Climatic Change

, Volume 86, Issue 1–2, pp 1–11

Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of anthropogenic climate change, 1995–2004

Article

Abstract

Eminent climate scientists have come to consensus that human influences are significant contributors to modern global climate change. This study examines coverage of anthropogenic climate change in United States (U.S.) network television news – ABC World News Tonight, CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News – and focuses on the application of the journalistic norm of ‘balance’ in coverage from 1995 through 2004. This study also examines CNN WorldView, CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports and CNN NewsNight as illustrations of cable news coverage. Through quantitative content analysis, results show that 70% of U.S. television news segments have provided ‘balanced’ coverage regarding anthropogenic contributions to climate change vis-à-vis natural radiative forcing, and there has been a significant difference between this television coverage and scientific consensus regarding anthropogenic climate change from 1996 through 2004. Thus, by way of the institutionalized journalistic norm of balanced reporting, United States television news coverage has perpetrated an informational bias by significantly diverging from the consensus view in climate science that humans contribute to climate change. Troubles in translating this consensus in climate science have led to the appearance of amplified uncertainty and debate, also then permeating public and policy discourse.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adger WN, Benjaminsen TA, Brown K, Svarstad H (2001) Advancing a political ecology of global environmental discourses. Dev Change 32:681–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Argrawala S (1998a) Context and early origins of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Clim Change 39:605–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Argrawala S (1998b) Structural and process history of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Clim Change 39:621–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett WL (2002) News: the politics of illusion. Longman, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Boehmer-Christiansen S (1994) Global climate protection policy: the limits of scientific advice part 1. Glob Environ Change 4:140–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boykoff MT, Boykoff JM (2004) Bias as balance: global warming and the U.S. Prestige Press. Glob Environ Change 14:125–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruggers J (2006) Watchdog earth: for greens, the T.V. News Blues, July 31, available at http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/bruggers/2006_07_01_archive.html
  8. Crowley TJ (2000) Causes of climate change over the past 1000 years. Science 289:270–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunwoody S, Peters HP (1992) Mass media coverage of technological and environmental risks. Public Underst Sci 1:199–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edwards PN, Schneider SH (1997) The 1995 IPCC report: broad consensus of “scientific cleansing? Ecofables/Ecoscience 1:3–9Google Scholar
  11. Entman R (1989) Democracy without citizens: media and the decay of American politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Falkowski PR, Scholes RJ, Boyle E, Canadell J, Canfield D, Elser J, Gruber N, Hibbard K, Hogberg P, Linder S, Mackenzie FT, Moore B III, Pederson T, Rosenthal Y, Seitzinger S, Smetacek V, Steffen W (2000) The global carbon cycle: a test of our knowledge of Earth as a system. Science 290:291–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flannery T (2006) The weathermakers: how man is changing the climate and what it means for life on earth. Atlantic Monthly Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Fleming R (1998) Historical perspectives on climate change. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  15. Harris R (2006) Global warming a hot topic in congressional hearing. National Public Radio, July 20, available at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5569901
  16. Henderson-Sellers A (1998) Climate whispers: media communication about climate change. Clim Change 40:421–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Houghton JT, Meira Filho LG, Callander BA, Harris N, Kattenberg A, Maskell K (eds) (1996) Climate change 1995: the science of climate change – contribution of working group I to the second assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) (2001) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis – contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  19. Inhofe J (2003) The science of climate change. Senate Floor Statement. Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, US Senate, July 28Google Scholar
  20. Karl TR, Trenberth KE (2003) Modern global climate change. Science 302:1719–1723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mann ME, Bradley RS, Hughes MK (1998) Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries. Nature 344:779–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Leary NA, Dokken DJ, White KS (eds) (2001) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability – contribution of working group II to the IPCC third assessment report. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  23. McCright A, Dunlap R (2003) Defeating Kyoto: the conservative movement’s impact on U.S. climate change policy. Soc Probl 50:348–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Moran T (2005) At the summit meeting of the G-8. ABC World News Tonight, 6 JulyGoogle Scholar
  25. Myers J (2006) Heat wave has senator sticking to beliefs. Tulsa World, 22 JulyGoogle Scholar
  26. Nelkin D (1987) Selling science: how the press covers science and technology. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. NSF Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (2004) available at http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind04/start.htm
  28. Oreskes N (2004) The scientific consensus on climate change. Science 306:1686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pew Research Center for People and the Press Summary Report (2003) October 21, available at http://people-press.org/
  30. Pielke RA Jr, Sarewitz D (2002) Wanted: scientific leadership on climate. Issues Sci Technol 1:27–30Google Scholar
  31. Project for Excellence in Journalism (2005) The State of the News Media 2004, available at http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org
  32. Revkin AC (2005) Bush aide edited climate reports. New York Times, 8 June, A1Google Scholar
  33. Sandell C, Blakemore B (2006) Making money by feeding confusion over global warming. ABC News, 27 JulyGoogle Scholar
  34. Showstack R (2003) Climate change statement highlights human influence. Eos 84:574Google Scholar
  35. Starr P (2004) The creation of the media: political origins of modern communications. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Trumbo C (1996) Constructing climate change: claims and frames in US news coverage of an environmental issue. Public Underst Sci 5:269–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tyndall Report (2006) Tyndall Report 2005 Year in Review, available at http://www.tyndallreport.com/yearinreview.php3
  38. Weart SR (2003) The discovery of global warming. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilson KM (1995) Mass media as sources of global warming knowledge. Mass Commun Review 22:75–89Google Scholar
  40. Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies (2005) available at http://www.yale.edu/environcenter

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.James Martin 21st Century School Research Fellow, Environmental Change InstituteOxford University Centre for the EnvironmentOxfordUK
  2. 2.University of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations