• Laurence L. DelinaEmail author


Interacting is a shorthand for activists reaching out to a large proportion of the population. Numbers remain imperative for effective mobilisation; thus, interactions between people of like minds and other commonalities remain an imperative for climate actions. With low media attention and unfriendly media stance over climate issues, this chapter asks how do contemporary action groups achieve effective public communication, how can these strategies be translated into climate actions, what are the strengths and limitations of new media, and how do contemporary action groups use them effectively. Furthermore, the chapter asks how can face-to-face interactions be balanced with the strategic use of social media alongside deliberative exercises.


Climate communication Media Social media Deliberation 


  1. Agyeman, J., Doppelt, B., Lynn, K., & Hatic, H. (2007). The climate-justice link: Communicating risk with low-income and minority audiences. In S. C. Moser & L. Dilling (Eds.), Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change (pp. 119–138). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bacon, W. (2013). Climate Science in Australian Newspapers. Sydney, Australia: The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism.Google Scholar
  3. Bacon, W., & Nash, C. (2012). Playing the media game: The relative (in)visibility of coal industry interests in media reporting of coal as a climate change issue in Australia. Journalism Studies, 13, 243–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bostrom, A., Böhm, G., & O’Connor, R. E. (2013). Targeting and tailoring climate change communications. WIREs Climate Change, 4, 447–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14, 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carson, L. (2010, September 9). Growing up politically: Conducting a national conversation on climate change. Australian Policy Online.
  7. Carson, L. (2011). Dilemmas, disasters and deliberative democracy: Getting the public back into policy. Griffith Review Edition 32: Wicked Problems, Exquisite Dilemmas, 32(Winter), 25–32.Google Scholar
  8. Chenoweth, E., & Stephan, M. J. (2011). Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Chomsky, N. (2012). Occupy. New York: Zuccotti Park Press.Google Scholar
  10. Delina, L., Diesendorf, M., & Merson, J. (2014). Strengthening the climate action movement: Strategies from histories. Carbon Management 5, 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Democracy Now! (2014, September 21). Special 3-Hour Broadcast of the People’s Climate March.
  12. Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Dryzek, J. (2009). Democratization as deliberative capacity building. Comparative Political Studies, 42, 1379–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dunlap, R. E., & McCright, A. M. (2011). Organized climate change denial. In J. S. Dryzek, R. B. Norgaard, & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society (pp. 144–160). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Featherstone, H., Weitkamp, E., Ling, K., & Burnett, F. (2009). Defining issue-based publics for public engagement: Climate change as a case study. Public Understanding of Science, 18, 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feldman, L., Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2011). Climate on cable: The nature and impact of global warming coverage on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. The International Journal of Press/Politics 17, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fung, A. (2008). Democratizing the policy process. In R. Goodin, M. Rein, & M. Moran (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy (pp. 669–688). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jasanoff, S. (2004). Science and citizenship: A new synergy. Science and Public Policy, 31, 90–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson T. (2014). Sunday News Shows Ignore Historic Climate March. Media Matters for America.
  21. Karagiannopoulos, V. (2012). The role of the internet in political struggles: Some conclusions from Iran and Egypt. New Political Science, 34, 151–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kurzman, C. (1996). Structural opportunity and perceived opportunity in social movement theory: The Iranian Revolution of 1979. American Sociological Review 61, 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kurzman, C. (2012). The Arab Spring: Ideals of the Iranian Green Movement, methods of the Iranian Revolution. International Journal of Middle East Studies 44, 162–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., & Roser-Renouf, C. (2009). Global Warming’s ‘Six Americas’ 2009: An Audience Segmentation Analysis. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change: School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University; Fairfax, VA: Center for Climate Change Communication and George Mason University.Google Scholar
  25. Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., et al. (2012). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. Parkinson & J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale (pp. 1–26). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. McCauley, D., Rehner, R. W. M., & Pavlenko, M. (2015). Assessing the justice implications of energy infrastructural development in the Arctic. In R. J. Heffron & G. Little (Eds.), Delivering Energy Law and Policy in the EU and US. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Mirkinson, J. (2014, September 22). TV news misses yet another opportunity to cover climate change. The Huffington Post.
  28. Moser, S. C. (2007a). Communication strategies to mobilize the climate movement. In J. Isham & S. Waage (Eds.), Ignition: What You Can Do to Fight Global Warming and Spark a Movement (pp. 73–95). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  29. Moser, S. C. (2007b). In the long shadows of inaction: The quiet building of a climate protection movement in the United States. Global Environmental Politics, 7, 124–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moyer, B., McAllister, J., Finley, M. L., & Soifer, S. (2001). Doing Democracy: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Munteanu, I. (2009). Moldova’s “Twitter revolution”. Journal of Democracy, 20, 136–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nagda, B. R. A. (2006). Breaking barriers, crossing borders, building bridges: Communication processes in intergroup dialogues. Journal of Social Issues, 62, 553–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Niemeyer, S., & Jennstål, J. (2018). Scaling up deliberative effects—Applying lessons of minipublics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Orr, D. W. (2013). Governance in the long emergency. In E. Assadourian & T. Prugh (Eds.), State of the World 2013: Is Sustainability Still Possible? (pp. 279–291). Washington, DC; Covelo; and London, UK: Island Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. People’s Climate March. (2014). Wrap Up.
  36. Schlosberg, D., & Dryzek, J. S. (2002). Digital democracy: Authentic or virtual? Organization & Environment, 15, 332–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere and political change. Foreign Affairs, 90, 28–41.Google Scholar
  38. Slaughter, A.-M. (2005). A New World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Stepanova, E. (2011). The role of information communication technologies in the “Arab Spring”: Implications beyond the region. Washington, DC: PONARS Eurasia, the George Washington University, and Elliott School of International Affairs.
  40. Stirling, A. (2008). ‘Opening up’ and ‘closing down’: Power, participation and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 33, 262–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Suarez, S. L. (2006). Mobile democracy: Text messages, voter turnout and the 2004 Spanish general election. Representation, 42, 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thomas, T. (2013, December 19). A room full of eco-idiots. The Daily Telegraph.
  43. Weber, T. (1997). On the Salt March. New Delhi, India: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range FutureBoston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations