Amid swirling questions about the politics and platforms of presidential hopefuls, the veracity of promises made by tech leaders, and the influence of AI, one fear underlies it all: that growing misinformation could seal the fate of the American population.
On Jan. 16, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (a nonprofit tracking online hate speech and disinformation recently subjected to the ire of X CEO Elon Musk) released a new report chronicling the rise of new forms of climate-based misinformation, also known as denial content, specifically taking over YouTube.
According to the report, titled “The New Climate Denial,” the past five years have witnessed a rise in less on-the-nose forms of climate change denial, which the CCDH dubs “New Denial.” These kinds of claims avoid arguing against the existence of human-caused climate change, and instead focus their attention on disputing the motivations of scientists and politicians, seeking to discredit possible solutions and split populations against action.
Around 70 percent of all climate change denial claims made on YouTube are New Denial claims, the center found, an increase from 35 percent just six years ago.
“Scientists have won the battle to inform the public about climate change and its causes, which is why those opposed to climate action have cynically switched focus to undermining confidence in solutions and in science itself,” explained Imran Ahmed, the CEO and founder of the CCDH.
The amount of YouTube videos arguing these claims as fact is a million-dollar business, the center also found, reporting that predictive models of total ad revenue show monetized new climate denial channels rake in $13.4 million per year.
https://twitter.com/UNDP/status/1747483890518806867″ target=”_blank” title=”(opens in a new window)” rel=”noopener
In another, Peterson claims that the term “ecocide” (defined by activists as intentional acts to inflict mass ecosystem damage) is now being used to blame working class citizens for climate change, rather than industrial actors.
Both of these posts exemplify New Denial attacks on both the efficacy of climate solutions and the motivations of climate policy leaders. Comment sections are rife with similar kinds of thinking.
How social media is proliferating “New Denial” content
YouTube is prone to these kinds of posts and comments, according to the new survey of the site’s most popular channels and videos. Plus, the video-centric nature of the site is particularly engaging for young users. According to Pew Research Center data, YouTube is the most popularly used site among 13-17 year olds, and 77 percent of teens say they visit it everyday.
Climate change deniers have transitioned their content from insulated blogs into viral video essays and live podcasts published directly to the platform. According to Social Blade (a social media analytics site) data collected by researchers, the 96 YouTube channels studied in the report received 3.4 billion (3,356,433,249) views on their content between December 2022 and December 2023.
In response to similar rises in misinformation and political events that warrant intervention, many social media companies have added climate change-specific policies. In 2022, Pinterest became the first social media platform to completely ban climate misinformation, releasing a comprehensive content removal policy that covers posts denying climate change, refuting scientific consensus, or misleading users. These policies also applied to advertisements spreading misinformation or intentional disinformation.
Credit: Vicky Leta / Mashable
In Nov. 2023, TikTok announced a new commitment to addressing climate misinformation on its platform, part of the U.N.-backed Verified for Climate program that seeks to stop such digital content. A few months earlier, TikTok ramped up its policies to completely ban these kinds of posts from the app.
But researchers have found the popular app is struggling to enforce its policies.
Meanwhile, X özgü ranked the worst among other social platforms in its policies stopping the spread of climate change denial.
For years, Google özgü reportedly failed to enforce its own policy, and New Denial content is slipping through the cracks even more.
Google, YouTube’s Big Tech parent company, özgü outlined its own stance on climate misinformation, stating that it prohibits:
“ads for, and monetization of, content that contradicts well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change. This includes content referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change.
When evaluating content against this new policy, we’ll look carefully at the context in which claims are made, differentiating between content that states a false claim as fact, versus content that reports on or discusses that claim. We will also continue to allow ads and monetization on other climate-related topics, including public debates on climate policy, the varying impacts of climate change, new research and more.”
But, for years, Google özgü reportedly failed to enforce its own policy, and New Denial content is slipping through the cracks even more.
“Center for Countering Digital Hate and the Climate Action Against Disinformation coalition found 200 videos on YouTube containing disinformation about climate change, with half of them directly breaching Google’s policy,” the report details. “In total, they were seen 73.8 million times. Tests indicate that 63 percent of popular climate denial articles still carry Google ads. Google allowed Daily Wire to run ads on searches for ‘climate change is a hoax.'”
According to the researcher Boussalis, following the money is fundamentally important to understanding continued climate misinformation. “These actors are not behaving in a vacuum, but rather are supported by large conservative funders. The last section of our study shows how conservative think tanks who received the most money from ‘dark money’ sources are less likely to communicate New Denial and are more likely to focus on outright denial and attacks on science. This suggests that organized interests are still supporting the most insidious biçim of climate change contrarianism — and it is not clear to me that this trend is set to change any time soon.”
Mirjam Nanko, PhD researcher at the University of Exeter and another CARDS model developer, explained that the question is no longer if New Denial content is on the rise, but how a democracy should respond to it. [Editor’s note: Nanko was part of a group that met with the CCDH on the use of CARDS for its new report.]
“The core challenge now is to differentiate between the strategic and systematic use of these claims to delay or prevent policy, and legitimate criticism integral to democratic policy discussions,” Nanko told Mashable. “Raising awareness about these strategies is a key initial step. People should be equipped to use them as analytical tools in understanding the ongoing debate.”
How you can spot and respond to climate misinformation
The inadequate response from tech’s leaders thus leaves the misinformation fight in the hands of researchers, watchdogs, and individuals themselves.
“It is vital that those advocating for action to avert climate disaster take note of this substantial shift from denial of anthropogenic climate change to undermining trust in both solutions and science itself, and shift our focus, our resources and our counter-narratives accordingly,” the Center for Countering Digital Hate advises. “This report is a call-to-action.” [moved]
Tackle New Denial with facts
A fact-based approach to debunking climate denial content is the most straightforward way to spot and stop the spread, Cook points out. “Explaining how misinformation is wrong by explaining the facts is really about building climate literacy,” he says.
Pull in the support of a global network of researchers through official reports, like the IPCC annual climate assessments, science-backed blogs like Real Climate, or officially sanctioned websites like NOAA’s Climate at a Glance or NASA’s Vital Signs of the Planet.
Just as important: It’s never too early to start building climate literacy, perhaps even more pressing as teens engage with New Denial more and more online. Many school districts and childhood educators have advocated for the inclusion of climate change science in core educational curriculum, and organizations around the world are sharing child-friendly lesson plans and curriculum guides.
Appeal to those at risk with logic
Both Nanko and Cook also point to knowing the specific rhetorical techniques used by climate denial actors as crucial for spotting and avoiding the content. Cook calls this a “logic-based” approach to tackling misinformation.
“A consistent and practical way to deal with [climate denial content] is just identifying misleading techniques or logical fallacies across all these different types of misinformation,” said Cook. “Once you can spot those patterns and fallacies, then you become immunized or less likely to be misled by those arguments — and not just in climate misinformation, but across any topic.”
According to Cook, some of the most common patterns found in climate denial content include:
-
Fake experts: presenting an unqualified person or institution as a source of credible information.
-
Logical fallacies: arguments where the conclusion doesn’t logically follow from the premise.
-
Impossible expectations: the demand for unrealistic levels of certainty before acting on the science.
-
Cherry picking: carefully selecting data that appear to confirm only one position.
-
Conspiracy theory: arguments that a secret plan exists to implement a nefarious scheme, including covering up the “truth.”
He also notes the rise of ad hominem arguments, or attacks on the person sharing information rather than the content itself.
Educating individuals on these techniques can get around the limitations of fact-based approaches. “When people are presented with climate facts and at the same time they’re shown climate misinformation —and they don’t have the tools to tell the difference between them — they tend to just disengage and believe neither. It can cancel out our attempts to communicate facts,” Cook says. “Whereas if you explain the techniques of misinformation, that’s effective regardless. It’s a more robust way to inoculate people against misinformation. I recommend a combination of the fact-based and the logic-based approaches to build people’s climate literacy but also build their critical thinking skills.”
Cook developed the online resource and game Cranky Uncle, which helps build these types of critical thinking skills on the path towards fighting misinformation.
Media literacy groups, like the News Literacy Project, offer digital tools that teach people how to fact check sources themselves, including its misinformation blog RumorGuard and online quizzes.
Remember your resources
Numerous other organizations offer an assortment of climate literacy resources, as well.
Climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe, one of the authors of the federal government’s annual climate report, offers a long list of resources on her personal website, including advice for speaking to people who have fallen into climate denial conspiracy.
Hayhoe points to her own YouTube series, Global Weirding, that addresses common questions and misconceptions.
Climate Action Against Disinformation, a coalition of climate and anti-disinformation organizations, publishes insights and reports on ongoing efforts to stop climate misinformation.
Additionally: read through more of Mashable’s extensive coverage, including our How To Change a City video series exploring the ways urban environments can better adapt to our climate future.
For more climate science reading:
Topics
Social Good
YouTube