27/01/2020

The Murdoch Media: Polluting Australia's Airwaves? (video)

Al Jazeera

Contributors
  • Richard Cooke - Contributing editor, The Monthly
  • Amy Remeikis - Political reporter, The Guardian Australia
  • Rodney Tiffen - Author, Rupert Murdoch: A Reassessment & Emeritus Professor, University of Sydney
  • James Painter - Research Associate, Reuters Institute and author, Climate Change in the Media
In Australia, soaring temperatures, extended droughts and strong winds have resulted in a wildfire season like no other.
Yet, as so much of the country burns, most of the Australian media outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch refuse to call this story what scientists say it is: a disaster exacerbated by the climate crisis.
Millions of acres have been burned out, dozens of people have died, wildlife is on the run and papers like The Australian and networks like Sky News Australia are not only dismissing the scientific consensus, but are trafficking in some false, debunked narratives.
Murdoch's media empire has long held a disproportionate influence over Australian politics and he and Prime Minister Scott Morrison are united on this issue.
Throw in Murdoch's close ties to Australia's powerful fossil fuel lobby and all the elements are there for a conspiracy of disinformation on the biggest, gravest story of our time.


As bushfires flare, Murdoch's news empire peddles climate scepticism.

Links

If You Love Australia, Climate Change Should Scare The Hell Out Of You

The Guardian

Conservatives love to talk up Australia ‘punching above its weight’, but they turn to self-hating cowards when it comes to climate change
‘Australia is a nation on the extremities, where climate change will affect and strip away what we love much sooner than will occur in Europe and North America.’ Photograph: Dan Himbrechts/AP
I love Australia.
It’s not a thing you hear too often from progressives. Mostly this is because we don’t go in for the pathetic jingo-nationalist, quasi-militaristic “love it or leave it”-style patriotism that John Howard attempted to link with a love of country.
But I do love Australia. I get an absurd amount of irrational pride when I hear of Australians doing well.
When I read stories that Indigenous rock art might be among the oldest in the world I get excited and think, yeah suck it, caves of Cantabria!
I can still remember where I was when John Aloisi scored the winning penalty against Uruguay (jumping up in my home in Cairns and cutting my hand on the overhead fan), and like all sensible Australians I let out a deep groan whenever I hear someone start yet again an “Aussie, Aussie, Aussie” chant at the tennis.
But my love has nothing to do with Australian Day and no, this is not an article about Australia Day.
I mean, of course we should change the date. As one who grew up in country South Australia from German ancestors, the English landing in Sydney has never resonated for me as anything more than New South Wales Proclamation Day. Thanks for the holiday and the cricket at Adelaide Oval, but otherwise ...
Keep the public holiday – make it the last Monday in January – it is nicely timed to signal an end to the summer holidays. Call it “Summer Day” or some such and then find another day to actually celebrate the nation. Better still, become a republic and make it that day. But I digress.
This is not about Australia Day, but climate change.
Because I love Australia, and the real question is why don’t conservatives who refuse to do more on climate change love Australia? Because climate change will destroy much of what we love about this country of ours.
Much of what makes Australia unique and beloved by those of us lucky enough to live here is linked to the extremes of our land and climate.
This summer has shown how precarious our Australian lifestyle is
In my lifetime I have mostly lived in country areas – in South Australia on the Murray River, in Redlynch just north of Cairns, and now in the northern suburbs of the bush capital that is Canberra.
So I love our biggest river and the farming areas of wheat, sheep and dairy around my home town to the grapes and fruit in the Riverland where during uni I picked fruit in the summer holidays.
Then there are the tropics with Mossman Gorge, the glorious drive from Cairns to Port Douglas, the Great Barrier Reef and the late afternoon rains.
And yes, I love the surrounds of Canberra – where I can live near a national park with kangaroos and echidnas and be able to see the snow caps on the Brindabellas in winter and fiery red of the trees in autumn and the blossoms in spring.
As anyone who has spent any time overseas knows, there is something about the sky in Australia that is different – that shade of blue so perfectly captured by Tom Roberts in his painting A Break Away!. That gorgeous clear, crisp blue.
I must admit I don’t love Dorothea Mackellar’s My Country. I find the poem rather maudlin, but perhaps I am biased because I am sick of hearing climate change-denying politicians recite it as though it is evidence that climate change has not occurred.
Because here’s the thing: when she published that poem in 1908, the average annual temperature in Australia was about 2C lower than it is now.
And those conservatives who recite the line about “a sunburnt country” ignore that climate change is going to wreak havoc with everything we love – that tenuous balance of droughts and flooding rains, the ability of agriculture to exist on “thirsty paddocks”, our rivers, our wildlife where “orchids deck the treetops”, even the crisp air and “pitiless blue sky”.
This summer has shown how precarious our Australian lifestyle is – the bushfires that have not stopped since September; the mix of fires, smoke, dust, hail (and that is just in Canberra in the past fortnight). We are a nation on the extremities, where climate change will affect and strip away what we love much sooner than will occur in Europe and North America.
No patriotic Australian can be anything but angry to read stories of a billion or more animals killed in the fires – especially when you realise the koalas on Kangaroo Island are chlamydia-free and are essentially the best protection against their extinction.
Our wildlife is so exceptional and precious that the upset in balance that comes from climate change will render some habitats unliveable.
To read that the platypus is facing extinction due to human activity exacerbated by climate change should have every patriotic Australian filled with rage.
Conservative patriots love to talk up Australia “punching above its weight” on things such as sport or business or war, but they turn to self-hating cowards when it comes to climate change.
Yes, Australia “only” accounts for around 1.3% of emissions (of course well above what you would expect given our population), but given the fragility of our ecosystem, any political leaders who profess to love Australia should be energising our diplomatic networks and using every economic and political lever we have to cajole, convince and encourage other nations to act on climate change.
We should do this even if it is out of purely selfish reasons of loving our country and wanting it to remain in the same state that has caused that love.
If you love Australia, climate change should scare the hell out of you because the reef, our rivers, our wildlife, our fresh air, even, as we have seen since December, our relaxed summer holidays are going to be stripped away from us.
Our government has more reason than most others outside of the Pacific Islands to be demanding global action on climate change.
Given our wealth we should be leading the way – leading by example rather than leading to ruin as our current government has been at the most recent climate change conferences.
What we love about Australia will be taken by climate change well before other nations who emit much more greenhouse gas will feel great changes. And that should enrage us and our representatives, and it should drive their actions.
I love Australia and so I want action on climate change. And if you love Australia, so should you.

Links

Blue Acceleration: Our Dash For Ocean Resources Mirrors What We’ve Already Done To The Land

The Conversation

Oil tankers load up in a port at twilight. Avigator Fortuner/Shutterstock


Humans are leaving a heavy footprint on the Earth, but when did we become the main driver of change in the planet’s ecosystems? Many scientists point to the 1950s, when all kinds of socioeconomic trends began accelerating. Since then, the world population has tripled. Fertiliser and water use expanded as more food was grown than ever before. The construction of motorways sped up to accommodate rising car ownership while international flights took off to satisfy a growing taste for tourism.
The scale of human demands on Earth grew beyond historic proportions. This post-war period became known as the “Great Acceleration”, and many believe it gave birth to the Anthropocene – the geological epoch during which human activity surpassed natural forces as the biggest influence on the functioning of Earth’s living systems.
But researchers studying the ocean are currently feeling a sense of déjà vu. Over the past three decades, patterns seen on land 70 years ago have been occurring in the ocean. We’re living through a “Blue Acceleration”, and it will have significant consequences for life on the blue planet.
Human claims on ocean resources and space have increased rapidly in the last three decades. Jouffray et al. (2020), Author provided
Why is the Blue Acceleration happening now?
As land-based resources have declined, hopes and expectations have increasingly turned to the ocean as a new engine of human development. Take deep sea mining. The international seabed and its mineral riches have excited commercial interest in recent years due to soaring commodity prices. According to the International Monetary Fund, the price of gold is up 454% since 2000, silver is up 317% and lead 493%. Around 1.4 million square kilometres of the seabed has been leased since 2001 by the International Seabed Authority for exploratory mining activities.
In some industries, technological advances have driven these trends. Virtually all offshore windfarms were installed in the last 20 years. The marine biotechnology sector scarcely existed at the end of the 20th century, and over 99% of genetic sequences from marine organisms found in patents were registered since 2000.
During the 1990s, as the Blue Acceleration got underway, the world population reached 6 billion. Today there are around 7.8 billion people. Population growth in water-scarce areas like the Middle East, Australia and South Africa has caused a three-fold growth in volumes of desalinated seawater generated since 2000. It has also meant a nearly four-fold increase in the volume of goods transported around the world by shipping since 2000.
Cargo ships enter Singapore – one of the busiest ports in the world. Donvictorio/Shutterstock
Why does the Blue Acceleration matter?
The ocean was once thought – even among prominent scientists – to be too vast to be changed by human activity. That view has been replaced by the uncomfortable recognition that not only can humans change the ocean, but also that the current trajectory of human demands on the ocean simply isn’t sustainable.
Consider the coast of Norway. The region is home to a multi-million dollar ocean-based oil and gas industry, aquaculture, popular cruises, busy shipping routes and fisheries. All of these interests are vying for the same ocean space, and their demands are growing. A five-fold increase in the number of salmon grown by aquaculture is expected by 2050, while the region’s tourism industry is predicted to welcome a five-fold increase in visitors by 2030. Meanwhile, vast offshore wind farms have been proposed off the southern tip of Norway.
The ocean is vast, but it’s not limitless. This saturation of ocean space is not unique to Norway, and a densely populated ocean space runs the risk of conflict across industries. Escapee salmon from aquaculture have spread sea lice in wild populations, creating tensions with Norwegian fisheries. An industrial accident in the oil and gas industry could cause significant damage to local seafood and tourism as well as the seafood export market.
A salmon farm off the coast of Vestland, Norway. Marius Dobilas/Shutterstock
More fundamentally, the burden on ocean ecosystems is growing, and we simply don’t know as much about these ecosystems as we would like. An ecologist once quipped that fisheries management is the same as forestry management. Instead of trees you’re counting fish, except you can’t see the fish, and they move.
Exploitation of the ocean has tended to precede exploration. One iconic example is the scaly-foot snail. This deep sea mollusc was discovered in 1999 and was on the IUCN Red List of endangered species by 2019. Why? As far as scientists can tell, the species is only found in three hydrothermal vent systems more than 2,400 metres below the Indian Ocean, covering less than 0.02 square kilometres. Today, two of the three vent systems fall within exploratory mining leases.

What next?
Billionaires dreaming of space colonies can dream a little closer to home. Even as the Blue Acceleration consumes more of the ocean’s resources, this vast area is every bit as mysterious as outer space. The surfaces of Mars and the Moon have been mapped in higher resolution than the seafloor. Life in the ocean has existed for two billion years longer than on land and an estimated 91% of marine species have not been described by science. Their genetic adaptations could help scientists develop the antibiotics and medicines of tomorrow, but they may disappear long before that’s possible.
Scientists have barely sampled the diversity of life in the deep sea. NOAA/UnsplashCC BY-SA
The timing is right for guiding the Blue Acceleration towards more sustainable and equitable trajectories. The UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development is about to begin, a new international treaty on ocean biodiversity is in its final stages of negotiation, and in June 2020, governments, businesses, academics and civil society will assemble for the UN Ocean Conference in Lisbon.Yet many simple questions remain. Who is driving the Blue Acceleration? Who is benefiting from it? And who is being left out or forgotten? These are all urgent questions, but perhaps the most important and hardest to answer of all is how to create connections and engagement across all these groups. Otherwise, the drivers of the Blue Acceleration will be like the fish in the ecologist’s analogy: constantly moving, invisible and impossible to manage – before it is too late.

Links