From Green Energy Reporter:
The New York Times‘ Dot Earth blogger/science reporter/lightning rod Andrew Revkin’s name has appeared on a list of potential buyout takers on the media Web site Gawker.
The uber-popular Gawker writes of the list Revkin is on: “We received this additional list of NYT buyout-takers. This list is unconfirmed, but the source is generally reliable.” That’s good enough to blog on, isn’t it? Heck it’s probably good enough for a front-page story in the NYT since someone first sent me the story in an email this morning. Let’s ask their public editor….
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Joe,
I forgot my old media manners and failed to at least ask Andy what his plans are.
I am in the process of correcting my mistake.
Matt
Greenenergyreporter.com
In my view, Andy could do far better without The New York Times, I hope.
Indeed, one of the things that would be great to see is a groundbreaking, deeply honest, insightful, and generally super book (and/or website) about the immense problems in, and of, the media and in the media’s treatment of such issues as climate change and energy. Let’s get them into the open, and let’s fix them. Andy could be a KEY leader in that necessary and long-overdue change effort.
In any case, I wish him luck.
Jeff
Well if he’s leaving, he left a sweet interactive graphic on the history of climate change science behind him. It gives you a pretty useful visualization of just how little climate science Swifthack could even POTENTIALLY affect – just by drawing a box around those years. Maybe deniers can spot on the timeline where, exactly, the conspiracy started.
http://akwag.blogspot.com/2009/12/history-of-global-warming-science-where.html
Also, it’s official: 2000s will be warmest decade on record.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aJdaPHRr43Qs
I’ve always thought Andy’s problem was the Sulzbergers, leading to hints from the editors to be careful about how you frame the issues. Letters to the public editor or an ombudsman from bloggers like me are meaningless in that context.
I hope he leaves the Times. It would be an important symbolic gesture, and he could find his voice again.
This seems like a tragedy. Where else could he possibly have as great a reach?
Oops, I forgot this is ClimateProgress. As bad as he’s messed up, he’s the only voice at the Times even talking about this in a semi-rational way, and I admire his ability to admit his mistakes. I have no idea why he still talks to the Pielkes. But: It could be worse; he could be replaced by Tierney.
The change(s) from his NYT to post-NYT reporting will be very illuminating.
Revkin was interviewed on the NYTimes podcast “Science Times” today and said “the world is clearly warming, and even skeptics acknowledge that”.