What’s the Rush? Reacting to a Slow-Moving Disaster

  • Susanna Priest
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Media and Environmental Communication book series (PSMEC)


Even when people accept the existence and causes of climate change, there seems to be little collective will to address it. Human beings are a unique species and we have been successful in overcoming many serious problems confronting us, including some major environmental problems. However, not just political obstacles but important psychological and social barriers seem to have prevented major action on climate in the United States to date. It is difficult for people to accept that the Earth can actually change and become irreversibly less hospitable. Society is not a self-correcting system and powerful interests encourage “skeptical” thinking on the issue of climate. Both our social environment—the perceived “climate” of public opinion—and our changing media system influence our perspectives.


Climate Change Collective Action Public Opinion Cognitive Dissonance Scientific Consensus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Allgaier, J.2013. On the Shoulders of YouTube: Science in Music Videos. Science Communication 35(2): 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bamberg, S., and G. Möser.2007. Twenty Years After Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A New Meta-Analysis of Psycho-Social Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology 27(1): 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, U. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Boykoff, M.T., and J.M. Boykoff.2004. Balance as Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press. Global Environmental Change 14(2): 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carey, J. 2011. Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather is a Product of Climate Change. Scientific America, June 28.
  6. Carson, R.1962. Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  7. Carvalho, A., and T.R. Peterson.2012. Climate Change Politics: Communication and Public Engagement. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.Google Scholar
  8. Festinger, L. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Gandy, O.H.1982. Beyond Agenda Setting: Information Subsidies and Public Policy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  10. Griffin, E. 2008. A First Look at Communication Theory. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill. Also available online at
  11. Lorenzoni, I., S. Nicholson-Cole, and L. Whitmarsh.2007. Barriers Perceived to Engaging with Climate Change Among the U.K. Public and Their Policy Implications. Global Environmental Change 17: 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. O’Neill, S., and S. Nicholson-Cole.2009. Fear Won’t Do It”: Promoting Positive Engagement with Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations. Science Communication 30(3): 355–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Priest, S., H. Bonfadelli, and M. Rusanen.2003. The “Trust Gap” Hypothesis: Predicting Support for Biotechnology Across National Cultures as a Function of Trust in Actors. Risk Analysis 23(4): 751–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shanahan, J., and M. Morgan. 1999. Television and Its Viewers: Cultivation Theory and Research. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Shanahan, M. 2007. Talking About a Revolution: Climate Change and the Media. International Institute for Environment and Development, December.
  16. Taylor, K., S. Priest, H. Fussell, S. Banning, and K. Campbell.2009. Reading Hurricane Katrina: Information Sources and Decision-Making in Response to a Natural Disaster. Social Epistemology 23(3–4): 361–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Yang, J., and L. Kahlor.2013. What, Me Worry? The Role of Affect in Information Seeking and Avoidance. Science Communication 35(2): 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanna Priest
    • 1
  1. 1.Camano IslandUSA

Personalised recommendations