How the Media Talk (or Stay Silent) About Climate. Reuters Institute Report

illustration: DALL-E

The 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