First Post : Global Warming and Hot Air

I have great reason to believe I am either the first or one of the first to write a serious commentary in this class. I was looking through the various links I had and some did not work whereas others were still under construction. You could say mine is too but I really cannot be bothered to “decorate” my blog. Is that the right term? Never mind. Here is my commentary on the article “Global Warming and Hot Air” by Robert J. Samuelson. The article is taken from Newsweek online and here is the link http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17025081/site/newsweek/

The article is an article commenting on the situation of global warming and his outlook on what the people of the world are doing to try to prevent it. However, the article is filled with satire and biting sarcasm. This is evident from the title of the article which reads “Global Warming and Hot Air”. The double meaning on the words “Hot Air” can mean the temperature of the earth getting warmer. Its other meaning is that the hype over politicians doing something about the situation is just hot air, meaning that there was not much really being done, more words than actions. This title sets the tone for the most part of the article where the writer criticizes the politicians and big companies that say they are doing their part to save the environment. This is as he feels they are just doing that to improve their public image and he feels they have made a lot of talk but little action has been taken.
The main focus of the article is to criticize the politicians and Multi-National Companies that are trying to show that they care about global warming by making extravagant speeches about their efforts and campaigns against global warming. Another purpose of the article could be also to raise awareness of the current situation. This is as the writer does include evidences like the percentage of the world’s energy coming from fossil fuels, the Earth’s total emission of carbon dioxide as well as the percentage of those emissions coming from developed countries.
It is evident that from the writer’s point of view, the talk about things being done to improve the situation is nothing more than talk, or just a lot of “hot air”. The writer is an experienced writer and writes mainly analyses on socioeconomic issues. He wrote the article from his own point of view, one of a person that lives in a developed country. The insights he gives into his area of expertise are honest but blunt. It is evident from his scalding criticisms that he does not mince his words and just writes what he can infer from evidences he collects as well as to his own knowledge. How far can his insights be trusted is another issue. This is as there is not much evidence that says that the politicians and the Multi-National companies are not doing what they pledged to do. The only evidences are from the writers own knowledge and the ever worsening situation.
From my point of view, the article has brought some light onto my view of the environmental situation. It has shown me how serious the situation actually is, something I never realized and never really bothered about. Most of the time I just considered global warming as a myth and the politicians and Multi-National Companies were just creating a lot of hype. Now I realize another point of view, one that says the situation is really bad and the politicians and Multi-National Companies are not doing much about it.
Living in Singapore which is more or less devoid of natural disasters, I felt that the situation was far away and not going to happen in my life. However, I now realise that I knew practically nothing at all. This was due to my comfortable and sheltered life. I guess that the article is somewhat effective with its blunt and open criticism and scalding sarcasm.