Climate summit coverage chose drama over science, claims new report

Less than 10 per cent of articles about the Copenhagen summit last year discussed the science behind climate change, according to a report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ).

Journalists focused on the "drama and minutiae of the negotiations" at the cost of explaining the science behind the issues being discussed, according to the report by James Painter, head of the RISJ's Journalism Fellowship Programme, and backed by the British Council's Climate Change programme.

More than 400 articles from 12 countries, including the UK, USA, Russia, China and Brazil, were studied for the report. Nearly 80 per cent of the articles gave 10 per cent or less of their column space to mentioning science, the research suggests.

The research estimates that 3,880 journalists from 119 countries were registered to attend the summit, which ran from 7-18 Decmeber 2009. Of these, 85 per cent were from the developing world. China and Brazil sent more than 100 journalists each and Google had 29 journalists registered.

The study found differences between coverage by the Western press and the rest of the world, in particular a Western focus on the 'Climategate' story and fewer quotes from climate change sceptics by the developing world's press outlets.

"Given that the science of climate change was hardly reported when the peg and the opportunity were self-evident, getting the science into print or onto the airwaves will remain even more of a challenge, demanding a reinvigorated debate about new, interesting and engaging ways to do it. For climate scientists, the issue of how best to engage with the media and public more effectively has also become more urgent because of signs (in the west) of a decline in public confidence in climate science caused partly by 'Climategate' and other publicised errors about the science", says James Painter in the executive summary of the report, which is available to download from the RISJ's website.

According to Painter's research, 250 universities were present at the Copenhagen summit, but scientists from universities represented only 12 per cent of those quoted on the scientific issues by the media. A lack of communications officers and media relations staff from universities at the summit was part of the problem, the study suggests.

The report makes a series of recommendations for how climate change science might be best communicated, including: "more imaginative use" of new media; more media personnel at the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]; and more dedicated climate change press officers at universities and research centres.

There should be less "adversarial" coverage of climate science by the press with instead an emphasis on frontline reporting on "what people are experiencing and what they are doing about it".

"This important and revealing report is one of the very few studies of climate change in the media to highlight the often neglected area of media relations. COP15 and the crisis that surrounded it exposed the shocking shortage of press officers exclusively dedicated to supporting climate researchers.

"This report should be a wake-up call to the climate science community to invest more in press officers who can both communicate the best available research to journalists and defend researchers whose work is unfairly attacked," says Fiona Fox, director of the Science Media Centre, in a response to the report.

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).