| Revision as of 05:39, 15 June 2010 editGuettarda (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators63,420 edits fmt← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:40, 15 June 2010 edit undoGuettarda (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators63,420 edits current affiliation, not contemporaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Climate change alarmism''' or '''global warming alarmism''' is a ] which stresses the potentially catastrophic effects of ] as a technique for motivating public action. Ereaut and Segnit described alarmism as a ] which communicates climate change using inflated language, an urgent tone and imagery of doom. They report that it is frequently employed by newspapers, popular magazine and in campaign literature put out by government and environment groups.<ref name="Ereaut2006">{{cite book |last1=Ereaut |first1=Gill |last2=Segrit |first2=Nat |title=Warm Words: How are we Telling the Climate Story and can we Tell it Better? |year=2006 |publisher=Institute for Public Policy Research |location=London}}</ref> The term also often used by those who disagree with the ] as an epithet for those who broadly adhere to the consensus view. | '''Climate change alarmism''' or '''global warming alarmism''' is a ] which stresses the potentially catastrophic effects of ] as a technique for motivating public action. Ereaut and Segnit described alarmism as a ] which communicates climate change using inflated language, an urgent tone and imagery of doom. They report that it is frequently employed by newspapers, popular magazine and in campaign literature put out by government and environment groups.<ref name="Ereaut2006">{{cite book |last1=Ereaut |first1=Gill |last2=Segrit |first2=Nat |title=Warm Words: How are we Telling the Climate Story and can we Tell it Better? |year=2006 |publisher=Institute for Public Policy Research |location=London}}</ref> The term also often used by those who disagree with the ] as an epithet for those who broadly adhere to the consensus view. | ||
| People who hold alarmist views of climate change represent one end of a continuum in public perceptions of climate change. ] |
People who hold alarmist views of climate change represent one end of a continuum in public perceptions of climate change. ] found that alarmists made up about 11% of the ] population, while "naysayers", who have a skeptical or cynical view of climate change, make up about 7% of the population. The remained of the public lay between these two extremes. Their perception of climate change was similar to that of the alarmists, but they differed significantly from them on questions related to perceived risk.<ref name="Leiserowitz2005">{{cite journal |last=Leiserowitz |first=Anthony A. |year=2005 |title=American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? |journal=Risk Analysis |volume=25 |issue=6 |pages=1433–1442 |issn=0272-4332 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00690.x}}</ref> | ||
| ==Influence of media coverage== | ==Influence of media coverage== | ||
Revision as of 05:40, 15 June 2010
Climate change alarmism or global warming alarmism is a rhetorical style which stresses the potentially catastrophic effects of global warming as a technique for motivating public action. Ereaut and Segnit described alarmism as a linguistic repertoire which communicates climate change using inflated language, an urgent tone and imagery of doom. They report that it is frequently employed by newspapers, popular magazine and in campaign literature put out by government and environment groups. The term also often used by those who disagree with the scientific consensus on climate change as an epithet for those who broadly adhere to the consensus view.
People who hold alarmist views of climate change represent one end of a continuum in public perceptions of climate change. Allan Leiserowtiz found that alarmists made up about 11% of the United States population, while "naysayers", who have a skeptical or cynical view of climate change, make up about 7% of the population. The remained of the public lay between these two extremes. Their perception of climate change was similar to that of the alarmists, but they differed significantly from them on questions related to perceived risk.
Influence of media coverage
Views of scientists
Scientists who agree with the consensus view on global warming often have been critical of those who exaggerate or distort the risks posed by global warming. Stephen Schneider has criticized such exaggeration, stating that he "disapprove of the 'ends justify the means' philosophy" that would exaggerate dangers in order to spur public action. Mike Hulme, professor at the University of East Anglia and former director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, describes such exaggerations as "self-defeating," in that they engender feelings of hopelessness rather than motivating positive action. Hans von Storch has objected to "alarmists think that climate change is something extremely dangerous, extremely bad and that overselling a little bit, if it serves a good purpose, is not that bad."
Scientists also have been critical of press sensationalism in reporting on climate change. Myles Allen, director of the Climateprediction.net experiment, criticized press reporting that seized on the extreme end of predictions from the experiment without emphasizing the much more likely cases of more moderate warming.
References
- Ereaut, Gill; Segrit, Nat (2006). Warm Words: How are we Telling the Climate Story and can we Tell it Better?. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
- Leiserowitz, Anthony A. (2005). "American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?". Risk Analysis. 25 (6): 1433–1442. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00690.x. ISSN 0272-4332.
- http://www.americanphysicalsociety.com/publications/apsnews/199608/upload/aug96.pdf
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6655449.stm
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4923504.stm