Climate change discourses on social media are often hardly about climate change at all. Outside of information posted by scientific institutions like NASA or climate activists such as Greta Thunberg, the discussions about climate change appear far removed from debates on actual “science.” One blog that appears to focus on information about climate science posts about a plethora of other topics, including COVID-19 misinformation, the “illegitimacy” of the 2020 Presidential election, and how NASA is a “fraud.” How are these topics brought up in a place that seems to be solely focused on “climate change?” Through the anthropological approach of discourse analysis (Sherzer 1987), I have observed hundreds of posts, videos, and comment threads from social media that reflect the following about climate change discourses: there are different knowledge systems and epistemologies at play, and they tend to form and reinforce themselves in echo chambers. But they do interact around volatile topics where conspiracy theorists try to expose the “truth.” When debates about climate change happen online, often it is a collision of worldview rather than a debate over “science.” One whose worldview is rooted in conspiracy theory will not listen to data from a scientific institution such as NASA if they believe that NASA is hiding something “behind the curtain” in the same way someone who listens to empirical evidence from peer reviewed articles will not listen to pseudoscience. This is the reality of the online discussions of climate change. This work is relevant to the area of science communication and my future career because it creates a basis for understanding the variety of perspectives and experiences people use to make meaning of the world around them. Additionally, it provides experience in empirical data collection and analysis, important skills for the future in an interconnected world.
Author: Ivan Wehner
Advisor: Leighton C. Peterson, Anthropology
You must be logged in to post a comment.