The story, "The Prophet of Climate Change: James Lovelock", was published in “Rolling Stone” about a year and a half ago and details the life of Lovelock, a prominent 20th century scientist most famous for pioneering the “Gaia hypothesis” and explains his gloomy predictions for mankind in the age of global warming. Unfortunately, Lovelock has made pessimistic prophecies of this sort before.
The headline is clear but not particularly powerful and it’s not until the summary deck that the reader’s interest is piqued by the revelation that Lovelock predicts that by the end of the 21st century, over 6 million people will perish as a result of global warming. Although the headline isn’t the strongest, the editor did a good job using the combination of the headline and summary deck to clarify to the reader that the article will both give details about who Lovelock is and why he feels that the planet is on the brink of disaster.
The lead is very effective; it gives the reader a perspective on the vast amount of experience in both science and life possessed by Lovelock and then bluntly states that these experiences have led him to this disturbing conclusion: “The human race is doomed.” By explaining that a man with such a wealth of knowledge is so pessimistic about the future of mankind, the lead forces the reader to continue to learn more about Lovelock and why he feels this way. The article explains Lovelock’s grim prediction for the future of our planet in short, concise sentences for the next several paragraphs. Such sentences are preferable when discussing topics such as global warming and the editor did a good job throughout the article of limiting the scientific jargon to really drive home the dire situation that Lovelock feels we are in.
The article mixes quotes from an interview with Lovelock with narrative accounts detailing his life and his experiences that influenced his predictions for the planet’s future throughout the article. After explaining Lovelock’s prophecy, the writer dives into a lengthy account of Lovelock’s life. Although some of this information is vital to understanding Lovelock, the editor should have cut this background down to the essentials. It rambles for so long that the reader finds themselves reading what seems like a profile of his life rather than an explanation of or evidence supporting his grim forecast. The article was originally presented superimposed on an illustration of the planet embroiled in flames. This presentation works well with the foreboding tone of the story and illustrates Lovelock’s view that sometimes the only way to get people to support a cause is to scare them into action.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Drew, this is an interesting take on a complex story. Longer magazine pieces of this sort tend to combine biography with whatever topical aspect of the subject's life led to the current story. There must always be a tension in reporting and editing these stories between the issue at hand and the biographical details that make the subject not just an expert but a rounded human being.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious what you would have chosen for a more powerful main headline, and if you have ideas for non-traditional ways of presenting Lovelock's scientific evidence in the magazine without breaking into the narrative to do so.
Perry