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
Information laundering. Russian propaganda returns as news from China
KFi
Russian intelligence agencies use complex tactics to mask the primary source of their harmful narratives. Patrycja Krzyśpiak from NASK details this dangerous process of information laundering in a recent report.
Health disinformation on the internet. Diagnosis from an algorithm
Katarzyna Czechowicz
Health disinformation can cause a cancer patient to see a doctor when it is too late for effective treatment. It can also undermine trust in doctors and public institutions. As a result, people may refuse to cooperate even during a real external threat, experts warn.
Feminatives are not a given. How Polish women talk about their professions
SWPS
Polish women still rarely use female job titles. This comes from the latest report by the Center for Research on Social Relations at SWPS University. Women's professional activity proved to be a significant factor in using feminatives.
See articles on a similar topic:
Milgram Experiment 2023. AI Can Encourage Violence
KrzysztoF
Researchers from SWPS University replicated the famous Milgram experiment, in which participants were instructed to inflict pain on another person under the authority’s command. This time, the authority was a robot. It’s the first study showing that people are willing to harm another person when a robot commands them to do so.
Radio Listenership in Poland 2024: Demographics, Trends, and Statistics
Krzysztof Fiedorek
Why do millions of Poles still choose radio? What drives RMF FM's dominance and Eska's surprising results? The latest "Audio Track" report from the National Media Institute reveals listenership data, demographics, and evolving trends. How does the digital revolution affect traditional stations?
Cinema in the era of algorithms and AI
Arkadiusz Murenia
Will artificial intelligence kill the creativity of filmmakers? The most honest answer is: no, AI is unlikely to kill the creativity of filmmakers, but it will very clearly change the place where this creativity manifests itself and, above all, how.
How the Media Talk (or Stay Silent) About Climate. Reuters Institute Report
Krzysztof Fiedorek
Although climate change is becoming increasingly noticeable worldwide, the media have failed to maintain growing interest in the topic. The report "Climate Change and News Audiences 2024" shows that audience engagement with climate topics has remained almost unchanged for several years.
