Advertisement

Media representational practices in the Anthropocene Era

  • Maxwell T. Boykoff
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security book series (NAPSC)

Media representational practices are vitally important to conceptions of challenges and possibilities for action to address the issue of anthropogenic climate change. They shape processes between science, policy and the public and thereby influence issues of governance and practices in our everyday lives and livelihoods in the twenty-first century. Many complex factors contribute to media representation practices: external (such as political economic challenges associated with corporate media consolidation) as well as internal influences (such as contributions from the deployment of journalistic norms). In this chapter, I touch on salient and swirling factors that contribute to how issues, events and information have often become climate ‘news’n about anthropogenic climate change. To the extent that these pressures have led to problematic representational practices, media coverage of climate change has contributed to misperceptions, misleading debates, and divergent understandings. Such practices are therefore detrimental to efforts that seek to enlarge rather than constrict the spectrum of possibility for appropriate responses to various environmental challenges.

Keywords

climate change media discourse framing representations anthropogenic 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abarbanel, A. and T. McClusky (1950). Is the world getting warmer? Saturday Evening Post 22, 23, 57: 60–63.Google Scholar
  2. AC Nielsen (2007). Global Omnibus Survey. Oxford, UK, AC Nielsen.Google Scholar
  3. Bagdikian, B. (2004). The Media Monopoly. Boston, Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London, Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, W. L. (2002). News: The Politics of Illusion. New York, Longman.Google Scholar
  6. Bord, R. J., R. E. O'Connor, and A. Fisher (2000). In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change? Public Understanding of Science 9: 205–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boykoff, M. T. (2007a). Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003–2006. Area 39(4): 470–481.Google Scholar
  8. Boykoff, M. T. (2007b). From convergence to contention: United States mass media representations of anthropogenic climate change science. Transactions of the Institute for British Geography 32(4): 477–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boykoff, M. T. (2008). The real swindle, Nature Reports Climate Change 2(2): 31–32.Google Scholar
  10. Boykoff, M. T. and J. M. Boykoff (2004). Bias as balance: Global warming and the U.S. Prestige Press. Global Environmental Change 14(2): 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boykoff, M. T. and J. M. Boykoff (2007). Climate change and journalistic norms: A case study of U.S. mass-media coverage. Geoforum 38(6): 1190–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boykoff, M. T. and S. R. Rajan (2007). Signals and noise: Mass-media coverage of climate change in the USA and the UK. European Molecular Biology Organization Reports 8(3): 1–5.Google Scholar
  13. Carvalho, A. and J. Burgess (2005). Cultural circuits of climate change in UK broadsheet newspapers, 1985–2003. Risk Analysis 25(6): 1457–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chambers, R. (1997). Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. London, ITDG PublishingGoogle Scholar
  15. Collins, H. M. and R. Evans (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science 32(2): 235–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Corbett, J. B. and J. L. Durfee (2004). Testing public (un) certainty of science: Media representations of global warming. Science Communication 26(2): 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cowen, R. (1957). Are Men Changing the Earth's Weather? Christian Science Monitor. Boston, Massachusetts, USA 13.Google Scholar
  18. Demeritt, D. (2001). The construction of global warming and the politics of science. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91(2): 307–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Doyle, G. (2002). Media Ownership: The Economics and Politics of Convergence and Concentration in the UK and European Media. London, Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Graber, D. (2000). Media Power in Politics. Washington D.C., CQ Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gupta, J. (2001). Our Simmering Planet: What to Do About Global Warming? New York, NY, Zed Books.Google Scholar
  23. IPCC (2007). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policymakers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  24. Kaempffert, W. (1956). Science in review: Warmer climate on Earth may be due to more carbon dioxide in the air. New York Times. New York: 191.Google Scholar
  25. Krosnick, J. A., A. L. Holbrook, L. Lowe, and P. S. Visser (2006). The origins and consequences of democratic citizens' policy agendas: A study of popular concern about global warming. Climatic Change 77(1): 7–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Leggett, J. K. (2001). The carbon war: Global warming and the end of the oil era. New York, Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Lorenzoni, I. and N. F. Pidgeon (2006). Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Climatic Change 77(1): 73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McChesney, R. W. (1999). Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times. Urbana and Chicago, University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  29. Miller, B. (1997). Political action and the geography of defense investment: Geographical scale and the representation of the Massachusetts Miracle. Political Geography 16: 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelkin, D. (1987). Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology. New York, W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  31. New York Times (1932). Next great deluge forecast by science. New York Times. New York: 4.Google Scholar
  32. Nisbet, M. C. and C. Mooney (2007). Framing science. Science 316(6 April): 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sarewitz, D. (2004). How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environmental Science and Policy 7: 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shabecoff, P. (1988). Global warming has begun, expert tells senate. New York Times. New York: A1.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, J., Ed. (2000). The Daily Globe: Environmental Change, the Public and the Media. London, Earthscan Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  36. Starr, P. (2004). The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications. New York, NY, Basic Books.Google Scholar
  37. Ungar, S. (2000). Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: Climate change versus the ozone hole. Public Understanding of Science 9: 297–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ungar, S. (1992). The rise and (relative) decline of global warming as a social problem. The Sociological Quarterly 33(4): 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weingart, P., A. Engels, et al. (2000). Risks of communication: Discourses on climate change in science, politics, and the mass media. Public Understanding of Science 9: 261–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilson, K. M. (1995). Mass media as sources of global warming knowledge. Mass Communications Review 22(1&2): 75–89.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maxwell T. Boykoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Environmental Change InstituteSchool of Geography and the EnvironmentOxfordUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations