COMMENT The climate change confusion may be explained by what Gadi Wolfsfeld in his book, ‘Making Sense of Media & Politics’ calls the five principles of political communication, the third principle being: There is no such thing as objective journalism (nor can there be). “The question is not, then, whether or not the media is biased (they are), the question is how are they biased,” he points out. The biases may be cultural, ideological and commercial.

Wolfsfeld points out that “true objectivity is totally impossible”. The very fact that journalists have to choose to report on just a few items among a ridiculously large number of world events tells you that, even in the digital age, journalists have to make subjective judgments about what people need to know and what can be ignored.

He says cultural bias has to do with the fact that every news story is rooted in a certain time and place. If the story of Rima in Borneo gets reported at all, the issues will also look very different when it is reported in America, France, or Japan. Wolfsfeld says one of the reasons why cultural bias is so powerful is that it is usually invisible. “People are rarely called upon to question their basic assumptions about their world in part because ethnocentric news is so natural and familiar.”

He says ideological bias, on the other hand, appears much easier to recognise. It is certainly a major issue for public debate, with countless columns and books ruthlessly attacking the news media for their slanted reporting.

“The importance of these cultural considerations starts long before an editor decides whether or not to cover an event. The decisions made by news editors are based primarily on assumptions about what they assume their particular audience - and their potential audience - wants to hear about.”

Commercial bias, according to Wolfsfeld, refers to the tendency of journalists to choose, highlight, and create dramatic news stories - “Stay tuned because that’s coming up next.”

Aditya Wardhana, an Indonesia TV producer, highlights the commercial bias this way: “(Indonesian) national media don’t really care because the problem is so far away from Jakarta. Palm oil is a local problem. Jakarta people, (who make up) the main audience, don’t care about the palm oil problems. When the audience does not care then the rating/share for TV drops so the producer prefers to pick up another story to broadcast.”

But he concedes that the local media do not have sufficient resources to cover the palm oil problem continuously.

“Media have failed to make the environmental issues clear, interesting and understandable to the audience. What is happening to us not just about orang utan as the issues are larger.”

For instance, the controversy also takes on a jingoistic flavour when it comes to land ownership. “As many plantations are Malaysian-owned, it’s always a hot issue as the question then would be ‘how come Malaysians can grab Indonesian land?”

“Palm oil is big business, a lot of money. Palm oil companies can buy anyone who fight against them. My friend who was an NGO activist said many NGO and environmental organisations are funded by palm oil companies. They are stooges. The biggest advertisers are also palm oil companies,” Aditya says.

P Gunasegaram, publisher of KiniBiz, points out that though there is coverage on the palm oil industry they are often not in depth and not very understandable for most people.

“I think even local coverage does not take into account local factors and interests such as land is needed for economic development, people need incomes etc.” he says.

He says foreign media is definitely influenced by anti-palm oil lobby and hardly any foreign coverage takes into account domestic economic considerations and jobs.

Of local media, he says, “I am surprised by the amount of coverage in local publications which are unsympathetic. But these are often (taken from) foreign wire reports e.g Bloomberg, Reuters etc.”

“We have done some reporting on RSPO and such (issues) but not major direct reporting on the environmental issues. Basically readership interest on these matters are low.”

Balanced reporting

While there is no such thing as objective journalism, this is no excuse for not pursuing fair and balanced reporting. There is no shortage of factual information and countervailing opinions. The New Scientist is a case in point.

In an article, ‘Don’t demonise palm oil to save orang utans’ it points out, “The palm-oil industry is often vilified for the plight of orang-utans - but mud-slinging won’t save them. Palm oil is a huge source of revenue. You can’t expect the country to give up its main source of income... Environmental activists are sometimes ridiculous in the claims they make.”

In another instance, the UK-based The Ecologist points out, “Now, the multi-billion dollar industry is hitting back with more sophisticated lobbying efforts aimed at altering negative perceptions of palm oil, and have found their champions in free market, libertarian think-tanks and Conservative UK politicians.”  

On the local front, even though the industry finds it hard to inch their way into foreign media, credible attempts have been made by industry professionals like Dr Yusof Basiron, CEO of the Malaysian Palm Oil Council, through their own websites.

“To clear the air, I have written down my personal thoughts in the hope that more and more people will recognise the untiring efforts made by the Malaysian palm oil industry to improve our natural habitats, our environment and our own health.

“They may see why I am passionate about palm oil - and why I wish to share this passion with NGOs. Working together, we can share a common vision that commits to sustainable practices today, for the generations of people to come tomorrow, on a healthier, livelier and greener earth - the planet we call home.”

Conclusion

Political scientist Maxwell McCombs points out in his article, ‘Building Consensus: The News Media’s Agenda Setting Role’, that “agenda setting is the inadvertent outcome of reporting news, this is a role that cannot be abdicated or side stepped... This is a time of exaggerated individual differences.

“The focus (of agenda setting theory) is on the building achievement of consensus, a social science perspective that attributes significant influence to the news media in the process of achieving community consensus about the most problems and tasks of the day.

“...The agenda setting role of the news media is an awesome ethical responsibility. Every news organisation need to carefully consider what role it is playing, deliberate or inadvertent, in the achievement of community consensus. Mass communication has significant consequences for the building of community...”

In the words of the philosopher in the Bible, the final word in agenda setting was uttered long, long ago: “The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.” (Ecclesiastes 12:13). The first duty of the original stakeholders was to look after Planet Earth (Genesis 2:15).

The orang utans feature significantly in God’s biodiversity (Genesis 1:24) but God’s agenda is in mankind like Rima in the headwaters of Borneo because she, like the rest of us, are made in the very image of God - Imago Dei. (Genesis 1:26).

There may be no such thing as objective journalism according to Gadi Wolfsfeld but as Maxwell McCombs points out, “Every news organisation need to carefully consider what role it is playing, deliberate or inadvertent, in the achievement of community consensus.”

In setting the climate change agenda, it is important the media do not mistake the trees or orang utans for the forests. Impoverished Dayak communities and children like Rima living in the headwaters of Borneo need not have to become the collateral damage and unseen human face of the global warming jaw-jaw.

We need to build communities in the shadow of climate change. In the words of Dr Yusof, “Working together, we can share a common vision that commits to sustainable practices today, for the generations of people to come tomorrow, on a healthier, livelier and greener earth - the planet we call home.”

Indeed, the agenda-setting role of the news media in building consensus is an awesome ethical responsibility. For faith-based writers, this becomes more than just an ethical mandate.

Part I: The forgotten human face in climate change

BOB TEOH is a freelance writer who believes the first obligation of journalism is to truth. This article is adapted from a paper he submitted as a requirement for his Masters in Journalism programme at the Konrad Adenauer Asian Center for Journalism, Ateneo University, Manila.

The climate change debate is contentious particularly over greenhouse gas emission arising from massive forest clearing for oil palm cultivation and its threat to the survival of the orang utan. But mud-slinging by the anti-palm oil lobby won’t save the orang utan. Part I of this article looks at the unseen human face of climate change. PartII looks at how the media sets the agenda.