This discussion will be aimed towards generating and gathering ideas and thoughts for writing. Before you add your discussion, you need to read "News, Propaganda, and Pseudo-Events" by Mark R. Levin (page 25).

After reading these pieces, consider the following questions:

"News, Propaganda, and Pseudo-Events" by Mark R. Levin

• Where does Mark Levin use fact, and where does he use opinion? Does he use more of one or the other?
• Mark Levin is quoting someone, Roy Spencer, for a lot of this article. Do Spencer's opinions match what you've heard from other sources about climate change?
• Who is Mark Levin's audience here? How is this different from Thunberg's audience?
• One of the ways we recognize bias is considering whether the person making the argument is open to considering different ideas or perspectives, or whether they are only drawing from one narrow perspective. Did you feel this piece was biased? How can you tell?

read the questions, think about them, and then share your thoughts. Be specific in your response: if you're saying that Thunberg uses evidence and support well, which exact sentence are you taking this idea from? If you're pointing out that Levin is biased, where in the text specifically do you see this?

News, Propaganda, and Pseudo-Events MARK R. LEVIN Mark R. Levin hosts the FOX News program Life, Liberty, and Levin and is also a nationally syndicated talk- radio host. He has written five consecutive New York Times #1 bestsellers: Liberty and Tyranny, Plunder and Deceit, Rediscovering America, Ameritopia, and The Liberty Amendments, in addition to Unfreedom of the Press, in which this selection appears. Roy W. Spencer "received his Ph.D. in meteorology at the University of Wisconsin- Madison in 1981. Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA's Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer's work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua Satellite."_ During a presentation at the Heartland Institute's Ninth International Conference on Climate Change in Las Vegas, Spencer explained that "[too many people think that all areas of science are created equal and that scientists objectively look for the answers, but no, there's two kinds of scientists, male and female. Other than that they're the same as everybody else, and in many instances [in the climate sciences] more biased than your average person. . . . Spencer went on to criticize the temperature data of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) because it has never taken into account the phenomenon of urban heat islandeffect.\"? Indeed, Spencer pointed to the thermometer-related algorithms as one of the problems in measuring heat. \"A lot of us still think that a lot of the warming we are seeing in the thermometer record is just urban heat island effect. In fact, Las Vegas, here, even though it's built in the desert basically . . . in the last forty years or so, nighttime temperatures here have risen by ten degrees Fahrenheit because of urbanization. This is an effect that they can't take out of the thermometer record. Their algorithms can't take it out because you can't separate it from global warming. If you've got a long-term warming trend because of urbanization there's no way NOAA can take out that effect because it's indistinguishable from other temperature readings.\"? In the end, Spencer argues, very little is really known about global warming, also known as climate change. \"After working on global warming for the last twenty plus years, what do we know about it now? The longer you go [into the research] you get more questions than you get answers. So, what do we really know about it? Almost nothing.\" There are many more highly educated and experienced experts who raise a variety of substantive issues and questions about man-made climate change. And henceforth, none of them are welcome on NBC's Meet the Press. Moreover, like NBC, they are not likely to be taken seriously in most newsrooms or by most journalists because they dare to challenge the orthodoxy of the Democratic party-press and the progressive agenda in which \"solutions\" to climate change involve new ways of expanding the government's regulatory and taxing role in society via pycyment reading pane 2 0 10 bk e ek e e A e S i 0 a of expanding the government's regulatory and taxing role in society via the \"urgency\" of climate change, and surrendering national sovereignty to international organizations through multigovernment agreements. Thus one-sided opinion is treated as objective truth; reputable and legitimate individuals who could provide contrary factual information to the public are dismissed as science deniers and climate imposters; and the government and public are urged to engage in immediate political and social activism and demand far-reaching national solutions, such as the \"Green New Deal.\" NBC and Chuck Todd, among other media outlets and journalists, have \"interpreted\" and \"analyzed\" the relevant facts through their progressive approach and their conclusion is final. \"Period.\" almost-nothing-about-global-warming/ (March 17, 2019). 3 |bid. 2 |bid