Who's Writing What You're Reading?

In this week's episode, Justin Worland, senior correspondent at Time, talks to Marcius about the evolving craft of journalism, the impact of the attention economy on his writing, and effective ways to communicate climate issues in a changing media landscape.

Let us know what you think at podontherise@gmail.com

Guest links:
Twitter - https://twitter.com/JustinWorland
LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/justinworland/
Future Proof Newsletter - https://time.com/author/justin-worland/

Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
02:52 Justin's Path Into Journalism
07:07 How Does Being A Journalist Work?
11:00 How Has the Craft of Journalism Changed Over the Last Decade?
13:42 The Challenges of Writing Shorter
15:59 Tailoring Your Content For Your Audience
18:01 Who Is Justin's Audience?
20:09 Has Editorial Oversight for Climate Changed Over the Years?
22:54 How Can We Reach New Audiences for Climate Content?
26:29 Has Justin's Approach to Journalism Changed?
30:07 Navigating the Energy Transition Debate
40:52 Is It Important to Name "The Thing"
43:26 The Importance of Local Journalism
47:02 Advice for Aspiring Journalists
48:55 Closing Thoughts & Claire Davis!

Keywords: journalism, climate change, attention economy, media, communication, energy transition, storytelling, journalism tips

On the Rise is a production of Extempo Media, copyright 2026.

Show Credits:
Vishrudh Sriramprasad, Producer
Claire Davis, Theme Music (Long Gone, Get It Right) | @clairedavismusic

Kheya Patel, Art | https://kheyapatel.com/

Contact: podontherise@gmail.com

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

People are really concerned about sort of telling you the honest truth in a way that's quotable. I go to the Sarah Week conference. Uh, this is the big oil and gas conference every year. This is think about last year. The headlines would be like oil and gas executives praise Trump because on the stage, they were praising Trump. And then you go to the happy hours afterwards and you talk to the people you know, and they're like, we're really concerned about tariffs. This guy wants oil to be $50 a barrel, and we're not going to make a profit at that level. But like nobody would want to say that publicly, right? So it's like having the relationships and the contextual understanding to be able to sift through this moment, I think, has been an advantage.

SPEAKER_00 0:47

Hello, my friends. Welcome to the On the Rise podcast. I'm your host, Marcus Extavor. You just heard the voice of Justin Warland, who's senior climate correspondent at Time magazine. Justin's a seasoned journalist who found himself covering climate and energy issues, and he brings a particular style to that reporting. He focuses on the people in power who make decisions in media, in technology, in business, in trade, in politics. He has a fantastic weekly newsletter that he publishes online through Time called Future Proof. I like to read it because it's concise, it's short, and it gets to the point through his lens on climate and energy and world affairs. In part one of my conversation with Justin, we focus a little bit more on these individuals in power. Who are they? What kind of decisions are they making, and what's the mood among them at this moment? Speaking about power, you may have noticed that a lot of people in positions of power, especially elected members or in political power, have got there through slightly different means. They've used social media. They're using what we now call the attention economy. It's a bit of a buzzy word, but you're hearing it more and more probably. When Justin started his journalism career, the main way to get our attention was through large media networks, and you gotta pay for time or work your way onto the air somehow, some way, in print, in other media outlets. Now, as many politicians have demonstrated, you can use clicks and views and speaking into your phone, like I am now, to get our attention. So the attention economy has really changed the dynamics of power and has brought new people into power, which are gonna mean different decisions, different pressures, and a slightly different landscape. Amidst all the changes in power and the attention economy, we thought it was a great idea to ask: well, how has the craft of journalism changed inside of all this? We have new forms of media, people like video now, people like shorter formats. And we asked Justin how he's adapted his approach to this kind of changing landscape, and maybe what hasn't changed in his journalism practice through these years. Here's my conversation with Justin Warland from Time. I'd love to ask you a little bit about how you got to be where you are, specifically your path into journalism. I don't know anybody personally that then that I knew from a kid that then became a journalist. So I'm asking you, how was your path? What interested you and what kept you interested and steered you in this direction?

SPEAKER_01 3:13

Yeah, I mean, it's a little, in some ways, it's a little I don't know, I don't want to say lame, but I my my story really starts like I think like in high school. It's like a little, it's like a little silly, I guess is the word to the to use to describe it. But I I started doing um my high school newspaper. And um I don't know, I mean, I was a little bit of an old soul, I guess you would say. And I I found it interesting that I, you know, there's all these sort of clubs and extracurriculars where you can do things that to me felt a little bit, I don't know, small bore, maybe like, oh, like great, like we're gonna, we're gonna um have model UN, like what does that matter? Actually, like doing journalism was a way to engage with people who sorry, if you are a model UN.

SPEAKER_00 4:01

No, I wasn't, I wasn't. My older sister was. That's why I'm laughing at your shots fired at the model. Please uh mock them mercilessly. Go ahead.

SPEAKER_01 4:09

Well, to be clear, I don't think that that doing the newspaper was any less of a dorky thing to do, but what I liked about it was that it was a way to like I felt like I was engaging with uh people, you know, about things that mattered in the community and like asking hard questions, conveying them. There was this, like, I remember in high school, we would get the we'd get it printed and then it would, you know, get distributed across, we would distribute it across campus, and people would rush to get it and to read it and to engage with like what it was very cool. Um, you know, what is the what what what's the thing that happened in the community and like how do we understand it? And I don't wanna I don't wanna like overstate it. I'm sure if I were to read it today, would I would probably be very embarrassed. But the same thing in in college, right? Like to be able to work on some stories that that felt you know in some important to the community, and in some cases, like there were a couple stories that became national or even global news stories. And to be able to do that while this is not a slight on anyone, but while you know, other students were like doing things that were just much more um much much smaller in scope, it just it was like a way to be above your years in in in sort of influence or or uh sort of the level of thing that you're engaging with. So that I think that's what drew me to it. I didn't really intend to be a journalist professionally, but I just kind of fell into it. Uh and like one thing led to another, and you know, it it worked well.

SPEAKER_00 5:44

I can definitely relate, just sort of stepping back a second to the you know, the high school version of well, me or you, but the high school feeling of wanting so badly to, or even before that, to be in the real world. Right. And to do something adult or the full version of it, not the toy version, sort of your model UN example again. Sorry, model UN folks. Um yeah, and I mean I see it in my kids now who are 10 and 12, but I uh I can relate to that part. I I had some of those sort of feelings too, because it felt more, I don't know, real somehow. Um so I but I'm also somebody that personally, let's make it about me. I like to I tend to be attracted to things that are kind of hard, probably too hard. I'm not sure it's necessarily a good quality. Journalism seems really hard uh to me. And I'm curious how you got into climate-oriented journalism in particular. I personally noticed that a lot of major publications in the English language world started to have somebody called a climate reporter or correspondent or had a regular feature. For me, I sort of noticed it around maybe 2017, 18. And I know you were active then and active before that, but that's just me as a reader and somebody working in energy and technology, and then I started reading this stuff. Um, and then your stuff. But how did you end up? Was it an assignment? Were you a journalist first? Did you want to cover climate things and then you figured out journalism? How did that come together for you?

SPEAKER_01 7:07

Yeah, I mean, truly a journalist first. If I'm if I'm being honest, I mean, I I I got hired at time in 2014 and was sort of doing general assignment work. And um, you know, and the the way it works, I mean, the in journalism, in most places, there's sort of a uh openness to like a you know, you can cover anything. And and I was good at the general sorry.

SPEAKER_00 7:36

Sorry to cut you off. Really? That's a thing you can Yeah, no.

SPEAKER_01 7:38

So there's a it's it's it's there's a philosophy. I mean, some places, some outlets have a even more rigorous, like, we will allow you to cover this thing for X number of years, and then that's it. Because if you get too embedded in the world, if you're too expert, then your audience becomes that world and not, you know, our readers, which are, you know, whatever, whatever that outlet's readers are. And so there's like a there's particularly with um less, you know, particularly I would say with uh like sort of um postings, right? So there's some places that say, okay, we'll we'll send you to to Delhi for five years. That's it. We want then, you know, then you go to, you know, you know, South America, you go somewhere else, but we just like you we we don't want people to be of the place. So it's a very, it's a very interesting philosophy. We don't we don't have that necessarily, but we what we do have, or we did have was like a sense that, oh, you don't have a climate background. We want someone to cover this. Um, you do good work, why don't you do it? And and I was kind of like, I mean, just wasn't really my thing, but I, you know, when you're doing general assignment work, it was an opportunity to own something. I thought I can do this for a couple years, then I'll move on to something else. And I was just immediately like, why, you know, why, why haven't I been focused on this? I think for me, there were, I mean, there were maybe three things. One is like clearly this is extremely important, and it's an opportunity to try to get people interested and engaged in something that's extremely important. Two, like, just from a sort of pure careerist mindset, I was like, this is really important, and people don't realize it, and they will. And so, you know, back in in 2015, like, like it was clear that this would become important and it just like wasn't getting the attention that it deserved. So that was like the sort of selfish reason. And then I think the final thing, which has been a hallmark of my work, I think, is that I realized that it was connected to a bunch of different things. And so, like, I didn't have to just write about like CO2 emissions, you know. I like I I can write about climate from any industry, from any geography, and it's become a way to explore a bunch of different, not just interests, but uh, you know, parts of society and the economy. And so though, yeah, that that it just it it it sucked me in.

SPEAKER_00 10:01

Uh I love hearing about that. Um, just because it's maybe not what I what I would have guessed. Two things I'll say. One, at the risk of gassing you up, I appreciate that you what your writing and your work doesn't feel like someone who is um advocating per se, or someone who is of the community trying to reach out. I it always feels like you're bringing a critical eye, which I appreciate. Uh okay, that'll be the last note of flattery for today. Um, but also it kind of mirrors my own experience. Like I, hey, I think there could be like job opportunities for me here, and I think it's important and it seems like it's growing, and it seems sort of like underreported at the in your context, underdeveloped, you know, my context. If I were a betting person, I would say like good odds, right? This is like it's good value. Um, and something in my case, I was like, I can use my technical skills. Uh wow, great, great combination. Let me just like start stumbling over there and see what happens. Um but something I've noticed is that uh I don't perceive, maybe you know, the part where I am sort of not objective is in the sort of technology and science thing because that's where I came from and I'm really steeped in that. I haven't really perceived that that side of things has changed that much. Tons of things have changed, there are changes, but the approach that's what I'm getting at, I don't think has changed. I don't think people are fundamentally doing engineering and science differently than they were 20 years ago. I think that people are doing journalism and certainly media differently. Do you agree that the craft of journalism has changed in the last five, 10, 15 years? And uh does it affect, if it has changed, how does it affect the way you cover your beat today?

SPEAKER_01 11:47

Well, yeah, I mean, a lot has changed in the industry. Um, I mean, obviously there's a lot of challenges, just you know, uh people are consuming their information differently. Um, I mean, I think in a in a very concrete way, I mean, I there was a nice sort of meaty part of my tenure where most of my work was devoted to doing long-form features. Um and I still do that. I mean, it's still one of my favorite parts of my job, but the reality is that like people uh don't have the attention spans that they had even 10 years ago. And um, and so one of the focuses for me has been to do things a little bit, you know, shorter uh so that people can really digest it.

SPEAKER_00 12:30

Um, you know, when you say long form feature, are you talking about like 5,000 words?

SPEAKER_01 12:35

Give me a rough Yeah, like like like three to five thousand words would be would be long form. Um, but really like so, you know, I mean I think like 600 words is like where a lot of people to now. So so you you gotta make sure that you're serving those those those people. Um you know, we're we're doing this this video podcast. Uh people like video now. And so um we've done various things with video. We're so we've launched um uh this this new newsletter and and sort of what we're calling like a platform called Future Proof to think about uh to telling climate stories differently and engaging these sort of people who are interested in these stories differently. And and one part of that will will have a video component because that's just like the way people consume information. The truth is though, like um it's complicated, it's challenging, right? Like, like the industry is is is constantly needing to evolve, and the way people consume information is evolving, one might say, more quickly than we can keep up with. So we're we're doing our best.

SPEAKER_00 13:44

How difficult is it to communicate the same thing in 600 words that you used to in a feature? Or are you no longer communicating the same thing? Are you is it fundamentally changing how you do your work, the format that is? Or are you just squeezing or adjusting your work into new containers?

SPEAKER_01 14:04

I mean, I think I think at the at the end of the day, or the everything begins with like information slash insight gathering. Um and that's how the job began 10 years ago and how it begins today. It's like, what is what can I learn? Um, what can I discover? What can I feel, what do I feel like is a gap that can be explained? And so that that part of the process is the same. I think then you sort of have this question, which is like, what's the best way to convey that information? And that's where it used to be that I would want to do like one meaty feature, and I still do this again sometimes, but one meaty feature that's going to that's gonna tie in 20 different threads, and it's really, you know, it's gonna be something that's at every paragraph, you'll have something new and interesting. And now I might say, well, I've got these five different interesting things. I'm gonna just gonna do five different stories rather than trying to pack it in one thing that that people aren't going to read through the end. So I it's just a I think it's a question of, yeah, thinking about how to package and present information rather than changing the fundamental practice of information and insight gathering.

SPEAKER_00 15:20

On insight gathering, I I appreciate that because that's always something I'm wondering about too, just how do the formats affect the sort of creative side or the generative side of a thing? Yeah. Um, whether it's in art or in science or in journalism, writing, etc. Sort of staying on that vein. Um do you find that different types of information are important now because of the way that you're changing in packaging? All the way through to do you look for different types of information now because of formats and the way that you're reaching audiences than you would have previously?

SPEAKER_01 15:57

Another really good question. Um, I I think yes. So I guess I would say one one one of the biggest trends that that's you know, we we see in media is you know, niches, audiences developing, right? In a way that in 1965 you read one of your two daily newspapers, maybe, or you know, the morning or evening edition, you tune into a one of a couple news broadcasts, and everybody kind of got the same thing. And now with algorithms, people have lots of different sort of niches that they fit into, lots of different uh messengers that they resonate with. And a key part for me, you know, working at a magazine, uh, not necessarily working at a place where I'm trying to deliver, like, here's what happened today, in like the most sort of straightforward way. I have to do something that's distinctive and I have to have a distinctive voice. And um I am tailoring what I do to the audience that I serve. And in some ways, it's almost like um instinctual. It's like I kind of know what I'm trying to do and who I'm trying to reach, uh, rather than being like overly data driven. But there is like an approach, and in doing that, I recognize that like not everybody is going to resonate with what I do. And I think it's really interesting in the world of climate journalism. Like, you look at the spectrum from the, you know, you look at the people who do Substacks, for example. You could look at the like really wonky David Roberts, like, you know, uh uh, how do you talk about like the power sector? To you look at Imily Atkin, who does like, let's be really angry about like all the people who are causing the problem. And like that's great. Like, those are those that's not what I do. And there's an audience for that, and they have great audiences. I have a different audience. And I'm trying to serve that audience. And I can't be everything to everyone, but you got to be something to someone that's like, you know, ideally not just a few people.

SPEAKER_00 18:00

What is that audience? How would you describe your audience or the audience you want to serve?

SPEAKER_01 18:05

Well, I think the the audience I want to serve is, you know, relatively well educated and informed on the topic, but they're not like experts, right? They're not like people who are just solely doing this in their day-to-day. They're people, again, I want anybody and everybody to read, to be clear. So, you know, if if you don't fit in this bubble, don't feel like you're excluded. But I guess people who who um feel like they would like to understand what's happening in an accessible, grounded way, often with a private sector lens, but like not always. Um and um, you know, they have a view that is critical, but they're not necessarily like um, they're not necessarily like uh skeptical of um you know the powers that be in every sort of way. Like there's like there is like a sense of like let's be grounded in the realities of the system as it exists. Um I don't know. I mean, it like I said, there's in some ways that it's just kind of instinctual almost. It's like I kind of know it's like I there was somebody who said to me, like, uh sort of an older journalist who said, you know, I I sit down and I think of every story like who is who am I writing this to? It's almost like I'm writing a letter to this person. And um, I don't think that necessarily, but I kind of like have a sense of it. Like I have a sense of who these people are, and I don't know. That's not the best, not the most precise answer.

SPEAKER_00 19:39

I feel like saying that you have instincts is yes, that's not gonna help, you know, me that wants to copy what you do or somebody wants to do exactly what you do, but it's I think a fair and honest answer. And it's uh to me, it's an answer that reveals, you know, skill, because people that have skill at a certain craft, but specifically that communication with an audience craft of that what comes in different forms. To be, I think the people that are great at that have a feel, they have an instinct that could develop over time, and so I think that's totally fine. Um, maybe a spicier question is you said earlier that you feel like journalism is really interesting or your career in the sense that people are sometimes encouraged to change beats and move around and not just develop expertise in one area, and that editors are open to all kinds of stuff. Climate and climate change are sort of dirty words now, depending on how you ask, and there's a lot of different pressure and feelings that have come up, let's say to say the least. Have you noticed any changes in editorial uh feedback or pressures or constraints that you may have? You know, you and I were colleagues briefly when I joined Time CO2 briefly, but I don't pretend to understand the editorial process fully. Do you feel different vibes from the editorial room now versus two years ago versus even 10 years ago?

SPEAKER_01 20:55

Um well, I think certainly 10 years ago, uh, there's a lot more interest today than there was 10 years ago, and you know, a lot more interest two years ago than there was eight years ago. Uh, I think like I I don't I don't sense well, let me just say this sort of in the broad environment, clearly, there's been a pullback at a lot of outlets from climate coverage. Also, you know, it's it's hard to separate that in some ways just from a general uh sort of tightening of belts in a lot of places, right? So it's like you've gotten climate teams that are laid off, but it's not like they just targeted the climate team. They targeted like, you know, whole swaths of the newsroom. Um, for us, I I don't feel any sort of difference. I mean, we continue to um, you know, we're continuing with our sort of the things that we do around climate and and trying to highlight good climate work. And um, you know, I think the future proof example that I highlighted where we renamed the newsletter from CO2 leadership report. To future proof. Like, you know, you could say, oh, well, you're taking climate out of the name specifically. Well, you know, actually what we're trying to do is broaden the aperture of how people understand what climate is. And I think that's a good thing.

SPEAKER_00 22:12

CO2 is pretty specific.

SPEAKER_01 22:13

CO2 is very specific. And I don't, it's, it's, as I was saying, it's like about meeting the audience where they are. Like it's it's understandable. Like personally, on a personal level, it it like feels hard for me to focus as much on climate when the world is like what the world is, right? And so the more that we can broaden the aperture and connect climate with the things that are of interest to our audience, to my audience, like the better job that we're doing on communicating climate. Um, but you know, so I mean, the long and short of it is like certain I don't feel that um uh at our newsroom, but you know, can't speak for the industry.

SPEAKER_00 22:54

I want to zoom out a little bit in media, and but before we do, just picking up something you said, you talked about ways to meet the audience where they are. I think that's amazing. I think we need more of that. Um, you know, hey, if you're watching or listening to this show, that's what we're trying to do with this show too. What are some, if there are any, maybe unexplored or good potential paths or directions or ideas for leaning in that direction to meet audiences where they are that maybe we haven't explored yet? If the goal is to communicate to more people that, hey, this climate thing is something you may be interested in, and it's important and may affect you directly or indirectly, and maybe there's something it crosses paths with your day-to-day life, maybe something you can do or use or benefit or protect or something. Any ideas that you think are unexplored for growing that conversation or audience?

SPEAKER_01 23:50

It's a great, it's a great question. I mean, I think the I think it's tricky because you don't want to be, you know, too um hit people over the head with it too much, right? Like, so sometimes I'll hear things like, you know, oh, we need like a uh influencer who's focused on baseball and climate. It's like, no, that's like a little much, right? Like you want it to be natural. You want it, you want it to be a part of the real, the real like are you smiling? Did is that your idea?

SPEAKER_00 24:19

Like, no, well, you just stole my idea. No, sorry. There's a YouTube create, there's a great YouTube baseball person. I like baseball called Badig's Dance Guy.

SPEAKER_02 24:26

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 24:26

He does impersonations of people swinging the bat. Right. He's a comic. I'm like, maybe that dude needs to like work in some CO2 or something into his movie. Not really. That's a terrible thing.

SPEAKER_01 24:38

But like maybe, but what I guess what I'm saying is like that dude should talk about climate in a way that makes sense, right? Like, not in a way that's like enforcing it.

SPEAKER_00 24:46

And I and I think that's part of the I don't want to hear him talk about the voluntary carbon market. I want to hear him talk about like why there's more home runs if there's more CO2 in the air, if that's even the thing, which probably isn't. I just made that up, you know.

SPEAKER_01 24:57

But right. And like, and like crucially, like in his own language, in his own way, in the way that resonates with his audience. Um uh so I you know, how do you actually get that to happen? Like I I don't know. I mean, I I think that is part of why, though, I think with future proof, it's like, how can we talk in this the language that people talk in and you know not have to make the headline CO2 or climate? Because like that's actually not how people are going to talk about you know the Straits of Hamoos. They're not going to say like their first concern is not going to be climate, right? Like that that can be part of that tapestry. So how do we like make that real? Like, how do we make it a real part of the tapestry rather than saying like pay attention to climate? Like, it's like, no, like let's be like, let's be real about it. Like, let's let's get out of the bubble and let's like have a real conversation and talk about these things in real ways.

SPEAKER_00 25:59

Um solar physics, but really people won't talk about sunburns. It's like you're not you're not gonna sell sunscreen by talking about solar physics, you're gonna sell sunscreen by talking about like oh, it's a problem you have. I can relate. Here's a fix for it. Let's discuss it. That's the thing people are feeling, even if there were some solar physics change. 100%. Um, does do you does it feel like you have to do your job differently? I'm asking this question again in a slightly different way. 10 years ago to now. Um, do you feel like you're still really relying on the same techniques and approaches, or has it shifted because the topic has shifted, or your the beat itself has shifted around you, or maybe just your approach has shifted because you're older and wiser and more experienced?

SPEAKER_01 26:42

I mean, a lot of things have shifted for sure. Um, I mean, one, it's just like I mean, especially compared to 10 years ago or whatever, a lot, you know, when I first started, um I mean I just know a lot more, you know. I mean, that's that's the that's the one thing. It's like I I sort of uh sort of can't imagine what I was writing then, like because it's a lot, it's complicated, it's complicated stuff, and I know a lot more. I think the other thing is one of the things I think is an advantage of mine in this moment is I know a lot of people. You alluded to this, it's like I can get into a lot of rooms. Um and I use that to inform my reporting in a way that I think earlier on it would have been, you know, you try to get someone on the phone and you kind of get a stilted interview. And now a lot of my work is like, hey, like I know you, and I'm gonna catch you, you know, after this event or you know, at the cocktail hour or whatever, and we're gonna have a real conversation, and and you're gonna be honest with me in a way that you might not have. And like, to be frank, you might not have had, like, you know, you won't have your prepared statement. And and and I also, I mean, one of the things that's been interesting in this moment in particular is being a little more comfortable, um, you know, sort of sifting through what people say and relying on on not or not having to quote them, you know, right? Because people are really concerned about sort of telling you the honest truth in a way that's quotable. I I go to the Sarah Week conference, uh, this is the big oil and gas conference every year. And if you read some of the headlines, this is think about last year, you read some of the headlines, the headlines would be like oil and gas executives praise Trump because on the stage they were praising Trump. And then you go to the happy hours afterwards and you talk to the people you know, and they're like, we're really concerned about tariffs. This guy wants oil to be $50 a barrel, and we're not gonna make a profit at that level. And, you know, it but like nobody would want to say that publicly, right? So it's like having the relationships and the contextual understanding to be able to sift through this moment, I think, has been an advantage.

SPEAKER_00 29:03

I I really appreciate that answer. I feel like I learned a lot, and just, you know, this shows where I am. I'm not a journalist, obviously, but the I never occurred to me the way you're describing it now, to see the value in being able to tell stories without having to quote people.

SPEAKER_02 29:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 29:18

You know, I was always like, the quote, that's what you want, right? But you're explaining how it can be freeing because you can maybe get closer to the truth if people are constrained with what they can say. And that can be on any topic.

SPEAKER_01 29:29

Yeah. And it's I mean, it's it's very particular to this moment. Like, this is not how you think about this in journalism school or in journalism 101, but it's like it's it is a it is a very odd sort of feature of this moment where people are very concerned about how they might be perceived by Washington, frankly.

SPEAKER_00 29:54

Okay. Um thinking about those people who are thinking about how they might be perceived by Washington, who are inviting you into the room sometimes, able to comment on the record off the record. I want to pull you back to London Climate Action Week where you were recently. Has the constituency of people that you interact with that's showing up there their London Climate Action Week is like a bunch of different events all over the city, similar to all the other city climate week is not a single thing for the audience. But my question is, who's showing up now versus then? Are they different types of people? I mean, I know you're, you know, for instance, is it easier for you to get on stage or to get into a room with the vice president of Fortune 500 company so-and-so, or deputy oil minister of so-and-so country? Or because of your tenure now, or is it were they just maybe not there? I'm I'm curious about who's there at a place like London Climate Action Week and how that may have changed.

SPEAKER_01 30:48

Versus 10 years ago? Sure. I mean, I think I think there are more people there, just generally. Like there's there's there are more people, um, and they represent a broader segment of like society, but a broader segment of of sort of the comp the sort of corporate uh uh, you know, corporate America, corporate world uh as well. Um, you know, I think for me personally, like there is, I think, almost like a I don't want to say a binary, but it's like if you know me, if we have a relationship, of course it's easier today than 10 years ago. Um, generally speaking, I think it's harder, partially because of the moment that I was alluding to earlier with the sort of political complications. Um, but also because like, and now maybe I'll make the comparison with four years ago, say, where four years ago there was a lot of eagerness to like show commitment to say, like, look at what we're signing up for. We're signing up for net zero, we're signing up for this pledge or that pledge. And now a lot of the conversations are like more how are we actually doing this stuff? Um, and I think in general, there's um, you know, I mean, those conversations can be harder than conversations about like we're signing up for something.

SPEAKER_00 32:11

So um is it now we're how are we doing this stuff, or is it how much of it is option A? How are we gonna do this stuff? Option B, how do we get out of that commitment that we made now that we can get out of it because no one cares about the commitments as much as they did? Or three, maybe um some other thing. I'm not trying to say it's option two, but I'm curious your perspective on that mix.

SPEAKER_01 32:36

Yeah, I mean, I I guess I I I um I think it's probably three, right? Like I think the how do we get out of it? Like, I think a lot of these, I mean, yes, I'm sure there's a lot of conversations about how to communicate, getting out of it, but I think a lot of it is like, yeah, like the pressure is that you know we we have to make money and we're this is the best way to make money, we're getting out of it. Like, I don't think there's like, I don't think that there's like so much heart-wrenching, like, oh, should we, should we or shouldn't we? It's like, no, we're gonna do what we can to make money. I think having said that, uh there's a lot of the folks that I don't want to be overly, I don't want to paint with too broad a brush, but I think for the most part, companies that made those commitments like wanted to, wanted to follow through. Like that, like they're it's not like it was entirely just, you know, like greenwashing. Like there was a desire to follow through. And so the conversation now might be, you know, I guess option C is like, we're not gonna make our commitment, or we're not gonna make our we're not gonna make, we're not gonna meet our uh target, um, but we still want to continue doing good work. What does that look like? How do we do it? Um, and um that's still a challenging conversation, right? Like that's still not an easy thing. So um, yeah, I don't know if that answered the question.

SPEAKER_00 33:58

I I feel like I can relate to that. And again, uh look, I don't whatever. I'll just tell you what I think. I I think there are many, many well-meaning people who are caught in that third situation. Yeah, it's not easy to figure out how to continue keeping your large company alive and making money, especially if it's a carbon-intensive, energy-intensive type of thing, and focus on climate risk or electrification or decarbonization, even if you can, you know, somebody like me or whomever can show you like, here's how you'll get in the black by making this investment now. You know, this is gonna, you're gonna make money on this in four years, or it's gonna pay off in 12 years, or what have you. It's still not easy. Um that's my sense of it, and I hear that in some of what you're saying, uh, some of what you're saying. Similar question, but specifically with energy folks, oil and gas and other, and this thing called the energy transition. I know for some people, even the idea that there is an energy transition can be a little bit that's too hot to handle because that sort of suggests a decrease in supply and demand of fossil fuels. Other folks say energy transition all day as if it's a foregone conclusion and it's just rolling downhill. But do you sense in your conversations that people feel a little bit caught in that option C we made a commitment, we want to do it, we're not sure how? Or do you think it's more of you know, some of those other options, specifically in that energy transition world, though?

SPEAKER_01 35:25

Um yeah, I mean, I think it's I think um it's hard to to to generalize here because I feel I mean, to your point, there are some people who just reject the idea of the energy transition full shot. Um there are a lot of folks, I think, who would say that the energy transition is, you know, there is a transition happening. Like, like what it can get down to like, you know, semantics of like what does it mean to transition? And but like the the reality is that like the way that we produce energy is there is there are different forms and different technologies that were not there. And just because there is still gas and you know, growing gas, like that doesn't mean like the the energy mix is transitioning, like that is like objectively true. It's just like from what to what. And I think that's like probably where I think a lot of the conversation is, and then I think on you know, in the sort of third bucket of people who would say, like, it should happen, it was happening, and now it's not. I mean, I but I don't know that that really I I kind of get I've been hesitant to use the word, the phrase energy transition, because then you get into a whole debate about what that even means and what you're trying to say. Interesting.

SPEAKER_00 36:47

You find that to be a bit of a triggering phrase to use that word, like it creates feelings. Is that what you is that fair to say?

SPEAKER_01 36:53

Yeah, it creates feelings, and I think it's fine to do that if you want to have a conversation, like the conversation that we're having now, like it's great to have this conversation, but you have to like recognize that like what you mean is is is um going to mean something different to different people, and like you're gonna have to spend a bunch of time talking about it. And so, you know, if I'm writing a story, like I don't want to spend, as we were saying earlier, I want people to get the sense of what's happening in 600 words. I don't want to spend, you know, 200 telling them like what I mean by energy transition, what the counterarguments to what I mean is. Like I just want to have the conversation about the thing. Um, but then sometimes, like, you know, I had a whole conversation, you know, a whole substantial segment of a panel with uh Ernie Moniz, you know, former energy secretary and Roger Martella, um, and a top executive at GE Vernova about about this very question. And they got into a whole debate about like GE Vernova saying that they were in a super cycle, and Ernie Moniz is like, no, it's to transition and what and it's like, but this is it's like worth having, but it's like not like the main point, you know? Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_00 38:02

Yes, that does make sense to me. That I think maybe it comes down to sometimes there's disagreement about what the main point is, right? Yeah, depending on one's view of the system. The main point is some system-level view of all energy bought and sold on earth, blah, blah, blah, you know, like energy system model. Everyday people aren't thinking about that. Everyday people are thinking about what is the price of gasoline.

SPEAKER_02 38:22

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 38:22

Like Vish and I, before we recorded, we're talking about, you know, how people really know, we know the price of gasoline. Most people know what that is. They can tell you that number. No one really knows what the price of electricity is at their house. You know, I was complaining about that. It's 39 cents, it's obscene per kilowatt hour for the electricity nerds. But yeah, like what's your context? Um, and whereas people that are more inside of it, they may be just thinking about, you know, oh, coal versus gas competition or or something very insider in the energy market. Um I still, whenever we're in a time where people hesitate from saying the main thing because it sometimes becomes political or emotional or distracting, energy transition, climate change, uh immigration. A lot of topics are like this. You know, you've essentially said, well, we can work around it, we can meet audiences where they are.

SPEAKER_01 39:13

You gotta But let me let me just be clear. It's not because I'm like afraid of the political or it's more just like I don't want to, I want to talk about the thing. And I I I find that I find, and this is my just my personal opinion, and a lot of people might disagree, but I find some of these debates about like, well, don't say natural gas, say because that's like a fossil fuel word, say, you know, fossil gas, or don't, you know, say the previous one, say climate crisis, not climate change. It's like it just the I I want people to understand what I mean most effectively, most efficiently. And natural gas is the way that most people talk. And so like I don't want someone reading the story to like have a whole separate, you know, sort of thought process about what I mean when I say that, you know? Like it's like it, it just it but I certainly would not shy away from using the word energy transition because I'm afraid that someone's gonna like criticize me for it. Like, that's it's more about like wasting their energy on that.

SPEAKER_00 40:19

I totally get that. I totally appreciate the as you've said, just wanting to say the thing. I'm not gonna restate it any better than you did. And um, for what it's worth, I think fossil gas is done. That doesn't matter. Um I also think you know, natural gas versus methane or methane, you know, it's it sort of becomes soccer versus football, like we started with. But I do wonder, and real quick on this before we move on, do we ultimately have to find a way to move back around to name the thing to make progress on the topic? Or is it really more effective ultimately to continue meeting people where they are and advance the conversation that way? Because that is really the only frontier of the conversation. It's only a few people that might think about the energy system and therefore think about energy, transition, and that kind of thing. You know what I mean? Is it structurally more likely, what's your instinct, that we can make progress, or do we ultimately have to name it, or is it okay and silly and not we don't have to think about that too much?

SPEAKER_01 41:18

No, I mean, I think I think to I think that A, we need to continue meeting people where they are and talking about it in those ways. I think that it would be great to have better nomenclature. I actually still personally, you know, despite everything I just said, think the energy transition is pretty apt. I think it's like there is a transition. Like what exactly it looks like, we don't know. But I do think that, and I and I wrote about that, that mart that Roger Martella Ernie Moniz conversation because I thought it was it it was telling that that I think one of the challenges with the nomenclature question is that we don't fully know where we are or where we're going. I mean, there's a lot happening really quickly, uh, and we we know some sort of trend lines, but like how to characterize it, I think, is like still up for debate, and not in like a not in like a uh normative way, but just like in a analytical, like what is actually happening, you know?

SPEAKER_00 42:15

Um I said this phrase to a woman who used to be my boss and mentor. We're gonna hope hopefully have her on the show. She's an executive at a big energy company. And the way she phrased it, I mean, she said a lot of things that were great, but what she meant was it sounds scary to people that are worried about reduced demand for fossil fuels.

SPEAKER_02 42:32

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 42:32

The other thing she said was, well, we never really stop using fuels, we just add to the mix, which is technically true. Also, that's the thing you would say if you don't want to face the fact that we're, you know, we don't burn oil to make electricity anymore. That was a thing that was all through the 20th century. That almost doesn't happen anymore because everyone thinks that's dumb and it's better to burn something else, even if we're just burning to make electricity. It's gas. Or like, you know, coal's going away because gas is eating coal. Renewables aren't eating coal, gas is eating coal. So renewables are gonna battle of gas in there in that way. But yeah, I think that's uh that's kind of interesting. Hey, I want to take it uh before we close, you've been really generous with your time, but I want to close thinking again about the craft of journalism in a couple things. I want to ask you for some to think about how you might launch a journalism career if you were gonna start now, if you were a younger version of yourself. But before we get there, I'd love to ask you about the local versus global versus regional thing in journalism. As a non-journalist and I'm just a consumer, a lot of conversation about the death or the challenges of local journalism and the way I can connect the dots about that being a challenge is news gathering. News gathering that you've talked to, what's interesting, how do you turn that into a story? Seems like local reporters know people, communities, issues really well and can contribute to the news gathering part. So this is sort of a hand fisted way of asking how do you think about the importance of local news in your beat? And any other broader comments or observations you have about how that has shifted again in your beat or maybe more broadly in your in your career so far? Is this something that that it's just a media freak out because, you know, TV shows like to make T T V shows about TV? Or is it something that really matters to people like me or other people listening that are readers and consumers of these stories?

SPEAKER_01 44:19

No, I think it's I mean, I think it's a huge problem, both on the information gathering and on the presentation of information. Um, I mean, I think uh we know uh what's happening and we know, you know, uh like some of the big sort of environmental challenges um because there were reporters to uncover that, to ask hard questions, to attend public meetings. Um and we've lost that. I mean, and I I don't have the numbers at my fingertip, but there are very few uh, you know, sort of certainly climate reporters at local news outlets across the country. And I think that's a huge loss for our ability to gather information. And as we were talking about earlier, like uh reaching people where they are requires like understanding the language and you know what matters to them. And um we still live in communities, even though people are glued to their screens. Like we still, you know, there is still a need to be able to speak to people uh in their in their place. And so um I think it's not just a challenge, it is crucially a challenge for information gathering, but it's also a challenge for um informing people.

SPEAKER_00 45:34

Um do local news stories matter though, if you're talking about like natural gas prices or oil markets? Well, maybe I'm just cherry-picking an example, you know?

SPEAKER_01 45:43

Well, I mean, I think I think that the impacts matter, right? So, like to explain to somebody how nano natural gas prices flow through to your uh to your power bill, like that that matters. And like actually, um, you know, there are a number of different factors affecting your power bill depending on what you know jurisdiction you're in. And like, so having someone who understands that and can explain it in a way that makes sense. Like, I can't tell you how hard it is as a national journalist to write about uh you know power prices and you know what what's affecting electricity bills, which are going up across the country, because it's like so many different factors. So, like, how do you how do you generalize? Well, you need a bunch of different people in every jurisdiction to explain that. So I I think it I think it I think it does matter. Um, of course, if you're just talking about the price on a day-to-day movement, yeah, it doesn't, I mean, you don't need you don't need someone in local communities, but I think it's I think it matters um, you know, if you're actually trying to give people a sense of what's happening in a way that feels relatable to them.

SPEAKER_00 46:46

Okay. I appreciate that answer. I'll uh I'll give a plug to Pacific Gas and Electric, PGNE, who's my local power utility. Uh, please get at me about that 39 cents uh paying per kilowatt hour. It's there's uh one of those numbers is wrong. Let's close on this, Justin. If you were you again, if you were that intrepid high school uh newspaper guy thinking about continuing after high school or outside of high school or taking it forward, what advice would you give to your younger self? Give us a couple things that you might absolutely do again, and maybe one or two that you may do differently, given everything about the way news has changed, media's changed, and this beat has changed.

SPEAKER_01 47:29

Well, I mean, I think I think I I mean this is both something I would say to do and and not to do, or rather, it's both, I think I have done this, and there are ways I could have done it better, which is to say, you know, be open-minded. And I I was open-minded and taking this beat, right? Like it was not an area that I was anticipating I would do, and it turned into something really great. Um, I think one area where I've been slower and we're we're we're working on is like, how do you experiment with new formats? How do you find different ways to get at people that gets beyond the written word, but also just beyond sort of like the sort of traditional ways that we think about journalism? And I think that is crucial to anyone trying to start a career today. Like this is a sec, this is an area that's evolving rapidly. Um, I this is what I say to people who are considering entering. I'm like, it's it's gonna be hard, it's gonna be complicated, but you have the opportunity to build something new and to be a part of something as it kind of reshapes and reforms. And so I would tell myself, like, be open to that, be open to like different formats and and and like really get your skills on social. That's not my not my area, your social skills, your social media skills down, um, be good at at video and and just uh yeah, be open-minded about different ways of telling stories.

SPEAKER_00 48:49

Let's end it there. Thank you so much, Justin. This has been great. Really appreciate you.

SPEAKER_01 48:53

Yeah, appreciate it. It's it's been fun.

SPEAKER_00 48:55

That does it for my conversation with Justin Warland. Thanks for tuning in, everybody, and thank you for your feedback. We always love hearing from you. You can always email us at podonthherise at gmail.com. That's podonthherise at gmail.com. If you haven't already, like and subscribe on YouTube, on Apple Podcasts, on Spotify, or wherever you listen to your podcasts. Also check us out on Substack. Vish and I are posting periodic reflections, more personal notes about our journey making the show together and what we've learned so far. Thank you to our producer Vish. Thank you everybody for tuning in today, and here is the music of the great Claire Davis to play us out.

SPEAKER_02 49:33

More studio I'm here, I'm in, I'm here, I'm in, I'm in, um here, um, I'm here, um