ABSTRACT
On October 15, 2012, The Guardian broke a story about a "geoengineering scheme" conducted off of Haida Gwaii on the west coast of Canada. Haida Gwaii was the perfect story: would-be scientist dupes multiple governments and contravenes international protocol while seeking profits from unproven and perhaps dangerous science. Journalists had little trouble finding scientists who were alarmed at the way the so-called experiment was conducted and sceptical of any results that might come of it. The problem facing both journalists and scientists seeking to educate the general public is that the science itself is hard to assess in mainstream publications. Numerous studies have advanced our understanding of geoengineering's potential as well as its potential knock-on effects, but conclusions are hard to come by. It was an interesting affair, but the end result of such events, measured in terms of journalistic output, is often a bit of a disappointment.
