Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 59:
==== To challenge the science related to global warming ====
The term ''alarmist'' has been used as a [[pejorative]] by critics of mainstream climate science to describe those that endorse the scientific consensus without necessarily being unreasonable.<ref>{{
Some media reports have used alarmist tactics to challenge the science related to global warming by comparing it with a purported episode of [[global cooling]]. In the 1970s, global cooling, a claim with limited scientific support (even during the height of a media frenzy over [[global cooling]], "the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature") was widely reported in the press.<ref name="The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus">{{cite journal |last1=Peterson |first1=Thomas C. |last2=Connolley |first2=William M. |last3=Fleck |first3=John |title=THE MYTH OF THE 1970s GLOBAL COOLING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS |journal=Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society |date=September 2008 |volume=89 |issue=9 |pages=1325–1338 |doi=10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1 |bibcode=2008BAMS...89.1325P }}</ref>
Several media pieces have claimed that since the even-at-the-time-poorly-supported theory of [[global cooling]] was shown to be false, that the well-supported theory of global warming can also be dismissed. For example, an article in ''[[The Hindu]]'' by Kapista and Bashkirtsev wrote: "Who remembers today, they query, that in the 1970s, when global temperatures began to dip, many warned that we faced a new ice age? An editorial in The Time magazine on June 24, 1974, quoted concerned scientists as voicing alarm over the atmosphere 'growing gradually cooler for the past three decades', 'the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland,' and other harbingers of an ice age that could prove 'catastrophic.' Man was blamed for global cooling as he is blamed today for global warming",<ref name="Kapitsa, Andrei 2008">Kapitsa, Andrei, and Vladimir Bashkirtsev, "Challenging the basis of Kyoto Protocol", ''[[The Hindu]]'', 10 July 2008,{{vs}}</ref> and the ''[[Irish Independent]]'' published an article claiming that "The widespread alarm over global warming is only the latest scare about the environment to come our way since the 1960s. Let's go through some of them. Almost exactly 30 years ago the world was in another panic about climate change. However, it wasn't the thought of global warming that concerned us. It was the fear of its opposite, global cooling. The doom-sayers were wrong in the past and it's entirely possible they're wrong this time as well."<ref name="Don 2007, p. 1">''[[Irish Independent]]'', "Don't believe doomsayers that insist the world's end is nigh", 16 March 2007, p. 1.</ref> Numerous other examples exist.<ref name="Schmidt, David 2002">Schmidt, David, "It's curtains for global warming", ''[[Jerusalem Post]]'', 28 June 2002, p. 16B. "If there is one thing more remarkable than the level of alarm inspired by global warming, it is the thin empirical foundations upon which the forecast rests. Throughout the 1970s, the scientific consensus held that the world was entering a period of global cooling, with results equally catastrophic to those now predicted for global warming."</ref><ref name="Francis Wilson 2009, p. 32">[[Francis Wilson (meteorologist)|Wilson, Francis]], "The rise of the extreme killers", ''[[Sunday Times]]'', 19 April 2009, p. 32. "Throughout history, there have been false alarms: "shadow of the bomb", "nuclear winter", "ice age cometh" and so on. So it's no surprise that today many people are skeptical about climate change. The difference is that we have hard evidence that increasing temperatures will lead to a significant risk of dangerous repercussions."</ref><ref name="The 2000">''[[National Post]]'', "The sky was supposed to fall: The '70s saw the rise of environmental Chicken Littles of every shape as a technique for motivating public action", 5 April 2000, p. B1. "One of the strange tendencies of modern life, however, has been the institutionalization of scaremongering, the willingness of the mass media and government to lend plausibility to wild surmises about the future. The crucial decade for this odd development was the 1970s. Schneider's book excited a frenzy of glacier hysteria. The most-quoted ice-age alarmist of the 1970s became, in a neat public-relations pivot, one of the most quoted global-warming alarmists of the 1990s."</ref>
==Media, politics, and public discourse==
As McCombs et al.'s 1972 study of the political function of mass media showed, media coverage of an issue can "play an important part in shaping political reality".<ref>{{cite journal|last=McCombs|first=M|author2=Shaw, D.|title=The Agenda Setting Function of Mass Media|journal=Public Opinion Quarterly|year=1972|volume=36|issue=2|pages=176–187|doi=10.1086/267990
=== Media-policy interface ===
Line 79:
[[File:Polarbearonice.jpg|thumb|The polar bear has become a symbol for those attempting to generate support for addressing climate change.]]Commentators have argued that the climate change discourses constructed in the media have not been conducive to generating the political will for swift action. The polar bear has become a powerful discursive symbol in the fight against climate change. However, such images may create a perception of climate change impacts as geographically distant,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lorenzoni |first1=Irene |last2=Pidgeon |first2=Nick F. |title=Public Views on Climate Change: European and USA Perspectives |journal=Climatic Change |date=21 August 2006 |volume=77 |issue=1-2 |pages=73–95 |doi=10.1007/s10584-006-9072-z |bibcode=2006ClCh...77...73L }}</ref> and MacNaghten argues that climate change needs to be framed as an issue 'closer to home'.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Macnaghten |first1=Phil |title=Embodying the Environment in Everyday Life Practices |journal=The Sociological Review |date=February 2003 |volume=51 |issue=1 |pages=63–84 |doi=10.1111/1467-954X.00408 }}</ref> On the other hand, Beck suggests that a major benefit of global media is that it brings distant issues within our consciousness.<ref>{{cite book |last= Beck |first=U |title= Risk Society - Towards a New Modernity |year=1992 |publisher= Sage |___location= Frankfurt |isbn= 978-0-8039-8345-8}}</ref>
Furthermore, media coverage of climate change (particularly in tabloid journalism but also more generally), is concentrated around extreme weather events and projections of catastrophe, creating "a language of imminent terror"<ref>{{cite book|last=Hulme|first=M|title=Why We Disagree About Climate Change|year=2009|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-72732-7|page=432}}</ref> which some commentators argue has instilled policy-paralysis and inhibited response. Moser et al. suggest using solution-orientated frames will help inspire action to solve climate change.<ref name="Moser & Dilling 2007">{{cite book|title=Creating a Climate for Change|last=Moser & Dilling|first=M., and L.|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2007|isbn=978-0-521-86923-2}}</ref> The predominance of catastrophe frames over solution frames<ref name="Boykoff2007">{{cite journal|last=Boykoff|first=M|author2=Boykoff, J|title=Climate Change and Journalistic Norms: A case study of US mass-media coverage|journal=[[Geoforum]]|date=November 2007|volume=38|issue=6|pages=1190–1204|doi=10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.008
Breaking the prevailing notions in society requires discourse that is traditionally appropriate and approachable to common people. For example, Bill McKibben, an environmental activist, provides one approach to inspiring action: a war-like mobilization, where climate change is the enemy. This approach could resonate with working Americans who normally find themselves occupied with other news headlines.<ref>{{cite magazine|last1=McKibben|first1=Bill|title=We Need to Literally Declare War on Climate Change|url=https://newrepublic.com/article/135684/declare-war-climate-change-mobilize-wwii|magazine=The New Republic|publisher=The New Republic|access-date=1 March 2018|archive-date=10 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210610094752/https://newrepublic.com/article/135684/declare-war-climate-change-mobilize-wwii|url-status=live}}</ref> Kester & Sovacool found that the usage of military termes in climate policy is dangerous and can lead to unintended consequences.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kester |first1=Johannes |last2=Sovacool |first2=Benjamin K. |title=Torn between war and peace: Critiquing the use of war to mobilize peaceful climate action |journal=Energy Policy |date=May 2017 |volume=104 |pages=50–55 |doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.026 }}</ref> Block, Li, Gärtner & Lenzen found thar real wars hamper climate change mitigation by several ways, and one of them is reducing the time media devotes to climate.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Block |first1=Katharina |last2=Li |first2=Mengyu |last3=Gärtner |first3=Jan |last4=Lenzen |first4=Manfred |title=Geopolitical conflict impedes climate change mitigation |journal=npj Climate Action |date=29 March 2025 |volume=4 |issue=1 |doi=10.1038/s44168-025-00224-7 }}</ref>
| |||