Lucy Biggers: How I Became a Biased Climate Reporter

As a young journalist, Lucy Biggers wanted to do good but gradually lost confidence in her own judgment. She now describes how group pressure, guilt and fear of exclusion shaped her climate reporting.

Climate Intelligence (Clintel) is an independent foundation informing people about climate change and climate policies.
Lucy Biggers on bias in climate reporting

Lucy Biggers is Head of Social Media at The Free Press

Evert Doornhof
Date: 19 September 2026

SHARE:

Lucy Biggers was 25 when she joined NowThis News in 2015. She entered a young, progressive newsroom and wanted to belong. Ten years later, she describes how that environment turned her into what she calls “an extremely biased climate reporter.”

For years, Biggers was deeply involved in the climate movement. She spent time with Greta Thunberg and worked with prominent Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, better known as AOC. Photographs of Biggers with both women make clear that she was not an outside observer: she was part of the world she now critically examines.

Lucy with Greta in Stockholm (2019) and with AOC (2018), source: The Free Press

Biggers now actively shares climate-realist content on social media and challenges bias in climate reporting. She has more than 40,000 followers on X and also serves as Head of Social Media at The Free Press.

In her recent X post, she summarizes her transformation in three steps and three short video’s you can see below:

  1. Deconstruct your identity
  2. Atone for your sins
  3. Fully submit to the ideology

A group she wanted to join

Biggers describes her new colleagues at NowThis as members of the political “Tumblr generation.” They supported Bernie Sanders and viewed society as a struggle between the oppressed and their oppressors.

Anyone who was white, Western, American or otherwise privileged automatically belonged to the oppressor class. Such people could not trust their own perception because it was assumed to be shaped by racism, sexism and privilege.

Biggers admired her colleagues. They appeared smarter, more progressive and better informed. As a result, she says, she surrendered her judgment to the group. If the group disliked something, she disliked it too. Who was she, “just some stupid white girl,” to disagree?

This thinking directly affected her climate reporting. Activists told her that fossil fuel companies were evil, capitalism was destroying the planet and the West was responsible for the world’s problems. Biggers accepted their truth as the truth.

Climate reporting as atonement

This led to the second step: atoning for her background and privilege.

Biggers wanted to fight inequality and help people. She acknowledges the United States’ history of racism and recognizes that she grew up with certain advantages. These were, she says, the “seeds of truth” that made the wider ideology persuasive.

But the conclusions went much further. As a white, privileged American, she felt she had to prove that she stood on the right side. Climate reporting became her way of atoning for “the sins of her birth.”

She began presenting climate change in a very specific way: as an existential threat caused by fossil fuel companies, capitalism and Western imperialism. By advancing that narrative and amplifying marginalized groups, she could demonstrate that she was a good ally.

Her motivation did not come from cynicism, Biggers stresses, but from compassion. That was precisely why she failed to recognize that her reporting had become ideological. Her beliefs determined which facts she could accept — and which she could not.

The fear of being cast out

In the third video, Biggers explains how difficult it is to break away from such a group. Many people recognize her experience, she says, but are afraid to agree with her publicly. They fear rejection by friends and colleagues, consequences at work or cancellation by their own peer group.

Biggers experienced that fear herself. Before speaking out about bias in climate reporting, she worried that people would call her racist. Within the oppressor-versus-oppressed framework, criticizing the climate movement also felt like betraying marginalized communities.

A decade of cancel culture, she argues, has taught people that questioning an ideology does not simply mean disagreement. Those who ask difficult questions can be portrayed as evil, racist, sexist or privileged.

This allows the group to sustain itself. People remain silent because they believe they are alone. Their silence then convinces everyone else that almost the entire group agrees.

The Climate Policy Trap from the inside

Biggers’ three steps form a closed system. First, people are taught not to trust their own judgment. Next, they are assigned a moral debt for which they must atone. Finally, agreement with the ideology becomes a requirement for being a good person and remaining part of the group.

Her experience connects with what we have previously called the Climate Policy Trap: a worldview that becomes increasingly resistant to criticism through group identity, moral status and social pressure. Biggers shows what that trap looks like from the inside.

“Once people become afraid to trust themselves, examine the facts, or stand against the group, you’ve got them,” she writes. “They can be convinced to believe and do anything.”

Evert Doornhof

Evert Doornhof has long been active in the financial world in commercial and management roles. After the COVID pandemic, he changed course when he observed how quickly personal freedoms can be restricted. He is now committed to shedding light on crises that appear to be manufactured or exaggerated. Among other things, he is active with the Clintel Foundation, where he manages social media and has written several articles.

The article you have just read was made possible by our donors.

Every day, Clintel publishes articles on climate, energy and science. We also translate and share international analyses in multiple languages, produce videos, publish reports and organize conferences and events around the world.

We receive no government funding and rely entirely on the support of our donors. Your support helps us promote independent research and contribute to a more open and balanced debate on climate and energy issues.

Would you like to support our work? Choose the option that suits you best:

• Become a Friend of Clintel – support us with an annual contribution
• Make a recurring donation – provide ongoing support and help us plan ahead
• Make a one-time donation – every contribution helps

Thank you for your support.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Climate Intelligence Clintel

more news

Beijing’s Useful Idiots: Germany and California

Germany and the ‘People’s Republic of California’ are China’s ‘useful idiots’. The two self-appointed climate leaders have made power dear, hobbled their own industries and handed the supply chains to Beijing, says Tilak Doshi.

Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent

Pierre Gosselin reflects om the insolvency of Portugal’s largest flagship solar park. “Europe’s green energy revolution is going the way of communism: lots of rosy promises turning into an economic debacle. Collapse is inevitable.”

New York Times tries to rebrand climate change: “energy security”

Climate is such a dirty word now, that even the Headquarters of Globalist Lefty Communication (The New York Times)  is telling their team to abandon it, says Jo Nova. “They never change the policy, they just change the language.”

By |2026-09-19T17:20:13+02:00September 19, 2026|Comments Off on Lucy Biggers: How I Became a Biased Climate Reporter
Go to Top