Guilt and Shame in U.S. Climate Change Communication

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Jacquet
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Fossil Fuel ◽  
The United States ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
Washington Dc ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Corporate Advertising ◽  
Change Behavior ◽  
The One

Some of the major misconceptions in the United States about climate change—such as the focus on scientific uncertainty, the “debate” over whether climate change is caused by humans, and pushback about how severe the consequences might be—can be seen as communications battles. An interesting area within communications is the contrasting use of guilt and shame for climate-related issues. Guilt and shame are social emotions (along with embarrassment, pride, and others), but guilt and shame are also distinct tools. On the one hand, guilt regulates personal behavior, and because it requires a conscience, guilt can be used only against individuals. Shame, on the other hand, can be used against both individuals and groups by calling their behavior out to an audience. Shaming allows citizens to express criticism and social sanctions, attempting to change behavior through social pressure, often because the formal legal system is not holding transgressors accountable. Through the use of guilt and shame we can see manifestations of how we perceive the problem of climate change and who is responsible for it. For instance, in October 2008, Chevron, one of the world’s largest fossil fuel companies, placed advertisements around Washington, DC, public transit stops featuring wholesome-looking, human faces with captions such as “I will unplug things more,” “I will use less energy,” and “I will take my golf clubs out of the trunk.” Six months later, DC activists reworked the slogans by adding to each the phrase “while Chevron pollutes.” This case of corporate advertising and subsequent “adbusting” illustrates the contrast between guilt and shame in climate change communication. Guilt has tended to align with the individualization of responsibility for climate change and has been primarily deployed over issues of climate-related consumption rather than other forms of behavior, such as failure to engage politically. Shame has been used, largely by civil society groups, as a primary tactic against fossil fuel producers, peddlers of climate denial, and industry-backed politicians.

Climate change coverage in the United States media during the 2017 hurricane season: implications for climate change communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 164 (3-4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Weiner ◽  
Sarah P. Church ◽  
Junyu Lu ◽  
Laura A. Esman ◽  
Jackie M. Getson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Hurricane Season

scholarly journals “What’s Up with the Weather?” Public Engagement with Extreme Event Attribution in the UK

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Ettinger ◽  
Peter Walton ◽  
James Painter ◽  
Shannon Osaka ◽  
Friederike E.L. Otto
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Extreme Event ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Extreme Weather ◽  
Extreme Weather Events ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Event Attribution ◽  
The Uk

AbstractThe science of extreme event attribution (EEA) – which connects specific extreme weather events with anthropogenic climate change – could prove useful for engaging the public about climate change. However, there is limited empirical research examining EEA as a climate change communication tool. In order to help fill this gap, we conducted focus groups with members of the UK public to explore benefits and challenges of utilizing EEA results in climate change advocacy messages. Testing a range of verbal and visual approaches for communicating EEA, we found that EEA shows significant promise for climate change communication because of its ability to connect novel, attention-grabbing and event-specific scientific information to personal experiences and observations of extreme events. Communication challenges include adequately capturing nuances around extreme weather risks, vulnerability, adaptation and disaster risk reduction; expressing scientific uncertainty without undermining accessibility of key findings; and difficulties interpreting mathematical aspects of EEA results. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations to help address these challenges when communicating EEA results beyond the climate science community. We conclude that EEA can help catalyze important dialogues about the links between extreme weather and human-driven climate change.

Agricultural Extension and Climate Change Communication

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda S. Prokopy ◽  
Wendy-Lin Bartels ◽  
Gary Burniske ◽  
Rebecca Power
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Smallholder Farmers ◽  
Agricultural Extension ◽  
The United States ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Generation Process ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication

Agricultural extension has evolved over the last 200 years from a system of top-down dissemination of information from experts to farmers to a more complex system, in which a diversity of knowledge producers and farmers work together to co-produce information. Following a detailed history of the evolution of extension in the United States, this article describes an example from the southeastern United States that illustrates how innovative institutional arrangements enable land-grant universities to actively engage farmers and extension agents as key partners in the knowledge generation process. A second U.S. example shows that private retailers are more influential than extension in influencing large-scale farmers’ farm management decisions in the midwestern United States. However, these private retailers trust extension as a source of climate change information and thus partnerships are important for extension. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have been an important source of extension services for smallholder farmers across the world, and examples from the NGO CARE indicate that a participatory and facilitative approach works well for climate change communication. Collectively, these examples emphasize that the role of agricultural extension in climate change communication is essential in the context of both developed and developing countries and with both smallholder farmers and large-scale farmers. These case studies illustrate the effectiveness of a co-production approach, the importance of partners and donors, and the changing landscape of agricultural extension delivery.

Climate Change Communication

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy E. Chadwick
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Change Factors ◽  
Persuasive Strategies ◽  
Social Scientific

Climate change, which includes global warming, is a serious and pervasive challenge for local and global communities. Communication theorists, researchers, and practitioners are well positioned to describe, predict, and affect how we communicate about climate change. Our theories, research methods, and practices have many potential roles in reducing climate change and its effects. Climate change communication is a growing field that examines a range of factors that affect and are affected by how we communicate about climate change. Climate change communication covers a broad range of philosophical and research traditions, including humanistic-rhetorical analyses, interpretive qualitative studies, and social-scientific quantitative surveys and experiments. Climate change communication examines a range of factors that affect and are affected by how we communicate about climate change. Much of the research in climate change communication focuses on public understanding of climate change, factors that affect public understanding, media coverage and framing, media effects, and risk perceptions. Less prevalent, growing areas of research include civic engagement and public participation, organizational communication, and persuasive strategies to affect attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors related to the climate. In all of these areas, most of the research on climate change communication has been conducted in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Western European countries. There is a need to expand the climate change communication research into other regions, particularly developing countries. In addition, climate change communication has natural links to environmental and health communication; therefore, communication scholars should also examine research from these areas to develop insights into climate change communication.

scholarly journals The effect of misinformation and inoculation: Replication of an experiment on the effect of false experts in the context of climate change communication

2021 ◽  
pp. 096366252110245
Author(s):  
Hannah Schmid-Petri ◽  
Moritz Bürger
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Communication Strategy ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication

An important communication strategy of climate skeptics is the use of fake experts, who act as spokespersons, although they do not possess any expertise in the field. One promising approach to tackle the effect of misinformation is inoculation. Previous research focuses on the United States, and the comparably low effect sizes of previous research call for further examination and consolidation. This study aims to complement those findings with data for Germany and replicates and extends an experiment by Cook et al. with a 2 × 2 between-subjects design. Our study confirms the importance of pre-existing worldviews for climate-related attitudes. Regarding the effects of misinformation messages and most notably, the effects of inoculation messages we could not replicate the findings of Cook et al.: At least in our setting, the misinformation message and also inoculation preceding misinformation had hardly any effect on the climate-related attitudes under study.

Audience Segmentation and Climate Change Communication

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald W. Hine ◽  
Wendy J. Phillips ◽  
Aaron B. Driver ◽  
Mark Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Message Content ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Audience Segmentation ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Change Behavior ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Marketing Principles ◽  
And Behavior

Scientists and policy makers face significant challenges when attempting to engage the public about climate change. An important first step is to understand the number and nature of the audiences one plans to target—a process known as audience segmentation. Segmentation involves identifying, within an audience or target population, homogenous subgroups that share similar demographic and/or psychographic profiles. After segmenting an audience, climate change communicators can target their messages based on the unique characteristics of each subgroup. For example, to stimulate engagement and behavior change, messages aimed at audiences that are skeptical about climate change may require different content and framing than messages aimed at audiences already deeply concerned about climate change. The notion of matching message content to audience characteristics has a long history, dating back to the Ancient Greeks. More recently, audience segmentation has played a central role in targeted advertising and also social marketing, which uses marketing principles to help “sell” ideas and behaviors that benefit society. Applications to climate change communication are becoming more common, with major segmentation and communication initiatives being implemented across the globe. Messages crafted to meet the needs of specific audience segments are more likely to be read, understood, and recalled than generic ones, and are also more likely to change behavior. However, despite these successes, the approach has not been uniformly embraced. Controversies have emerged related to the cost effectiveness of segmentation strategies, choice of segmentation variables, potential effects related to social stigmatization, whether segmentation encourages shallow (as opposed to deep) change, the extent to which segments are “found” as opposed to socially constructed by researchers, and whether interindividual differences are best conceptualized in terms of categories or dimensions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document