Communicating scientific facts about climate and nature to nonscientists determines the overall acceptance or rejection by the public. When we clearly lay out scientific principles, in an understandable way, we reduce the chances of non-scientists getting the wrong information and therefore giving a negative opinion.
In the article communicating climatic change, effective communication is not a lecture but a well laid out conversation that involves the essential scientific aspects that people really care about. For instance, people care less about the scientific facts behind climatic change. What concerns people most is how the said climatic changes will affect their daily life, and measures which can be taken in to place to curb the negative effects or influence the positive aspects. This is well clarified with the surveys carried out in the United States. It was noted out that people were more aware of how climatic changes will affect them than knowing the scientific principles behind climatic change and global warming (Physics Today, 2011).
According to the democratic theory, the society needs a journalist who is a rigorous watchdog of those who are in power and those who want to be in power and most important, he should ferret out truth from lies. The journalist should present a wide range of informed position on the daily important news. This way the society creates a rapport with journalism, and trusts that the information from journalists is reliable and important in their daily life aspects and will assist them make sound decisions on matters affecting them (Eos, 2011).
Practicing explanatory journalism is an important approach in ensuring that the real meaning of the information is not lost in between words during translation by the leader. It is important to use simple words and to always translate technical jargons into simple language for the sake of the leader. Numbers are deceiving and convincing as well, and should be carefully used when using them to derive figures which supports facts. Most importantly, it is important to explain all the facts instead of leaving them to the receiving end digression (Wall Street Journal, 2011).
Different controversies have emerged, some as a result of wrong interpretation of information on the receiver end and others due to differing opinions. It is very okay for different people to differ in opinion, but, on the other hand, it is very destructive for people to differ in opinion just because they interpreted the communicated information differently (the New Yorker, 2011).