A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
This framing isn't accidental.
Log In
Email *
Password *
Remember Me
Forgot Your Password?
Log In
New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access
Skip to content Skip to footer
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
Magazine
Newsletters
Subscribe
Log In
Search
Subscribe
Donate
Magazine
Latest
Archive
Podcasts
Newsletters
Sections
Politics
World
Economy
Culture
Books & the Arts
The Nation
About
Events
Contact Us
Advertise
Current Issue
Environment
/ March 12, 2026
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
War is a climate story, but billionaire media owners don’t want to tell it.
Kyle Pope
Share
Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky Pocket
Email
Ad Policy
Fire breaks out at the Shahran oil depot after US and Israeli attacks in Tehran, Iran on March 8, 2026.
(Hassan Ghaedi / Anadolu via Getty Images)
This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration cofounded by Columbia Journalism Review and The Nation strengthening coverage of the climate story.
The effects of a warming Earth are worsening. Climate disinformation is rampant. Wars around the world are pitting petro-states against one another. So why are much of the world’s media backsliding when it comes to the coverage of climate change?
Covering Climate Now was formed in 2019 in response to the climate silence that then prevailed in much of the press, especially in the United States. Over the years that followed, hundreds of newsrooms joined our effort, and press coverage of the story began to reflect the scale of the crisis. Newsrooms beefed up their climate reporting teams; they confronted misinformation that sought to play down the problem; they thought creatively about how to find the climate connection on every beat. Finally, newsrooms were giving the story the attention it deserved.
That all changed in the run-up to the 2024 US presidential election. Even though the stakes of that election were clear—everyone knew what Donald Trump would do to climate policy if he returned to power—climate never made it near the top of the list of journalistic priorities during the campaign. A September 2024 debate between Trump and Kamala Harris was typical: Climate change got only one question from the moderators, near the end of the debate. Trump used the moment to reiterate that he sees global warming as a hoax (an unequivocal falsehood, science has proven), and Harris reminded voters of her previous support for gas fracking.
The storyline was set. Just over a year into Trump’s second term, it is now clear that many newsrooms see the climate story as a slog, and are scaling back. In the United States, The Washington Post gutted its climate team as part of its ongoing series of layoffs, and CBS, NBC, and ABC cut back on their coverage.
There are important exceptions to the trend: The Guardian, The New York Times, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, and CNN continue to cover the climate story, maintaining and, in some cases, expanding their reporting teams.
More common, unfortunately, is the experience that Chase Cain, NBC’s former national climate reporter, recounted in an interview last …
This framing isn't accidental.
Log In
Email *
Password *
Remember Me
Forgot Your Password?
Log In
New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access
Skip to content Skip to footer
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
Magazine
Newsletters
Subscribe
Log In
Search
Subscribe
Donate
Magazine
Latest
Archive
Podcasts
Newsletters
Sections
Politics
World
Economy
Culture
Books & the Arts
The Nation
About
Events
Contact Us
Advertise
Current Issue
Environment
/ March 12, 2026
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
War is a climate story, but billionaire media owners don’t want to tell it.
Kyle Pope
Share
Copy Link
X (Twitter)
Bluesky Pocket
Ad Policy
Fire breaks out at the Shahran oil depot after US and Israeli attacks in Tehran, Iran on March 8, 2026.
(Hassan Ghaedi / Anadolu via Getty Images)
This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration cofounded by Columbia Journalism Review and The Nation strengthening coverage of the climate story.
The effects of a warming Earth are worsening. Climate disinformation is rampant. Wars around the world are pitting petro-states against one another. So why are much of the world’s media backsliding when it comes to the coverage of climate change?
Covering Climate Now was formed in 2019 in response to the climate silence that then prevailed in much of the press, especially in the United States. Over the years that followed, hundreds of newsrooms joined our effort, and press coverage of the story began to reflect the scale of the crisis. Newsrooms beefed up their climate reporting teams; they confronted misinformation that sought to play down the problem; they thought creatively about how to find the climate connection on every beat. Finally, newsrooms were giving the story the attention it deserved.
That all changed in the run-up to the 2024 US presidential election. Even though the stakes of that election were clear—everyone knew what Donald Trump would do to climate policy if he returned to power—climate never made it near the top of the list of journalistic priorities during the campaign. A September 2024 debate between Trump and Kamala Harris was typical: Climate change got only one question from the moderators, near the end of the debate. Trump used the moment to reiterate that he sees global warming as a hoax (an unequivocal falsehood, science has proven), and Harris reminded voters of her previous support for gas fracking.
The storyline was set. Just over a year into Trump’s second term, it is now clear that many newsrooms see the climate story as a slog, and are scaling back. In the United States, The Washington Post gutted its climate team as part of its ongoing series of layoffs, and CBS, NBC, and ABC cut back on their coverage.
There are important exceptions to the trend: The Guardian, The New York Times, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, and CNN continue to cover the climate story, maintaining and, in some cases, expanding their reporting teams.
More common, unfortunately, is the experience that Chase Cain, NBC’s former national climate reporter, recounted in an interview last …
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
This framing isn't accidental.
Log In
Email *
Password *
Remember Me
Forgot Your Password?
Log In
New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access
Skip to content Skip to footer
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
Magazine
Newsletters
Subscribe
Log In
Search
Subscribe
Donate
Magazine
Latest
Archive
Podcasts
Newsletters
Sections
Politics
World
Economy
Culture
Books & the Arts
The Nation
About
Events
Contact Us
Advertise
Current Issue
Environment
/ March 12, 2026
A World on Fire Needs More Climate Reporting—Not Less
War is a climate story, but billionaire media owners don’t want to tell it.
Kyle Pope
Share
Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky Pocket
Email
Ad Policy
Fire breaks out at the Shahran oil depot after US and Israeli attacks in Tehran, Iran on March 8, 2026.
(Hassan Ghaedi / Anadolu via Getty Images)
This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration cofounded by Columbia Journalism Review and The Nation strengthening coverage of the climate story.
The effects of a warming Earth are worsening. Climate disinformation is rampant. Wars around the world are pitting petro-states against one another. So why are much of the world’s media backsliding when it comes to the coverage of climate change?
Covering Climate Now was formed in 2019 in response to the climate silence that then prevailed in much of the press, especially in the United States. Over the years that followed, hundreds of newsrooms joined our effort, and press coverage of the story began to reflect the scale of the crisis. Newsrooms beefed up their climate reporting teams; they confronted misinformation that sought to play down the problem; they thought creatively about how to find the climate connection on every beat. Finally, newsrooms were giving the story the attention it deserved.
That all changed in the run-up to the 2024 US presidential election. Even though the stakes of that election were clear—everyone knew what Donald Trump would do to climate policy if he returned to power—climate never made it near the top of the list of journalistic priorities during the campaign. A September 2024 debate between Trump and Kamala Harris was typical: Climate change got only one question from the moderators, near the end of the debate. Trump used the moment to reiterate that he sees global warming as a hoax (an unequivocal falsehood, science has proven), and Harris reminded voters of her previous support for gas fracking.
The storyline was set. Just over a year into Trump’s second term, it is now clear that many newsrooms see the climate story as a slog, and are scaling back. In the United States, The Washington Post gutted its climate team as part of its ongoing series of layoffs, and CBS, NBC, and ABC cut back on their coverage.
There are important exceptions to the trend: The Guardian, The New York Times, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, and CNN continue to cover the climate story, maintaining and, in some cases, expanding their reporting teams.
More common, unfortunately, is the experience that Chase Cain, NBC’s former national climate reporter, recounted in an interview last …
0 Comments
0 Shares
26 Views
0 Reviews
