The self-proclaimed “climate change skeptic” Rupert Murdoch and his spawn — who currently run and operate the conservative Fox News syndicate — now own 73 percent of the once-autonomous, non-profit National Geographic publication. This unlikely coupling has many readers fearing that the integrity of the publication’s material may be compromised now that Fox News has a majority stake in the scientific syndication and it is now operating under the banner of Murdoch.
In the company’s press release on Sept. 11, 2015, National Geographic said the $725 million sellout was necessary to avoid financial ruin and to continue pursuing storytelling in the facets of science, exploration, research, conservation and education programs around the globe. Readers want to believe this. But when the face of Fox News, Murdoch, uses his Twitter feed to call environmental advocates “extreme greenies” and accuse the 2015 United Nations Sustainable Development Summit of being “pessimists always seen as sages” who propagate “alarmist nonsense,” there is good reason to question whether or not the publication is now in bed with the enemy.
Another concern of readers is that the nonprofit publication is now a for-profit business. Now that the company will have stakeholders, special interests and a capitalistic agenda, will the virtues of the 127-year-old National Geographic be compromised? Will National Geographic remain the voice of conservation, unbiased scientific accuracy, adventure and wanderlust? Will the loss of independence strike a blow to the magazine’s distinguished brand and quality?
Similar concerns were plastered all over National Geographic’s Twitter feed, and even longtime employees expressed shock and hesitance over the merger. Eighteen-year National Geographic photography veteran Brian Skerry told The Guardian that he believes, “If we were told to dumb down the science, I don’t think that’s going to fly.” Skerry also said many of the employees at National Geographic would “walk” if the values of the organization were compromised. Similar promises were made to readers in the press release once the pairing was announced.
For now, National Geographic assures readers that the partnership will be governed by a board with an equal number of representatives from Fox and National Geographic, to ensure that the interests of both organizations are equally represented. NatGeo also assures readers that the merger will increase financial opportunities that support scientists and explorers around the world. They promise that the value generated by this transaction, including the consistent and attractive revenue stream, will offer greater resources in the realm of grant-making programs that support scientists and explorers around the world. In addition, The National Geographic Society will now be able to basically double its investment in an array of science, research and education programs.
Although the promises of additional financial opportunities for science offered at the news release may quell some of the reservations held by readers, the conflicting ideologies have definitely raised a level of concern as to whether or not the publication will continue carrying on with the integrity journalism readers have come to expect.