ECREA16-Abstract_book

577 / 658

575
Friday, November 111 8 : 0 0 – 1 9 : 3 0
SCI03 Climate Change and Audience Engagement
PP 470 The Audience Is Present but the Curtain Remains Closed – Media Reception During an International Climate Event
I. Hoppe1, D. Arlt2, F. Schmidt3, J. Schmitt3, M. Brüggemann3
1 Universität Hamburg, Institut für Journalistik und Kommunikationswissenschaft, Hamburg, Germany
2 Universität Bern, Bern, Switzerland
3 Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
The UN Climate Summits are international events and main drivers of media attention on climate change worldwide (Schäfer, Ivanova & Schmidt, 2014).
They are a main point of reference in climate communication research. Most studies focus on communicators on site such as journalists, politicians or
NGOs (Roosvall & Tegelberg, 2013; Russell, 2013) – or on the media coverage (Zamith, Pinto & Villar, 2013). However, there is no published research fo‑
cusing the audience perspective during Climate Summits. To address this research gap, taking the Climate Summit COP-21 in Paris 2015 as a case study,
a mixed-method study combined group discussions (n= 15) during the event and a three-wave quantitative panel survey in Germany. Like Smith & Joffe
(2013) and Ryghaug, Sorensen, Holtan und Naess (2011) we assume that the meaning of climate change is socially constructed and recipients make sense
of it by interpretation and communication. Our main research question is: How do people experience media coverage during COP-21 (see for general climate
reception studies e.g. Leiserowitz, Maiback, Roser-Renouf, Feinberg & Rosenthal, 2015; Ryghaug et al., 2011; Smith & Joffe, 2013; Taddicken, 2013; Zhao,
2009)? With regard to the ECREA conference theme we would like to deepen two time-related aspects: How do memories of former UN-conferences (e.g.
Copenhagen) influence the reception of the current event? How does the anticipation of the future outcome of the conference frame the reception (hope vs.
frustration)? ResultsThe main pattern of reception can be described by Goffman’s [1959]‘front stage’and‘back stage’metaphor. At the beginning of the con‑
ference most recipients perceived the climate summit as an important political event, for which they remembered prominent (groups of) actors introduced
by media coverage, like the spectacular opening ceremony with Obama and the official press picture with its enormous amount of 169 state representatives.
However, after the intial ‘spectacular opening’ of an event that promised to reach an international climate agreement, the discussants describe a feeling
of being disappointed: sitting in the audience while the curtain has fallen, and neither being able to see what is happening on the front stage nor getting
insights into the negotiations at the back stage (“After [the beginning] there was NOTHING in the media, NO coverage of the negotiations, […] But I wanted
to know: what are the problems they are faced with in Paris, about what are they negotiating?”). The tension of the audience was pushed by memories on
earlier COPs and their failure as well as by the anticipation of a good or bad ending of the current event („It will fail, like always. Like every single summit.
All these efforts […]. You do have this fear. You don’t want to hear that again.“).
PP 471 Climate Change in the Media: Perceptions and Expectations of the Audience
M. Taddicken1, N. Wicke1, L. Wolff1
1 Technische Universität Braunschweig, Institute of Social Sciences, Braunschweig, Germany
During the last decades the interaction of science, media and citizenship has changed and is nowadays characterised by a perspective of a„Public Engage‑
ment of Science“ (Schäfer et al., 2015; Schäfer, 2009). Mass media coverage on scientific issues has grown enormously (Bauer, 2011; Elmer et al., 2008). One
of the scientific topics of great social relevance, which is a constant part of the global media agenda is climate change (Schmidt et al., 2013). At the same
time, scientific findings about climate change are highly abstract, uncertain and partly conflicting (van der Sluijs, 2012). Therefore, media plays an import‑
ant role in constructing and communicating this topic towards the public (von Storch, 2009). Studies show that German mass media often focus on scientific
arguments, for instance citing the IPCC reports (Engesser & Brüggemann, 2015; Peters & Heinrichs, 2008) and emphasize the certainty of scientific findings
(Maurer, 2011). Discussions about quality and functions of (scientific) journalism are dominated by a communicator’s perspective (e.g. Blöbaum, 2008).
The audience perspective is underrepresented in researching media coverage of scientific issues.Therefore, this study deals with the following questions: 1.)
How is the media coverage on climate change perceived and evaluated by the audience? 2.)What do recipients expect from the media?To investigate the at‑
titudes towards media coverage on climate change, four group discussions were conducted. Three media reports, offering (1) a highly scientific, (2) a con‑
tradictionary and (3) a satirical perspective on climate change, were provided as stimuli. Based on the results of a standardized questionnaire, the groups
were composed regarding age, sex, knowledge on and attitudes towards climate change. The participants refer to functional and role attributions towards
the media system and its actors as well as presentational aspects. On content level, climate change is reflected as a media-constructed topic. The media
coverage is perceived as sensational and criticized for its economic orientation. Quality and credibility are mostly attributed to public service broadcasting.
The participants demand a higher media attention on climate change. Especially new information is required to overcome the weariness of the ongoing
coverage. Hence a sophisticated explanative coverage is preferred, presenting objective facts which are at the same time easy to follow, giving background
information of scientific results and illustrating processes. Reports emphasizing contrary research results overwhelm many participants, which favour co‑
herent statements. Therefore an educational coverage is required, provoking a higher problem awareness in the society and giving recommendations for
a sensitive climate behaviour. In contrast, others approve an investigative coverage, discussing different perspectives and critical reflections on climate
change. Furthermore, satirical forms of coverage are evaluated contrarily – positively for its entertaining qualities, negatively for inappropriately handling
such a serious topic. In summary, the investigated audience perceptions, evaluations and expectations towards media coverage of climate change vary be‑
tween different normative orientations, compatible to theoretical concepts concerning functions and roles of journalism (e.g. Wyss, 2005). Results help sci‑
ence communicators by understanding how multifarious and informative media coverage can arouse interest on scientific issues and reach diverse publics.