View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2007 The .SU . broadcast news media as a social arena in the global climate change debate Adam Jeremy Kuban Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Journalism Studies Commons, and the Mass Communication Commons Recommended Citation Kuban, Adam Jeremy, "The .SU . broadcast news media as a social arena in the global climate change debate" (2007). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 15479. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/15479 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The U.S. broadcast news media as a social arena in the global climate change debate by Adam Jeremy Kuban A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Journalism and Mass Communication Program of Study Committee: Jeff Blevins, Major Professor Lulu Rodriguez Eugene Takle Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2007 Copyright © Adam Jeremy Kuban, 2007. All rights reserved. 2009 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Past studies on public knowledge and information sources 3 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 6 The rise and fall of media coverage of scientific issues 6 National versus international triggering events 9 The social arena theory 10 Research questions 18 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 20 Sampling method 20 Conceptual and operational definitions of variables and statistics 21 Inter-coder Reliability 24 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 28 Research question one: Trends in coverage 28 Research question two: National versus international triggering events 32 Research question three: The sources cited 33 Research question four: Degree of conflict 37 Research question five: Claims and counter-claims 38 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS 44 Overview of study 44 Discussion of results and deductions 44 Implications of the findings to the profession 47 Implications of the findings to theory 48 Limitations of the study 49 Suggestions for future study 50 APPENDIX A. OMITTED TRANSCRIPTS 52 APPENDIX B. CODING TEMPLATE 64 APPENDIX C. SOURCE IDENTIFICATION TEMPLATE 71 REFERENCES CITED 77 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Global climate change, sometimes known as “global warming,” remains a controversial phenomenon. Prominent scientists from around the world (i.e., the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC) have consistently warned that “there is a discernible human influence on global climate” (Murphy, 1998, p. 7). Global climate change can generally be described as the process where greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and members of the halocarbon family, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), trap heat in the lower levels of the atmosphere (Stamm et al., 2000), creating what is commonly known as the “greenhouse effect” (Schneider, 1998). To date “the most important greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide,” (Stamm et al., 2000, p. 225) which results from the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil, coal and gas, and to a lesser extent, through deforestation and the destruction of other vegetation (Stamm et al., 2000). It is generally acknowledged that the greenhouse gases maintain the earth’s current temperature patterns. “If it were not for the heat-trapping action of clouds, water vapor, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, the earth’s natural climate would be about 33°C [59.4°F] cooler than it is” (Schneider, 1998, p. 1). However, the continuous rise in carbon dioxide and methane levels has alarmed environmental activists and the scientific community. The IPCC contends that since the Industrial Revolution in the late 19th century, the “average global surface air temperatures have increased between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees Centigrade [0.54 and 1.08 degrees Fahrenheit]” (Murphy, 1998, p. 7). 2 Greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for long durations (Murphy, 1998). Scientists project that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases over time will raise global surface temperatures by around one to four degrees Celsius [1.8 to 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit] by 2100 A.D. (Schneider, 1998). A change in temperature of this magnitude could produce several effects: gradual rises of sea levels, more episodes of droughts and floods, redistribution and greater potential for extinction of species in natural ecosystems, and the possibility for “switches” in oceanic currents, such as the gulf stream (Schneider, 1998). Thus, the IPCC asserts, “global warming is a serious problem that…must be addressed immediately” (Boykoff and Boykoff, 2004, p. 125). Most mainstream climate scientists concur that the earth has warmed over the past century, that greenhouse gases result from human activities, and that several degrees of further warming seems probable in the next century (Schneider, 1998). However, they also admit that “it is difficult to predict any specific climatic impacts with a high degree of reliability” (Schneider, 1998, p. 2) because the climatic system is inherently complex. This complexity, often a characteristic of scientific phenomena, makes the semantics of global climate change difficult for the general public to comprehend (Gowda et al., 1997). For average citizens, the mass media are still the first—and often the only—source of information about science. Nevertheless, “while more than 90 percent of Americans have now heard of global warming and believe it is an important issue, [only] a much smaller percentage is actually personally concerned about it” (Moser and Dilling 2004, p. 36). The following studies provide evidence that many indeed rely on the mass media— specifically the broadcast industry—to learn about risks. The results also indicate substantial gaps in knowledge about global climate change among the public, although most people are 3 aware of it. These studies offer a glimpse into how the broadcast media disseminate material relevant to global climate change. Past studies on public knowledge and information sources In May 1997, Stamm et al. (2000) conducted a telephone survey that “included a variety of questions about whether or not respondents considered global climate change to be a problem; their ideas about causes, consequences and solutions to global climate change; and their media use, as well as demographics” (p. 223). Of the 512 randomly selected phone subscribers in the Washington metropolitan area that constituted their sample, 88 percent had heard of the terms “global climate change” or “greenhouse effect.” Of these, over 22 percent did not feel they knew enough to consider global climate change as a problem; an additional ten percent said outright that the situation is not a problem to them (Stamm et al., 2000). These findings indicate that while many acknowledge global climate change, a much smaller number actually considers this environmental issue a major concern. In spite of the well- publicized scientific consensus about the global climate change impacts on the earth, almost half of those interviewed had not heard of it or considered it a non-issue. Over 75 percent of the survey participants cited television as a source of information about global climate change (Stamm et al., 2000). Despite considerable broadcast media coverage, the respondents know little about this environmental topic. Another study by Gowda et al. (1997) surveyed high school students (66 ninth- graders in Honolulu, Hawaii, and 33 high school students in Oklahoma) to “probe their understanding of basic issues related to climate change” (p. 2233). About 57 percent of the students believed that global climate change is not occurring, a result that mirrors Stamm et 4 al.’s (2000) findings. The respondents also cited television as their primary source of information about the topic. The students also estimated a much higher increase in average temperature as a result of global climate change than did the IPCC scientists. Students speculated an 18.8-degree rise in temperature over 50 years in comparison to a 2.7-degree increase predicted by the IPCC. Students also cited a variety of causes of climate change. Forty-five believed pollution caused climate change; 39 linked fossil fuel usage to climate change; 29 mentioned deforestation and forest fires as a cause; 26 believed ozone depletion contributed to global climate change. More students believed that pollution, rather than the burning of fossil fuels, caused global climate change. Gowda et al. (1997) surmise the students’ misconceptions were due to their reliance on the news media for information about climate issues. The Media Research Center (1997) reports that global climate change is usually portrayed as an issue that pits scientists and environmental activists against industry. The issue is subject to the competing claims of and hostile debates from a multitude of sources cited in news reports: scientists, politicians, movie celebrities, religious leaders, advocacy groups, and industry spokespeople, among others. Problems arise when writers fail to distinguish between