po polsku
illustration: DALL-EThe Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism report, developed by Dr. Waqas Ejaz, Mitali Mukherjee, and Dr. Richard Fletcher, covers research conducted in eight countries (Brazil, France, Germany, India, Japan, Pakistan, the United Kingdom, and the USA), analyzing how often residents encounter climate-related information. It turns out that half of the respondents claim to see, hear, or read climate news at least once a week. This result is almost identical to 2022 (51%) and only slightly lower than in 2023 (55%).
The United States is an exception, where interest dropped drastically - from 50% in 2023 to 34% in 2024. Researchers partially attribute this to the fact that during the data collection period, public attention was focused on the presidential elections, which effectively pushed the climate topic into the background. Meanwhile, in France, where climate change is more present in public debate, 60% of respondents follow climate news at least once a week.
Media vs. Climate Change: How and Where Do We Seek Information?
Although new technologies and social media offer access to an almost unlimited number of sources, traditional media still dominate climate communication. According to analysts from the Reuters Institute, television remains the most popular medium for delivering climate news - 31% of respondents declare that they most often encounter such information there. News portals rank second (24%), while social media comes third (19%).
In countries like India and Pakistan, the popularity of social media as a source of climate information is higher than in Europe or the USA. In India, as many as 43% of respondents admit encountering climate misinformation online - the highest among the surveyed countries.
| Most Preferred Climate Information Formats | Percentage of Respondents |
|---|---|
| Video materials (e.g., TV reports, documentaries) | 51% |
| Texts (articles, reports) | 39% |
| Visualizations (charts, infographics) | 28% |
| Audio (podcasts, radio shows) | 20% |
| Discussions and panels | 20% |
| Interactive content (quizzes, simulations) | 18% |
Interestingly, despite the variety of formats, video materials remain the most preferred - especially in countries like India, Pakistan, and Brazil, where audiovisual content outweighs textual content.
Trust in Media: Scientists at the Top, Politicians at the Bottom
Trust in climate information sources remains stable - 50% of respondents trust the media, similar to 2023. Scientists are the most trusted source of information (74%), while politicians and political parties enjoy minimal trust (25%).
Main Climate Information Sources by Trust Level:
- Scientists: 74%
- Official international institutions (e.g., UN): 60%
- Charitable organizations: 52%
- Climate activists: 45%
- News media: 50%
- Politicians and political parties: 25%
- Celebrities: 24%
Interestingly, the format of information also matters. Video materials are the most favored - 51% prefer watching video reports or documentaries, while only 39% opt for written texts. In the United Kingdom, however, texts remain the most popular.
Climate Misinformation Online: Who Is to Blame?
Although climate misinformation no longer stirs as much emotion as it did a few years ago, it remains a serious challenge. One in four respondents (25%) claims to encounter false climate change information at least once a week.
Climate misinformation remains a significant issue, particularly in countries like India, where 43% of respondents report regularly coming across false information about climate change. Interestingly, misinformation sources vary widely, with politicians and celebrities among the most frequently indicated.
| Source of Misinformation | Percentage of Respondents |
|---|---|
| Politicians and political parties | 12% |
| Governments | 11% |
| Celebrities | 10% |
| Climate activists | 10% |
| Scientists | 8% |
| International institutions | 8% |
| Energy companies | 8% |
| Friends and family | 7% |
| Charitable organizations | 6% |
| Religious leaders | 6% |
The problem is not only the emergence of false content but also its dissemination by public figures and influential groups. The high number of mentions of politicians and celebrities as misinformation sources shows that major media players are not always responsible for misleading the public.
The Future of Climate Reporting
The report "Climate Change and News Audiences 2024" shows that while climate change should be a priority topic, the media do not always manage to effectively engage audiences. Journalists often limit themselves to reporting disasters without explaining their causes and long-term consequences.
Experts emphasize the need for more engaging forms of communication that not only describe disasters but also clearly explain the complexity of the problem. Creating local content that addresses the direct impacts of climate change can help increase interest in the topic.
In the fight for audience attention, the media must rethink their approach to climate coverage. It is essential not only to report disasters but also to show how political decisions and our daily choices impact the planet. Only then will climate change become a constant topic in public debate, rather than just a short-lived alarm after the next catastrophe.
The full "Climate Change and News Audiences 2024" report is available at https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk
COMMERCIAL BREAK
New articles in section Media industry
YouTube redefines viewer engagement. Goodbye to returning viewers
KFi
As many as 30% of internet users now turn to YouTube as their main news source, and 65% consume news in video form. Now the platform is shaking things up. Reach still matters, but engagement is what really counts.
Influencers and social video rule information. Digital News Report 2025
Krzysztof Fiedorek
Seconds of vertical clips set the future of news. TikTok, YouTube and an army of influencers pull viewers away from TV sets and newspaper pages. Whoever masters this new pulse seizes not only attention but also control of the story.
Cyberviolence and hate disguised as a joke. The RAYUELA report on youth
Krzysztof Fiedorek
The study conducted in five countries reveals a harsh truth. Online violence is not evenly distributed. It is a digital map of prejudice that hurts the most those who stand out the most. "It’s just a joke." That’s how violence often begins. Young people go through it in silence.
See articles on a similar topic:
How do we assess news credibility? Data analysis from 40 countries
Krzysztof Fiedorek
Are people defenseless against false information? Do they really fall for clickbait and fake news? A meta-analysis of 67 studies involving 200,000 people shows the problem is different than we thought. Instead of excessive gullibility, we are dealing with the opposite.
Russian Propaganda. Debunk.org Report on Moscow's Disinformation Scale
BARD, PAP Mediaroom
In 2022, the Russian Federation allocated approximately 143 billion rubles to mass media (equivalent to 1.9 billion US dollars), exceeding the planned budget by 25%. For the current year, the Kremlin's budget for this sector is set at 119.2 billion rubles (1.6 billion dollars).
Disinformation and Fake News. Experts Discuss Challenges for Journalists
RINF
The pandemic, followed by the war in Ukraine, triggered a massive wave of disinformation in media and social channels. Experts at the Impact’22 Congress in Poznań and the European Economic Congress in Katowice discussed effective strategies to combat disinformation.
Deepfake Blurs Truth and Falsehood. Human Perception Research
KFi
Studies indicate that only 60% of deepfake images can be correctly identified by humans. As AI begins to dominate content production, the problem of differentiation fatigue grows – users lose confidence in assessing the authenticity of information and fall into cynicism.
