Climate science scepticism disappearing from UK newspapers

New analysis has found that compared with ten years ago, climate science scepticism has almost entirely disappeared from the opinion pages of British newspapers.

The research found that a decade ago in 2013/14, a fifth (20%) of all opinion pieces and editorials on climate change featured ‘evidence scepticism’, questioning the science of climate change or claiming that warming is not happening, a number that has dropped to 5% in 2023/4.

‘Process scepticism’, usually seen as an attack on scientific models, or methods used to monitor and predict climate change, has seen an even sharper fall in opinion pieces and editorials, dropping from 20% in 2013/14 to 1% in 2023/24.

However, ‘response scepticism’, which dismisses or contests policies to address climate change, has marginally increased from 23% in 2013/14 to 24% in 2023/24. The nature of this scepticism has also changed; in 2013/14, technologies such as wind farms were frequently criticised, whereas in 2023/24, wider aspects of net zero policy were attacked.

Response scepticism, sometimes also known as ‘climate obstructionism’, appears to have shifted as real-world evidence has proven previous positions wrong. For example, despite claims in 2013/14 that wind energy is inefficient or unreliable, the UK has built a world-leading wind industry; in 2023, wind power contributed 29.4% of the UK’s total electricity generation.

With the latest Government auctions seeing onshore wind priced cheaper than average and offshore wind priced about the same as predicted future electricity prices, costs have also fallen dramatically. Previous analysis also showed that despite headlines predicting blackouts, none had occurred because of ‘intermittency’.

The analysis, which examined samples of opinion and leading articles in 2013/14 and 2023/24, was carried out by a group of academics including Simon Cocks, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford and Dr James Painter of the Reuters Institute at Oxford University, and was commissioned by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU). [1]

Commenting on the findings Dr James Painter, Research Associate at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, said: “Our findings are consistent with other research suggesting that the emphasis of the arguments of those not wanting to take climate action has shifted in the media in many parts of the world.  They also support the findings of other researchers who identify the high costs of taking action as the most common anti-action argument.

“Another characteristic is the relative absence, in the right-leaning media, of arguments outlining the costs of not taking action to reduce emissions or the co-benefits of taking action.”

Former BBC presenter Robin Lustig, who has presented programmes for the BBC World Service and BBC Radio 4, including the World Tonight for over 20 years, said “It’s encouraging that there do seem to be some grounds for hope: a marked reduction in media-encouraged denialism, and more positive coverage of possible solutions, even if parts of the press still prefer to focus on the alleged costs of reaching net zero targets.

“In the past, as it has admitted, the BBC fell into the trap of seeking to find a ‘false balance’ on the science of climate change. It mustn't do the same now as it reports on proposed solutions. Of course, there is always a need for debate, but it must be informed by the facts, not by opposing science with ideology.”

Joanna Haigh, Emeritus Professor, the Grantham Institute, Imperial College, said: “This is a careful and interesting piece of work. Its conclusions are not really surprising but it provides robust evidence of the distortions and cherry-picking employed by the sections of the media to support their pre-determined and dogmatic opinions. The promulgation of these views is worse than unhelpful and actually harmful.

“Parts of the media increasingly seem to disconnect net zero from climate change with many more articles mentioning the former without the later and little reference to the costs of not halting climate change. Net zero isn’t a political construct, it’s basic science which says that if you don’t stop adding emissions to the atmosphere, the problem continues to get worse.”

Geoffrey Lean, Britain's longest-serving environmental correspondent, said: "The strange thing is how out of touch some newspapers seem to be with their readers. Poll after poll show that vast majorities of Britons are concerned with climate change and one taken after the election found that three quarters (including 44 per cent of Reform voters) backed net zero. About two thirds have made changes to their lifestyle to tackle climate change.

“A poll the Sun carried out of its readers a few years ago found that over 90 per cent accepted that “climate change is impacting the world” and that more than half were “significantly changing their habits to help save the planet”.

Richard Black, founding Director and Senior Associate of ECIU, Director of Policy and Research at the global energy thinktank Ember and author of Denied – the Rise and Fall of Climate Contrarianism said: “The changes this study highlights are testament to the enduring value of evidence, even in these times when so much public discourse is determinedly evidence-free. Evidence- and process-scepticism have disappeared from British newspaper pages basically because they’ve convincingly been proven wrong, and it’s just not tenable for any editor concerned about credibility to keep commissioning that stuff.

“It’s also interesting though that a number of papers don’t seem to have learned from that experience. Many of the columnists who got it serially wrong a decade ago are now being commissioned to scare-monger about the UK’s net zero journey, even though the destination and the route are entirely rationally optimistic. There’s also a pattern, now, of writers dismissing every technology that’s actually getting built, and instead declaring that ‘we need X’ instead, where X is something that doesn’t exist in commercial form. It’s a clever way to pretend that you care about climate change while actually arguing for it not to be tackled. I guess a curmudgeonly desire to be on the wrong side of history is still, for some, a hard habit to break.” 

ENDS

Notes to editors:

1. The researchers, Simon Cocks, James Painter and Dan Hunt examined 303 opinion pieces and editorials published in the UK's main national newspapers, online and/or in print, from August 2013 to September 2014, and from August 2023 to September 2024. The full report is available here. 

    

2. Robin Lustig sits on ECIU’s Advisory Board, as did Prof Joanna Haigh.

 For more information or for interview requests:

George Smeeton, Head of Communications, ECIU, Tel: +44 (0)7894 571 153, email: george.smeeton@eciu.net