Meteorologists talking about climate change can have an impact, too. A recent study from July 2020 on the effectiveness of TV weathercasters reporting on the local impacts of climate change found that “watching even a brief amount of localized climate reporting (less than 6 min) delivered by TV weathercasters helps viewers develop a more accurate understanding of global climate change as a locally and personally relevant problem, and offer strong support for this promising approach to promoting enhanced public understanding of climate change through public media.” Fortunately, Jeff Berardelli of CBS and Al Roker of NBC consistently use the best science to connect climate change to real-time weather events, and they have occasionally discussed climate solutions in their segments.
Recent polling shows that a large majority of the American public want the government to do something about climate change, and that “developing sources of clean energy should be a high or very high priority.” At the global level, 64% of people “believe climate change is a global emergency.”
It’s clear that climate change is viewed as a serious threat, and the media has to do a better job of incorporating solutions into their climate reporting. It’s a shame that coverage of both climate change and climate solutions fell so much in 2020, at a time when we need it more than ever to spur the public into action to help fight for a livable planet.
Methodology
Media Matters searched transcripts in the Nexis database for ABC’s Good Morning America, World News Tonight, and This Week; CBS’ This Morning, Evening News, and Face the Nation; NBC’s Today, Nightly News, and Meet the Press; Fox Broadcasting Co.’s Fox News Sunday; and PBS’ NewsHour for any of the terms or any derivations of the terms “climate change,” “global warming,” “changing climate,” “climate warms,” “climate warming,” “warming climate,” “warmer climate,” “warming planet,” “warmer planet,” “warming globe,” “warmer globe,” “global temperatures,” “rising temperatures,” “hotter temperatures,” “climate science,” “climate scientist,” “Paris climate,” “climate accord,” “Paris accord,” “climate agreement,” “Paris agreement,” “climate deal,” “climate crisis,” “green new deal,” “climate conference,” “climate plan,” “COP 26,” “carbon emissions,” “greenhouse gases,” or “net zero” from January 1 through December 31, 2020.
We included any segment devoted to climate change, which we defined as instances when climate change was the stated topic of discussion or instances when we found “significant discussion” of climate change. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multi-topic segment discussed climate change with one another. We also included segments when network journalists or contributors -- which we defined as hosts, anchors, correspondents, or recurring guest panelists employed by the network -- substantially mentioned climate change or made a definitive statement about climate change. We defined “substantial mentions” and “definitive statements” as uninterrupted blocks of speech at least a paragraph in length by a network journalist or contributor.
We did not include instances when persons other than network journalists or contributors commented in passing on climate change without first being prompted by a network journalist or contributor; however, we did include such instances if the comment from a non-network journalist or contributor resulted in significant discussion.
We then coded the identified climate segments as including discussion or statements about climate solutions or actions when a climate segment referenced any actions, policies, regulations, or technologies intended to mitigate the effects of climate change, reduce carbon emissions, or create the political or economic environment necessary to transition away from fossil fuels.