User:Layne4/Media coverage of climate change

History

Media attention is especially high in carbon dependent countries with commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. The way the media report on climate change in English-speaking countries, especially in the United States, has been widely studied, while studies of reporting in other countries have been less expansive.[1][2] A number of studies have shown that particularly in the United States and in the UK tabloid press, the media significantly understated the strength of scientific consensus on climate change established in IPCC Assessment Reports in 1995 and in 2001.

A peak in media coverage occurred in early 2007, driven by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report and Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth.[3] A subsequent peak in late 2009, which was 50% higher,[4] may have been driven by a combination of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit email controversy and December 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference.[3][5][6]

The Media and Climate Change Observatory team at the University of Colorado Boulder found that 2017 “saw media attention to climate change and global warming ebb and flow” with June seeing the maximum global media coverage on both subjects. This rise is “largely attributed to news surrounding United States (US) President Donald J. Trump’s withdrawal from the 2015 United Nations (UN) Paris Climate Agreement, with continuing media attention paid to the emergent US isolation following through the G7 summit a few weeks later.”

Media coverage of climate change during the Trump Administration remained prominent as most news outlets placed heavy emphasis on Trump-related stories rather than climate-related events.[7] This shift in media focus is referred to as “Trump Dump” and was shown to peak in times when the President was most active on Twitter. Just in the year 2017, the word “Trump” was mentioned 19,187 times in stories covered by five of the nation’s biggest press accounts, with “climate” being the second most frequent word. [7]

Alarmism

Alarmism is using inflated language, including an urgent tone and imagery of doom. In a report produced for the Institute for Public Policy Research Gill Ereaut and Nat Segnit suggested that alarmist language is frequently used in relation to environmental matters by newspapers, popular magazines and in campaign literature put out by the government and environment groups.[8] It is claimed that when applied to climate change, alarmist language can create a greater sense of urgency.[9]

The term alarmist can be used as a pejorative by critics of mainstream climate science to describe those that endorse it. MIT meteorologist Kerry Emanuel wrote that labeling someone as an "alarmist" is "a particularly infantile smear considering what is at stake." He continued that using this "inflammatory terminology has a distinctly Orwellian flavor."[10]

It has been argued that using sensational and alarming techniques, often evoke "denial, paralysis, or apathy" rather than motivating individuals to action[11] and do not motivate people to become engaged with the issue of climate change.[12] In the context of climate refugees—the potential for climate change to displace people—it has been reported that "alarmist hyperbole" is frequently employed by private military contractors and think tanks.[13]

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"[14]) was widely reported in the press. 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".,[15] 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."[16] Numerous other examples exist.[17][18][19]

Another example of climate alarmism that regularly makes headlines is the threat of crop failure and widespread famine caused by climate change. These claims are regularly reported in the press even as they are contradicted by most available scientific evidence.  For example, an article in Rolling Stone titled “Climate Crisis: 11 Foods Already Being Impacted by Climate Change” raise alarm in the readers by claiming that climate change will soon cause many crops to fail, causing starvation and malnutrition across the globe. [20] One article from the Cornell Allience for Science claims that there are many farmers and ranches in southern Africa that a desperate for new technologies to combat failing crops. [21] This article states that climate change is “driving millions into hunger.” [21] These claims can be disputed by data from the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) that crop production in Africa could “reach multi-year highs” [22] as many food crops are being produced substantially and steadily across the continent.

Discourses of action

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,[23] and MacNaghten argues that climate change needs to be framed as an issue 'closer to home'.[24] On the other hand, Beck suggests that a major benefit of global media is that it brings distant issues within our consciousness.[25]

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”[26] 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.[27] The predominance of catastrophe frames over solution frames[28] may help explain the apparent value-action gap with climate change; the current discursive setting has generated concern over climate change but not inspired action.

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.[29] This approach would resonate with working Americans who normally find themselves occupied with other news headlines. Dispelling the capitalist commodification of the environment also requires different rhetoric that breaks certain ingrained notions concerning the human relationship with the environment. This could include incorporating traditional Indigenous knowledge that prioritizes human existence with the environment as a mutualistic and protective one.

Additionally, international movements in developing countries in the Global South are usually excluded in developed nations that assert hegemony over the economies of developing nations. This especially applies to the people of Latin America, that are battling multinational oil and mineral corporations that seek to cooperate with the ruling class and exploit fragile ecosystems, rather than provide real solutions to working people that mutually benefit the environment. This is apparent in Ecuador, where former President Rafael Correa, a left-leaning populist, incited “economic growth” as a reason to sell portions of the Amazon rainforest to oil companies.[30] These popular movements usually are neglected by the United States due to corporate relationships within the political sphere of influence.

[31]

Compared to what experts know about traditional media's and tabloid journalism's impacts on the formation of public perceptions of climate change and willingness to act, there is comparatively little knowledge of the impacts of social media, including message platforms like Twitter, on public attitudes toward climate change.

In recent years, there has been an increase in the influence and role that social media plays in conveying opinions and knowledge through information sharing. There are several emerging studies that explore the connection between social media and the public’s awareness of climate change. Anderson [32] found that there is evidence that social media can raise awareness of climate change issues, but warns that it can also lead to opinion-dominated ideologies and reinforcement. Another study [33] examined datasets from Twitter to assess the ideas and attitudes that users of the application held toward climate change. Williams et al. [33] found that users tend to be active in groups that share the same opinions, often at the extremes of the spectrum, resulting in less polarized opinions between the groups. These studies[32][33] show that social media can have both a negative and positive impact on the information sharing of issues related to climate change.

United States

One of the first critical studies of media coverage of climate change in the United States appeared in 1999. The author summarized her research:[34]

Following a review of the decisive role of the media in American politics and of a few earlier studies of media bias, this paper examines media coverage of the greenhouse effect. It does so by comparing two pictures. The first picture emerges from reading all 100 greenhouse-related articles published over a five-month period (May–September 1997) in The Christian Science Monitor, New York Times, The San Francisco Chronicle, and The Washington Post. The second picture emerges from the mainstream scientific literature. This comparison shows that media coverage of environmental issues suffers from both shallowness and pro-corporate bias.

According to Peter J. Jacques et al., the mainstream news media of the United States is an example of the effectiveness of environmental skepticism as a tactic.[35] A 2005 study reviewed and analyzed the US mass-media coverage of the environmental issue of climate change from 1988 to 2004. The authors confirm that within the journalism industry there is great emphasis on eliminating the presence of media bias. In their study they found that — due to this practice of journalistic objectivity — "Over a 15-year period, a majority (52.7%) of prestige-press articles featured balanced accounts that gave 'roughly equal attention' to the views that humans were contributing to global warming and that exclusively natural fluctuations could explain the earth's temperature increase." As a result, they observed that it is easier for people to conclude that the issue of global warming and the accompanying scientific evidence is still hotly debated.[36]

A study of US newspapers and television news from 1995 to 2006 examined "how and why US media have represented conflict and contentions, despite an emergent consensus view regarding anthropogenic climate science." The IPCC Assessment Reports in 1995 and in 2001 established an increasingly strong scientific consensus, yet the media continued to present the science as contentious. The study noted the influence of Michael Crichton's 2004 novel State of Fear, which "empowered movements across scale, from individual perceptions to the perspectives of US federal powerbrokers regarding human contribution to climate change."[37]

A 2010 study concluded that "Mass media in the U.S. continue to suggest that scientific consensus estimates of global climate disruption, such as those from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), are 'exaggerated' and overly pessimistic. By contrast, work on the Asymmetry of Scientific Challenge (ASC) suggests that such consensus assessments are likely to understate climate disruptions [...] new scientific findings were more than twenty times as likely to support the ASC perspective than the usual framing of the issue in the U.S. mass media. The findings indicate that supposed challenges to the scientific consensus on global warming need to be subjected to greater scrutiny, as well as showing that, if reporters wish to discuss "both sides" of the climate issue, the scientifically legitimate 'other side' is that, if anything, global climate disruption may prove to be significantly worse than has been suggested in scientific consensus estimates to date."[38]

The most watched news network in the United States, Fox News, most of the time promotes climate misinformation and employs tactics that distract from the urgency of global climate change, according to a 2019 study by Public Citizen. According to the study, 86% of Fox News segments that discussed the topic were "dismissive of the climate crisis, cast its consequences in doubt or employed fear mongering when discussing climate solutions." These segments presented global climate change as a political construct, rarely, if ever, discussing the threat posed by climate change or the vast body of scientific evidence for its existence. Consistent with such politicized framing, three messages were most commonly advanced in these segments: global climate change is part of a "big government" agenda of the Democratic Party (34% of segments); an effective response to the climate crisis would destroy the economy and hurtle us back to the Stone Age (26% of segments); and, concern about the climate crisis is “alarmists”, “hysterical,” the shrill voice of a "doomsday climate cult," or the like (12% of segments). Such segments often featured "experts" who are not climate scientists at all or are personally connected to vested interests, such as the energy industry and its network of lobbyists and think tanks, for example, the Heartland Institute, funded by the Exxon Mobil company and the Koch foundation. The remaining segments (14%) were neutral on the subject or presented information without editorializing.[39]

It has been suggested that the association of climate change with the Arctic in popular media may undermine effective communication of the scientific realities of anthropogenic climate change. The close association of images of Arctic glaciers, ice, and fauna with climate change might harbor cultural connotations that contradict the fragility of the region. For example, in cultural-historical narratives, the Arctic was depicted as an unconquerable, foreboding environment for explorers; in climate change discourse, the same environment is sought to be understood as fragile and easily affected by humanity.[40]

Gallup's annual update on Americans' attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years, (2008-2010) has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientist themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.[41]Data from the Media Matters for America organization has shown that, despite 2015 being “a year marked by more landmark actions to address climate change than ever before,” the combined climate coverage on the top broadcast networks was down by 5% from 2014.[42][43]

President Donald Trump denies the threat of global warming publicly. As a result of the Trump Presidency, media coverage on climate change was expected to decline during his term as president.[44] The decline in media coverage can be attributed to Trump’s downplay and withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement. [45] There are limitations that hinder the media’s ability to report on climate change matters. These include advertising and editorial challenges, “false balance” between skeptics and scientists, the fossil fuel industry’s influence within public relations, and finally the overall decline of climate change coverage, termed “Climate Silence”.[46] With this slow decline of coverage, the public perception and understanding of climate change could be distorted, in turn causing delayed policy reaction and implementation.

Globally, media coverage of global warming and climate change decreased in 2020. [47] In the United States, however, newspaper coverage of climate change increased 29% between March 2020 and April 2020, these numbers are still 22% down from coverage in January 2020. [47] This spike in April 2020 can be attributed to the increased coverage of the “Covering Climate Now'' campaign and the US holiday of “Earth Day”. The overall decline in climate change coverage in the year 2020 is related to the increased coverage and interconnectedness of COVID-19 and President Trump, without mention of climate change, that began in January 2020. [48]

Coverage of youth

Published in the journal Childhood, the article "Children's protest in relation to the climate emergency: A qualitative study on a new form of resistance promoting political and social change"[49] considers how children have evolved into prominent actors to create a global impact on awareness of climate change. It highlights the work of children like Greta Thunberg[50] and the significance of their resistance to the passivity of world leaders regarding climate change. It also discusses how individual resistance can directly be linked to collective resistance and that this then creates a more powerful impact, empowering young people to act more responsibly and take authority over the future. The article offers a holistic view of the impact of youth[49] to raise awareness whilst also inspiring action, and using social media platforms such as TikTok, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram to share the youth message.

Coverage by country

Australia

Australia has recently experienced some of the most intense bushfire seasons in its immediate history. This phenomenon has sparked extensive media coverage both nationally and internationally. Much of the media coverage of the 2019 and 2020 Australian bushfire seasons has discussed the different factors that lead to and increase the chances of extreme fire seasons.[51] A climate scientist, Nerilie Abram, at Australian National University explained in an article for Scientific American, that the four major conditions need to exist for wildfire and those include “available fuel, dryness of that fuel, weather conditions that aid the rapid spread of fire and an ignition.[52] She then explained that climate change aids the spread and frequency of Australian fires because of the effect it has on dryness of fuels and fire weather patterns.[52] Although as there has been increased media attention to climate change after these extreme fire seasons, Australian news outlets have been reported to present misleading claims and information.[53] One article from The Australian in 2009 claimed that climate change and global warming were fraudulent claims pushed by so-called “warmaholics”.[54] Many other examples of claims that dismiss climate change have been posted by media outlets in Australia throughout the years following as well.[55][56][57] As the world entered into 2020, global media media coverage of climate change issues decreased and COVID-19 coverage increased. This was also experienced by Australia with a 34% decrease in climate change articles published from March of 2020.[47]

Article Draft

Article body

References

  1. ^ Lyytimäki, J., Tapio, P. (2009). "Climate change as reported in the press of Finland: From screaming headlines to penetrating background noise". International Journal of Environmental Studies. 66 (6): 723–735. doi:10.1080/00207230903448490. S2CID 93991183.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. ^ Schmidt, Andreas; Ivanova, Ana; Schäfer, Mike S. (2013). "Media attention for climate change around the world: A comparative analysis of newspaper coverage in 27 countries". Global Environmental Change. 23 (5): 1233–1248. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.020.
  3. ^ a b Boykoff, M. (2010). "Indian media representations of climate change in a threatened journalistic ecosystem" (PDF). Climatic Change. 99 (1): 17–25. Bibcode:2010ClCh...99...17B. doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9807-8. S2CID 154624611.
  4. ^ "2004–2010 World Newspaper Coverage of Climate Change or Global Warming". Center for Science and Technology Policy Research. University of Colorado at Boulder.
  5. ^ STUDY: How Broadcast Networks Covered Climate Change In 2015 March 7, 2016 Media Matters for America
  6. ^ Boykoff, M.; Andrews, K.; Daly, M.; Katzung, J.; Luedecke, G.; Maldonado, C.; Nacu-Schmidt, A. "A Review of Media Coverage of Climate Change and Global Warming in 2017". Media and Climate Change Observatory, Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado.
  7. ^ a b "MeCCO Monthly Summaries :: Media and Climate Chage Observatory". sciencepolicy.colorado.edu. Retrieved 2021-04-21.
  8. ^ Ereaut, Gill; Segrit, Nat (2006). "Warm Words: How are we Telling the Climate Story and can we Tell it Better?" (PDF). London: Institute for Public Policy Research. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)[permanent dead link]
  9. ^ There are genuine climate alarmists, but they're not in the same league as deniers
  10. ^ "Climategate": A Different Perspective Archived 2018-11-18 at the Wayback Machine, by Kerry Emanuel, National Association of Scholars, July 19, 2010
  11. ^ Lisa Dilling; Susanne C. Moser (2007). "Introduction". Creating a climate for change: communicating climate change and facilitating social change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–27. ISBN 978-0-521-86923-2.
  12. ^ O'Neill, S.; Nicholson-Cole, S. (2009). ""Fear Won't Do It": Promoting Positive Engagement with Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations". Science Communication. 30 (3): 355–379. doi:10.1177/1075547008329201.
  13. ^ Hartmann, Betsy (2010). "Rethinking climate refugees and climate conflict: Rhetoric, reality and the politics of policy discourse". Journal of International Development. 22 (2): 233–246. doi:10.1002/jid.1676. ISSN 0954-1748.
  14. ^ Peterson, Thomas; Connolley, William & Fleck, John (September 2008). "The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus" (PDF). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 89 (9): 1325–1337. Bibcode:2008BAMS...89.1325P. doi:10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-01-14.
  15. ^ Kapitsa, Andrei, and Vladimir Bashkirtsev, "Challenging the basis of Kyoto Protocol", The Hindu, 10 July 2008,
  16. ^ Irish Independent, "Don't believe doomsayers that insist the world's end is nigh", 16 March 2007, p. 1.
  17. ^ 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."
  18. ^ 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."
  19. ^ 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."
  20. ^ Murphy, Andrea Marks,Hannah; Marks, Andrea; Murphy, Hannah (2021-04-19). "11 Foods That Are Already Being Impacted by the Climate Crisis". Rolling Stone. Retrieved 2021-04-21.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  21. ^ a b "African farmers yearn for biotechnology in the face of climate change". Alliance for Science. Retrieved 2021-04-21.
  22. ^ "FAO Cereal Supply and Demand Brief | World Food Situation | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations". www.fao.org. Retrieved 2021-04-21.
  23. ^ Lorenzoni, I; Pidgeon (2006). "Public Views on Climate Change: European and USA Perspectives". Climatic Change. 77 (1): 73–95. Bibcode:2006ClCh...77...73L. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9072-z. S2CID 53866794.
  24. ^ MacNaghten, P (2003). "Embodying the Environment in Everyday Life Practices" (PDF). The Sociological Review. 77 (1).
  25. ^ Beck, U (1992). Risk Society - Towards a New Modernity. Frankfurt: Sage. ISBN 978-0-8039-8345-8.
  26. ^ Hulme, M (2009). Why We Disagree About Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. p. 432. ISBN 978-0-521-72732-7.
  27. ^ Moser & Dilling, M., and L. (2007). Creating a Climate for Change. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-86923-2.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  28. ^ Boykoff, M; Boykoff, J (November 2007). "Climate Change and Journalistic Norms: A case study of US mass-media coverage". Geoforum. 38 (6): 1190–1204. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.008.
  29. ^ McKibben, Bill. "We Need to Literally Declare War on Climate Change". The New Republic. The New Republic. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  30. ^ Kaiman, Jonathan (2013-03-26). "Ecuador auctions off Amazon to Chinese oil firms". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-03-02.
  31. ^ Auer M.; et al. (2014). "The Potential of Microblogs for the Study of Public Perceptions of Climate Change". WIREs Climate Change. 5 (3): 291–296. doi:10.1002/wcc.273.
  32. ^ a b Anderson, Ashley A. (2017-03-29). "Effects of Social Media Use on Climate Change Opinion, Knowledge, and Behavior". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.369. ISBN 9780190228620. Retrieved 2021-04-21.
  33. ^ a b c Williams, Hywel T.P.; McMurray, James R.; Kurz, Tim; Hugo Lambert, F. (2015-05-01). "Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change". Global Environmental Change. 32: 126–138. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.006. ISSN 0959-3780.
  34. ^ Nissani, Moti (Sep 1999). "Media Coverage of the Greenhouse Effect". Population and Environment. 21 (1): 27–43. doi:10.1007/BF02436119. S2CID 144096201.
  35. ^ Environmental skepticism is "a tactic of an elite-driven counter-movement designed to combat environmentalism, and ... the successful use of this tactic has contributed to the weakening of US commitment to environmental protection." — Jacques, P.J.; Dunlap, R.E.; Freeman, M. (June 2008). "The organization of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism". Environmental Politics. 17 (3): 349–385. doi:10.1080/09644010802055576. S2CID 144975102.
  36. ^ Boykoff, M. T.; Boykoff, J. M. (2007). "Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage" (PDF). Geoforum. 28 (6): 1190–1204. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.008. Retrieved 2009-10-15.
  37. ^ Boykoff, M.T. (2007). "From convergence to contention: United States mass media representations of anthropogenic climate change science". Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. 32 (4): 477–489. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.132.9906. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2007.00270.x.
  38. ^ Freudenburg, W.R., Muselli, V. (2010). "Global warming estimates, media expectations, and the asymmetry of scientific challenge". Global Environmental Change. 20 (3): 483–491. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.04.003.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  39. ^ Public Citizen, 13 Aug. 2019, "Foxic: Fox News Network’s Dangerous Climate Denial 2019: Fox’s Continues to Pollute the Airwaves with Misinformation, Give Platform to Deniers"
  40. ^ Stenport, Anna Westerstahl, Vachula, Richard S (2017). "Polar bears and ice: cultural connotations of Arctic environments that contradict the science of climate change". Media, Culture & Society. 39 (2): 282–295. doi:10.1177/0163443716655985. S2CID 148499560.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  41. ^ Newport, Frank (11 March 2010). "Americans'Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop: Multiple indicators show less concern, more feelings that global warming is exaggerated". Gallup Poll News Service.
  42. ^ "How Broadcast Networks Covered Climate Change in 2015". Scribd. Media Matters for America.
  43. ^ "Study: How Broadcast Networks Covered Climate Change In 2015". Media Matters for America. 2016-02-29. Retrieved 2016-12-03.
  44. ^ Park, David J. (March 2018). "United States news media and climate change in the era of US President Trump". Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 14 (2): 202–204. doi:10.1002/ieam.2011. ISSN 1551-3793. PMID 29193745.
  45. ^ Park, David J. (2018). "United States news media and climate change in the era of US President Trump". Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 14 (2): 202–204. doi:10.1002/ieam.2011. ISSN 1551-3793. PMID 29193745.
  46. ^ Park, David J. (2018-03). "United States news media and climate change in the era of US President Trump". Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 14 (2): 202–204. doi:10.1002/ieam.2011. ISSN 1551-3793. PMID 29193745. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  47. ^ a b c https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/icecaps/research/media_coverage/summaries/issue40.html#:~:text=The%20decreases%20in%20media%20coverage,global%20warming%20is%2040%25%20lower. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  48. ^ "Climate change news coverage has declined. The audience has not". Digital Content Next. 2020-09-23. Retrieved 2021-04-21.
  49. ^ a b Holmberg, Arita; Alvinius, Aida (2019-10-10). "Children's protest in relation to the climate emergency: A qualitative study on a new form of resistance promoting political and social change". Childhood. 27: 78–92. doi:10.1177/0907568219879970. ISSN 0907-5682.
  50. ^ "Greta Thunberg", Wikipedia, 2020-01-01, retrieved 2020-01-02
  51. ^ "Media reaction: Australia's bushfires and climate change". Carbon Brief. 2020-01-07. Retrieved 2021-04-22.
  52. ^ a b Abram, Nerilie. "Australia's Angry Summer: This Is What Climate Change Looks Like". Scientific American Blog Network. Retrieved 2021-04-22.
  53. ^ "The Australian says it accepts climate science, so why does it give a platform to 'outright falsehoods'?". the Guardian. 2020-01-14. Retrieved 2021-04-22.
  54. ^ "The warmaholics' fantasy | The Australian". 2009-01-16. Archived from the original on 2009-01-16. Retrieved 2021-04-22.
  55. ^ Bacon, Wendy (2013-10-30). "Sceptical climate part 2: climate science in Australian newspapers". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  56. ^ "The Australian Brings You The Climate Science Denial News From Five Years Ago – Graham Readfearn". Retrieved 2021-04-22.
  57. ^ Chapman, Simon. "The Australian's campaign against wind farms continues but the research doesn't stack up". The Conversation. Retrieved 2021-04-22.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Layne4/Media_coverage_of_climate_change&oldid=1024862782"