Democrats and Republicans seem to never get along. Although that’s only the case for government policies and controversial topics right? There should be an agreement on topics that have a strong scientific consensus and objective truth, correct? Unfortunately, that is not the case. In fact, there have been consistent trends on the growing partisan divide over climate change (Dunlap, M. McCright and H. Yarosh, 2016; Guilbeault, Becker and Centola, 2018).
It is shocking how much of an impact political polarization has on climate change consensus. A recent study by Guilbeault, Becker, and Centola (2018), demonstrated how bipartisan networks amplify bias and polarization. Democrats and Republicans were shown an Arctic sea levels graph with a clear decreasing trend (Guilbeault, Becker and Centola, 2018) (Figure 1). At first, 40% of Republicans said Arctic sea-ice levels were increasing and 26% percent of Democrats were also incorrect in their interpretation. However, after removing all political affiliations and interacting in an anonymous networking system, 88% of Republicans and 86% of Democrats correctly determined that the ice levels were decreasing (Guilbeault, Becker and Centola, 2018). When there is no bias, politicians’ true opinions on climate change are immediately revealed. The great power of political framing shows how quickly political influences changed their opinions towards the same exact Arctic sea-levels graph.
Figure 1. Average Monthly Amount of Arctic Sea Ice from 1979 to 2013 (Guilbeault, Becker and Centola, 2018).
Furthermore, we can observe that from 2001 to 2010, Republicans are unsure of global warming while Democrats are more inclined to believe in its existence (Hoffman, 2012) (Figure 2). The widening gap between both parties demonstrates climate change polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, revealing a concerning issue to government-controlled environmental policies.
It seems that contradicting views around climate change are no longer about science. They usually revolve around culture, politics, and personal ideologies (Hoffman, 2012). There is a scientific consensus to climate change, however, there is still a lag behind the social consensus to each individual’s beliefs.
This is worrying to today’s political affiliations as we have many global leaders that convey their opinions through media outlets online. Approximately half of the Canadian population and over two-thirds of Americans receive the news via social media (O’Malley, 2018). Recent technological changes over the past decades have revolutionized political communications, and unfortunately, misinformation and fake news can now be easily spread. This is a difficult issue to resolve as there is little to no control within online communication regulations. We still have to respect other users’ freedom of speech on the internet, as well, journalists have to exaggerate their headlines to garner the most clicks on their article. When there is no political consensus on climate change issues and further amplification of this problem online, we face great challenges in implementing clean environmental policies. Conservatives and Republicans need to be persuaded by the scientific community about the objective truth to climate change. Urgent changes are needed and actions need to be taken as soon as possible. With the current partisan divide on climate change, we need to bring together scientists to advocate these issues and eradicate any doubts. Hopefully, with more urgency and greater awareness, we can start to close the gap between parties, improve science communication in the media, and ultimately come together in mitigating the effects of climate change.
References
Dunlap, R., M. McCright, A. and H. Yarosh, J., 2016. The Political Divide on Climate Change: Partisan Polarization Widens in the U.S. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 58, pp.4–23.
Guilbeault, D., Becker, J. and Centola, D., 2018. Social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(39), pp.9714–9719.
Hoffman, A., 2012. Climate Science as Culture War. [online] Stanford Social Innovation Review. Available at: <https://ssir.org/book_reviews/entry/climate_science_as_culture_war> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2018].
O’Malley, I., 2018. The Internet and climate change denialism. [online] Available at: <https://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/climate-change-science-knowledge-internet-online-skepticism-denial-social-media/112373> [Accessed 29 Oct. 2018].
Comments
9 Responses to “Climate Change and the Media: Political Polarization”
Hey everyone,
After coming across interesting cases of political polarization during the climate change research project, I thought this would be a cool blog post to write about. There’s a lot of bias and fake news online, and it’s even more alarming to observe political affiliations amplifying these concerns. Unfortunately, there’s still a lack of social consensus on climate change issues, and I hope that this post can help everyone understand political polarization’s implications. I would appreciate any feedback that can help improve my blog post, thanks!
Bea
Hi Bea,
This was a really interesting post! I had no idea that political affiliations could cause such a particular effect on climate change acceptance. I just have a few comments that I think might help overall:
– In your second paragraph you describe how removal of the part affiliations and associated bias caused both groups of politicians to correctly analyze the presented figure. However you haven’t really explained how the authors of that study did so. If you have the space you might want to go into a bit of detail regarding their methodology because I think it would be very useful for a reader’s understanding.
– Your second sentence in your second paragraph could be reworded to something along the lines of, “A recent study by Guilbeault, Becker and Centola (2018)….” to help with clarity.
– The first sentence of your conclusion seems like it might be a bit too far reaching. Could you maybe add a citation for this to really help support your point?
Happy editing,
Yajur
Hey Yajur,
Thank you so much for your feedback, I will make sure to note the methodology to help readers understand, change my second sentence for more clarity, and change up my first sentence or add a citation. Appreciate the feedback.
Sincerely,
Bea
Beatrice,
I really liked reading your post. If I might make a few quick suggestions:
“There should be an agreement on topics that have a strong scientific consensus and objective truth, correct? Unfortunately, that is not the case.”
In my opinion this seems a bit awkward, maybe you could reword the sentence to make it flow a bit nicer?
In the fifth paragraph, you say “This is a difficult issue to bring peace to”. Maybe consider using “resolve”, instead of “to bring peace to”.
These are just some thoughts. I really enjoyed your post, it was easy to read and you make some excellent points about the impact of social media and the difficulties for scientists to successfully convey their insights to the public. Great work!
Jessica
Hey Jessica,
Thanks so much for your feedback, I will switch my wording to “resolve” as that does flow a lot better, thank you! I will also consider revising my intro later.
Bea
Hi Beatrice,
I really loved your blog post! This topic is so important and so interesting. I loved the way you wrote it, it was easy to follow and stay engaged.
The only suggestion I really have is regarding the separation of the fourth and fifth paragraphs. I would suggest putting the last sentence of the fourth paragraph with the fifth paragraph. This is because the first sentence in the fifth paragraph builds upon the fourth paragraph. There would be more of a flow if it were together.
Overall, this blog post was definitely one of my favourites. I enjoyed reading it and I can’t wait to see your final post.
Happy editing!
Evlyn
Hey Evlyn,
I’m glad you liked my blog post! I have now merged my last two paragraphs, I do think that it flows better, thank you for your helpful suggestion.
Bea
Hi Beatrice,
I loved this blog post, as it talks about how people’s views on climate change has many societal factors. It really makes the reader think about the other factors that influence people’s views.
I just have one quick suggestion. In the 4th sentence of the 2nd paragraph, it might be better to say “…correctly determined that the ice levels were decreasing.”
This blog post was a simple concept, but one that brings light to the complexity of issues in society. Great work!
Happy editing,
Keshikaa
Hey Keshikaa,
I’m happy to hear that you enjoyed reading my blog post! I do like the flow of your suggestion better, I have now reworded it to your revision, thanks.
Bea