IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v11y2023i1p278-292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Between Calls for Action and Narratives of Denial: Climate Change Attention Structures on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Hendrik Meyer

    (Department of Journalism and Communication Studies, University of Hamburg, Germany)

  • Amelia Katelin Peach

    (Department of Journalism and Communication Studies, University of Hamburg, Germany)

  • Lars Guenther

    (Department of Journalism and Communication Studies, University of Hamburg, Germany)

  • Hadas Emma Kedar

    (Department of Journalism and Communication Studies, University of Hamburg, Germany)

  • Michael Brüggemann

    (Department of Journalism and Communication Studies, University of Hamburg, Germany)

Abstract

The threats posed to society by climate change often fail to become priorities for voters and policymakers. Nevertheless, it has been shown that merely paying online attention to climate change can increase the perceived severity of the associated risks and thus encourage climate action. Therefore, we focus on public discourse on Twitter to explore the interplay of “triggers” and discursive features that stimulate attention to climate change. We collected data from 2017 to 2021, identified each year’s top five “peak” events of climate attention, and applied manual content ( N = 2,500) and automated network analyses ( N = ~17,000,000). The results show that while specific events and actors may not trigger and maintain attention permanently, there are discursive features (types of domains, discourses, users, and networks) that continuously shape attention to climate change. Debates are highly politicized and often call for action, criticize administrations, stress negative future scenarios, and controversially debate over the reality of climate change. Attention thereby is amplified within hybrid discourses which merge different triggers, being dominated by political, cultural, and journalistic media accounts: Political events trigger posts that stress the reality of climate change, whereas tweets on protests and cultural events are amplified if they call for action. However, antagonism and backlashes to such posts are essential features of the peaks investigated. Accordingly, attention is often connected to controversial debates regarding focusing events, polarizing figures (such as Greta Thunberg or Donald Trump), and the formation of counter-public networks. Which content is amplified highly depends on the subnetworks that users are situated in.

Suggested Citation

  • Hendrik Meyer & Amelia Katelin Peach & Lars Guenther & Hadas Emma Kedar & Michael Brüggemann, 2023. "Between Calls for Action and Narratives of Denial: Climate Change Attention Structures on Twitter," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 278-292.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v11:y:2023:i:1:p:278-292
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v11i1.6111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/6111
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v11i1.6111?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Brulle & Jason Carmichael & J. Jenkins, 2012. "Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 169-188, September.
    2. Ines Lörcher & Irene Neverla, 2015. "The Dynamics of Issue Attention in Online Communication on Climate Change," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 17-33.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hendrik Meyer & Amelia Katelin Peach & Lars Guenther & Hadas Emma Kedar & Michael Brüggemann, 2023. "Between Calls for Action and Narratives of Denial: Climate Change Attention Structures on Twitter," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 278-292.
    2. Shelley Boulianne & Mireille Lalancette & David Ilkiw, 2020. "“School Strike 4 Climate”: Social Media and the International Youth Protest on Climate Change," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 208-218.
    3. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    4. Jeremiah Bohr, 2017. "Is it hot in here or is it just me? Temperature anomalies and political polarization over global warming in the American public," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 271-285, May.
    5. Lackner, Teresa & Fierro, Luca E. & Mellacher, Patrick, 2025. "Opinion dynamics meet agent-based climate economics: An integrated analysis of carbon taxation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    6. Prieur, Fabien & Zou, Benteng, 2018. "Climate politics: How public persuasion affects the trade-off between environmental and economic performance," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 63-72.
    7. Latré, Edwin & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter, 2017. "Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 124-133.
    8. Bramoullé, Yann & Orset, Caroline, 2018. "Manufacturing doubt," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 119-133.
    9. Marino, Maria & Iacono, Roberto & Mollerstrom, Johanna, 2024. "(Mis-)Perceptions, information, and political polarization: A survey and a systematic literature review," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    10. Clarke, Christopher E. & Evensen, Darrick T.N., 2023. "Attention to news media coverage of unconventional oil/gas development impacts: Exploring psychological antecedents and effects on issue support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    11. David M. Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles H. Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    12. Hoppe, Janna & Tröndle, Tim & Patt, Anthony, 2025. "“I didn't like them from the beginning, and I hate them now.” Changes in attitudes towards electric vehicles and phase-out policies for conventional cars," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    13. Adam Wilke & Lois Morton, 2015. "Climatologists’ patterns of conveying climate science to the agricultural community," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(1), pages 99-110, March.
    14. Saatvika Rai, 2020. "Policy Adoption and Policy Intensity: Emergence of Climate Adaptation Planning in U.S. States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 444-463, July.
    15. Sisco, Matthew R. & Bosetti, Valentina & Weber, Elke U., "undated". "Do Extreme Weather Events Generate Attention to Climate Change?," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 244330, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    16. Artur Pawłowski & Paweł Rydzewski, 2024. "Pathways to Carbon Neutrality: Integrating Energy Strategies, Policy, and Public Perception in the Face of Climate Change—A Global Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-31, November.
    17. Kelly S. Fielding & Matthew J. Hornsey & Ha Anh Thai & Li Li Toh, 2020. "Using ingroup messengers and ingroup values to promote climate change policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 181-199, January.
    18. Adelle Thomas & Lisa Benjamin, 2018. "Perceptions of climate change risk in The Bahamas," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(1), pages 63-72, March.
    19. repec:rim:rimwps:20-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2016. "Public Awareness of the Scientific Consensus on Climate," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(4), pages 21582440166, November.
    21. Anderson, Brilé & Bernauer, Thomas, 2016. "How much carbon offsetting and where? Implications of efficiency, effectiveness, and ethicality considerations for public opinion formation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 387-395.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v11:y:2023:i:1:p:278-292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.