair and balanced, which includes conducting extensive research, finding evidence-based critiques, and ensuring diverse sourcing. While most interviewees said advocacy journalism is important within the bigger picture of environmental coverage, they do not label themselves as advocates for any particular solution while reporting on environmental issues.