Balance (Climate and Environment Coverage)

Abstract

Balance – as a journalistic norm in the domain of climate change reporting – is measured by analyzing both coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., the existence of anthropogenic global warming) and coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., actions regarding global warming) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004). Field of application/theoretical foundation: Balance is a commonly investigated and internationally agreed-upon journalistic norm that ensures that journalists portray different sides of a story in a neutral and objective way (Westerståhl, 1983). In science reporting, more specifically in reporting on climate change, this journalistic norm can lead to biased reporting in that sense that journalistic coverage does not mirror the scientific understanding (i.e., climate change does exist and action is needed) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004). References/combination with other methods of data collection: There are experimental studies that test the effects of differentially balanced news stories (e.g., Clarke et al., 2014; Dixon & Clarke, 2012), largely confirming that balanced coverage reduces confidence in a scientific consensus and heightens uncertainty of science, risks, etc. Example studies: Boykoff & Boykoff (2004); Boykoff (2007); Clarke (2008); Clarke et al. (2014); Dixon & Clarke (2012) Information on Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004 Authors: Maxwell T. Boykoff & Jules M. Boykoff Research question: The prevalence of the norm of balance in reporting on climate change and the degree to what this coverage’s adherence to balance led to biased coverage of both anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., its existence) and resultant action. Object of analysis: A sample (636 articles) of the US prestige-press coverage of global warming, i.e., New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal Time frame of analysis: between 1988 and 2002 Info about variables Variables: Two measures of balance: (a) Coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., existence) (b) Coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., action) Level of analysis: Newspaper article Variables and values: (a) First measure: Coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., existence) Article only presents argument that anthropogenic global warming exists, clearly distinct from natural variations Article presents both sides, but emphasizes that anthropogenic global warming exists, still distinct from natural variation Article presents a balanced account of debates surrounding existence of anthropogenic global warming Article presents both sides, but emphasizes dubious nature of the claim that anthropogenic global warming exists (b) Second measure: Coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., action) Dominant coverage of decisions/assertions regarding immediate/mandatory action to deal with global warming Balanced accounts of various decisions regarding action Dominant coverage of decisions/assertions regarding cautious/voluntary approaches to deal with global warming Reliability: Intercoder reliability rate of 93% Codebook: Table 1 in Boykoff & Boykoff (2004, p. 128)