Wonders of the World - an Essay on the Importance of Being Critical When Reading Media

By Abby Quilty

    Reading with a critical eye will influence our understanding of the world by challenging us to consider

the possibility of other ideas through different perspectives, viewpoints and biases. Once we identify

these ideas, we can analyze them to understand what values they represent and what ideas may hold

more truth. Understanding the values and truths behind ideas will show us the large range of opinions in

the world and remind us how important it is to form our own opinions based on knowledge. Global

warming is a common topic in the news that leads to deeper investigation, as there are many different

opinions about the topic. It is crucial to understand some ideas about global warming to fathom the

possible dangers that it entails and how to prevent them.

    The first thing I noticed about these articles is their headline. It is the first thing any reader will

see, and sometimes the only thing a reader will see. The headline of my first article is “Climate Change:

How Do We Know?.” Right away, I noticed this headline was blunt in stating its opinion that they believe

in global warming. I imagined there would be evidence to support this in order to persuade readers to

think the same, as the headline asks, “How Do We Know?”, as if they are trying to prove a point. The

headline on my second article is “31, 000 scientists say, “no convincing evidence”. This headline was

somewhat confusing to me, as there was no mention of the topic of global warming. I only found that

the article was addressing global warming after reading it. Otherwise, the headline made me think that

they had plenty of evidence from trustworthy sources that the idea they were addressing is false, like

how the first article presented evidence to support its opinion. The headline of the third article is

“Global Climate Change: What You Need to Know”. This headline made me believe that the article

would focus on the facts needed in order to create an educated opinion and give the reader the

freedom to make this educated opinion. This is different from the other articles, as they stated a clear

opinion and did not provide freedom to make an opinion.

    After reading the articles, I noticed some of the articles used loaded language. The first article

did not have much loaded language; it kept a professional and fact-based viewpoint. One quote that

seemed very loaded was “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” This

statement implies that the evidence they are presenting proves their point. Other than that quote, the

rest of the article was very fact-based and left out the opinion of the author. The article was short,

however it provided links to other articles by the same website for examples to support the statement.

The second article did not have much loaded language. This surprised me, as the headline made me

think this article would be very opinionated. There was a poll done by scientists to prove the headline

statement showed to be true in their research, however the headline was misleading. The article had a

more neutral opinion, as it mostly described the thoughts of the participants behind the poll. Most

statements had clear statistics from the poll, and other statements discussed how the poll was done. An

example of this is the quote “97% of the climate scientists surveyed believe “global average

temperatures have increased” during the past century.” The third article presented lots of loaded

language, unlike the last two articles. This surprised me because the headline appeared to have a

neutral opinion on the topic. The article appeared to agree with the idea of global warming, which was

clear in the loaded language. An example of this is “Climate change is a challenge faced by every living

being.” This implies that climate change exists throughout our planet, for both animals and plants. The

loaded language present in this article is much more intense than that of the other two articles.

    After reading the articles, I investigated the source of the facts so I could understand how

accurate they may be. The first article did not have a clear author, so it is unknown what the author’s

background is like. There were many sources cited at the bottom of the page, which proves that there

was extensive research done on the topic. The amount of research done, and the quality of the sources

lead me to think this was a trustworthy article. The second article had no information about the author

specifically, but it claimed to be sourced from George Mason University. There were few other sources,

which proves that most of the research was based on the poll. The poll claimed to have interviewed

‘expert’ climate scientists, without a clear definition as to what qualified the individual to possess this

title. This was interesting to me, because it meant that people of unknown expertise were taking this

poll and there is no way to prove whether these opinions are based on a proper education. This made

me think that despite some similarities in opinions, this article is not as accurate with information as the

first article. The third article clearly stated that the author was Melissa Denchak, who is a freelance

writer and editor. The only information about Denchak’s education is that she has a culinary diploma

and enjoys writing about food. I found this strange, as culinary studies are not science related and would

not help with writing an article about science. There were many links throughout the text to articles

from outside sources that supported statements. The authors education on the topic worried me at first,

but these links proved to me that the article presents some trustworthy ideas.

    In conclusion, it is very important to use critical thinking when reading news articles to

acknowledge the ideas and form an opinion based on what information is given. It is very easy to

analyze a text and detect flaws, which is an important skill to have when reading and learning. This will

expose us as readers to the rich variety of opinions and lead us to make our own. Exposing us to flaws in

facts will remind us how easily false information can spread and how dangerous it is to believe. This can

be clearly seen in the accuracy of information in my first and third article, and the inaccuracy of my

second article.

Work Cited

Article 1:

“Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?” NASA, NASA, 10 May 2021, climate.nasa.gov/evidence/.

Article 2:

“31,000 Scientists Say ‘No Convincing Evidence’.” OSS Foundation, 21 Feb. 2014,

ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/31000-scientists-say-no-

convincing-evidence.

Article 3:

Denchak, Melissa. “Global Climate Change: What You Need to Know.” NRDC, 23 Feb. 2017,

www.nrdc.org/stories/global-climate-change-what-you-need-know.