September 2023

​

“Don’t feed the doomsday story”

​

​

Preventing post-truth tendencies by understanding a spectrum of perspectives on climate reporting and attitudes to the news media

​

​

​

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

IN/LAB is a small team on a big mission

​

• Inclusion Lab (IN/LAB), is a joint venture between Schibsted and Tinius Trust. Our mission is to prototype new(s) futures for current news outsiders. �
• We use the term news outsiders, rather than “avoiders” to highlight various groups not consuming editorial news today. We believe there are many groups whose information needs and desires the news media has not paid sufficient attention to in the past. �
• Our work is based on research and experiments, where we try to uncover user needs and prototype solutions to meet them.

Belenn Bekele�Community researcher

Molly Grönlund Müller

Community researcher

Agnes Stenbom�Head of lab

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Executive Summary

Background & Target Groups

​

​

Research Methods

Suggested Actions

Insights

01.

02.

03.

04.

05.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

​

​

Executive Summary

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Preventing post-truth tendencies by understanding a spectrum of perspectives on climate reporting

​

​

​

​

​

• Research focus - 6% of Swedes and 24% of Norwegians don’t think climate change is caused by human activities, despite strong scientific consensus. We explored if the news media can counter post-truth tendencies and prevent negative attitudes to fact-based reporting on climate change. �
• Methods - Our research in Sweden and Norway focused on the groups Known skeptics (self-identify as skeptics), possible skeptics (fit academic criteria for skepticism) and “impossible” skeptics (young people concerned about climate change). We used interviews, email conversations, guerilla research, surveys and speculative workshops to gain insights about the groups.�
• Insight summary - All groups get negative emotions from climate reporting. Known and possible skeptics think it gives youth a dark outlook on life. This strengthens Known skeptics’ already negative attitude to the news media. Possible skeptics are critical towards the news media, but for other reasons. “Impossible” skeptics request more perspectives and constructive angles and are critical of the news media’s portrayal of the climate movement.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

​

​

Background &

Target Groups

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Research motivation�

Preventing post-truth tendencies

• IPCC reports clearly show human influence on a wide range of climate characteristics. Despite this, 24% of Norwegians and 6% of Swedes are climate change skeptics, i.e. they don’t think climate change is caused by human activities. These are worrying signals of post-truth tendencies in a domain with strong scientific consensus. �
• When people don’t trust the information presented in the news media, it risks undermining trust in society, democracy and institutions. When more people turn away from news consumption it can also lead to a democratic deficit where less people are informed about current affairs. �
• We wanted to understand if there is anything editorial news media could do to counter these post-truth tendencies and prevent more people from developing a negative attitude to fact-based news reporting on climate change.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

DETACHED FROM REALITY

GROUNDED IN REALITY

YOU ARE HERE

(HOPEFULLY)

Research motivation�

Ideas that are detached from reality

• Climate skeptic ideas build on conspiracy theories and have passed the line of reality denial, i.e. the ideas are detached from what reality actually looks like.�
• Ideas like this can be harmful to the person holding the beliefs, but also to people around them and to society as a whole.�
• Some ideas can be relatively harmless, but people who believe one conspiracy theory are more likely to believe others. There is an upward pull towards what conspiracy theory researcher Abbie Richards defines as “the antisemitic point of no return”.�

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Things that characterise the climate change skeptic group

• Previous research suggest that people who are likely to disagree with global scientific consensus on climate change have low trust in state institutions and are discontent with democracy and politics overall. �
• Climate change skepticism also seems to be higher in rural areas compared to urban areas.

​

• There is an overrepresentation of men in the group, with most being above the age of 50. The group generally has a low level of education and income. They are typically critics of editorial news media and the reporting on climate change.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Working with a wide spectrum of groups

Apart from climate change skeptics, we wanted to talk to a potentially similar group and one that in theory should be the opposite of skeptics. Therefore, we focused on three groups:

​

• Known skeptics - People who self identify as skeptics and explicitly state their skepticism, e.g. through networks or blogs.

​

• Possible skeptics - People who might be on the verge of developing similar negative attitudes to news media since they fit the academic criteria for skepticism.

​

• “Impossible” skeptics - Young people who are concerned about climate change and accept climate science.

DETACHED FROM REALITY

GROUNDED IN REALITY

Line of reality denial

Known �Skeptics�

Members of networks denying climate science

Possible �Skeptics�

People fitting academic criteria for climate change skepsis

“Impossible” Skeptics�

Young (20-30) and concerned about climate change

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

The overarching questions

We were interested in understanding the groups’ news experience and causes for any negative attitudes to editorial news media. When talking to Known skeptics and Possible skeptics, we used these questions to guide our research:�

• How are facts and opinions perceived in climate reporting in the groups?
• What causes negative attitudes to news media in the groups?
• How might the news media avoid pitfalls that risk driving more people into post truth groups?�

When it came to “Impossible” skeptics, we used these questions:�

• How does climate reporting affect the group?
• What opportunities does the news media have to reach this group?
• What kind of future does the group envision for climate reporting?

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

​

​

Research Methods

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Identifying participants

​

Searching online forums and contacting organisations

• To find Known skeptics we identified and contacted people who self-identify as climate skeptics on climate skeptic online forums such as Klimatrealisterna and Klimatsans (two of the dominant climate skeptic forums in Sweden). �
• To find the “Impossible” skeptics we contacted the environmental organisation Naturskyddsföreningen that had a trainee program for people 20-30 years old, coming from different parts of Sweden with a passion for climate change issues. �
• With Possible skeptics, we used a more unusual approach. Read about it on the next page.

Image: Klimatupplysningen, a website run by the climate skeptic network Klimatrealisterna.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Identifying participants�

Standing outside gas stations in rural areas

• To find Possible skeptics we went to Åsele (Sweden) and Hurdal (Norway), municipalities that fit some of the academic criteria for climate change skepticism such as (1) rural area or small town, (2) relative low economic standard, (3) relative low education and (4) relative distrust in politics and democracy.

​

• We used a manned gas station in each municipality as basis to meet residents. Research suggests that if you don’t approve of increased fuel taxes, you are more likely to distrust the scientific evidence that motivate the taxes. Owning a car and having to drive long distances might increase the likelihood of climate skepticism*.

Hurdal

Åsele

*We need to be careful to not ascribe people traits or beliefs they haven’t expressed. We want to stress that 21% of Swedes and 31% of Norwegians in the group made clear climate skeptical statements. The findings should be read with this in mind!

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Research methods

​

Learning about the groups’ news experience

​

• With Known skeptics, we had interviews (1,5-3 hours) and email conversations (6 in total). Participants also commented on a mock-up news feed on climate change. We also analysed climate skeptic complaints on tv and radio programs from to the the Swedish Broadcasting Commission 2012-2022 (195).

​

• With Possible skeptics, we conducted guerilla research (5-15 minute interviews) with people stopping by the gas stations - in Åsele and Hurdal (35 people, 19 in Åsele, 16 in Hurdal).�
• For “Impossible” skeptics (17 people) we organised a workshop at Naturskyddsföreningen’s Stockholm office, identifying perceived problems with climate reporting and creating speculative solutions. Participants also answered a short survey before the workshop on their news experiences.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

​

​

Insights

​

Learnings are presented separately �for our three target groups:

​

​

​

​

​

Known skeptics

Possible skeptics

Impossible skeptics

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Summary of pain points for Known skeptics

�We have identified the following pain points based in the experiences and perspectives shared by the group.

Alarmist agenda

​

The group believes climate reporting is driven by an alarmist agenda where only negative, incorrect news is presented.

Dismissed by the media

​

The group wants to give feedback to the media, but feels that the media doesn’t listen to them.

Empathy for the young

​

The group is concerned for young generations and that the media gives them a dark outlook on life.

01

02

03

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 1�

Alarmist agenda

• The group believes that climate reporting is driven by an alarmist agenda where only negative (and often factually incorrect) news are presented. �
• The experienced consequences are that the alarmist agenda leads to an unfounded hysteria among the population and tax money is wasted on solving a problem that doesn’t even exist. �
• Another consequence that is highlighted is that climate reporting is distracting people from more relevant problems like mass immigration and crimes committed by terrorist groups like the Islamic State.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 1�

Quotes from participants

• “They [the news media] claim that CO2 is affecting the climate and raising the temperature. They are spreading some kind of religious fanaticism.”

​

• “Scientists are constantly launching new crisis hypotheses to attract attention. It gives people a dark perspective. It is the news media’s role to sift through the alarming news and determine if there is actual urgency.”

​

• “It is alamism, selective reporting. Photos of polar bears on ice floes and other celebrated photos do not portray reality. How they got that photo I don’t know. Perhaps they lured the polar bear out on the ice floe.”

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 2�

Dismissed by the media

• The group feels dismissed by the news media when it tries to give feedback on climate reporting. They contact journalists, editors and public agencies reviewing media content in order to present their own scientific proof, solutions and criticism. This interaction leads to a feeling of being ridiculed and belittled. �
• In the end, they believe it’s the media consumer that suffers from the dismissive attitude to the skeptic group, because the consumer won’t get correct information.

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 2�

Quotes from participants

• “The newspapers pick the side that is most in line with the general opinion. They ridicule skeptics and publish biased news.”�
• “I don’t like that we are described as ‘climate change skeptics’, it’s not the existence of climate we are skeptics towards.” �
• “So called ‘climate change skeptics’ like myself and our opinions are banned from big media. We are only shown in certain ‘surveys’, presenting us in a negative light as reactionary old men without any empathy.”�
• “The journalist speculated that we were weird people and not psychologically stable.”

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 3�

Empathy for the young

• The group feels that climate reporting is giving young generations a dark outlook on life and the future. The reporting exaggerates the climate threat and is unnecessarily negative and gloomy, claiming that the world is coming to an end due to climate change. �
• The group thinks the news media is to blame for mental health problems among the youth. They describe how young people become vegans to save the climate but end up with anorexia, and that some become so depressed by the news that they commit suicide.

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 3�

Quotes from participants

• “If it isn’t that dramatic, don’t write about it. I have talked to young people close to me and they have a very dark outlook on the world. I want them to see that the real world isn’t that bad.”

​

• “This kind of reporting reinforces the hysteria, especially among young people. Many commit suicide because these claimed threats make them panic.”

​

• “Greta [Thunberg] is acting in good faith, but she doesn’t know enough when she references the IPCC. It’s good that young people get involved but they haven’t understood the issue.”

​

• “I know a young girl who became a vegan to reduce her ‘carbon footprint’ and instead got anorexia.”

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Additional insights ��Beyond the key pain points, we learned the following from interactions with the group.

Galileo self image �

They see themselves as champions of science on a mission to expose the truth.

​

They feel that the media portrays them in a prejudice and negative way (“old men with no empathy”) because they question certain truths that the majority are seeing as given.

Science is important!

�They claim most journalists don’t understand natural science and therefore are ill equipped to scrutinise authorities like governments and the IPCC. Climate reporting could be more trustworthy if the content came straight from a scientific institution, e.g. through AI news.

We are all fanatics��They are skeptical to Schibsted and talk about the news media the same way the news media often talks about them - like uninformed fanatics. A consequence of this fanaticism is that media is in a crisis, rapidly losing readers. IN/LAB is seen as doomed to fail.

The ordinary people

​

They believe they’re better than the media at reaching “ordinary people” with their knowledge and see themselves as educators. They talk about their own group as a network of close (mostly male) friends who help each other - and ordinary people - to gain enlightenment.

​

01

02

03

04

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Summary of pain points for Possible skeptics

�We have identified the following pain points based in the experiences and perspectives shared by the group.

Most think climate news give the young negative emotions

​

Both the Norwegians and Swedes interviewed think climate reporting gives young people (and them!) negative emotions.

​

Widespread negative attitudes towards news media

​

Both groups express negative attitudes towards the news media, but for different reasons and to different extent.

All want facts, some want perspectives

​

Both groups think it is hard to know what is true about climate change and sustainability, but want different things from (future) climate reporting.

​

​

01

02

03

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• Both the Norwegians (69%) and Swedes (74%) interviewed think climate reporting gives young people (and them!) negative emotions. �
• Fear is the most commonly described (believed) feeling. Others are worry, exhaustion, resignation and hopelessness. Many think the youth feels this way because they believe the climate is changing for the worse, giving them a bleak future. �
• Few Swedes (26%) blame the media for this, but can’t think of anyone who should take responsibility. In contrast, a majority of the Norwegians (56%) think it is the media’s fault, and that the media scares young people by exaggerating the threat from climate change.

Pain point 1�

Most think climate news give the young negative emotions

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• “Everything is going to hell with the climate. What they show on the news is only negative.” (SE)�
• “I think young people feel very sad hearing from the news media that the world is ending. It's the same fear I had as a child during the Cold War - a big, imminent threat of extinction.” (SE)

​

• “Parents and schools should teach kids to handle negative climate news. It’s not the media’s fault the news is negative, but it would be good if they reported positive things too.” (SE)

​

• “It is probably overwhelming. I think youth get into the issue or shut down because they can't handle all the negative stuff.” (NO)�
• “Adults should protect kids. The media shouldn't scare people.” (NO) �

Pain point 1�

Quotes from participants

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• Both the groups in Norway and Sweden express negative attitudes towards the news media, but for different reasons and to different extent. �
• In Norway, more people express complete lack of trust in the news media specifically and disinterest in climate reporting and news in general. Many think the news media exaggerates the climate threat and Norway's responsibility to fight it.�
• In Sweden, general establishment critique (e.g. towards the state or politicians) spills over on the news media - and vice versa. The news media’s perceived lack of scrutiny towards politicians is highlighted. Many also feel misunderstood and unfairly shamed for unsustainable practices.

Pain point 2�

Widespread negative attitudes towards news media

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• “The news are just crap. Nothing would make me read them. The media is only doing it for profit. All professors who are allowed to speak are bought. They just lie and scare people for money. It's all just crap.” (NO)�
• “I don't think climate change is a problem in Norway. Much of it is exaggerated. The media must stop exaggerating the threat.” (NO)

​

• “The media is the fourth estate, they have a responsibility to scrutinize politicians, to hold their feet over the fire” (SE)�
• “We should leave the EU, they’re only making it harder for us with their environmental legislation. The media and the politicians shouldn’t listen to them so much.” (SE)

​

Pain point 2�

Quotes from participants

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• There is a shared frustration in the groups that it is difficult to know what is true about climate change and sustainability. �
• In Norway, this is expressed as a need for clear and simple facts. This comes both from those accepting and more skeptical of climate change. �
• In Sweden, the group wants to know about effects of climate change on local communities and how to live sustainably given their own circumstances and local conditions. They strongly express a need for local and regional perspectives to be recognised, understood and reported on.

​

​

Pain point 2�

All want facts, some want perspectives

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• “It’s hard with everything you have to do to be climate friendly. People in the south think we should just take the bus. They don't understand, there are no buses. At least we recycle our trash.” (SE)�
• “Environmental legislation only makes it harder for us up here, we get poorer. We try to make a living from nature, hunting and fishing, as we have always done. The media should talk about that, about our perspective.” (SE)

​

• “I want objectivity and more focus on opportunities, for example new research.” (NO)�
• “Bring in more research, now it's mostly uncritical interviews. Examine what the facts are on climate change.” (NO)�

​

​

Pain point 3�

Quotes from participants

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Summary of pain points for “Impossible” skeptics

�We have identified the following pain points based in the experiences and perspectives shared by the group.

​

A loud call for good news

�

The group gets negative emotions from climate reporting and wants more constructive news focused on inspiration, empowerment and hope.�

​

​

More perspectives are requested

�

Not all relevant perspectives are being included in climate reporting according to the group. Some actors get too little space in the news, some get too much.

The climate movement - more than blocking roads

​

The group perceives news coverage of the climate movement as unfairly negative and oversimplified, often shown as an extreme.

​

01

02

03

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• Climate reporting gives the group negative emotions and makes it hard for them to feel hopeful about the future.

​

• To address negative emotions, the group wants more constructive news stories on climate change. Constructive news to them consist of concrete solutions and more empowering, hopeful and inspirational stories on what can be done and what is already being done to combat climate change. �
• At the same time, they stress that a constructive perspective does not mean downplaying the gravity of the issue and making it easier for people to not take action. Instead, they want the news media to help visualise what a more sustainable society could look like.

​

Pain point 1

​

A loud call for good news

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 1

​

Quotes from participants

​

​

​

​

• “Climate coverage should aim to inspire rather than frighten. Clickbaits are engaging, but we should avoid feeding the doomsday story.“�
• “I think it is always good to bring up examples of positive change, people who are already improving things. It makes the task seem more doable and motivates people to get involved.” �
• “The news media needs to present a future that feels nice and sustainable so people don’t fall down in the darkness of despair. It becomes a filter towards bad things that are happening.”�
• “Climate reporting is often perceived as too advanced and complicated, yet shouldn’t be downplayed. It is a big challenge.”

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

• The group thinks all relevant perspectives are not being included in climate reporting. Scientists, experts and environmental organisations get to little space, while company and industry interests get too much. �
• A general critique against the news media is that journalists don’t scrutinize powerful actors (such as governments and companies) more thoroughly and critically when it comes to climate and sustainability. �
• The need for more nuance in discussions around climate issues is a recurring topic in the group. They believe the news media should incorporate a broader range of topics and explanations in their coverage of climate change.

Pain point 2

​

More perspectives are requested

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 2

​

Quotes from participants

​

​

• “I want more climate news, and if they [the news media] are worried that people will get tired of climate news it is because the news lack perspectives. That makes it feel repetitive.”�
• “I got very irritated when H&M’s person in charge of sustainability was interviewed last week. On the question why their emissions had increased he replied ‘because of the oversized trend’. The reporter didn’t question that. As if that was a reasonable explanation. They just let H&M get away with it.” �
• “I’m worried that climate reporting is perceived as politically biassed, but that becomes the case if reporters don’t dare to ask uncomfortable questions to those who are responsible for large emissions.” �

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 3

​

The climate movement - more than blocking roads

• The group perceives news coverage of the climate movement as unfairly negative and oversimplified. The news are seen as one sided, presenting the movement as extreme with stories of civil disobedience and activists blocking roads. �
• The news media often portrays the movement as a villain, according to the group. Activism is shown as something bad and blame is put on protesters and not on what they are protesting against. �
• A perceived consequence is that individuals and organisations get alienated, ridiculed and belittled. Also, it results in other positive and “less extreme” climate initiatives not getting the coverage they deserve.

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Pain point 3

​

Quotes from participants

​

​

• “Civil disobedience is a perfect example of how the media puts blame on them [the climate movement] and not on what they are protesting against.“�
• “The most radical actions from environmental activists are what gets attention on all the news channels. Other successful environmental projects are not getting the same attention. I guess they don’t have the same news value.”�
• “The news media feels partial in their selection of activists that they present in the news. I’m sure there are many other activists that do a good job. I wonder when we will hear about a Greta Thunberg from Bangladesh.”

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Diverse groups, but with some commonalities��Although the groups in the study are different in many ways, they still share some more broad pain points.

Experienced negative emotions

​

Climate reporting generates negative emotions among all groups, albeit for different reasons. Still, they all believe the news media presents an overly negative narrative in climate reporting. This is criticised both by those who believe in climate science and those who don’t.

Missing one’s own perspective

​

People in the groups are missing their own perspective in the news. They feel that the groups they identify with (climate skeptics, rural populations, climate activists) are shown in a bad light by the news media. This gives them a more negative attitude towards the news media.

The topic is seen as far away

​

News on climate issues are perceived as far away. More skeptical people express that climate change doesn’t concern them or their country. Those more accepting of climate science are concerned that it is shown as something happening somewhere else.

01

02

03

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

​

​

Suggested Actions

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

What can newsrooms do?

�Based on insights from the groups, previous research and validation with academic researchers, we would like to share three suggestions for broad actions newsrooms can take to address some of the key issues.

Inspire feelings of security, hope and empowerment with constructive news – a known antidote to conspiracy thinking and news avoidance.

Encourage trusting skepticism in communities with low trust, for example by communicating the news media’s values of integrity and transparency through community events or targeted campaigns.

​

Connect climate change to local contexts and focus on how climate change affects different communities and places in different ways.

Perceived lack of perspectives

Negative attitudes towards news media

Negative emotions from climate reporting

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

Questions about this report?

�

Molly Grönlund Müller

Community Researcher at IN/LAB

molly.gronlund.muller@schibsted.com

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative

References

This is a selection of relevant sources that the project has used.

​

• Oscarsson H, Strömbäck J & Jönsson E (2021). Svenska klimatförnekare in Ulrika Andersson, Anders Carlander, Marie Grusell & Patrik Öhberg (red) Ingen anledning till oro (?). Göteborg: SOM-institutet, Göteborgs universitet.
• Poortinga W, Spence A, Whitmarsh L, Capstick S, & Pidgeon N. F. (2011). Uncertain climate: An investigation into public scepticism about anthropogenic climate change.
• Douglas K et al. (2019) Understanding Conspiracy Theories.
• Schulz A (2019) Where populist citizens get the news: an investigation of news audience polarization along populist attitudes in 11 countries. Communication Monographs 86(1): 88–111.
• Lindell & Mikkelsen Båge (2022) Disconnecting from digital news: News avoidance and the ignored role of social class.
• Štětka V, Mihelj S & Tóth F (2021) The impact of news consumption on anti-immigration attitudes and populist party support in a changing media ecology. Political Communication 38(5): 539–560. DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2020.1820647.
• Damstra A et al (2021) Knowledge and the News: An Investigation of the Relation Between News Use, News Avoidance, and the Presence of (Mis)beliefs.
• Vowles K (2021) Scare-quoting climate: The rapid rise of climate denial in the Swedish far-right media ecosystem.
• Dagens Nyheter (2022) Därför vill människor inte tro på klimatörändringarna. Updated: 2022-02-07. Published: 2022-02-06.
• Peritia project (2022). Public Perceptions on Climate Change. King’s College London.
• van Prooijen J-W & Douglas K (2018) Belief in conspiracy theories: Basic principles of an emerging research domain.
• EBU News Report (2023). Climate Journalism - Between Knowledge and Impact.
• Bjärstig T et al (2022). Is large-scale wind power a problem, solution, or victim? A frame analysis of the debate in Swedish media.

​

​

A Schibsted & Tinius Trust Initiative