I do not think that it is dialogically interesting to critique the reporting when the subject matter is clearly what is in scope here. As with any new reporting

I do not think that it is dialogically interesting to critique the reporting when the subject matter is clearly what is in scope here. As with any new reporting if you have interest in a broader context or more details after consuming a story you should, you know, check it out. I'm fuzzy on what your expectation would be... a comprehensive telling of an enormously large scale of data in a mainstream press story? The story is that it was the hottest-ever October. The reason for the telling is that October 2019 just came to a close. But, to do as you ought to have done rather than type and copy and paste this story in the comments, I googled: global temperature data for last 100 years. The first response is from NOAA which has reasonably accurate temp data since 1880. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/all/10/1900-2019 https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/global/time-series/globe/land_... October 2019 data is not yet added, but it does already indicate that September 2019 was the hottest on record, and that the top of a sorted list of hottest months ever recorded features very few months not in the 21st century. It's interesting. Poke around. Also, friend, .69 degrees C more in the global temperature average is not, not at all, a narrow margin. Variations exist in these global averages for sure, and they are often naturally occurring and they can be bigger than that but .69 is not small. Check it out.