Abstract
Anthropogenic climate change (ACC) is widely acknowledged to be morally significant, but little is known about everyday moralising around ACC. We addressed this gap via quantified thematic analysis of 300 online comments to British newspaper articles on ACC, drawing on Bandura's moral disengagement theory. Moral disengagement through denial of ACC was widespread. Other disengagement strategies, such as palliative comparison and diminishing agency, occurred less often. There was also some moral engagement, most often through assertions of the existence of ACC and/or its harmful effects. Moral disengagement was significantly more common in comments on right wing than left wing newspapers, whereas the opposite was true of moral engagement. Although Bandura's framework provided a useful starting point to make sense of ACC moralising, it did not capture moral concerns that extended beyond its “harm/care” remit. In particular, many “denial” comments included a “dishonesty” discourse, whereby ACC proponents were accused of deception for ulterior motives. To classify this discourse as moral disengagement obscures its engagement with a different set of moral issues around trust and honesty. We suggest that Bandura's theory represents one possible “moral landscape” around ACC and could be extended to encompass a broader range of moral concerns.
Highlights
Evidence continues to accrue for the existence of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) and its likely negative consequences for humans and other species around the globe (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2013, 2014)
The current study investigates whether moral disengagement strategies can be discerned in online comments made by members of the public to newspaper articles on ACC
The morality of ACC has been widely acknowledged as important, the current study is the first to examine whether and how the public brings morality to bear on discussions about ACC
Summary
Evidence continues to accrue for the existence of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) and its likely negative consequences for humans and other species around the globe (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2013, 2014). Left wing newspapers may tend to express more concern for potential victims of ACC beyond the UK compared with their right wing counterparts (Laksa, 2014) This differential attention to victims may be considered an example of moral engagement at the fourth locus of Bandura's theory (emphasising victims), whereas scepticism about the existence of ACC may represent moral disengagement at the third locus (outcomes). We suggest that this overall ideological difference in sympathy toward the issue of ACC in the media may extend to readers. We hoped that these articles would be likely to trigger moralised comments, whether in the form of engagement or disengagement
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.