Search

Sammendrag I denne artikkelen utforsker vi norsk klimadekning i en tid da klima har gått fra å være en «sak» til å bli en «dimensjon» i den offentlige debatten. Vi analyserer fire kommentarartikler om koronakrisepakken til oljenæringen i VG, Aftenposten, Dagbladet og Nettavisen. Ved hjelp av narrativ analyse ser vi på den aktive konstruksjonen av narrativer langs sentrale tidslinjer; oljealderen i Norge og det grønne skiftet. Vi finner at selv kommentatorer som har klima høyt oppe på agendaen, kritiserer oljeskattepakken av økonomiske grunner, men at det, særlig i Aftenposten og Dagbladet, er tilløp til en direkte kobling til behovet for en klimaomstilling. Sett i ettertid gir denne narrative omkoblingen næring til nye, mer uttalt klimakritiske narrativer om en fossilfri fremtid.

Anybody who lives “in the know” of the climate crisis—and understands some of the systemic causes of the relentless expansion of fossil fuel excavation and combustion—feels enfeebled by the obvious questions of what to say and/or what to do, to change things for the better. It does matter what we say, but most of the wise things have already been said. Meanwhile, journalists covering climate summits flip-flops between speaking the truth about where we are with global warming and political realism. This perspective article is shaped as confessions from an activist professor, who has inhaled climate activism and exhaled thoughts on climate communication for the last 15 years. Noting how the Latin roots of communicate is “to make common,” the author argues that the school strikes of 2019 were the last time hope was genuinely felt across the globe, because they found meaningful action together. What can be made common now, within the fog from Gaza, the Ukraine war and the cost of living crisis? Instead of “blowing up a pipeline,” the author suggests that climate jobs can break more spells of inaction for majority publics and help unleash and shape the broadest possible mass climate struggle.

Only a few years ago a normative turn away from objective reporting in Norwegian climate change journalism took place. Journalists begun to ask themselves whether it was their job to rescue the planet. In this article, several dimensions of the ideal of objectivity are explored among Norwegian climate change journalists: balance, reflecting public opinion, truthfulness and neutrality. The truth-seeking ideal is illustrated by the conflict between political and natural realism in climate change politics: How large do cuts in emissions of greenhouse gases need to be? The author defends a critical realist ideal of objectivity, which does not have to be in contradiction with agenda-driven journalism.