To be fair though this is a journalist's blog, which is more like backstory context or addendum to the actual article in WaPo which to me doesn't feel biased or

To be fair though this is a journalist's blog, which is more like backstory context or addendum to the actual article in WaPo which to me doesn't feel biased or to push a 'narrative.' Is there something in the actual article that you feel pushes an unfair narrative? To me it reports facts, which are scary. I don't think the article uses much hyperbole, but even if one concedes your point there IS impending doom to the people he interviewed. Their houses are sinking and rotten and becoming not livable because of climate change. I really liked the Newsroom show; there's a great quote about narratives and bias. Sometimes giving equal weight to arguments just for the sake of 'fairness' is inherently unfair on settled topics like basic fundamental climate change facts. As others have pointed out this type of journalism has some inherent bias simply from the choice of the journalist to do research & write on the topic. Quackenbush writes in this blog how the hot moldy house piqued an urgency in himself, which he (rightly) feels is important to report on. It's fundamentally a human interest piece, just like interviewing people who's houses were destroyed after a hurricane. IMHO this is the most important & pressing issue today and should be #1 news and Quackenbush is right in trying to report more stories that give real human emotional consequences to the reality of destruction.