Public Opinion about Climate Change in United States, Partisan View and Media Coverage of the 2019 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 25) in Madrid (original) (raw)
Related papers
The US News Media, Polarization on Climate Change, and Pathways to Effective Communication
Environmental Communication, 2018
The news media are a central source of information about climate change for most people. Through frames, media transmit information that shape how people understand climate change as well as the actions they are ultimately willing to support to address the problem. This article reviews the rise of climate change in the US news media and the emergence of related frames in public discourse. In doing so, it traces the roots of partisan divisions over climate change and highlights the role that events, journalistic practices, technological changes, and individual-level factors such as ideological and partisan identity have played in fostering polarization. The article concludes by identifying the core challenges facing communicators who seek to build consensus for action on climate change and highlights the most viable solutions for achieving success. The news media are a central source of information about climate change for most people. 1 Through frames, media transmit information tha...
Public Understanding of Science
This study examines non-editorial news coverage in leading U.S. newspapers as a source of ideological differences on climate change. A quantitative content analysis compared how the threat of climate change and efficacy for actions to address it were represented in climate change coverage across The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and USA Today between 2006 and 2011. Results show that The Wall Street Journal was least likely to discuss the impacts of and threat posed by climate change, and most likely to include negative efficacy information and use conflict and negative economic framing when discussing actions to address climate change. The inclusion of positive efficacy information was similar across newspapers. Also, across all newspapers, climate impacts and actions to address climate change were more likely to be discussed separately than together in the same article. Implications for public engagement and ideological polarization are discussed. Polarizing News 3 Polarizing News? Representations of Threat and Efficacy in Leading U.S. Newspapers' Coverage of Climate Change The global scientific community is in widespread agreement that climate change is occurring and that the majority of observed warming in the climate system is due to human activities (IPCC, 2013). In the U.S., recent reports indicate that climate impacts are already being felt across the country (Melillo, Richmond, & Yohe, 2014; Romero-Lankao et al., 2014); however, public opinion remains divided on the issue. These divisions increasingly fall along ideological lines, with liberals more accepting of and concerned about climate change than conservatives (McCright & Dunlap, 2011). Various explanations have been advanced to account for this polarization, prominent among them the media's conflicting information flows on the issue (McCright & Dunlap, 2011). In a high-choice media environment that facilitates selective exposure to like-minded news, distinct cues about climate change can polarize attitudes of opposing partisans (Feldman, Myers, Hmielowski, & Leiserowitz, 2014). Scholars interested in how representations of climate change vary across U.S. media outlets primarily have focused on cable news organizations (e.g., Feldman, Maibach, Roser-Renouf, & Leiserowitz, 2011), such as MSNBC and Fox News, which are well known for their respective liberal and conservative orientations. However, these outlets tend to attract a relatively narrow audience of strong partisans (Levendusky, 2013) and therefore may not fully account for the media's effects on opinion polarization among the broader U.S. population. Thus, this study instead focuses on representations of climate change in the straight news coverage of leading U.S. newspapers, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and USA Today. In addition to these newspapers being among the nation's most read (Alliance for Audited Media, 2013), they differ from one another in the political slant Polarizing News 4 of their coverage and the partisan composition of their audiences (e.g. Gentzkow & Shapiro, 2010, 2011; Groseclose & Milyo, 2005). This suggests that there may be disparities in their reporting on climate change, with implications for the ideological divides in U.S. public opinion. Although climate change coverage in U.S. newspapers has been widely studied (e.g., Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004; Boykoff, 2007a), the potential for differences between newspapers, particularly in non-editorial coverage, has received scant attention, a gap this study helps to fill. This study also advances a novel framework for analyzing representations of climate change in the press. Prior analyses of climate change coverage in U.S. newspapers have focused on claims of scientific uncertainty. For example, Boykoff and Boykoff (2004) found that between 1988 and 2002, the U.S. prestige presswhich includes the newspapers we study herediverged significantly from the scientific view on climate change by giving equal attention to a small group of skeptics who questioned human contributions to global warming. However, by 2005, evidence for this false balance largely disappeared (Boykoff, 2007a; Nisbet, 2011). Thus, in the current study, which evaluates newspaper coverage between 2006 and 2011, we move away from analyzing claims of uncertainty about climate science and instead analyze how information about the threat of climate change and efficacy for actions to address it is communicated. Using content analysis, we examine threat and efficacy information both directly and indirectly, through the discussion and framing of climate change impacts and actions. To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyze representations of threat and efficacy in climate change news reporting in the U.S. prestige press. The current study builds on prior research (Authors, 2014), which analyzed the representation of threat and efficacy in U.S. network TV news coverage of climate change.
Discourses around climate change in the news media
2015
Ever since the publication of their first report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has described the origin of climate change as anthropogenic and, declaring it as ‘unequivocal’ in 2007. Nevertheless, societies worldwide react in different ways while the level of scepticism remains high and the scientific evidence is challenged. This research examines the ways printed newspapers have framed climate change issues across four countries: Britain, Brazil, Germany and Italy. Our ultimate aim is to investigate the role that mass media in shaping public opinion. These countries are all major emitters of greenhouse gases but their citizens reveal different attitudes and different levels of concern towards climate-change related issues (PEW 2010; EC 2011). Here, we are interested in examining the similarities and differences across these four countries regarding the debate around climate change issues within the news media. More specifically, we aim to explore the followi...
Frontiers in Communication, 2019
The news media play an influential role in shaping public attitudes on a wide range of issues—climate change included. As climate change has risen in salience, the average American is much more likely to be exposed to news coverage now than in the past. Yet, we don’t have a clear understanding of how the content of this news coverage has changed over time, despite likely playing an important part in fostering or inhibiting public support and engagement in climate action. In this paper we use a combination of automated and manual content analysis of the most influential media sources in the U.S. -the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the Associated Press- to illustrate the prevalence of different frames in the news coverage of climate change and their dynamics over time from the start of the climate change debate in 1988. Specifically, we focus on three types of frames, based on previous research: economic costs and benefits associated with climate mitigation, appeals to conservative and free market values and principles, and uncertainties and risk surrounding climate change. We find that many of the frames found to reduce people’s propensity to support and engage in climate action have been on the decline in the mainstream media, such as frames emphasizing potential economic harms of climate mitigation policy or uncertainty. At the same time, frames conducive to such engagement by the general public have been on the rise, such as those highlighting economic benefits of climate action. News content is also more likely now than in the past to use language emphasizing risk and danger, and to use the present tense. To the extent that media framing plays an important role in fostering climate action in the public, these are welcome developments.
The great divide: understanding the role of media and other drivers of the partisan divide in public concern over climate change in the USAAbstract Recent scholarship has identified a large and growing divide on how Republicans and Democrats view the issue of climate change. A number of these studies have suggested that this polarization is a product of systematic efforts to spread doubt about the reality of climate change through the media in general and conservative media in particular. However, research to date has largely relied on speculation about such a relationship rather than empirical evidence. We improve on existing research by conducting an empirical analysis of the factors affecting national-level, quarterly shifts in public concern about climate change between January 2001 and December 2014. Our analysis focuses on the potential role played by four factors that should account for changes in levels of concern regarding climate change: (1) media coverage, (2) extreme weather, (3) issuance of major scientific reports, and (4) changes in economic activity and foreign conflict. Some results suggest that partisan media influences beliefs in ways expected by communication scholars who describe Becho chamber^effects and Bboomerang^effects. Among other supporting evidence, we find that partisan media not only strengthen views of like-minded audiences but also when Republicans are presented with opposing frames about climate change from liberal media, they appear to reject the messages such that they are less concerned about the issue. Findings also demonstrate that the dissemination of science increases concern about climate change among Democrats but has no influence on Republicans. Finally, extreme weather does not increase concern among Democrats or Republicans. Implications for future research are discussed.
Claims and frames: How the news media cover climate change
Climate change has been called “the greatest environmental challenge facing our planet” (President Obama, BBC News 2015), and also “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” (Sen. James Inhofe 2012). How could the science of climate change on the one hand be so clear, yet the response by society on the other be so contested? The answer, in part, is in the way the media have reported the issue. This lesson aims to provide students with insights into how the news media cover climate change. First, the students are introduced to key concepts in media and journalism studies as they relate to climate change. Then, working in groups, they are required to follow a specific climate change-related story in the news in order to collect data on the levels of coverage (i.e., the number of stories or mentions). They then analyze the content of the coverage. Students present their findings to their peers and class instructors in a formal presentation and write a follow-up, 1000-word paper on their learning experience. For those instructors who wish to introduce students to this topic without devoting such a large amount of teaching and seminar time to it, an abbreviated lesson plan consisting of two lectures, two seminars, and a shorter assignment is also provided. For instructors who wish to teach this lesson, but whose area of expertise lies outside journalism studies or media studies, some lecture notes are also included. People get most of their information about science from the media (Nelkin 1995). They cannot visit the icecaps, measure the glaciers or monitor atmospheric CO2 themselves; they rely on the news media to tell them. Also, people equate high levels of media coverage with salience (Ungar 2000). If something is in the news a lot, the public thinks it must be important. “News confers legitimacy,” as Michael Schudson (1989) puts it. The converse is also true: when a topic disappears from the media, most people forget about it. So whether the media cover climate change in the first place is important. But we also know that how they cover it matters too. For example, when climate change is described as a looming apocalypse, people may respond differently than when it is described as an economic and social opportunity. The media’s “framing” of climate change is therefore a key factor in promoting public engagement with the issue (Nisbet 2010). Another factor that has an impact on climate change coverage is how the media themselves operate. Reporters’ work conditions, how much they know about the subject, the amount of pressure they are under in their newsrooms, the number of calls they make or resources they consult all affect how they write about climate change (Boykoff & Boykoff 2007). D. Robbins & P. Brereton Climate change claims and frames Reporters and editors work in a field that has its own rules, norms, and values. These help them to decide what is news and what isn’t, which stories will make it into their newspapers, bulletins or websites and which won’t (Harcup & O’Neill 2001; Schultz 2007). Often, climate change does not align with “news values” (defined in “key terms” below) for a variety of reasons.
Media Politics and Climate Change: Towards a New Research Agenda
Climate change is one of the most pressing issues of our time, and the media have been demonstrated to play a key role in shaping public perceptions and policy agendas. Journalists are faced with multiple challenges in covering this complex field. This article provides an overview of existing research on the media framing of climate change, highlighting major research themes and assessing future potential research developments. It argues that analysis of the reporting of climate science must be placed in the wider context of the growing concentration and globalization of news media ownership, and an increasingly ‘promotional culture’, highlighted by the rapid rise of the public relations industry in recent years and claims-makers who employ increasingly sophisticated media strategies. Future research will need to examine in-depth the targeting of media by a range of actors, as well as unravel complex information flows across countries as media increasingly converge.
How news media (de-)legitimize national and international climate politics
International Communication Gazette, 2019
Implementing global climate change policies on the national and sub-national level requires the support of many domestic societal and economic actors. This support partially depends on the perceived legitimacy of climate policies, which is sustained by legitimation discourses in domestic media. The following article analyzes legitimation discourses on climate change politics in newspapers of five countries for three Conferences of the Parties in 2004, 2009, and 2014 (n = 369 legitimation statements). According to our data, it is mainly the legitimacy of international climate policies which is evaluated in national fora, and usually with a negative outcome. However, there is a noticeable shift in the arguments used, moving from efficiency as the dominating evaluation criterion to questions of fairness in the distribution of costs and gains.
A changing climate of skepticism: The factors shaping climate change coverage in the US press
Public Understanding of Science, 2015
Skepticism toward climate change has a long tradition in the United States. We focus on mass media as the conveyors of the image of climate change and ask: Is climate change skepticism still a characteristic of US print media coverage? If so, to what degree and in what form? And which factors might pave the way for skeptics entering mass media debates? We conducted a quantitative content analysis of US print media during one year (1 June 2012 to 31 May 2013). Our results show that the debate has changed: fundamental forms of climate change skepticism (such as denial of anthropogenic causes) have been abandoned in the coverage, being replaced by more subtle forms (such as the goal to avoid binding regulations). We find no evidence for the norm of journalistic balance, nor do our data support the idea that it is the conservative press that boosts skepticism.
Public understanding of the politics of global warming in the news media: the hostile media approach
This study uses the politics of global warming in the US to investigate an affective mechanism of hostile media perception and the democratic consequences of such perception, in an effort to delineate audience and journalistic barriers to stimulating urgent concern about climate change. The study confirms that partisanship played a significant role in perceptual differences with regard to media bias in an important area of science journalism—climate change. News consumers’ anger perception was tested as a mediator in seeking an affective mechanism of hostile media perception. Hostile media perception has important democratic consequences in that it is positively associated with individuals’ trust in news coverage of global warming and with selective media use.