Misinformation in the Media and How to Avoid Falling Victim
Reef Relief has fought hard since its establishment in 1986 to advocate for the protection of not only our coral reefs, but preservation of all marine ecosystems as they have seen rapid decline in the last several decades. It is no question that it has become increasingly important in our current day and age to be aware of the amount of misinformation (false or inaccurate information) as well as disinformation (false information intentionally meant to mislead) in the media, and how to identify it. Commonly, information is “cherry picked” from one source, given out of context, and oversimplified to serve a certain narrative. Sensationalized headlines garner more clicks and shares for a media source, and such misrepresentative rhetoric is harmful and oftentimes fueled by private interests. Unfortunately, we see this as very common practice in relation to the conversation around our climate crisis. In today’s over-saturation of information, how do you avoid being misled?
1.Check the Source
Be sure the information you are consuming comes from a reputable source. Sometimes this can be an easy task, if the source is an individual sharing an opinion or an account with no legitimate backing that communicates in sensationalized rhetoric and definitive statements meant to illicit a strong reaction from its readers to get more shares. In other instances, it can be trickier. Many sources may present information in a way to appear more legitimate than they are to gain the trust of the reader. Creating professional looking websites, listing titles or education status of involved individuals when they aren’t necessarily applicable to the topic being discussed, and citing unreliable research sources are some of the many ways this is done.
Looking for sources of funding for the information you are reading is a great way to learn their motivations for sharing this information and help you discern if it is reliable. Companies or organizations commonly fund information to be provided that will ultimately help them receive capital gains. This can be accomplished through paid advertising to publish articles in seemingly reliable news sources, or through the funding of research to be done that will ultimately support their end goal. If an organization or research cited in an article proclaims that carbon dioxide emissions do not contribute to a trending increase in global temperatures, but the organization or research is funded by those who have ties to the fossil fuel industry, it can safely be assumed their stance is biased or skewed. When it comes to discussions of climate science, give more weight of trust to experts. You also want to be sure any research used to support a claim is peer reviewed (the work was reviewed, and its merit has been approved by other experts in the same field) and is not funded by a source that is a clear conflict of interest.
2. Context Matters
Authors will pull a piece of information from a reputable source (or source that is commonly in support of the opposite side of their argument) and provide it out of context, leaving out relevant information and misrepresenting the truth in in the process to bolster whatever point they are trying to make. Otherwise known as “cherry picking”, this argument method is a dangerous way in which legitimate information is skewed to fit a specific narrative. To combat this, find the original source of the information being referenced to provide context and see if it was adjusted to be misrepresented.
(https://www.aims.gov.au/monitoring-great-barrier-reef/gbr-condition-summary-2023-24)
This graph was created by the Australian Government and Australian Institute of Marine Science. It has been used out of context to claim that coral cover is higher than ever. Insinuating that corals in the Great Barrier Reef are not under threat or being negatively impacted by climate change. However, when you visit the source of this graph, they clearly state that although an increase in coral cover had been seen in this small area within the Great Barrier Reef, this survey was conducted before a mass bleaching event and passage of cyclones (the effects of which have not yet been assessed). It is also indicated that this survey includes bleached corals (corals who have lost their symbiotic zooxanthellae which provides them with 90% of their food, leaving them with an increased susceptibility of getting sick and dying) as they are still technically living coral. The source further makes the point that although this increase in coral cover is good, the reef is still under threat from cumulative stressors including the 5th mass coral bleaching event since 2016 with the largest footprint of bleaching recorded, and that these bleaching events severity and frequency are fueled by climate change.
3. Sensationalized and Absolute Statements
It is common practice among many sources of information to headline articles with bold diction to illicit a certain reaction from the reader and gain more traction. If you find yourself having a particularly strong reaction to a headline, or the information is written using absolute statements such as “warming has always been great for humans and cold has been bad”, this should trigger a warning that it is likely sensationalized and misrepresentative. To avoid contributing to the spread of misinformation, get context on the claims being made before sharing.
4. Climate Change is not as straightforward as deniers would make it seem.
Most of us have heard claims that because it is snowing, the Earth “certainly can’t be warming”, or have seen how the recent cold weather snaps and snow in Florida is being used to “prove” that climate change is not happening. Climate Change does not mean that everywhere is getting very hot all the time, but that historic climate patterns are being altered due to anthropogenic factors, and the effects of which can be varied but ultimately point to the same trend.
Understanding this is a nuanced topic with many factors influencing it can help you not fall victim to oversimplification intended to debase the science behind it.
Despite the vast amounts of misinformation on climate science, we must take a moment to celebrate our recent wins in fighting global climate change. In this past year, the United Kingdom closed its last coal-fired plant stopping their production of electricity from burning coal. For the first time in the United States, wind generation produced more electricity than coal generation, and Washington voters enacted a law limiting the amount of climate pollution Washington’s largest industries can release, requiring polluters to pay for their pollutants and investing the money into efforts combating climate change, such as investing in renewable energy and cleaner transit. In times where it seems much of the progress that is made to combat climate change is being undone, it is important to focus on the wins and remind ourselves why we continue to push forward, for the protection and preservation of our worlds beautiful and natural resources.
Misinformation is an incredible threat to the conservation of our environment. Not only does it create false narratives, if can be used to divide people and distract from the issues at hand. When you are reading things online, via social media, chat threads, from your favorite celebrities, or even leadership, stop and ask yourself “Is this credible?”. We like to recommend that when hearing information from an outside source, do your own research. If you cannot find that information confirmed in three separate places, it is most likely not true.
Climate wins references:
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=62784
https://vitalsigns.edf.org/story/5-reasons-be-hopeful-big-environmental-wins-2024