ABSTRACT

Media and climate change scholarship in Zimbabwe has mainly focused on news stories. However, news stories are dependent on news values, which science, including climate change, performs badly against. Besides, news stories are written by journalists, some with limited understanding of science, resulting in misrepresentation of climate change. However, unlike previous studies, this article uses qualitative content analysis and rhetoric analysis to interrogate arguments on climate change advanced by newspaper columnists – also referred to as pundits. This article analyzes columns written by Jeffrey Gogo (The Herald) and Peter Makwanya (NewsDay) from 2017 to 2018 to assess the rhetorical and argumentative techniques they use to argue their positions on climate change. It concludes that the two columnists use their proximity to the news media and their knowledge of science communication to argue for urgent climate change action. Such arguments demonstrate the fifth estate function of columnists in not only holding to account power holders and scientists but also highlighting the shortcomings of the news media.

摘要

津巴布韦的媒体和气候变化奖学金主要集中于新闻报道。但是，新闻报道取决于新闻价值，而包括气候变化在内的科学则不利于新闻价值。此外，新闻报道是由新闻记者撰写的，其中一些人对科学的了解有限，导致对气候变化的误解。但是，与以前的研究不同，本文使用定性内容分析和修辞分析来询问报纸专栏作家提出的有关气候变化的论点，这些论点也被称为专家。本文分析了Jeffrey Gogo（《先驱报》）和Peter Makwanya （新闻日）撰写的专栏从2017年到2018年，评估他们用来论证自己在气候变化问题上的立场的修辞和辩论技巧。结论是，两位专栏作家利用与新闻媒体的接近和对科学传播的了解来主张采取紧急的气候变化行动。这些论点证明了专栏作家的第五种职能，即不仅要追究权力持有者和科学家的责任，而且要强调新闻媒体的缺点。