Is Social Media Environmentalists’ New Best Friend?
Laura Tendall / Nov 19 / Environment & Climate
Since the mid-twentieth century, human activity has caused significant alterations to earth system processes, creating devastating and potentially irreversible environmental degradation. Recent reports estimate that a million species are now facing extinction and that up to a billion people are at risk of becoming climate migrants by 2050. Despite genuine concern, many of us have become largely numb to these kinds of statistics- we are so physically removed that the numbers feel meaningless. For every mile or year put between ourselves and the problem, we are less emotionally invested. We must acknowledge the privilege we hold in being able to view this data as abstract. Anthropogenic climate change is symptomatic of western capitalism and consumerism, yet unjust systems of environmental racism and classism mean that communities of colour and the working class absorb a disproportionately large environmental burden.
Bridging the Gap
In an effort to counter our tendency to think ‘out of sight, out of mind’, environmentalists are attempting to find more effective methods of climate change communication. Due to limitations of traditional news media (e.g. print newspapers, television, and radio), and with a user base of over two-thirds of global internet users, environmentalists have started turning to social media as an awareness-raising tool. Examples include Extinction Rebellion, Greta Thunberg, andDavid Attenborough, who recently set the world record for the shortest time to reach one million Instagram followers. As the climate crisis becomes increasingly urgent, we must explore the effectiveness of these new media platforms in providing a means for environmental communication.
Once, the weekly paper provided us with the newest of news. Today, in the time it takes to travel from King’s Cross to Old Street, new news has become old news. But you’re never too late to the party- as soon as you’ve reached the ticket barrier and regained signal, Twitter’s live ‘News for you’ update will hit you, along with a barrage of replies and retweets. Social media’s ability to allow us to consume content in real-time is especially beneficial for environmentalists due to the ever-changing nature of climate change as a phenomenon.
Social media can also play an equaliser role in raising awareness as, used alongside traditional news media, it enables communications to reach a broader audience. This is because different demographics tend to consume communications from different types of news sources. Age is a particularly distinct divider. When surveying the American public, the Pew Research Center found that those aged 65+ are about five times as likely as those aged 18-29 to regularly consume news via television, whilst those aged 18-29 are over four times as likely as those aged 65+ to do so via social media. Through using social media to reach the younger demographic, environmentalists can expand their audience. Communications can then be tailored to different target demographics. This larger reach has the potential to create more widespread environmental awareness which is vital if we are to significantly slow the climate crisis. Social media’s inclusion of the younger demographic is especially valuable as it is this age group who will be most responsible for influencing change going forward. An example of the impact that social media communications can have within the younger demographic is Greta Thunberg’s #FridaysForFuture Twitter hashtag which caused her ‘School Strike 4 Climate’ to go viral. As a result, Greta was able to mobilise over 13 million people in 7,500 cities worldwide.
In addition to reaching a wider audience, social media facilitates media pluralism which, by broadening the range of voices available for consumption, enables the formation of a more informed and diversified public opinion. Regulation of traditional news media means messages stay relatively undifferentiated, and almost always reflect a unified class agenda, favouring environmentally detrimental systems such as consumerism. Because of this, many of us find ourselves doubting its integrity and questioning whether it truly aims to serve the public interest concerning the climate crisis. We might determine that traditional news media’s ineffective approach to climate change communication is unlikely to be accidental: approaches are either unthreatening but insufficient, lulling us into a false sense of comfort; or alarming but hopeless, leaving us feeling stifled or nihilistic. Both of these responses are unhelpful in fostering an individual’s sense of agency. Social media decentralises media oligopoly by removing restrictions such as print space and censoring, therefore allowing environmentalists to more effectively express the realities of the climate crisis, free from the biases of traditional media.
Combatting Misinformation
However, it is worth noting that this freedom of expression goes both ways, also giving license to the spread of misinformation and disinformation, the latter of which is intended to deceive. This might take the form of fabricated stories, conspiracy theories, or clickbait, and is commonly fuelled by a desire to influence perspectives on highly politicised subjects such as climate change. The ease and speed with which social media allows this content to be shared therefore poses a danger to the environmental movement as declining attention spans or unyielding political allegiances can cause this content to go unchecked.
That said, the proliferation of ‘fake news’ on social media means many of us are becoming increasingly able to recognise and challenge it. This includes both individuals and the platforms themselves. In recent months we have seen a blurring of lines between traditional media and social media in terms of censorship, as platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been implementing warning labels upon detection of misleading information- notably when President Trump claimed that COVID-19 is “far less lethal” than the flu. In contrast to the cherry-picking at play in traditional news reporting, however, this type of censorship pertains more to responsible fact-checking and thus is more likely to serve the public interest.
This capability to challenge communications is a testament to the dynamic nature of social media and its potential for constant activity, change, and progress. By allowing us to engage in a two-way conversation instead of simply remaining passive consumers of news, social media works to combat our lacking sense of agency, propelling us into action. We can debate with strangers, share articles with friends, and sign petitions from around the world. We can even use these platforms to hold companies directly accountable regarding their Corporate Social Responsibility. The hashtag #AmazonCeaseFire was recently used to create a ‘social media storm’ whereby participants demanded that US financial institutions such as BlackRock stop funding companies that enable the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Other targets include fast fashion companies such as H&M who have been consistent recipients of greenwashing accusations. The company is currently being denounced by commenters who criticise the company’s continued efforts to position themselves as industry leaders in sustainable fashion with hashtags such as #jointherecyclingrevolution, whilst simultaneously being at the forefront of a developing situation involving the discovery of thousands of discarded H&M labels found to be polluting the Wetahirakanda Nature Reserve in Sri Lanka.
Constructive Activism
Whilst these examples are still ongoing, there is proof that this strategy can be successful. In 2011, an attempt to call out Barbie manufacturer Mattel saw Greenpeace set up fake Facebook and Twitter accounts for ‘Ken’ through which they exposed the environmental damage caused by Mattel’s unsustainable packaging. Mattel subsequently received over half a million emails which led the company to source more environmentally friendly materials. By forcing organisations to operate with transparency or risk being publicly called out, social media assists environmentalists in their cause, as it is only when government and businesses start to take responsibility that we will be able to seriously tackle climate change.
However, although online communities can be beneficial in forming a collective response through a shared purpose, the prominence of echo chambers within social media can put us in danger of making oversights and becoming complacent. It is important to remember that these echo chambers may not only hinder environmental awareness from spreading across different opinion groups but can also work to perpetuate anti-environmental views. This could have significant tangible impacts such as influencing political support. For example, climate change sceptics/deniers who have had their views legitimised within social media echo chambers might be more likely to vote for a far-right administration. It is easy to forget that by validating and amplifying our beliefs, social media echo chambers cocoon us into our own socio-political bubbles and leave us to exist in a warped reality. For environmentalists, being mindful of this is especially important as feelings of complacency are detrimental to the climate change movement.
Despite its drawbacks, the advantages of social media as a means of environmental communication are evident. It is therefore unsurprising that these platforms are increasingly favoured by environmentalists. With time running out to address the climate crisis and the injustices which it creates, it is promising to see that social media has the potential to help mobilise. Nevertheless, as a relatively new tool for communication, it will be interesting to monitor its effectiveness long term, particularly in an increasingly polarised world where political divisions continue to escalate and the threat of climate change intensifies.
As David Attenborough’s first Instagram post declares, “saving our planet is now a communications challenge”.