Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumPolarization May Cause Climate Communication to Backfire
https://nicholas.duke.edu/about/news/Polarization-Climate-Communication-Backfire[font face=Serif][font size=5]Polarization May Cause Climate Communication to Backfire[/font]
April 26, 2016 - 6:00 pm
Featuring
MENGLIN (JACK) ZHOU
[font size=3]DURHAM, N.C. -- Political advocates who support action on climate change have long sought the perfect message for swaying skeptics. If the issue can be framed correctly, they believe, the battle can be won.
A new Duke University study suggests it may be more complicated than that.
Because climate change has become polarized along party lines, its no longer just an issue of finding the right framing to convey relevant facts, said study author Jack Zhou, who will graduate with a Ph.D. in environmental politics next month from Dukes Nicholas School of the Environment. It has become a matter of political identity, particularly the political party we feel closest to.
Even efforts to frame climate change around seemingly win-win issues such as economic growth, national security or poverty alleviation are likely to backfire, Zhous study finds, if the communication conflicts with the partisan identity of the targeted audience.
[/font][/font]
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2016.1166602April 26, 2016 - 6:00 pm
Featuring
MENGLIN (JACK) ZHOU
[font size=3]DURHAM, N.C. -- Political advocates who support action on climate change have long sought the perfect message for swaying skeptics. If the issue can be framed correctly, they believe, the battle can be won.
A new Duke University study suggests it may be more complicated than that.
Because climate change has become polarized along party lines, its no longer just an issue of finding the right framing to convey relevant facts, said study author Jack Zhou, who will graduate with a Ph.D. in environmental politics next month from Dukes Nicholas School of the Environment. It has become a matter of political identity, particularly the political party we feel closest to.
Even efforts to frame climate change around seemingly win-win issues such as economic growth, national security or poverty alleviation are likely to backfire, Zhous study finds, if the communication conflicts with the partisan identity of the targeted audience.
[/font][/font]
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 585 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Polarization May Cause Climate Communication to Backfire (Original Post)
OKIsItJustMe
Apr 2016
OP
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)1. The climate change debate has become a matter of competing belief systems.
Belief systems can't be challenged by presenting conflicting evidence. That only entrenches them deeper.
Belief systems change one funeral at a time.
Or in the case of climate change, one billion funerals at a time.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)3. it's like with the fundies--the only way to get them to stop their beliefs is to stop them from
being fundies!
it's always extraordinarily dangerous when something is turned into a culture-war identity marker: even flat earthism can take over in America in a few years this way
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)2. We live in a country governed by
IDEOLOGY....NOT facts and reason. Alas. Ms Bigmack