Public Perception & the Planet: Correlation between College Students’ Media Exposure to Contradictory News and Their Perceptions of Climate Change

Public perception of global warming can be defined by a combination of factors, including certainty that most scientists think global warming is happening, certainty about the human causes of global warming, certainty about the occurrence of global warming, and concern about global warming impact (Feldman, Maibach, Roser-Renouf, & Leiserowitz, 2012). The media plays a critical role in communicating scientific findings to the public and can create an informational bias by providing coverage on viewpoints that do not align with the scientific consensus on climate change. The purpose of this project was to examine if there is a correlation between college students’ perceived exposure to conflicting media coverage of climate change and their perceptions of the issue. Understanding how college students perceive the issue is particularly important because this group is vulnerable to misconceptions about the issue and distinctive challenges are associated with changing their attitudes on socio-scientific issues such as climate change. Through an anonymous survey of 132 undergraduate students, this study found that there is a significant correlation between college students’ perceived exposure to contradictory media coverage and certainty that most scientists think global warming is happening, along with certainty about the human causes of climate change. This provides an understanding as to which aspects of climate change the media may have more influence in shaping through environmental communication. PUBLIC PERCEPTION & THE PLANET 5 Introduction Climate change is a significant and pressing issue facing society today that guarantees negative consequences for individuals and populations around the globe. Not only does the scientific community largely acknowledge this problem, but more than 97% of climate scientists endorse the consensus that human activity contributes to climate change (Cook et al., 2013). With this large majority of experts in agreement, many scientists are now taking a serious look at how severely and quickly consequences will arise, such as the spread of disease and an increased frequency of extreme weather events (Jones, 2014). Although the scientific community has developed an overall consensus about the severity of climate change, the general public is less concerned. Research has shown that even with very high public awareness, the issue remains a low priority for a majority of people (Whitmarsh, 2011). This lack of concern about climate change suggests a failure within environmental communication practices. Environmental communication is directly tied to the media, as most individuals learn about current science-related topics from the media rather than scientific experts (Feldman, 2016). Within school settings, along with exposure to the topic in the media, students associate global climate change with misconceptions, such as being unable to identify the difference between weather and climate, attributing reduced amounts of stratospheric ozone as the main cause for rising global temperatures, and correlating unlinked pollution effects to climate change (Lombardi & Sinatra, 2010). Furthermore, the relationship between environmental communication and the media is important because the media has been shown to be able to influence the public’s perception of climate change (Pasquaré & Oppizzi, 2012). Public perception of global warming can be defined by five factors, including “the perception of scientific agreement on global warming, belief in the human causes of global PUBLIC PERCEPTION & THE PLANET 6 warming, certainty that global warming is happening, concern about the impact of global warming, and the valence of expectations regarding the outcomes of taking action on global warming” (Feldman, Maibach, Roser-Renouf, & Leiserowitz, 2012, p. 16). These five beliefs can be used in combination as an indicator of global warming acceptance (Feldman et al., 2012). This indication can therefore suggest an overall perception of global warming. Climate change is difficult for individuals to understand due to the issue and its potential effects being unobtrusive and complex (Schäfer & Schlichting, 2014). The media has long held an important position in delivering climate change information to the public, with scientists understanding the significance of the media in this role (Schäfer & Schlichting, 2014). Presenting information about climate change through frames is one way the media is able to exert their influence. Specific frames that can connect to an underlying belief already held by the audience are more likely to be effective (Nisbet, 2009). Framing environmental issues impacts how different populations think about changes in the environment by presenting information in a manner that highlights some components as more important than others (Pasquaré & Oppizzi, 2012). For example, this type of targeted framing is demonstrated by scientists highlighting religious and moral components of climate chance in an effort to convince religious leaders that the topic is inherently connected to their faith and communities (Nisbet, 2009). Similarly, if a new government regulation is proposed, advocates may frame the issue by emphasizing potential environmental disasters that can result from climate change, while those opposed to the regulation may frame the issue by focusing on the possible economic costs of the regulation (Nisbet, Hart, Myers, & Ellithorpe, 2013). Due to the power the media holds in this regard, it is important to gain insights and develop an understanding of environmental communication and examine if exposure to conflicting media frames is correlated with the PUBLIC PERCEPTION & THE PLANET 7 public’s perception regarding climate change. An example of conflicting news can come from the overall tone of the broadcast. This is demonstrated by Fox News being dismissive of climate change in almost 60 percent of their reports, while CNN and MSNBC reports are accepting of climate change in more than 70 percent of the stations’ broadcasts (Feldman et al., 2012). The current research seeks to examine if there is a correlation between college students’ perception of global warming and perceived exposure to conflicting media frames on the issue. The current research is novel because it specifically focuses on college students’ perception of climate change. There is a dearth of research on this subject, especially when compared to the amount of time that climate change has been a focus of scientific research (Lombardi & Sinatra, 2012). It is significant to understand college students’ perception of climate change, as this population is vulnerable to unique challenges, such as having difficulty conceptualizing the issue, due to limited knowledge or misconceptions (Sinatra, Kardash, Taasoobshirazi, & Lombardi, 2012). Today’s conflicting media frames about climate change could lead to increased misconceptions for students and impact how they view the issue. Additionally, these misunderstandings are important to recognize because citizens reach voting age during their college years and develop news consumption and voting patterns that they may carry out throughout their lifetime (Diddi & LaRose, 2006). There are 69.2 million millennial individuals of voting age in the United States and just fewer than 69.7 million Baby Boomers who are eligible to vote, with the former having the ability to meaningfully impact the results of an election (Kinery, 2016). College students’ perception of today’s current issues, such as climate change, which may be related to the media messages they consume, could potentially impact their voting behavior. By specifically investigating the connection between environmental PUBLIC PERCEPTION & THE PLANET 8 communication and college students’ perception of climate change, this project serves as a basis to gaining an understanding about the correlation between perceptions of climate change and perceived exposure to conflicting media coverage of the issue. Literature Review News Media Coverage of Climate Change The media uses agenda setting to provide more or less coverage of a debated topic (McQuail, 2010). In this process, conflicting opinions within the public and plans by influential politicians exist and those with different viewpoints compete to highlight the prominence of the issue they deem important (McQuail, 2010). Pressure stemming from high-ranking politicians, public opinion, and real-world events contribute to how the media determines the amount of coverage that will be allotted to each issue (McQuail, 2010). Evidence has suggested that agenda-setting is a function of the mass media, based on individuals and the media having the same definition of what is significant (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). The ability to influence agenda setting provides the news media with significant power in drawing the public’s attention to specific topics. However, the media’s power does not stop at agenda setting. Instead, the power is expanded by frames. Frames must “be considered schemes for both presenting and comprehending news” (Scheufele, 1999, p. 106). Furthermore, media frames are “a central organizing idea, or story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip of events, weaving a connection among them. The frame suggests what the controversy is about, the essence of the issue” (Gamson & Modigliani, 1987, p. 143). Events are perceived by primary frameworks, with these frameworks fostering a way to describe the event (Goffman, 1974). Media framing can be broken down into a process model with input, processes, and outcomes. Organizational pressures PUBLIC PERCEPTION & THE PLANET 9 and ideologies act as inputs, frame building serves as the process, and the outcome results in the media frame (Scheufele, 1999). Frames are important, particularly with policy issues, because they shape public opinion and impact behavioral intentions in individuals (Wiest, Raymond, & Clawson, 2015). Recogniz