Stuck In Denial versus Moving With Science: Climate Change Discourses and the Influence of the Denial Machine on Left and Right News Media

Fossil fuel industry giants in the United States like ExxonMobil sponsor contrarian science to distort the public image of the (virtually non-existing) debate on whether anthropogenic global warming exists. The efforts of this so-called ―Denial Machine‖ seem to bear fruit: despite scientific consensus, Americans remain divided on the issue of anthropogenic climate change. Liberal Democrats are more likely to follow the consensus view (79% believes the planet is warming mostly due to human activity), whereas only 15% of the Conservative Republicans supposes this to be the case. Dunlap and McCright argue that conservative media outlets function as an echo chamber for the contrarian voices of this Denial Machine. Liisa Antilla argues that the conservative media is not the only side responsible for this echoing—in their quest for ―journalistic balance,‖ mainstream and progressive news outlets (including the New York Times) have also presented contrarian voices as ―experts‖ in the past....Show moreFossil fuel industry giants in the United States like ExxonMobil sponsor contrarian science to distort the public image of the (virtually non-existing) debate on whether anthropogenic global warming exists. The efforts of this so-called ―Denial Machine‖ seem to bear fruit: despite scientific consensus, Americans remain divided on the issue of anthropogenic climate change. Liberal Democrats are more likely to follow the consensus view (79% believes the planet is warming mostly due to human activity), whereas only 15% of the Conservative Republicans supposes this to be the case. Dunlap and McCright argue that conservative media outlets function as an echo chamber for the contrarian voices of this Denial Machine. Liisa Antilla argues that the conservative media is not the only side responsible for this echoing—in their quest for ―journalistic balance,‖ mainstream and progressive news outlets (including the New York Times) have also presented contrarian voices as ―experts‖ in the past. With these insights in mind, this study maps the climate change discourses and source-use of two opposing poles in the U.S. media landscape in the months prior to Trump‘s election: the New York Times on the Liberal Democrat side; news weblog Breitbart on the Conservative Republican side. The results show that these opposing poles conduct their climate change reporting on completely different levels: while the conservative Breitbart seems stuck in denial, hence condemned to the debate-level, the liberal Times has passed this level by accepting consensus and focusing its reporting on the consequences of climate change. In addition, this study also concludes that the Times no longer functions as an echo chamber for contrarian voices for the sake of journalistic balance, while Breitbart, by giving pseudo scientists space to directly publish on their platform regularly, not only functions as echo chamber, but also as the vocal cords of contrarian voices.Show less

Leiden University Student Repository

Documents

In Collections

Stuck In Denial versus Moving With Science: Climate Change Discourses and the Influence of the Denial Machine on Left and Right News Media