Climate Change and News Media: How Objectivity Differs in Climate Coverage
Brandi D. Addison Fall 2022, NYU
Introduction
Summary
I’ve chosen to explore the intersection of news media and climate change, primarily emphasizing focus toward objectivity in climate journalism and how it differs from other beats and coverage areas in the U.S. news media. This area of focus stems from passion and personal interest, and I intend to use it as a forward for my thesis, and hopefully, will supplement the foundation of my work before I conduct a deeper dive on the topic.
Working definitions
A. U.S. news media will refer to the “forms of mass media that focus on delivering news to the general public or a target public.” For this research, it will include USA TODAY, The New York Times, the Washington Post, HuffPost, CBS News, CNN, the L.A. Times, and FOX News.
B. The climate crisis will refer to the synonymous phrase of “adverse effects of climate change,” which the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) has defined as “changes in the physical environment or biota resulting from climate change which have significant deleterious effects on the composition, resilience or productivity of natural and managed ecosystems or on the operation of socio-economic systems or on human health and welfare.”
2
How major news organizations report on climate change
The Media and Climate Change Observatory compiles a monthly summary that analyzes climate coverage in dozens of news organizations from around the world. Regardless of how trends shift each month, there are a few underlying themes consistent in how the world’s major news organizations report on the climate crisis: ecological and meteorological, scientific, political and economic, and cultural.
For instance, while El Mundo has primarily covered the impact of wildfires on local victims— which increased globally as the much of the world faced increased drought and significant heatwaves — the Associated Press has primarily focused on the impact of climate change on the economy (Anderson, 2021). The Associated Press also continues to connect the climate crisis with faults of President Joe Biden, transitioning from its previous flames on former President Donald Trump — deemed as the Trump effect — over several years.
Beyond coverage trends, the topic has continually gained momentum within the last decade, and according to the Media and Climate Change Observatory, both print and broadcast organizations throughout the United States have increased their climate coverage this summer (Anderson, 2021). The topics primarily relate to agriculture, drought, natural disasters, and policy. There has consistently been less coverage in wildlife conservation since early this year.
How media has made the climate crisis a partisan issue
According to the University of Colorado in Boulder, major print media in five countries have represented climate change with consistent accuracy and facts — hitting a 90% accuracy rate in the last 15 years.
3
“Scientifically accurate coverage of man-made climate change is becoming less biased — headlining the idea that print media are no longer presenting climate change as a controversy,” wrote the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences as the University of Colorado Boulder. “But there’s one place where the team did find biased coverage: conservative media.”
And while most reports incorporate the scientific facts and concrete evidence of the climate crisis — acknowledging the natural disasters, food scarcity, increased temperatures, and other major consequences of climate change — conservative media continues to align its focus with partisan views that match their political agenda, according to CU Boulder. Essentially, climate change is not a naturally biased topic but has become controversial amid political distress and competing newspapers.
Positionality Research: The Intersection of News Media and Climate Change
Positionality in qualitative research focuses on the researcher’s personal biases, thoughts, feelings, and culturally ascribed characteristics — such as gender, nationality, race, and economic status — and their using their relevant attributes and personal history to elevate their work. In Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach (3rd edition), Joseph A. Maxwell highlights that a “clear understanding of the goals motivating your work will help you avoid losing your way or spending time and effort doing things that don’t advance these goals” (2013, p. 23).
I’m analyzing how the nation’s major news organizations report on the environment and climate and will 1.) Determine how reports differ based on the attributes of the author, and 2.)
4
Determine how each organization unintentionally presents bias in their coverage of climate change through the selected topics and sources. While I explore this issue out of personal passion, I also intend to use its content for background in my thesis next semester, which will hopefully supplement the foundation of my work.
When it comes to the intersection of news media and climate change, I have many advantages: in education, profession, and personal interests. As an environmental journalist based in West Texas — a major hub for agriculture and oil and gas — I’ve always rejected the notion that climate coverage can be biased, because I’ve believed no journalist would choose to support the issue. But in preparing for lectures as an adjunct instructor in longform journalism over the last several months, I’ve come to realize that, while that specific idea may be true, bias in climate coverage is still possible through topic selection and omission of sources — particularly when it comes to environmental justice and wildlife. Since recognizing the plausibility, I’ve spent each morning dissecting climate coverage across the nation’s major news organizations, so I can better familiarize myself with the intersection of news media and climate coverage. This includes USA Today, the New York Times, the Washington Post, HuffPost, CBS News, CNN, the L.A. Times and FOX News. In terms of education, I completed a minor in health, science, and environmental studies, and I’ve completed courses on writing for science and the environment. I’ve also completed continuing education courses in media literacy and climate journalism.
As proven, my selected research topic aligns with the roots of my educational background, professional career, and even, personal interests. There’s no doubt that I have many advantages in my chosen topic, and I hope my background continues to provide deeper research,
5
while also rewarding me with needed context and additional experience to bolster my long-term goals.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research study is to analyze how U.S. news media covers the climate crisis and determine any potential biases within news organizations or any topical biases, in addition to possible trends that correlate among specific attributions of the reporting journalists, such as age, sex, and education level.
At this stage in research, the U.S. news media will refer to the “forms of mass media that focus on delivering news to the general public or a target public.” For this purpose, the research will observe the works of four print organizations and four broadcast organizations, consisting of The New York Times, HuffPost, Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, ABC News, CNN, Fox News, and CBS News.
Additionally, the climate crisis will refer to the synonymous phrase of “adverse effects of climate change,” which the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) has defined as “changes in the physical environment or biota resulting from climate change which have significant deleterious effects on the composition, resilience or productivity of natural and managed ecosystems or on the operation of socio-economic systems or on human health and welfare.”
6
As the climate crisis becomes more dire, its essential for the majority population to understand the seriousness of its impact. Researchers have identified media and journalism as some of the key actors in influencing collective action from the greater population (Berglez, Olausson, and Ots 2017; Hackett et al. 2017). Moreover, several studies have indicated that the framing within climate journalism may increase public concern and engagement (Olausson, 2009). With its importance, it is essential that climate journalism does not lose its credibility due to personal biases or agendas, possibly steering away readers.
Advocacy in Climate Journalism
Among the most noticeable ‘biases’ that occurs in climate coverage is advocacy journalism, described as “journalism where the reporter intentionally and transparently adopts a non-objective point of view usually for some social or political purpose” (Vine, 2017). While objectivity remains among the biggest guidelines for journalism, environmental reporters continue to struggle in separating their environmental values from their reporting (Fahy, 2017). Historically, journalists have struggled to find a balance in climate reporting, because “even though the overwhelming majority of the world’s experts agree that human-driven climate change is real and will have major future impacts, a minority of scientists dispute this consensus” (Fahy, 2017) shaping the climate crisis into a partisan issue that otherwise would not have been. As a result, environmental journalism has changed over time “especially as the topic moved from the scientific domain to encompass, also, the political, social, legal, and economic realms.” Consequently, when an environmental reporter does include advocacy language or environmental values in their reporting, they can easily diminish their credibility and lose the support of readers, as well as put their jobs on the line.
7
Greenpeace NZ journalist Phil Vine argues, since climate change was not initially a partisan issue when the topic gained movement in the 1960s, that mainstream media should “negotiate a new form of advocacy journalism within the environmental movement.”
“In order to stem plunging levels of credibility and adapt to the fast-changing digital environment while recognizing existing biases within traditional reporting, it may be that mainstream media needs to embrace a more inclusive attitude towards so-called ‘(advocacy) journalism,’” Vine (2017) wrote. “NGO journalists for their part should ensure that they maintain high levels of factual accuracy and fairness in their work to maintain credibility. If they are concerned about criticism from the mainstream they could perhaps look at adopting more nuanced ways of describing themselves.”
Potential Biases in Covering the Climate Crisis
As the climate crisis becomes more political, climate coverage consists of several biases, whether directly elite cues, which suggests “suggests individuals form opinions based on cues given by elites with whom they identify” (Bolin et. al, 2018) or more subtly through reinforcing spirals framework which combines selective exposure with biased assimilation, stating individuals intentionally seek out sources that reinforce their own biases (Slater 2007). According to Bolin et. al (2018), more conservative-leaning news businesses, such as Fox News, are susceptible to these frameworks than liberal-leaning organizations.
Another examples of biases in environmental journalist include blatant editorializing and topical selection, in which environmental journalists prioritize some issues more than others. For example, Amiraslani et. al (2021) anaylzed three major newspapers over a seven-year study to
8
determine trends among wildlife coverage. They found that, in 434 articles that focused on environmental news, 61 items addressed wildlife.
Research Questions
Overarching Inquiry Question: How does the news media report on climate change differently from other topics?
Central Question 1: Is there an acceptance of advocacy journalism that others would consider opinion on other beats?
o Subheading question: Can advocacy journalism and pro-environmentalist stances in climate coverage even be considered a form of bias?
o
Subheading question: How did support toward science become a bias?
o
Subheading question: Can advocacy journalism in climate coverage diminish audience’s trust in the same way it would other topics?
This question focuses on whether advocacy journalism is acceptable in climate coverage when it wouldn’t be appropriate in other places in the journalism industry. My topic hones in
9
on how climate change became such a bipartisan issue that supporting the planet’s longitude became a bias.
Central Question 2: How do the two major political sides report on the climate differently?
o Subheading question: Do they use different actions of bias in their coverage?
The answers to this question will relate back to how climate change became a bipartisan issue but also present different ways that climate coverage could slant.
Central Question 3: Does the media cover climate change equally across the industry?
o Subheading question: How do major newspapers present climate change differently?
o Subheading question: Are certain topics covered more, depending on the newspaper?
o Subheading: Does coverage vary depending on the author’s demographics, such as age and sex?
This focuses on how bias or coverage varies industry-wide.
1. The rise of the environmental journalism movement
“Many date the rise of the modern environmental movement and the beginning of modern environmental journalism in the West to Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in 1962,
10
which led to a shift in the environmental paradigm from conservation to pollution and human health risk,” (Neuzil, 2020).
2. How advocacy journalism became the norm for climate coverage
A. Advocacy journalism refers to news that aligns with a specific political ideology. In climate journalism, this primarily favors the environmentalist movement.
i. Advocacy journalism is described as “journalism where the reporter intentionally and transparently adopts a non-objective point of view usually for some social or political purpose” (Vine, 2017).
B. Objectivity and advocacy have been contentious topics within environmental journalism since the beat first originated in the 1960s (Fahy, 2017).
i. “The reporting of climate change has changed over time, especially as the topic moved from the scientific domain to encompass also the political, social, legal and economic realms. Objectivity and advocacy remain important guiding concepts for environmental journalist today, but they have been reconfigured in the digital era that has transformed climate change news,” (Fahy, 2017).
ii. In climate journalism, objectivity differs from the standard rule that requires journalists to present both sides.
iii. “Objectivity in climate reporting can be viewed as going beyond the need to present both sides of an issue to the application in reports of a journalist’s trained judgment, where reporters use their training and knowledge to interpret evidence on a climate-related topic. Objectivity can also be viewed as a transparent method for finding, verifying, and
11
communicating facts. Objectivity can also be seen as the synthesis and curation of multiple points of view,” (Fahy, 2017).
3. Common biases in journalism
Across the industry, in coverage of all beats and topics, there are many forms of biases:
A. Elite cues suggest that “individuals form opinions based on cues given by elites with whom they identify” (Bolin et. al, 2018).
B. Reinforcing spirals framework combines selective exposure with biased assimilation, stating individuals intentionally seek out sources that reinforce their own biases (Slater 2007).
According to Bolin et. al (2018), more conservative-leaning news businesses, such as Fox News, are susceptible to these frameworks than liberal-leaning organizations.
4. How the environmentalist movement became political
The polarization of climate change and global warming has increased significantly since 2000, (McCright et al, 2011).
A. “We find that liberals and Democrats are more likely to report beliefs consistent with the scientific consensus and express personal concern about global warming than are conservatives and Republicans. Further, the effects of educational attainment and selfreported understanding on global warming beliefs and concern are positive for liberals and Democrats but are weaker or negative for conservatives and Republicans. Last, significant ideological and partisan polarization has occurred on the issue of climate change over the past decade,” McCright at al, 2011).
Consequently, the politicization of climate change has increased the polarization of climate journalism.
12
A. While politicization is increasing, mentions of scientists are decreasing in climate coverage, which may indicate that scientific discourse is being replaced by political discourse.
B. “Describing trends in politicization and polarization in climate change news coverage is an important step toward understanding why and how U.S. public opinion has become increasingly polarized, despite increasing scientific consensus on the reality and anthropogenic sources of climate change,” (Chinn et al, 2020).
C. Chinn et al (2020) finds that political actors are mentioned, on average, at least once in every climate change news article since the 2000s.
D. The level of polarization appears consistent in news until 2011, when polarization in news coverage accelerates. Additionally, Republican mentions beginning to outnumber Democratic mentions in coverage.
E. Increased polarization may be driven in part by the success of Tea Party candidates in the 2010 election, who were more likely to oppose climate policy than non-Tea Party Republicans (Hamilton & Saito, 2015; Mayer & Smith, 2017). From this time, belief in climate change increasingly became a litmus test of partisan identity (McCright et al., 2014), with some conservative politicians backtracking on previous support for climate action (Childress, 2012).
F. Chinn et al (2020) found that “liberals and Democrats are more likely to report beliefs consistent with the scientific consensus and express personal concern about global warming than are conservatives and Republicans. Further, the effects of educational attainment and self-reported understanding on global warming beliefs and concern are positive for liberals and Democrats but are weaker or negative for conservatives and
13
Republicans. Last, significant ideological and partisan polarization has occurred on the issue of climate change over the past decade.”
Research Methods
The purpose of this research is to determine how objectivity and biases in climate journalism differ from coverage on other beats and topics in the U.S. news media.
In conjunction with narrative research and interpretive research, which will detail the personal experiences of climate journalists, content analysis can provide more in-depth information on long-term trends and examines the history of the issue over an extended period.
Data will focus on personal experiences and opinions of longtime climate journalists, especially as they relate to objectivity and biases. If possible, the researcher will seek out journalists who have covered other areas and beats, so the interviewees’ narratives are diverse, and they can relate to the differences in objectivity in biases between climate journalists and other journalism topics.
For this research, participants are specifically climate journalists within the Gannet corporation, which owns hundreds of newspapers around the nation. I currently have frequent conversation with environmental and climate journalists within Gannett, and several have already confirmed.
Data analysis from personal interviews will be compared to content analysis, so I can observe any trends on objectivity within climate journalism — specific to why objectivity
14
in climate journalism is more acceptable than other beats. In terms of literature and content analysis, data will focus on the history of advocacy journalism and the shift over the years through observation of historic trends as they relate to climate journalism and primary U.S. news media sources.
The researcher will diversify her sources as much as possible and will ensure that she reaches out to climate journalists of all demographics in terms of various genders, socioeconomic statuses, ethnicities and religions. It’s essential that the range of sources varies as to ensure that the research is more accurate and not incidentally skewed by source selection.
Conclusion
Researchers have identified media and journalism as some of the key actors in influencing collective action from the greater population. Moreover, several studies have indicated that the framing within climate journalism may increase public concern and engagement. With its importance, it is essential that climate journalism does not lose its credibility due to personal biases or agendas, possibly steering away readers, especially as climate change becomes a more significant issue around the globe.
15
References
Anderson, L. (2021, October 8). Media creates false balance on climate science, study shows University of California. Retrieved September 19, 2022, from https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/media-creates-false-balance-climate-sciencestudy-shows
Bolin, J.L. & Hamilton, L.C. (2018). The News You Choose: news media preferences amplify views on climate change, Environmental Politics, 27:3, 455476, DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2018.1423909
Chinn, S., Hart, P. S., & Soroka, S. (2020). Politicization and polarization in climate change news content, 1985-2017. Science Communication, 42(1), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019900290
Fahy, D. (2017). Objectivity, false balance, and advocacy in news coverage of Climate Change. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.345
16
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public's views of Global Warming, 2001–2010. The Sociological Quarterly, 52(2), 155–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x
Neuzil, M. (2020). The development of environmental journalism in the western world. Routledge Handbook of Environmental Journalism, 19–37. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351068406-3
Slater, M. D. (2007). Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory, 17(3), 281–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00296.x
Vine, P. (2017). When is a journalist not a journalist?: Negotiating a new form of advocacy journalism within the environmental movement. Pacific Journalism Review, 23(1), 4354. Retrieved September 30, 2022, from https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.959913224068625
Weeman. (2021, August 17). Majority of climate change news coverage now accurate. CIRES. Retrieved September 19, 2022, from https://cires.colorado.edu/news/majority-climatechange-news-coverage-now-accurate
17
18