Zillow Drops Climate Change Information From Listings;

Zillow has dropped climate change information from its
real estate listings. Reportedly at least in part due to
resistance from the real estate industry

More than a year ago, Zillow, the big online real estate marketplace, began providing climate change risks in their listings.

They were responding to a willing audience, which for the most part really wanted that information to judge the risks of buying a home in a particular area. Especially now that climate change is upping the risk of disasters. 

A 2023 survey conducted by Zillow indicated 80% of buyers now consider climate risks when shopping for a home. 

But, as always, the moneyed class getting more money is far, far more important than those lowly home buyers. The climate change info is no longer on Zillow listings. 

According to realestatenews.com:

"Home search leader Zillow has changed the way that it shares climate risk information -directing visitors to the website of data partner First Street rather than surfacing it on Zillow home details page.

'This update ensures consumers continue to have access to important information to help them consider factors such as insurance, repair costs and long-term homeownership planning, and reflects our long-standing commitment to empowering consumers with transparent information,' a Zillow spokesperson shared with Real Estate News over email when asked about the move."

Well, at least you can get the information.You have to really dig for it, but I suppose it's there. 

The real estate industry appears to have helped kill Zillow's climate information sharing. As The Guardian explains it:

"....Zillow has deleted this climate index in the wake of complaints from real estate agents and some homeowners that the rankings appeared arbitrary, could not be challenged and harmed house sales. The complaints included those from the California Regional Multiple Listing Service, which oversees a database of property that Zillow relies upon."

It seems like the climate change information on Zillow fell victim in part to profit margins. People who want to sell homes, the real estate industry and insurers. There's a lack of affordable housing. There's been climate-driven disasters that have destroyed thousands of homes. 

"All of that adds pressure to close sales however possible....Climate risk data didn't suddenly become inconvenient. It became harder to ignore in a stressed market," said Matthew Ely, founder an chief executive of First Street, as Mother Jones reports.

First Street officials,  the Zillow data partner that compiled the climate risk information, said removing the information from Zillow website will leave many buyers"flying blind" at a time when the effects of extreme weather are messing with the real estate market in the U.S, Eby said. 

"The risk doesn't top away; it just moves from a pre-purchase decision into post-purchase liability....Families discover after a flood that they should have purchased flood insurance, or discover after the sale that wildfire insurance is unaffordable or unavailable in their area."

Of course the First Street climate risk data that was until recently on Zillow probably had some margin of error. The science of tagging individual properties with exact levels of climate risk might not be completely there yet. 

If these assessments are wrong, they could perversely make people doubt climate change, as the Mother Jones article notes. 

Meanwhile, other real estate sites are still showing climate data in their home listings. An example is Redfin, which said in a statement that they "will continue to provide the best-possible estimates of the risks of fires, floods and storms."  

Organizers Of New Website, Climate.us Hope To Replace Deleted, Politicized Government Climate Site

A new website, climate.us is being set up by 
to replace climate.gov the climate change 
information website all but destroyed by 
the Trump administration. Climate.us
plans to put up information erased from
the old web site, and add info. 

Before the Trump administration took over, the Climate.gov site was one of the most widely used places on the internet to find climate information. 

That site is now gutted. You can still access it, but most of the information has been removed or redirected to government websites more in line with Donald Trump's climate denial mindset.

Thanks to some volunteers, though, much of that missing information might be coming back. Welcome to climate.us

The website's mission statement says in part: "Our goal is to build an enduring, independent, and scientifically rigorous platform that the world can rely on for climate communication, education and engagement." 

Reports The Guardian:

"Now, a team of climate communications experts - including many members of the former climate.gov team - is working to resurrect its content into a new organization with an expanded mission.

Their effort's new website, climate.us, would not only offer public-facing interpretations of climate science, but could also begin got directly offer climate-related services, such as assisting local governments with mapping increased flooding risk due to climate change."

The climate.us web page is up, and its home page tells us the following:

"From climate.gov to the National Climate Assessment, climate information you can trust is being hidden, erased, and replaces with misinformation. We're not letting that happen. We're building Climate.us - independent, nonprofit and immune to politics. But we can't do it without you."

It is a non-profit, so they are asking us to donate. 

Climate.gov was a sort of clearinghouse for climate change information, helping the public interpret what the science meant for them. Now, under Trump, Climate.gov has essentially gone dark, redirecting users to a different NOAA website controlled by political appointees, Rebecca Lindsey told CNN. 

Lindsey is climate.gov's former managing editor. She was fired last winter along with other employees at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. She is now among the group of former colleagues starting up climate.us. 

"The things that were most popular on climate.gov were things that basically just taught people about climate, both natural climate and climate change..... There is a need for content that helps people achieve basic climate literacy independent of an agency," Lindsey said. 

She went on with this good point: "This is information that the taxpayers already paid for... This administration is trying to hide it and take it away from us. It's an abuse of government. It's a waste of resources. People should be indignant. That's not the way the government should work."

The effort to establish climate.us is gaining support, including legal help and a short-term grant to help develop the overall vision for the website. 

Other organization are trying to preserve government data sets going dark because of the Trump administration. Climate.us is different because it plans to keep building on the old climate.gov content.  

Meteorologist Fired For Instagram Blast At Elon Musk: What It Means For Other Meteorologists

Sam Kuffel a Milwaukee television meteorologist, was
fired after she posted on social media criticisms of
Elon Musk after he made gestures that many 
believed to be Nazi salutes. 

A television meteorologist named Sam Kuffel was fired recently from a Wisconsin television station for blasting Elon Musk's gesture during President Trump's inauguration. 

The meteorologists, who had worked at WDJT CBS58 in Milwaukee for more than five years, was canned not long after her rather strident posts. 

I know this is a weather and climate blog, and the only relation to these topics is the fact that a meteorologist was involved, but it's an important topic. So I ought to cover it. 

More importantly, what is the duty of on-air meteorologists to report facts that contradict the Trump administration?   With Trump's climate denial, it's more important than ever for meteorologists to offer true but not sensationalized information on climate change.  Should meteorologists speak up if the Trump administration blunts the expertise and truthfulness from the National Weather Service? How far should meteorologist go to speak truth to power?

Unfortunately, Kuffel, likely unwittingly, chose a not-so-important hill to die on. Sure, Nazi salutes are beyond horrible, and they need to be called out. But we face years of climate denial, anti-science gaslighting that needs to be combated full-throatedly. 

As the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported, Kuffel posted a picture of Musk doing his thing and wrote "Dude Nazi saluted twice. TWICE. During the inauguration." You (expletive) with this and this man, I don't (expletive) with you. Full stop."

She then posted a GIF from "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia" with a caption. "Screw that old (expletive). He's a Nazi."

Her posts caught the attention of conservative activists, as these things do.  Radio host Dan O'Donnell accused Kuffel of "spreading the lie that Elon Musk was giving a Nazi salute."

To me, it sure looked like a Nazi salute, though Musk's defender said it was just an awkward gesture, not intended to support Nazis. I would have liked a statement from Musk explaining what happened, but he's not one to do that. 

For her part, Kuffel said she "never intended to harm anyone" with those social media posts. "I was just voicing my personal opinion on a private social media account that was not accessible to the general public."

There's actually more moving parts here than you'd think.   Many news organizations have codes of conduct when it comes to social media.  When I worked at the Burlington Free Press until 2013, I already had active social media accounts.

I had to be careful what I posted so as not to make my political opinions known. It was part of our code of conduct, something many news organizations have.  Given the need to not appear biased, journalists need to keep their political opinions close to their chests, even when they're not on the clock. 

"People who aren't bound by journalist codes of ethics can give any opinion they want, and it doesn't have to be nuanced, but it's an opinion....If you're related to a media organization, you have a deeper responsibility to show your math," said Jill Geisler, the Bill Planet Chair in Leadership and Media Integrity and Loyola University Chicago told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel .

It's unclear whether CBS58 had a code of conduct, as it's not displayed on its website. For transparency's sake, many news organizations publish their conduct codes online.

This gets into First Amendment issues, too.  Yes, an employer can fire you for your actions, even if you were not at work when you did them. 

But Musk is now at least nominally part of the federal government. The First Amendment guarantees the right of free speech free of government suppression.  Neither Musk nor anybody in the Trump administration ordered the television station to fire Kuffel.

However, given the current political climate, did the station feel compelled to can the meteorologist, to protect itself from whatever repercussions they might receive from Trump's minions? 

The bottom line is on air meteorologists have more responsibility than ever to tell the truth about everything, even if it touches on politics.

I hear people say meteorologists should exclusively stick to the weather forecast. Just tell us if we need to bring an umbrella today.   But partly sunny with a chance of showers is only part of their job. The meteorologists on your local television stations are also journalists. 

Most of them, I trust, have more than enough integrity to give us the science and climate news with the best information available. 

The Kuffle firing over Musk's likely Nazi salute probably is just a sideshow that has already exhausted its life in today's rapid fire news cycle. 

But it's a signal to us all.  Meteorologists have a responsibility to tell us the truth. And the public has the right to demand it.