On June 30, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority issued an unsurprisingly devastating ruling on West Virginia v. EPA that severely limits the Environmental Protection Agency’s power to make power plants cut the toxic pollution that is driving the climate crisis. Climate advocates and scientists have been watching this case anxiously since 2021, knowing that failing to cut fossil fuel emissions would lead to increasingly destructive climate events such as wildfires, and would hit the most vulnerable communities the hardest.
Despite the clear consequences of hamstringing the EPA, right-leaning U.S. news and politics pages on Facebook characterized its enforcement of environmental protections as regulatory overreach and inaccurately framed the ruling as a win for small government and the economy rather than what it actually is: a victory for the fossil fuel industry and its right-wing allies.
Media Matters compiled and analyzed Facebook posts about West Virginia v. EPA from U.S. news and politics pages between June 30 and July 5 and found that right-leaning pages earned more interactions on their posts during this time frame than left-leaning and ideologically nonaligned pages combined – receiving more than half of all such interactions on less than one-third of total posts about the case.
Key Findings:
- Between June 30 and July 5, right-leaning Facebook pages earned the most interactions on posts related to West Virginia v. EPA. These pages had over 338,000 interactions, accounting for 54% of total interactions on posts about the Supreme Court decision.
- Right-leaning pages produced almost 60% more posts about the case than left-leaning pages, and these right-leaning posts received nearly 71% more interactions in total.
- Out of the top 10 posts that Media Matters analyzed with the most interactions, 6 were from right-leaning pages, which often attacked the power of federal regulatory agencies that conservative media have previously villainized for enforcing lockdowns and vaccine mandates.