The Relationships Between Climate Change News Coverage, Policy Debate, and Societal Decisions

Author(s):  
D. B. Tindall ◽  
Mark C.J. Stoddart ◽  
Candis Callison

This article considers the relationship between news media and the sociopolitical dimensions of climate change. Media can be seen as sites where various actors contend with one another for visibility, for power, and for the opportunity to communicate, as well as where they promote their policy preferences. In the context of climate change, actors include politicians, social movement representatives, scientists, business leaders, and celebrities—to name a few. The general public obtain much of their information about climate change and other environmental issues from the media, either directly or indirectly through sources like social media. Media have their own internal logic, and getting one’s message into the media is not straightforward. A variety of factors influence what gets into the media, including media practices, and research shows that media matter in influencing public opinion. A variety of media practices affect reporting on climate change─one example is the journalistic norm of balance, which directs that actors on both sides of a controversy be given relatively equal attention by media outlets. In the context of global warming and climate change, in the United States, this norm has led to the distortion of the public’s understanding of these processes. Researchers have found that, in the scientific literature, there is a very strong consensus among scientists that human-caused (anthropogenic) climate change is happening. Yet media in the United States often portray the issue as a heated debate between two equal sides. Subscription to, and readership of, print newspapers have declined among the general public; nevertheless, particular newspapers continue to be important. Despite the decline of traditional media, politicians, academics, NGO leaders, business leaders, policymakers, and other opinion leaders continue to consume the media. Furthermore, articles from particular outlets have significant readership via new media access points, such as Facebook and Twitter. An important concept in the communication literature is the notion of framing. “Frames” are the interpretive schemas individuals use to perceive, identify, and label events in the world. Social movements have been important actors in discourse about climate change policy and in mobilizing the public to pressure governments to act. Social movements play a particularly important role in framing issues and in influencing public opinion. In the United States, the climate change denial countermovement, which has strong links to conservative think tanks, has been particularly influential. This countermovement is much more influential in the United States than in other countries. The power of the movement has been a barrier to the federal government taking significant policy action on climate change in the United States and has had consequences for international agreements and processes.

Author(s):  
María Carmen Erviti ◽  
Bienvenido León

It is not easy to determine the precise moment when climate change became a public communication issue in Spain. Among early references, the national newspaper El País published a story titled “World climate is going to change,” on November 17, 1976, and the term “global warming,” imported from the United States, appeared frequently in the media, from 1988 onward. However, academic research about communication of this important issue is relatively recent. A seminar held in 2005 warned that there were “no specific studies on the way the Spanish citizenry is facing the climate change threat” (II Seminario de Comunicación, Educación y Participación frente al Cambio Climático, Lekaroz, Navarra). This seminar precipitated the first study on public perception of climate change in Spain. According to more recent research, 90.1% of Spanish citizens are aware that climate change is happening, whereas only 4.6% are not. Historical records indicate that awareness has grown consistently in the early 21st century, with awareness levels that are similar to those of other countries. However, although there exists a strong consensus within the scientific community on the existence and the anthropogenic origin of climate change, polls indicate that only a small part of the Spanish population (39.0%) is aware of this agreement; a figure that is similar to that of other countries, such as the United States. In addition, two thirds of the Spanish population (64.4%) believe that climate change is mainly a consequence of human activities; a higher percentage than in other countries, like the United States. This ambivalent picture is not surprising, considering climate change is a marginal topic for mainstream Spanish media. According to a study conducted in 2005 and 2011, only 0.2% of all stories in the main national newspapers and 0.19% of national TV news focused on climate change, a lower percentage than in other countries. Media coverage of this issue has fluctuated since the 1990s, depending on several factors, like the existence of links to current affairs (such as international climate summits), notable report publications (from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and public engagement efforts (such as the Al Gore film An Inconvenient Truth). As far as the quality of the coverage is concerned, research shows similar trends to those detected internationally, including politicization, superficiality, and catastrophism. However, compared to other countries, there is a lower representation of skeptic viewpoints in the Spanish media that may be related to a weaker public visibility of skeptic think tanks and personalities. Academic interest in climate change communication has risen since 2010. Only four publications (books or articles) were released from 2001 to 2005, whereas more than 30 appeared in the period 2011–2015. Research has primarily focused on public perception and media coverage of climate change and has been conducted mainly by four universities (Universidad Complutense, Universidad de Málaga, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, and Universidad de Navarra). Communication actions related to climate change have been carried out by several nongovernmental organizations, often as part of international events and campaigns. In the early 21st century, national and regional public institutions have conducted several campaigns to communicate and raise climate change awareness, producing several exhibitions and publications, mainly on climate change mitigation. Several forums have suggested that the current weaknesses could benefit from a closer relationship among the media and scientific institutions. This could contribute to provide more credible information on the reality of climate change, as well as the options for mitigation and adaptation. Future research could also address climate change coverage in online media and social networks, as well as reception studies, currently underrepresented in academic studies conducted in the country.


2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sedona Chinn ◽  
P. Sol Hart ◽  
Stuart Soroka

Despite concerns about politicization and polarization in climate change news, previous work has not been able to offer evidence concerning long-term trends. Using computer-assisted content analyses of all climate change articles from major newspapers in the United States between 1985 and 2017, we find that media representations of climate change have become (a) increasingly politicized, whereby political actors are increasingly featured and scientific actors less so and (b) increasingly polarized, in that Democratic and Republican discourses are markedly different. These findings parallel trends in U.S. public opinion, pointing to these features of news coverage as polarizing influences on climate attitudes.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 334-367
Author(s):  
Nicholas Evan Sarantakes

The Battle of Okinawa was the last major ground battle of World War ii. The Tenth u.s. Army that invaded this small piece of Japan was a unique force composed of units from the u.s. Army and others from the u.s. Marine Corps. Much historical literature has focused on the different approaches to ground combat of the two armed services, but they also employed very different policies towards support of the news media. The u.s. Marines were much more supportive than the u.s. Army. The two different policies and styles of news coverage that reporters employed led to coverage favoring the u.s. Marines. Reporting suggested that u.s. Marine procedures were less costly in lives and created enormous concern in the United States about casualty rates, motivating President Harry S. Truman to hold an Oval Office meeting to re-think strategy in the Pacific theater. It would be wrong, though, to argue that the media altered the course of the war. Truman asked hard probing questions about the direction of the war, but General of the Army George C. Marshall acted to ensure that the United States stayed on its current strategic path.


Communication ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Waisbord

This article offers a review of key works in media sociology and identifies key themes in sociological research that have contributed to media studies. Given the interdisciplinary nature of media/communication analysis, establishing what falls within media sociology and drawing clear-cut distinctions between sociological and other approaches are not easy tasks. Here, media sociology is understood as research that situates communication and media research within the dynamics of social forces and links them to questions about order, conflict, identity, institutions, stratification, authority, community, and power. The origins of mass communication/media research are grounded in sociology. Not only was it sociologists who charted key themes in the field of communication/media studies, particularly in the United States in the 1920s, but foundational research was concerned with core sociological questions, such as the integrative role of the media in the transition from traditional to modern societies and the community-building dimensions of the media. Around the time of World War II, US media sociology experienced two transitions. Geographically, the center of studies moved from the University of Chicago to Columbia and Harvard Universities, and the research foci changed from news and media to public opinion and mass communication. Analytically, the focus shifted from the relation between media and modern society to questions about war propaganda and persuasion. Given the focus on the dynamics of public opinion, sociological questions about personal and media influence moved to the forefront, and interest in issues related to media and community faded. With financial support from the US government and private foundations, public opinion attracted considerable attention from media and communication researchers in the 1950s. However, as questions embedded in social psychology and behavioral research gained currency, sociological approaches, particularly those focused on structural issues, gradually lost centrality. This shift indicated the beginning of the rift between sociology and media/communication studies in the United States. Sociological theories and questions increasingly became less relevant for mass communication research. The historical trajectory of media sociology has been different in Europe, however. It has not had the focus on public opinion research and media effects that it has in the United States. Instead, it has been grounded in different theoretical paradigms and research questions. Traditionally, it has been more concerned with questions about class, power, institutions, and social differentiation.


Author(s):  
James S.J. Schwartz

This chapter considers and rejects traditional spaceflight rationales, accenting the insubstantial evidence that is usually offered in their support. It uses regression analyses and public opinion data to show that spaceflight activities do not have a clear impact on either STEM degree conferral rates or overall scientific literacy within the United States. Next, it uses public opinion data to show that the general public is not especially interested in astrobiology or in the scientific search for extraterrestrial life. It also uses genetics and anthropological research to show that there is no innate human biological compulsion to explore space. Finally, it describes and criticizes the “space frontier” metaphor as well as basic arguments for space resource exploitation and space settlement.


2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 261-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Clinton

Throughout his writings, Harold Nicolson advocates a distinction between ‘policy’ (to be subject to democratic control) and ‘negotiation’ (to remain the province of professional diplomatists), preferring to separate these two quite different activities, rather than lumping them together under the general term ‘diplomacy’ (an intermingling that he found conceptually muddled and politically impossible to sustain once general public opinion becomes politically mobilized). Nicholas Murray Butler and George Kennan, who may be taken as representing idealist and realist American opinion in the twentieth century, found themselves at one in rejecting Nicolson’s distinction. Butler believed that the progressive enlightenment of public opinion, resulting in the attainment of the ‘international mind’, would improve both the formulation of policy and the conduct of negotiations; Kennan deprecated public opinion, at least in the United States, as irredeemably clumsy and ill-informed, and was convinced that this domestic political force would not be satisfied with directing policy, but would insist on interfering with negotiation as well. Across the board, American opinion seems to be hostile to Nicolson’s differentiation. This rejection of Nicolson’s view illustrates a more general influence of distinctively American thinking about international relations on American attitudes towards, and expectations of, diplomacy.


2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celine-Marie Pascale

On 11 March 2011, an earthquake of a 9.0 magnitude and the consequent tsunami destroyed Japan’s Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant. Known as 3/11 in Japan, the effects of this triple disaster will continue for decades. How did the media covering the catastrophe articulate issues of risk to the general public? This article is a textual analysis of accounts about the Fukushima disaster published between 11 March 2011 and 11 March 2013 in four of the most prominent media outlets in the United States. In particular, the analysis explores the practices through which these US media constructed the presence and meaning of public health risks resulting from the nuclear meltdown. The article illustrates how systematic media practices minimized the presence of health risks, contributed to misinformation, and exacerbated uncertainties. In the process, the study demonstrates how the media created vernacular epistemologies for understanding and evaluating the health risks posed by nuclear radiation. The article concludes by weighing the implications of the vernacular epistemologies deployed by media.


2019 ◽  
pp. 17-32
Author(s):  
Andrei P. Tsygankov

The chapter discusses national fears and the role of media in the context of the United States’ views of Russia. It develops a framework for understanding the US perception and describes fears of Russia in the media as rooted in substantive differences between national visions of the American dream and the Russian Idea and polarizing political discourses stemming from tensions in the two countries’ relations. The chapter further analyzes the role of US government and explains its ability to influence media perception of Russia after the Cold War by setting the agenda, signaling the appropriate tone and frames of coverage, and directly engaging with the general public.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document