Sorry, but the Virus Shows Why There Won’t Be Global Action on Climate Change is an op-ed by Jason Bordoff that argues despite the quick and effective response to COVID-19 there will be no transferral of quick and effective action to climate change. This is due to the refusal to uproot daily lives for climate crisis, the lack of public buy-in, and the strong link between carbon emissions and economic activity.
I believe this piece is an op-ed because of the type of language the author is using as well as the types of arguments. Throughout the article, Bordoff uses confident language. He states, “Like COVID-19, climate change is the ultimate collective action problem. Each ton of greenhouse gas contributes equally to the problem, no matter where in the world it is produced.” He continues to call the lessons Coronavirus is teaching about climate change “sobering”, and notes a the public opinion as concern over the “so-called ” of climate risk.” Bordoff also cites many other sources, but none of his own opinion, throughout his article. It comes off as an entirely fact-based stand. He does not entertain any other arguments or narratives, as you might see in scholarly articles or essay. This hyper-focused and passionately worded argument reads to me as an op-ed.
Love the observation about it being “hyper focused” and “passionately worded,” Zoe. Since you mention the op-ed as sounding very confident, what kind of ethos do you think the writer is creating?