Balance (Climate and Environment Coverage)
Authors: Mahl Daniela , Guenther Lars 
Published: April 2021

Balance – as a journalistic norm in the domain of climate change reporting – is measured by analyzing both coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., the existence of anthropogenic global warming) and coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., actions regarding global warming) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004).
Field of application/theoretical foundation:
Balance is a commonly investigated and internationally agreed-upon journalistic norm that ensures that journalists portray different sides of a story in a neutral and objective way (Westerståhl, 1983). In science reporting, more specifically in reporting on climate change, this journalistic norm can lead to biased reporting in that sense that journalistic coverage does not mirror the scientific understanding (i.e., climate change does exist and action is needed) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004).
References/combination with other methods of data collection: There are experimental studies that test the effects of differentially balanced news stories (e.g., Clarke et al., 2014; Dixon & Clarke, 2012), largely confirming that balanced coverage reduces confidence in a scientific consensus and heightens uncertainty of science, risks, etc.
Example studies:
Boykoff & Boykoff (2004); Boykoff (2007); Clarke (2008); Clarke et al. (2014); Dixon & Clarke (2012)
 
Information on Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004
Authors: Maxwell T. Boykoff & Jules M. Boykoff
Research question: The prevalence of the norm of balance in reporting on climate change and the degree to what this coverage’s adherence to balance led to biased coverage of both anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., its existence) and resultant action.
Object of analysis: A sample (636 articles) of the US prestige-press coverage of global warming, i.e., New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal
Time frame of analysis: between 1988 and 2002
Info about variables
Variables: Two measures of balance:
(a) Coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., existence)
(b) Coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., action)
Level of analysis: Newspaper article
Variables and values:
(a) First measure: Coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., existence)

Article only presents argument that anthropogenic global warming exists, clearly distinct from natural variations
Article presents both sides, but emphasizes that anthropogenic global warming exists, still distinct from natural variation
Article presents a balanced account of debates surrounding existence of anthropogenic global warming
Article presents both sides, but emphasizes dubious nature of the claim that anthropogenic global warming exists

(b) Second measure: Coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., action)

Dominant coverage of decisions/assertions regarding immediate/mandatory action to deal with global warming
Balanced accounts of various decisions regarding action
Dominant coverage of decisions/assertions regarding cautious/voluntary approaches to deal with global warming

Reliability: Intercoder reliability rate of 93%
Codebook: Table 1 in Boykoff & Boykoff (2004, p. 128)
 
References
Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental change 14, 125-136. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001
Boykoff, M. T. (2007). Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area 39(2), 470-481. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00769.x
Clarke, C. E. (2008). A question of balance. The autism-vaccine controversy in the British and American elite press. Science Communication 30(1), 77-107. doi: 10.1177/1075547008320262
Clarke, C. E., Dixon, G. N., Holton, A., Weberling McKeever, B. (2014). Including “evidentiary balance” in news media coverage of vaccine risk. Health Communication 30(5), 461-472. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2013.867006
Dixon, G. N., & Clarke, C. E. (2012). Heightening uncertainty around certain science: Media coverage, false balance, and the autism-vaccine controversy. Science Communication, 35(3) 358-382. doi: 10.1177/1075547012458290
Westerståhl, J. (1983). Objective News Reporting General Premises. Communication Research, 10(3), 403-424. doi: 10.1177/009365083010003007