Climate communication sits at a treacherous crossroads. The science clearly indicates serious risks: rising temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, more intense extreme weather, rising seas. Yet translating this science for public understanding invites distortions from multiple directions. Sensationalism exaggerates risks for clicks and attention. Denialism downplays or dismisses established findings. And even well-intentioned communication can inadvertently confuse or mislead. How do we talk about climate risk honestly, accurately, and effectively?