U.S. Media’s Depiction of Climate Change
How media has the ability to influence public perception on climate change
The main concern with effectively communicating climate science reports to the general public alongside policymakers and international leaders is not only how the US media portrays such information, but also the lack of attention and representation in terms of news coverage. The division on the issue of climate change is prevalent in media even though there is an existing scientific consensus the climate change does indeed exist and is influenced by anthropogenic activities (1). Media plays an influential role in public opinion on topics like climate change and environmental science, but fails to adequately give such topics a consistent amount of attention, holding politicians accountable and striving for open discussion from diverse opinions from scientific authority figures (2). Consistent news coverage would connect the general public to the climate crisis, especially if they humanize topics on human rights and activism within the climate crisis (2).
Fig. 1. Temperature anomaly data, showing general consensus between various research facilities and scientific associations. Source: NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
News sources are the primary method for information sharing with the general public regarding climate change in the US with 6 out of 10 individuals receiving their news from social media primarily (3). Mass media coverage of climate change is not simply a random combination of newspaper articles or television broadcasts, it is a social relationship between scientists, policymakers, and the public (4). Influential newspapers and television broadcasting platforms within the US tend to misrepresent the top climate scientists’ perspective, and present informational bias by dramatizing, and exaggerating climate change symptoms as a novelty and devalues to overall point and concerns being addressed in climate assessment reports and research (5). Mass media is a key actor in identifying and interpreting environmental issues (5). Environmental issues particularly related topics such as global warming, appear in the news because of a threatening attitude or perception related to climate change (5). There are periods of reduced climate change coverage in newspapers and television even though there were a steady pace of journal articles being published concurrently (5).
Fig. 2 U.S. news and media coverage of climate change from 1988 - 2004. Source: Boykoff & Boykoff (2007).
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a report called the SR15, outlining the fact that global warming is likely to reach 1.5 degrees Celsius as soon as 2030 than compared to the previously predicted 2 degrees Celsius prediction by 2100 (6). This newly released report was primarily focused on front page covers of US national newspapers such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the Boston Globe, but only 22 out of the 50 top high-ranking us newspapers featured the story even though the language and information discussed within the report are primarily sought after in mass media due to the negative or more concerning tone that this report presented (6). There was a high level of confidence and likelihood of over 70% of the statements associated with the fifth report claimed to have a high or very high level of confidence and primarily constituted a call to action on the part of the representative or international leader (7). The dangers of climate change are not tangible or visible in our day-to-day lives which leads decision-makers to risk the chance of waiting until such dangers are visible enough, and by then it is too late to reverse impacts, adding uncertainty to the scientific assessments and projections regarding climate change and altering the intentions of what scientists were communicating of such projected outcomes (7). If we examine all five IPCC reports we can see increase in parties affiliated with international plans such as the Kyoto Protocol or COP15, overtime as their level of confidence and call to action language increases (7).
Fig. 3 World media coverage of climate change from June 2018 to September 2019, after the publication of SR15. Source: Boykoff & Pearlman (2019).
Since the SR15 report there has been an increase in articles claiming deadlines or targeted extreme events (7). media representation of scientific information is a critical link between the public’s general understanding and awareness of climate change but also influences the polarization between science policy proposals and policy makers (7). This type of deadline or target-date language within the media regarding climate change has increased over time. Over-exaggeration leads to confusion within public perception and runs risks of the general public or policymakers discrediting the science and denying it all together claiming that it may be too late to even bother taking any significant action any longer (7). Even though stating that climate change goals or projections have a deadline aims at motivating action from an individual level on a short-term scale, these goals can have unintended consequences and create opportunities for climate science deniers within the political realm to dismiss the threat of climate change (7).
Table 1. Dramaticized media coverage of SR15 and “deadline” terminology used to create fear and panic for attractive articles. Source: Boykoff & Pearlman (2019).
Recently the amount of news coverage on climate change has been compared to the amount of time Jeff Bezos’ trip to space. According to Media Matter’s analysis of three US broadcasting shows, the single trip received 212 minutes of news coverage in a single day (July 20, 2021) compared to the amount of news coverage discussing climate change was 267 minutes throughout a single year (2020) (8). The amount of coverage on Bezos’ flight made up approximately 86% of what news media covered on climate change (8).
In a survey conducted by Pew research, only four-in-ten American expect the extreme effects of climate change will harm wildlife, shorelines, and weather patterns (9). It was recognized that conservative republicans are less likely to believe negative effects of climate change or proposed solutions will make a difference in climate mitigation, with half or less of liberal democrats believed there are negative effects from climate change and support policy solutions making major difference in effective mitigation (9). Peoples beliefs are likely to influence their opinion and trust on scientific consensus and understanding of climate change, and this particularly is influenced by their political stance, such perceptions only lead to further divide between political parties (9).
Source: Pew Research
Credit: Pew Research
As climate impacts continue to increase, the lack of awareness or discussion that both educates and informs the public will only lead to further damage to the public’s perception or priorities on what they should be concerned with outside of their daily life. Media coverage on climate change needs to be more consistent, in order for there to be a broader range of viewers and groups advocating for better climate policies on a local, state, and federal level. The argument that there is little incentive for media groups to cover climate change since it leads to a reduced number of viewers should not be a valid argument. The fact that such companies seek out higher ratings and funding, but are willing to risk public awareness on such a massive international crisis is a failure to humanity. Ignoring the issue or sticking our heads in the sand and pretend that’s everything is okay won’t effectively solve anything and will only lead to more panic and public ignorance on the issue, as well as politicians and corporations failing to avoid accountability. Of course, this is not targeting individual journalists or reporters, but rather the company altogether that prioritizes economic and social gains.
References:
Principles for Effective Communication and Public Engagement on Climate Change. - IPCC. www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2017/08/Climate-Outreach-IPCC-communications-handbook.pdf.
Woldemichael, Liyu. “The Media Is At The Center Of Fighting Climate Change (March).” The Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University, 23 Apr. 2020, kenan.ethics.duke.edu/the-media-is-at-the-center-of-fighting-climate-change/.
Corbett, Mike. “Social Media and Public Polarization over Climate Change in the United States.” Climate Institute, climate.org/social-media-and-public-polarization-over-climate-change-in-the-united-states/.
Boykoff, Maxwell T., and Jules M. Boykoff. “Climate Change and Journalistic Norms: A Case-Study of US Mass-Media Coverage.” Geoforum, vol. 38, no. 6, 2007, pp. 1190–1204., doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.008.
“U.S. Response to the IPCC Climate Science Report.” Climate Advisers, 7 Nov. 2018, climateadvisers.org/climate-intel/u-s-response-to-the-ipcc-climate-science-report/.
Molina, Tomas, and Ernest Abadal. “The Evolution of Communicating the Uncertainty of Climate Change to Policymakers: A Study of IPCC Synthesis Reports.” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 5, 2021, p. 2466., doi:10.3390/su13052466.
Boykoff, Maxwell, and Olivia Pearman. “Now or Never: How Media Coverage of the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C Shaped Climate-Action Deadlines.” One Earth, vol. 1, no. 3, 2019, pp. 285–288., doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2019.10.026.
Plummer, Kate. “Bezos Got More Media Coverage in One Day than the Climate Crisis Got in All of 2020, Analysis Reveals.” indy100, indy100, 21 July 2021, www.indy100.com/news/jeff-bezos-space-climate-crisis-b1887975.
“Americans' Views on Climate Change and Climate Scientists.” Pew Research Center Science & Society, Pew Research Center, 30 Dec. 2019, www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/10/04/public-views-on-climate-change-and-climate-scientists/.