After writing my previous blog post regarding news versus opinion on whether California wildfires are worse year over year, an article in The Atlantic by Robinson Meyer caused me to want to analyze it deeper. When reading with a more critical eye, I wondered about its credibility for many reasons. This article instigated a more thorough investigation because of its use of “science” related information from “scientists” with no visual data offered. For my “deep” article analysis, I am using the S.I.F.T. method to evaluate California’s Wildfires Are 500 Percent Larger Due to Climate Change:
- Stop: After reading the article, I asked myself if I believed this information to be from a credible news site. I felt The Atlantic to be a well-known source, but to confirm that I checked their credibility rating. According to Media Bias Fact-Check, they are an extremely credible source known to embrace factual reporting practices and have not encountered fact-checking issues.
- Investigate the Source: After confirming the information I am receiving is from a credible site, I asked myself whether the source was equally credible. Robinson Meyer is a regular writer for The Atlantic and has written numerous environmental articles for them since 2018. He has been recognized for his environmental investigative journalism by winning the SEAL award in 2017/2019.
- Find Better Coverage: In the Atlantic article, Meyer provides readers with a link to a scientific journal published by Earth’s Future in 2019, which he uses as the basis of his article. The scientific journal noted that California wildfires had seen an increased burn area 5x more significant than in 1972 with cited sources. Meyer contends that this increase “is clearly attributable to the warming climate.” Interestingly, the journal contributors attribute the increase to multiple factors and admit California’s wildfire issue is complex. The researchers point out that the drier climate is an overwhelming cause, but forest vegetation cover and residential building in fire zones cannot be ignored. Numerous other scientific journals like PNSA.org and PERC.org make similar assertions while highlighting a particular contributing factor.
- Trace Claims, Quotes, and Media Back to Original Context: While Meyers offers links to a couple of outside sources, the quotes within the article are from verbal conversations he had with researchers. However, using the “find on page” webpage tool, the context of the quotes can be found within the scientific journal. The claims Meyers highlights are also verified within the source journal. Tracing claims and media from the cited journal is easily performed due to the extensive backlinks to the outside sources.
My first instinct is to grade this article in the “B” range because it uses a single cited scientific article and quotes only one of the seven other contributing authors. However, after using the S.I.F.T. method, I would give the piece an A-. This final score is given because the scientific article source is full of additional credible sources and published in a credible media channel. At the end of the article, the author haphazardly offers another driver of California wildfires and attempts to seek additional input from another college professor in that field of study. I believe the author could have done a better job at offering a well-rounded view of the issue at hand. It appears Meyers may be slightly biased on climate change being the primary driver of California wildfires even though his source, with great detail, studies all the drivers and their subsequent impact. Overall, the article, the outlet, the author, and the source are all credible. My only wish is for the author not to have led with his predisposition.
