Content deleted Content added
m Dating maintenance tags: {{Pn}} {{Vs}} {{Fact}} |
fix refs |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 4:
[[Climate communication|Climate change communication]] research shows that coverage has grown and become more accurate.<ref name="Climate Change 2022" />{{Rp|page=11}}
Some researchers and journalists believe that media coverage of [[politics of climate change]] is adequate and fair, while a few feel that it is biased.<ref name="NewmanEtAl2018">{{cite journal |last1=Newman |first1=Todd P. |last2=Nisbet |first2=Erik C. |last3=Nisbet |first3=Matthew C. |title=Climate change, cultural cognition, and media effects: Worldviews drive news selectivity, biased processing, and polarized attitudes |journal=Public Understanding of Science |date=November 2018 |volume=27 |issue=8 |pages=985–1002 |doi=10.1177/0963662518801170 |pmid=30253695 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Lichter |first1=S. R. |last2=Rothman |first2=S. |chapter=The media and national defense |pages=265–282 |editor1-first=Robert L. |editor1-last=Pfaltzgraff |editor2-first=Uri |editor2-last=Ra'anan |title=National Security Policy: The Decision-making Process |date=1984 |publisher=Archon Books |isbn=978-0-208-02003-1 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Bozell |first1=L. Brent |last2=Baker |first2=Brent H. |title=And That's the Way it Is(n't): A Reference Guide to Media Bias |date=1990 |publisher=Media Research Center |isbn=978-0-9627348-0-9 |oclc=551474402 }}{{pn|date=June 2025}}</ref><ref name="Nissani-1999">{{cite journal |last1=Nissani |first1=Moti |title=Media coverage of the greenhouse effect |journal=Population and Environment |date=September 1999 |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=27–43 |doi=10.1007/BF02436119 }}</ref>
== History ==
Line 19 ⟶ 17:
In 2007, the [[BBC]] announced the cancellation of a planned television special ''[[Planet Relief]]'', which would have highlighted the global warming issue and included a mass electrical switch-off.<ref>{{cite news |last=Black |first=Richard |date=5 September 2007 |title=BBC switches off climate special |work=BBC |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6979596.stm |access-date=15 December 2011}}</ref> The editor of BBC's [[Newsnight]] current affairs show said: "It is absolutely not the BBC's job to save the planet. I think there are a lot of people who think that, but it must be stopped."<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/05/bbc.television2 BBC drops climate change special]. ''[[The Guardian]]''. 5 September 2007. Retrieved 15 December 2011.</ref> Author [[Mark Lynas]] said "The only reason why this became an issue is that there is a small but vociferous group of extreme right-wing climate 'sceptics' lobbying against taking action, so the BBC is behaving like a coward and refusing to take a more consistent stance."<ref>McCarthy, Michael, [http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article2934318.ece Global Warming: Too Hot to Handle for the BBC] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070915053005/http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article2934318.ece|date=15 September 2007}}, ''The Independent'', 6 September 2007</ref>
A peak in media coverage occurred in early 2007, driven by the [[IPCC Fourth Assessment Report]] and [[Al Gore]]'s documentary ''[[An Inconvenient Truth]]''.<ref name=Boykoff2010India/> A subsequent peak in late 2009, which was 50% higher,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/media_coverage/ |title=2004–2010 World Newspaper Coverage of Climate Change or Global Warming |work=Center for Science and Technology Policy Research |publisher=[[University of Colorado at Boulder]] |access-date=2010-08-15 |archive-date=2019-08-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190831031804/https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/media_coverage/ |url-status=live }}</ref> may have been driven by a combination of the November 2009 [[Climatic Research Unit email controversy]] and December [[2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference]].<ref name=Boykoff2010India>{{cite journal |last1=Boykoff |first1=Max |title=Indian media representations of climate change in a threatened journalistic ecosystem |journal=Climatic Change |date=March 2010 |volume=99 |issue=1–2 |pages=17–25 |doi=10.1007/s10584-010-9807-8 |bibcode=2010ClCh...99...17B }}</ref><ref
The Media and Climate Change Observatory team at the University of Colorado Boulder found that 2017 "saw media attention to climate change and global warming ebb and flow" with June seeing the maximum global media coverage on both subjects. This rise is "largely attributed to news surrounding United States (US) President Donald J. Trump's withdrawal from the 2015 United Nations (UN) [[Paris agreement|Paris Climate Agreement]], with continuing media attention paid to the emergent US isolation following through the [[43rd G7 summit|G7 summit]] a few weeks later."<ref name="sciencepolicy.colorado.edu">{{cite web|last1=Boykoff|first1=M.|last2=Andrews|first2=K.|last3=Daly|first3=M.|last4=Katzung|first4=J.|last5=Luedecke|first5=G.|last6=Maldonado|first6=C.|last7=Nacu-Schmidt|first7=A.|title=A Review of Media Coverage of Climate Change and Global Warming in 2017|url=http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/icecaps/research/media_coverage/summaries/special_issue_2017.html|publisher=Media and Climate Change Observatory, Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado|access-date=2018-03-02|archive-date=2019-08-06|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190806225441/https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/icecaps/research/media_coverage/summaries/special_issue_2017.html|url-status=live}}</ref>
Media coverage of climate change during the Trump Administration remained prominent as most news outlets placed heavy emphasis on Trump-related stories rather than climate-related events.<ref name="sciencepolicy.colorado.edu"
In a 2020 article, Mark Kaufman of [[Mashable]] noted that the [[English Wikipedia]]'s article on climate change has "hundreds of credible citations" which "counters the stereotype that publicly-policed, collaboratively-edited Wikipedia pages are inherently unreliable".<ref>{{Cite web|last=Kaufman|first=Mark|date=2020|title=The guardians of Wikipedia's climate change page|url=https://mashable.com/feature/climate-change-wikipedia/|url-status=live|access-date=2021-04-22|website=[[Mashable]]|language=en|archive-date=2021-04-18|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210418190338/https://mashable.com/feature/climate-change-wikipedia/}}</ref>
Line 46 ⟶ 44:
A 2020 study in ''PNAS'' found that newspapers tended to give greater coverage of press releases that opposed action on climate change than those that supported action. The study attributes it to [[false balance]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wetts|first=Rachel|date=2020-07-23|title=In climate news, statements from large businesses and opponents of climate action receive heightened visibility|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=117|issue=32|pages=19054–19060 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1921526117 |pmid=32719122|pmc=7431090|bibcode=2020PNAS..11719054W |doi-access=free }}</ref>
Research that was done by Todd Newman, Erik Nisbet, and Matthew Nisbet shows that people's partisan preference is an indicator as to which media outlet they will most likely consume. Most media outlets often align with a particular partisan ideology. This causes people to resort to selective exposure which influences views on world issues such as climate change beliefs.<ref
Since 1990 climate scientists have communicated urgent warnings while simultaneously experiencing the media converting their statements into sensational entertainment.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Richardson |first1=John H. |date=20 July 2018 |title=When the End of Human Civilization Is Your Day Job |url=https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a36228/ballad-of-the-sad-climatologists-0815/ |website=Esquire}}</ref>
Line 54 ⟶ 52:
==== To achieve climate action ====
{{See also|Climate apocalypse}}
[[Alarmism]] is using inflated language, including an urgent tone and imagery of doom.{{Citation needed|date=August 2021}} In a report produced for the [[Institute for Public Policy Research]] Gill Ereaut and Nat Segnit suggested that alarmist language is frequently used in relation to environmental matters by newspapers, popular magazines and in campaign literature put out by the government and environment groups.<ref name="Ereaut20062">{{
It has been argued that using sensational and alarming techniques, often evoke "denial, paralysis, or apathy" rather than motivating individuals to action and do not motivate people to become engaged with the issue of climate change.<ref name="Dilling & Moser">{{
==== To challenge the science related to global warming ====
Line 69 ⟶ 67:
=== Media-policy interface ===
The relationship between media and politics is [[Reflexivity (social theory)|reflexive]]. As Feindt & Oels state, "[media] discourse has material and power effects as well as being the effect of material practices and power relations".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Feindt |first1=Peter H. |last2=Oels |first2=Angela |title=Does discourse matter? Discourse analysis in environmental policy making |journal=Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning |date=September 2005 |volume=7 |issue=3 |pages=161–173 |doi=10.1080/15239080500339638 |bibcode=2005JEPP....7..161F |url=https://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/frontdoor/index/index/docId/94625 }}</ref> Public support of climate change research ultimately decides whether or not funding for the research is made available to scientists and institutions.
Media coverage in the United States during the Bush Administration often emphasized and exaggerated scientific uncertainty over climate change, reflecting the interests of the political elite.<ref name="Boykoff-Flogging" /> Hall et al. suggest that government and corporate officials enjoy privileged access to the media, allowing their line to become the 'primary definer' of an issue.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hall |first1=Stuart |last2=Critcher |first2=Chas |last3=Jefferson |first3=Tony |last4=Clarke |first4=John |last5=Roberts |first5=Brian |title=Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State and Law and Order |date=2017 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-1-137-00721-6 |page=438 }}</ref> Media sources and their institutions very often have political leanings which determine their reporting on climate change, mirroring the views of a particular party.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Carvalho |first1=Anabela |last2=Burgess |first2=Jacquelin |title=Cultural Circuits of Climate Change in U.K. Broadsheet Newspapers, 1985–2003 |journal=Risk Analysis |date=December 2005 |volume=25 |issue=6 |pages=1457–1469 |doi=10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00692.x |pmid=16506975 |bibcode=2005RiskA..25.1457C |hdl=1822/41721 }}</ref> However, media also has the capacity to challenge political norms and expose corrupt behaviour,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Anderson |first1=Alison |title=Media, Politics and Climate Change: Towards a New Research Agenda |journal=Sociology Compass |date=March 2009 |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=166–182 |doi=10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00188.x }}</ref> as demonstrated in 2007 when ''[[The Guardian]]'' revealed that [[American Enterprise Institute]] received $10,000 from petrochemical giant [[ExxonMobil]] to publish articles undermining the [[IPCC]]'s 4th assessment report.
Line 97 ⟶ 95:
===Australia===
{{See also|Climate change in Australia}}[[Australian media|Australian news outlets]] have been reported to present misleading claims and information.<ref>{{
Australia has recently experienced some of the most intense [[Bushfires in Australia|bushfire seasons]] in its immediate history. This phenomenon has sparked extensive media coverage both nationally and internationally. Much of the media coverage of the [[2019–20 Australian bushfire season|2019 and 2020 Australian bushfire seasons]] discussed the different factors that lead to and increase the chances of extreme fire seasons.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-01-07 |title=Media reaction: Australia's bushfires and climate change |url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/media-reaction-australias-bushfires-and-climate-change |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200929204905/https://www.carbonbrief.org/media-reaction-australias-bushfires-and-climate-change |archive-date=2020-09-29 |access-date=2021-04-22 |website=Carbon Brief |language=en}}</ref> A climate scientist, [[Nerilie Abram]], at [[Australian National University]] explained in an article for ''[[Scientific American]]'', that the four major conditions need to exist for wildfire and those include "available fuel, dryness of that fuel, weather conditions that aid the rapid spread of fire and an ignition.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Abram |first=Nerilie |title=Australia's Angry Summer: This Is What Climate Change Looks Like |url=https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/australias-angry-summer-this-is-what-climate-change-looks-like/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210505014148/https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/australias-angry-summer-this-is-what-climate-change-looks-like/ |archive-date=2021-05-05 |access-date=2021-04-22 |website=Scientific American Blog Network |language=en}}</ref>
Line 164 ⟶ 162:
In 1988 in United States, NASA scientist [[James Hansen]] stated that climate change was anthropogenic, that is, man-made. This had a similar result to Thatcher's speeches, drawing public attention to the climate crisis and spurring increased media coverage of the issue. The US and UK are comparable in their coverage of climate change for this reason.<ref name="Gavin-2011">{{cite journal |last1=Gavin |first1=Neil T. |last2=Leonard-Milsom |first2=Liam |last3=Montgomery |first3=Jessica |title=Climate change, flooding and the media in Britain |journal=Public Understanding of Science |date=May 2011 |volume=20 |issue=3 |pages=422–438 |doi=10.1177/0963662509353377 |pmid=21796885 }}</ref> Despite evidence for anthropogenic climate change arising as early as the late 19th century, both countries lacked significant media coverage on climate change prior to 1988. However, the trajectory of media coverage in these countries varies significantly after this 1988 increase.
For a short period in 1988, the United States had slightly more coverage, but the two countries were quite similar. However, in the following years, the UK consistently produced more articles, and in 2003, it spiked, producing a significantly larger amount of articles. The year 2003 saw the UK and much of Europe experience the hottest summer to date.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The heatwave of 2003 |url=https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/learn-about/weather/case-studies/heatwave |access-date=2023-12-07 |website=Met Office |language=en}}</ref> Temperatures reached up to 38.5 °C, which is 101.3 °F, resulting in 2,000 deaths in the UK, and more across Europe. This significant event drew the attention of newspapers, therefore increasing the amount of articles produced. For example, in the year following the heatwave, ''[[The Guardian]]'' released an article in March, 2004, warning about even more severe summers that would come. This article included a quote from Dr. Luterbacher, who stated, "We don't know if it will get warmer every year, but the trend is certainly in that direction." The article also claimed that this extreme event was not due to natural causes, suggesting that human activity was responsible.<ref>{{
In 2001, the National Survey of Public Attitudes to Quality of Life survey found that the public ranked global warming 8th on their list of current concerns. The Office for National Statistics then constructed an additional poll asking the same question but asked about expectations for 20 years ahead. A majority reported that in 20 years time, congestion fumes and noises from traffic would be more concerning than the significant impacts of climate change.<ref name="Hulme-2004" />
Line 186 ⟶ 184:
A specific case of the community's reaction to climate change can be seen in the YouthStrike4Climate movement, specifically [[UK Youth Climate Coalition]] (UKYCC) and the UK Student Climate Network (UKSCN). According to Bart Cammaerts, there has been an overall positive media representation of the climate movement from United Kingdom media outlets. It is significant that 60% of the ''Daily Mail'''s articles written about the climate movement were in a negative tone, while the ''BBC'' had over 70% written in a positive tone. There are a range of media outlets covering climate change, and they all have different opinions on this movement.<ref name="Cammaerts-2023">{{cite journal |last1=Cammaerts |first1=Bart |title=The mediated circulation of the United Kingdom's YouthStrike4Climate movement's discourses and actions |journal=European Journal of Cultural Studies |date=February 2024 |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=107–128 |doi=10.1177/13675494231165645 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
While there are diverse perspectives represented in print media, right-wing newspapers reach far more readers. For example, the right-leaning ''[[Daily Mail]]'' and ''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]'' each circulated more than 1 million copies in 2019, while the left-wing equivalents, [[Daily Mirror]] and [[The Guardian]] only circulated 600,000 copies.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mayhew |first=Freddy |date=2019-02-14 |title=National newspaper ABCs: Mail titles see slower year-on-year circulation decline as bulk sales distortion ends |url=https://pressgazette.co.uk/media-audience-and-business-data/media_metrics/national-newspaper-abcs-mail-titles-see-year-on-year-circulation-lift-as-bulk-sales-distortion-ends/ |access-date=2023-12-07 |website=Press Gazette |language=en-US}}</ref> Over time, these right-wing newspapers have published fewer editorials opposing climate action. In 2011, the proportion of these editorials was 5:1 against climate change. In 2021, this ratio had dropped to 1:9. Additionally, articles critical of climate action have shifted away from outright denial of climate change. Instead, these editorials highlight the costs associated with climate action, as well as blame other countries for climate change.<ref>{{
In the United Kingdom, the youth activism movement played a key role in the increased production of media coverage of climate change.global activist celebrity and media outlets began covering her more and more. From September 17, 2019, to October 3, 2019, 21% of all media coverage on specific people was about Greta Thunberg. This young climate activist's prevalence in the media continued to increase and thus so did the amount of media on the subject.<ref name="Cammaerts-2023" /> With more attention to Greta Thunberg and other young women, there has arguably been increased misogyny regarding [[women in climate change]]. According to Bart Cammaerts, "These disparaging discourses of belittlement also serve to deny children the right to have a voice on environmentalism and politics."<ref name="Cammaerts-2023" />
Line 207 ⟶ 205:
Gallup's annual update on Americans' attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years (2008-2010) has become less worried about the threat of [[global warming]], less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientist themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Newport |first1=Frank |title=Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop |url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/126560/americans-global-warming-concerns-continue-drop.aspx |work=Gallup |date=11 March 2010 }}</ref>
Data from the Media Matters for America organization has shown that, despite 2015 being "a year marked by more landmark actions to address climate change than ever before", the combined climate coverage on the top broadcast networks was down by 5% from 2014.<ref>{{cite web|title=How Broadcast Networks Covered Climate Change in 2015|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/302896750/Media-Matters-Climate-Broadcast-Study|website=Scribd|publisher=Media Matters for America|access-date=2018-03-01|archive-date=2021-11-19|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211119205858/https://www.scribd.com/doc/302896750/Media-Matters-Climate-Broadcast-Study|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="MediaMatters">{{Cite news|url=http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/03/07/study-how-broadcast-networks-covered-climate-ch/208881|title=Study: How Broadcast Networks Covered Climate Change In 2015|date=2016-02-29|newspaper=Media Matters for America|access-date=2016-12-03|archive-date=2019-06-13|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190613094946/https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2016/03/07/study-how-broadcast-networks-covered-climate-ch/208881|url-status=live}}</ref>
President [[Donald Trump]] denies the threat of global warming publicly. As a result of the Trump Presidency, media coverage on climate change was expected to decline during his term as president.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Park |first1=David J |title=United States news media and climate change in the era of US President Trump |journal=Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management |date=November 2017 |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=202–204 |doi=10.1002/ieam.2011 |pmid=29193745 |bibcode=2018IEAM...14..202P }}</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2020}}
Line 237 ⟶ 235:
== Further reading ==
* {{cite book |last=Pooley |first=Eric |date=June 8, 2010 |title=The Climate War: True Believers, Power Brokers, and the Fight to Save the Earth |url=https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781401323264 |publisher=Hachette Books |isbn=978-1-4013-2326-4 }}
*
* {{cite book |
* {{cite book |
* {{cite book |doi=10.3726/b14826 |title=Climate Change and the Media |date=2018 |isbn=978-1-4331-5437-9 |url=https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/37995 |editor-last1=Brevini |editor-last2=Lewis |editor-first1=Benedetta |editor-first2=Justin }}
* {{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.03.001 |vauthors=Uusi-Rauva C, Tienari J |title=On the relative nature of adequate measures: Media representations of the EU energy and climate package |journal=Global Environmental Change |volume=20 |issue=3 |pages=492–501 |year=2010 |bibcode=2010GEC....20..492U }}
* {{cite journal |author=Anderson, Alison |title=Media, Politics and Climate Change: Towards a New Research Agenda |journal=Sociology Compass |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=166–182 |date=March 2009 |doi=10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00188.x}}
*
{{Global warming|state=collapsed}}
| |||