Mediating Public Science: Experts, Politics, and Climate Change in the News Media in Canada
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MEDIATING PUBLIC SCIENCE: EXPERTS, POLITICS, AND CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE NEWS MEDIA IN CANADA BERNHARD ISOPP A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STUDIES YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO October 2018 © Bernhard Isopp, 2018 Abstract This project offers a reconstructionist science and technology studies (STS) analysis of climate change coverage in three Canadian newspapers, the Globe and Mail, the National Post, and the Toronto Star from 2006 to 2013. It employs a combination of framing, critical discourse, and philosophical analyses to address two core questions: (1) Why has climate change been represented in these newspapers in the ways it has? (2) What effects have these newspapers had in shaping issues of climate change? These broad inquiries are organised by a set of six more specific conceptual concerns stemming from STS: i) How do scientists relate, engage, and compete with other actors in influencing climate change coverage? ii) To what extent can these newspapers be understood as a site of scientific practice, communication, and knowledge production? iii) What broader social, political, and economic factors are linked to the competing representations of climate change and actor coalitions that emerge in these newspapers? iv) What broader images, ideologies, and philosophies of science and scientists shape and emerge from these media discourses? v) What do STS conceptions of scientific rhetoric suggest about these discourses? vi) How is the authority of science and scientists established, affected, challenged, and undermined through and by all these interacting influences and processes? While the answers to these questions are multifaceted, the authority of science is a culminating theme. Here there is ambivalence: concerned and sceptical voices in these newspapers accuse each other of politicisation, while appealing to the authority of objective, apolitical science to bolster their positions. A paradox appears in that the more fervent the appeal to unpoliticised science, the more the politicisation of science is on display. A normative suggestion is offered: the discourses found in these newspapers all involve rhetorical, ideological, authority-seeking, and thoroughly political appeals to science, thus undermining any hope of grounding responses to climate change in science that is free from politics. But they are not all equivalent: some offer a means to sincere and accountable public deliberations involving scientific knowledge, and thus are preferable for addressing climate change. ii For Auguste iii Acknowledgements This work and the PhD degree it fulfills would not have been possible without the support of many people. Thank you to Colin Duncan, Jeffrey Brison, and Marguerite Van Die for serving as mentors in my undergraduate and encouraging me to continue my studies at the graduate level. Thank you to Joan Steigerwald for helping me to focus this project in its fledgling stages during my Master’s. Thank you to Bernie Lightman, Aryn Martin, Jagdish Hattiangadi, Kenton Kroker, and Kean Birch for your work as graduate program directors and helping to get our STS programme off the ground. Thank you to my colleagues from the first PhD cohort who also did their part in establishing our graduate programme. Thanks to Cameron Murray and Jenna Mariash for all the NYE parties. Thank you to Jordan Bimm for your friendship and enthusiasm for scholarship. Thank you to Ali McMillan for the many late nights we spent discussing our work and other philosophical matters, these conversations were as valuable as any course. Thank you to Katey Anderson for being a part of my committee, your helpful comments, and the courses I was fortunate enough to take with you. Thank you to Jamie Elwick for being a tireless, thoughtful, and constructive proof-reader and being a model of collegiality. A special thank you to Steve Alsop for your mentorship and setting such a fine example as a scholar – one who is sagacious, reflective, earnest, curious, generous, and humble. I will miss our chats dearly. And finally, I owe an immense debt of gratitude to my wife, Alanna, without whom, this work would literally not have been possible. Thank you for helping me work out ideas, giving me invaluable feedback, joining me at the library, attending conferences with me, bringing me breakfast, and all the other little and large acts of unconditional love and support. iv Table of Contents Abstract ii Dedication iii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents v List of Tables vii List of Figures viii Preface ix 1 Why do an STS Study of Climate Change in the Canadian Media? 1 1.1 Understanding Climate Change in the Media Through STS 3 1.2 Central Arguments 9 1.3 The Potential of Reconstructionist STS 10 1.4 The Project at a Glance 12 2 Literature Review: Between STS and Media Studies 16 2.1 The Many Factors Shaping Climate Change in the Media 17 2.2 Constructionism, Symmetry, and Normativity 24 2.3 Scientists in the Media 32 3 Trends, Framings, and Critical Discourse Moments in Canadian Climate Change Newspaper Coverage 37 3.1 Methods 39 3.2 Coverage Trends 50 3.3 Reporting Cycles 56 3.4 An Inconvenient Truth, AR4, Copenhagen, and “Climategate,” as Critical Discourse Moments 57 3.5 Scientific Framings 67 3.6 Framing Groupings: Policy, Business, and Industry 69 3.7 Predominance of Political Framings 71 3.8 Conclusions: Politicised Coverage? 74 4 The Politicisation of Climate Change in the Canadian News Media 76 4.1 Misrepresentation as Politicisation 79 4.2 Periodisation as Politicisation 82 4.3 Commentary as Politicisation 87 4.4 Concern and Scepticism 92 4.5 The IPCC and the Politicisation of Science 103 4.6 Sound vs. Politicised Science 108 4.7 Consensus and Epistemic Standards 110 4.8 Assessing Accuracy and Defining Debate 116 4.9 Sincere Scepticism? 122 4.10 Conclusions: The Politicisation of Climate Change Scepticism 126 5 Who Speaks for Climate Science?: The Contested Authority of Climate Scientists 130 v 5.1 Methods and Theoretical Issues 131 5.2 The Decline of Scientists and a Diversity of Claims-Makers 133 5.3 Discursive Competition 137 5.4 Authorised Speakers and the Authority of Science 142 5.5 “Dueling” Claims-Makers, “Balance,” and Climate Change “Debates” 145 5.6 Genuine and Generic Scientists 151 5.7 “The Deniers” 155 5.8 Sceptical Strategies 159 5.9 Conclusions: (In)Validating Climate Science 163 6 The Perils and Politics of Media-Active Scientists 165 6.1 Politicisation and the Value-Free Ideal 166 6.2 Are Scientists Evolving into Climate Crusaders? 168 6.3 Why Would a Scientist Engage the Media? 177 6.4 Double Standards of Expertise 188 6.5 Conclusions: Shifting Boundaries, Rhetorical Tactics 192 7 Conclusions 195 7.1 Do Media Actors Define Science? 195 7.2 The Media as a Site of Scientific Controversy 197 7.3 Mediating Social Factors 199 7.4 Shared Ideologies of Science? 200 7.5 Unpersuasive Rhetoric 201 7.6 A Loss of Authority? 202 7.7 A Return to Norms? 206 7.8 Fostering Reflexivity 217 Epilogue: Climate Change and the Media since 2013 220 Appendices 224 Appendix A: Sample Sizes for the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, and National Post 224 Appendix B: Total Number and Percentage of Climate Change Articles in the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, and National Post 224 Appendix C: Coverage of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit E-mail Theft 225 Appendix D: Example of a Minor Article 227 Appendix E: Examples of Sceptical, Somewhat Sceptical, and Concerned Commentary 229 Appendix F: Sceptical Commentary in the National Post 234 Appendix G: Excerpts from Sceptical Columns in the National Post 239 Appendix H: Number of Major Commentaries 243 Appendix I: Number of Climate Change Articles Mentioning Politicisation 243 Appendix J: List of Articles or Columns Written by Members of the Competitive Enterprise Institute 244 Appendix K: Articles Containing Competing Claims 246 Works Cited 247 vi List of Tables Table 3.1: Thematic framing analysis categories and sub-themes 47 Table 3.2: Keyword analysis search terms 48 Table 3.3: Actor categories and sub-categories 49 Table 4.1: Categorisations of scepticism by type 97 Table 4.2: Categorisations of scepticism by degree 97 Table 5.1: Claims-makers categories 133 Table 6.0: Sample of interview questions 174 Table A.1 Sample size for each newspaper 224 Table A.2 Total number of climate change articles 224 Table A.3 Total number of articles of any kind 224 Table A.4 Frequency of climate change articles 225 Table A.5: Excerpts from sceptical, somewhat sceptical, and concerned commentary 229 Table A.6: Titles of sceptical commentary in the National Post 234 Table A.7: Excerpts from sceptical commentary in the National Post 233 Table A.8: Number of major commentaries 243 Table A.9: List of articles or columns written by members of the Competitive Enterprise Institute 244 Table A.10: Commentary citing the work of the Competitive Enterprise Institute in the National Post 245 vii List of Figures Figure 3.1: Relative monthly frequency of global, American, and Canadian climate change coverage, 2006-2013 51 Figure 3.2: 2000-2016 Canadian newspaper coverage of climate change or global warming 52 Figure 3.3: Total climate change or global warming coverage, per year, 2006-2013 54 Figure 3.4: Frequency of climate change or global warming coverage, per year, 2006-2013 54 Figure 3.5: Total climate change or global warming coverage, per month, 2006-2013 55 Figure 3.6: