Accuracy in Media

President Donald Trump has worked to return the Environmental Protection Agency to its original purposes – reducing smog, cleaning up messes and ensuring clean air and water – but that has not met with the approval of the mainstream media, which wants him focused on its highest priority, global warming.

Further evidence of this arrived yesterday with a story on the Time magazine website headlined “Donald Trump Called Climate Change a Hoax. Now He’s Awkwardly Boasting About Fighting It.”

Author Jason Worland attempts to straighten out the president from his first paragraph on. “President Trump has falsely called climate change a ‘hoax’ invented by China, incorrectly suggested that wind turbines cause cancer and dismissed a landmark scientific report produced by the federal government’s own scientists,” Worland wrote. “His administration has sought to roll back key climate regulations at every turn.”

First, Trump called global warming a hoax, and it appears to be. Modeling of the theory that increases in greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, trap heat and make the Earth warmer have yet to match observable phenomena. In recent years, when carbon dioxide was said to be at its highest levels in hundreds, if not thousands, of years, temperatures have fallen sharply.

The media widely derided Trump’s claims that wind turbines cause cancer, but there is a growing body of evidence that people living near wind turbines have adverse health effects, which some say could include cancer. Certainly, mining the rare-earth metals used to make wind turbines causes widespread cancer in the localities in which it occurs.

Finally, the landmark report to which Worland refers, the National Climate Assessment, released late last year, broke no new ground but instead was a compendium of past government reports meant to raise fear levels and funding demands.

Worland then takes the president to task for saying “Every single one of the signatories to the Paris climate accord lags behind America,” which is true.

Worland declares the statement “misleading” because “emissions rose in the U.S. last year and Trump’s policies are likely to make future reductions less likely.” But the significance of the statement, he insisted, was that “the claim appears to be an acknowledgement by the president that climate change is an actual problem that the United States should be addressing, something he has previously dismissed.”

He seems to acknowledge his point is hard to follow with the next paragraph, which reads: “To be clear, Trump did not make that case explicitly nor did he discuss the threat of climate change in any specific way. But his claims would make no sense if climate change was a hoax or simply a byproduct of changes in the weather, arguments that Trump has made in the past.”

It actually appears Trump was saying he exceeded all the metrics by which the media had measured past EPA performance even while pursuing the agenda the media did not favor.

What Trump spoke of and what his agency has confirmed is that his objective is to return the EPA to is core mission of working with states to meet air quality standards, ensuring the safety of chemicals in the marketplace and taking faster action on cleaning up priority contaminated sites.

Worland also took the opportunity to defend the Green New Deal, the $93 trillion proposal put forth by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and others to remake the economy by placing massive requirements on businesses to meet new environmental standards.

“He claimed that the Green New Deal would cost the economy $100 trillion, when in fact the Green New Deal is merely a resolution, meaning it lacks specifics that would allow economists to determine what it costs.” He has assured us clean air would be a priority, Worland continued, “while the Environmental Protection Agency has changed air pollution rules in fashion that will lead to more deaths.” No evidence was offered for this claim.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


Comments are turned off for this article.