Climate change is a serious threat to the survival of our society. It causes unpredictable and extreme weather that endangers human and natural lives. Human activities such as carbon emissions, waste dumping, and deforestation worsen the problem. News media can play a key role in educating people and encouraging positive actions to protect the environment. This study analysed news-related content on the effects of climate change reported via various means of information and examined the extent of coverage for such information. There exist significant disparities in the characteristics of the information disseminated by various news platforms, with social media as the most frequent platform for sharing climate change information. Broadcast media and online news outlets are less common. Print media is the least outlet while some sources are unknown. There are no consistent patterns in the impact of climate change as reported by news outlets. These findings provide valuable insights into the current media landscape by delineating its portrayal of climate change.
AbbasS (2022) Climate change and major crop production: Evidence from Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research29(4): 5406–5414.
2.
Abdul MajidA (2021) Malaysia’s Climate Change Act? What to Expect. ZICO Law (December 2021). Epub ahead of print 2021.
3.
AtanasovaD (2022) How constructive news outlets reported the synergistic effects of climate change and COVID-19 through metaphors. Journalism Practice16(2–3): 384–403.
4.
AzmiNJOmarNAMZaidSBM, et al. (2015) Media portrayal on global climate change: An analysis of Malaysian mainstream newspapers. Studies in Media and Communication3(1): 73–78.
5.
BaiardiD (2023) What do you think about climate change?Journal of Economic Surveys37(4): 1255–1313.
6.
BevanLD (2022) The ambiguities of uncertainty: A review of uncertainty frameworks relevant to the assessment of environmental change. Futures137: 102919.
7.
BogertJMBucznyJHarveyJA, et al. (2024) The effect of trust in science and media use on public belief in anthropogenic climate change: A meta-analysis. Environmental Communication18(4): 484–509.
8.
CarvalhoA (2010) Media (ted) discourses and climate change: A focus on political subjectivity and (dis) engagement. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change1(2): 172–179.
9.
ChenH. (2022) Research on the development from print media to digital media–taking the American market as an example. In: 2022 International Conference on Comprehensive Art and Cultural Communication (CACC 2022). Atlantis Press, 327–331.
10.
ChenXChengZYangH (2024) Empowering pro-environmental behavior in tourists through digital media: The influence of eco-guilt and empathy with nature. Frontiers in Psychology15: 1387817.
11.
ChengHGonzalez-RamirezJ (2021) Trust and the media: Perceptions of climate change news sources among US college students. Postdigital Science and Education3: 910–933.
12.
ChungDS (2008) Interactive features of online newspapers: Identifying patterns and predicting use of engaged readers. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(3): 658–679.
13.
CohenLManionDMorrisonK (2007) Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge. Taylor and Francis Group.
14.
CohenLManionLMorrisonK (2002) Research Methods in Education. London, England: Routledge.
15.
CostelloAAbbasMAllenA, et al. (2009) Managing the health effects of climate change: Lancet and university college London institute for global health commission. The Lancet373(9676): 1693–1733.
16.
CramerH (1946) Mathematical methods of statistics, Princeton, 1946. Math Rev (Math-SciNet) MR16588 Zentralblatt MATH63: 300.
17.
CubaschUWuebblesDChenD, et al. (2021) AR5 Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis — IPCC. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ (accessed 25 May 2023).
18.
DaumeSGalazVBjersérP (2023) Automated framing of climate change? The role of social bots in the twitter climate change discourse during the 2019/2020 Australia bushfires. Social Media+ Society9(2): 20563051231168370.
19.
DiamondEBernauerTMayerF (2020) Does providing scientific information affect climate change and GMO policy preferences of the mass public? Insights from survey experiments in Germany and the United States. Environmental Politics29(7): 1199–1218.
20.
DrummondCSiegristMÁrvaiJ (2020) Limited effects of exposure to fake news about climate change. Environmental Research Communications2(8): 81003.
21.
EvenDAbdallaSMMaaniN, et al. (2024) News media as a commercial determinant of health. The Lancet Global Health12(8): e1365–e1369.
22.
Fage-ButlerALeddererLNielsenKH (2022) Public trust and mistrust of climate science: A meta-narrative review. Public Understanding of Science31(7): 832–846.
23.
FieldA (2013) Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. London, England: Sage.
24.
FotopoulosS (2023) Traditional media versus new media: Between trust and use. European View22(2): 277–286.
25.
FunkSKellnerDShareJ (2016) Critical media literacy as transformative pedagogy. In: Handbook of Research on Media Literacy in the Digital Age. Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA: IGI Global, 1–30.
26.
GibbsHKBrownSNilesJO, et al. (2007) Monitoring and estimating tropical forest carbon stocks: Making REDD a reality. Environmental Research Letters2(4): 45023.
27.
HamidSAliS (2021) Exploring medium and citizens engagement: The state of print media versus social media use for political communication and information in Peshawar city of Pakistan. Human Nature Journal of Social Sciences2(1): 1–11.
28.
HardakerABodnerTDandyN (2022) Tree planting for climate change: Coverage in the UK farming sector press. Journal of Rural Studies94: 140–149.
29.
HartmannDL (2015) Global Physical Climatology. Oxford, England: Elsevier, 25–30.
30.
HaseVMahlDSchäferMS, et al. (2021) Climate change in news media across the globe: An automated analysis of issue attention and themes in climate change coverage in 10 countries (2006–2018). Global Environmental Change70: 102353.
31.
HassanI (2018) Readers’ preferences for print and online newspapers in Northwestern Nigeria. Available at SSRN 3573482. Epub ahead of print 2018.
32.
HassanIMusaRMAzmiMNL, et al. (2020) News reporting of injury prevalence in football: A study of selected Nigerian online newspapers. Media Watch11(2): 323–336.
33.
HassanIMusaRMLatiff AzmiMN, et al. (2023) Analysis of climate change disinformation across types, agents and media platforms. Information Development40: 02666669221148693.
34.
HornseyMJLewandowskyS (2022) A toolkit for understanding and addressing climate scepticism. Nature Human Behaviour6(11): 1454–1464.
35.
HsiehH-FShannonSE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research15(9): 1277–1288.
36.
IyengarSPetersMDKinderDR (1982) Experimental demonstrations of the “not-so-minimal” consequences of television news programs. American Political Science Review76(4): 848–858.
37.
Jakučionytė-SkodienėMLiobikienėG (2022) The changes in climate change concern, responsibility assumption and impact on climate-friendly behaviour in EU from the Paris agreement until 2019. Environmental Management69(1): 1–16.
38.
JunshengHAkhtarRMasudMM, et al. (2019) The role of mass media in communicating climate science: An empirical evidence. Journal of Cleaner Production238: 117934.
39.
KleinbergaV (2022) Global, not yet local: Media coverage of climate change and environment related challenges in Latvia. Information & Media93: 8–27.
40.
Knox-HayesJ (2022) Combating climate change: Dismantling the spatial and temporal assumptions of the core and periphery. Geographical Research60(2): 342–346.
41.
KrippendorffK (1980) Validity in content analysis. Epub ahead of print 1980.
42.
LeeGWVineKAtkinsonA-R, et al. (2023) Impacts of climate change on health and health services in northern New South Wales, Australia: A rapid review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health20(13): 6285.
43.
LewandowskyS (2021) Climate change disinformation and how to combat it. Annual Review of Public Health42(1): 1–21.
44.
LoyLSHamannKRSReeseG (2020) Navigating through the jungle of information. Informational self-efficacy predicts climate change-related media exposure, knowledge, and behaviour. Climatic Change163(4): 2097–2116.
45.
MalikiABHMNazarudinMNAbdullahMR, et al. (2024) Patterns in assignment submission times: Analysis of factors contributing to undergraduate students’ commitment to core-curriculum related course. Heliyon10(4): e26214.
46.
MarwickAE (2018) Why do people share fake news? A sociotechnical model of media effects. Georgetown law Technology Review2(2): 474–512.
47.
McCombsMEShawDL (1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly36(2): 176–187.
48.
MengYChungDZhangA (2023) The effect of social media environmental information exposure on the intention to participate in pro-environmental behavior. PloS One18(11): e0294577.
49.
MillerTMaxwellR (2018) The Media Produce Climate Change: Fake News, Post-Truth and Journalistic Pollution. New York, USA: Peter Lang Publishing, 159–171.
50.
MonroeMCPlateRROxarartA, et al. (2019) Identifying effective climate change education strategies: A systematic review of the research. Environmental Education Research25(6): 791–812.
51.
MoserSC (2010) Communicating climate change: History, challenges, process and future directions. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change1(1): 31–53.
52.
MusaRMHassanIAbdullahMR, et al. (2022) A longitudinal analysis of injury characteristics among elite and amateur tennis players at different tournaments from electronic newspaper reports. Frontiers in Public Health10: 835119.
53.
OleinikA (2011) Mixing quantitative and qualitative content analysis: Triangulation at work. Quality & Quantity45(4): 859–873.
54.
PaekHOhHJHoveT (2024) Differential effects of digital media platforms on climate change risk information-sharing intention: A moderated mediation model. Risk Analysis44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14270.
55.
PeelMCFinlaysonBLMcmahonTA (2007) Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences11(5): 1633–1644.
56.
PergaM-ESarrasinOSteinbergerJ, et al. (2023) The climate change research that makes the front page: Is it fit to engage societal action?Global Environmental Change80: 102675.
57.
PetersenAMVincentEMWesterlingAL (2019) Discrepancy in scientific authority and media visibility of climate change scientists and contrarians. Nature Communications10(1): 3502.
58.
PfeiferLOttoIM (2023) Changing seasonal temperature offers a window of opportunity for stricter climate policy. Environmental Science & Policy140: 35–45.
59.
PogsonM (2021) Climate disinformation adverts: Real-world indicators of an online problem. Academia Letters2(4): 1–10.
60.
PradhanBKishoreKGokhaleN (2023) Social media influencers and consumer engagement: A review and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies47(6): 2106–2130.
61.
RochaJOliveiraSVianaCM, et al. (2022) Climate change and its impacts on health, environment and economy. In: One Health. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 253–279.
62.
Sánchez-HolgadoPArcila-CalderónCTovar-TorrealbaM (2024) Communication of climate change on the social network Twitter, perceptions and orientations towards the objectives of the 2030 Agenda: Longitudinal analysis 2019-2022. Observatorio (OBS*)18(2): 1–20.
63.
SancinoAStaffordMBragaA, et al. (2022) What can city leaders do for climate change? Insights from the C40 cities climate leadership group network. Regional Studies56(7): 1224–1233.
64.
SchäferMSPainterJ (2021) Climate journalism in a changing media ecosystem: Assessing the production of climate change-related news around the world. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change12(1): e675.
65.
SemenzaJCPazS (2021) Climate change and infectious disease in Europe: Impact, projection and adaptation. The Lancet Regional Health–Europe9: 100230.
66.
ShackleySWynneB (1996) Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: Boundary-ordering devices and authority. Science, Technology, & Human Values21(3): 275–302.
67.
ShahbaznezhadHDolanRRashidiradM (2021) The role of social media content format and platform in users’ engagement behavior. Journal of Interactive Marketing53(1): 47–65.
68.
SoaresFBRecueroR (2021) How the mainstream media help to spread disinformation about COVID-19. M/C Journal24(1): 1–15.
69.
StockerTFJonesRGHegglinMI, et al. (2024) Reflecting on the science of climate tipping points to inform and assist policy making and address the risks they pose to society. Surveys in Geophysics45: 1–22.
70.
StockerTFQinDPlattnerG-K, et al. (2014) Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of IPCC the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, 17–24.
71.
TsfatiYBoomgaardenHGStrömbäckJ, et al. (2020) Causes and consequences of mainstream media dissemination of fake news: Literature review and synthesis. Annals of the International Communication Association44(2): 157–173.
72.
TuitjerLDirksmeierP (2021) Social media and perceived climate change efficacy: A European comparison. Digital Geography and Society2: 100018.
73.
Van ValkengoedAMStegLPerlaviciuteG (2023) The psychological distance of climate change is overestimated. One Earth6(4): 362–391.
74.
VrseljaIPandžićMRihtarićML, et al. (2024) Media exposure to climate change information and pro-environmental behavior: The role of climate change risk judgment. BMC Psychology12(1): 262.
75.
WangKTeklerZDCheahL, et al. (2021) Evaluating the effectiveness of an augmented reality game promoting environmental action. Sustainability13(24): 13912.
76.
WattsNAmannMArnellN, et al. (2021) The 2020 report of the lancet countdown on health and climate change: Responding to converging crises. The Lancet397(10269): 129–170.
77.
WeaverDH (2007) Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming. Journal of Communication57(1): 142–147.
78.
WuH (2021) When housing and communities were delivered: A case study of post-wenchuan earthquake rural reconstruction and recovery. Sustainability13(14): 7629.
79.
XuZLaffidyMEllisL (2023) Clickbait for climate change: Comparing emotions in headlines and full-texts and their engagement. Information, Communication & Society26(10): 1915–1932.
80.
ZanuddinHAmbikapathyM (2017) Visual framing of “lahad datu” conflict coverage in Malaysian mainstream newspapers. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences40(2): 22.
81.
ZhaoQGuoYYeT, et al. (2021) Global, regional, and national burden of mortality associated with non-optimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: A three-stage modelling study. The Lancet Planetary Health5(7): e415–e425.
