Sifted just dropped climate tech – and proved what’s wrong with the media

"Climate tech is evolving. So are we," wrote Sifted’s Managing Editor Tom Nugent in a note to readers yesterday, announcing the closure of its weekly climate tech newsletter.

Or, as we in the media industry usually phrase it: they’re "integrating" climate into their broader reporting – another way of saying that they are phasing it out.

Nugent explains that Sifted’s climate reporters have "sensed a shift from founders and investors", some of whom are now pivoting from climate to resilience to capitalise on the boom in defence tech.

You might think I’d be happy. Our biggest competitor is stepping back, leaving the climate and impact beat wide open.

And yes, my founder ego did feel a flicker of joy. For about two minutes. Then came the doubt: if Sifted can’t make climate coverage work – with all its funding and reach – what chance does a small independent outlet from Sweden have? That thought lingered for another 30 seconds.

In the end, what I felt most was disappointment. Not just that there’ll be even less climate reporting in a world that desperately needs it. But that yet another outlet admitted it no longer stands for something.

But that yet another outlet admitted it no longer stands for something

As Tom Nugent puts it: "As a tech publication we have to move with the market, and with our readers. So we’re making a shift as well."

Truth is, this has always been the excuse for media owners and managing editors. Our industry loves to talk about the power journalism has – until tough decisions need to be made. Then suddenly, the readers are to blame. 'It’s not our fault that the world looks like this,' is the convenient refrain.

The same logic explains everything from the lack of female founders in tech coverage to the inability to 'find money' for climate reporting.

I’ve worked across most corners of the media world, from Cosmopolitan to running Sweden’s biggest tech news site, before founding Impact Loop. I know how hard it is to keep passion alive in big organisations when attention (and ad money) drifts elsewhere. And yes, every publication has to make tough calls about what to cover. Qualitative journalism is costly, and Impact Loop Europe is yet not profitable.

But I also know this: the job of journalism isn’t just to mirror the market – it’s to challenge it. When well-funded outlets drop important coverage because the grass looks greener elsewhere, they help shape what people think is hot or not. And by stepping away from climate, they help reinforce the false idea that climate tech is over.

And when the planet is literally on fire – something Sifted’s farewell note somehow forgot to mention – that’s not a decision I’d want to take.

Honestly, I’ll miss the battle for scoops with Sifted. Hopefully they’ll come around. But no matter what:

I hope Impact Loop can be the new home for Europe’s climate founders and investors. Because the world doesn’t need more media that follows the market. It needs a media that dares to lead.