Uncertain 2 Degrees J Baehr I Hense L

Uncertain 2 Degrees J. Baehr, I. Hense, L. Kutzbach, S. Rödder, M. Scheffold, J. Scheffran Session 9, 05. 06. 2019 Climate Communication Lecturer: Michael Brüggemann Moderator: Maike Scheffold Course coordination: Lars Kutzbach, Simone Rödder, Maike Scheffold

Today's Schedule Uncertainty Talks incl. Reflection Climate Communication– Input by Michael Brüggemann Role-play preparation Role-play 5 (question and roles) Homework 9 Panel preparation: Status Quo and Open questions

Uncertainty talks “Does uncertainty make it easier for people to ignore the risks of climate change? ” Host: Jürgen Scheffran

Uncertainty talks Reflection

Lecture “Climate Communication” Michael Brüggemann 12. 01. 202 2 5

(1) How Journalists Communicate Uncertainties and (2) What Audiences Make of it Michael Brüggemann 12. 01. 202 2 6

1. Is there a problem, why should we care?

2. Journalism dealing with uncertainties related to (climate) science

Should journalists emphasize scientific uncertainties on Climate change? „Die Klimawandelleugner gewähren zu lassen ist eine größere Gefahr, als die Unsicherheitverschweiger davonkommen zu lassen. “

What kind of uncertainties are mentioned in these articles? How do journalists evaluate these uncertainties? „We lack knowledge. The risks posed by climate change are large, and so is our ignorance about them. Scientists are baffled by many of the underlying forces that determine the rate and extent of the epidemic. They lack the models that will enable them to calculate and predict the consequences with reasonable accuracy. E. g. scientists continuously adjust expectations for global sea rise, unfortunately upward each time. This is further underlined, by the science’s tendency to stick to safe estimates of risk and thus continually lag behind reality. Consequently, this results in delayed and weak responses. […] Today many of the leading climate scientists argue that we have passed a point of no return in regards to the climate changes. This meaning, that even though we reduce our carbon dioxide emissions markedly the coming years, the earth will still reach a significant turning point within this decade. […] It is unacceptable and disheartening that we do not put massive efforts into getting more certainty about the dramatic prospects for the future of the world. No one today can say with certainty whether and when the possible doomsday scenarios become reality — or to what extent. But we owe it to the next generations to find out. ” Huff. Post, 2. 1. 2011, updated, 6. 12. 2017, https: //www. huffingtonpost. com/erik-rasmussen/the-worlds-mostdangerous_1_b_817239. html

What kind of uncertainties are mentioned in these articles? How do journalists evaluate these uncertainties? “The target has a long, winding history that is rooted as much in politics and economics as in science. […] A decade of subsequent research added scientific support to the notion that 2 C was a dangerous threshold. […] Yet even as the 2 C target has become a touchstone for the climate talks, scientific theory and real-world observations have begun to raise serious questions about whether the target is stringent enough. […. ] scientists realize they may have underestimated the vulnerability of the ice sheets in Greenland Antarctica. […] 30 feet, or even more, of sea level rise, though scientists have no clear idea of how fast that could happen. They hope it would take thousands of years, but cannot rule out a faster rise that might overwhelm the ability of human society to adapt. […] they have enlisted scientists in a major review of whether it is strict enough. […] it is not at all clear how a lower target could be met. […] In practice, moreover, a tighter temperature limit would not alter the advice that scientists have been giving to politicians for decades about cutting emissions. Their recommendation is simple and blunt: Get going now. ” NYT, 15. 12. 2014 https: //www. nytimes. com/2014/12/16/science/earth/is-a-two-degree-limit-on-global-warming-off-target. html

Journalism: A professsion that deals with uncertain situations Routinizing the Unexpected (Tuchman 1973): Professional routines help to deal with having to decide quickly in uncertain situations - Typification: translating occurences into a limited set news stories - Following certain practices (such as quoting sources, mentioning facts) as substitute for objectivity Journalists in need of validation (Donsbach 2004): - Preserve consistency with their own prior beliefs - Search validation from their peers

Journalistic Reconstruction of Scientific Uncertainties Context Routine science coverage Conflict coverage Implications for news item Leaving out caveats „neutral“ assemblage of pro-and contra-claims emphasizing uncertainty Contextualization New, surprising finding Conflict http: //video. foxnews. com/v/5586316094001/ ? #sp=show-clips (elaboration of Stocking (1999))

Journalistic Reconstruction of Scientific Uncertainties Context Routine science coverage Conflict coverage Implications for news item Leaving out caveats „neutral“ assemblage of pro-and contra-claims with regards to uncertainty Contextualization New, surprising finding Conflict Beat Science beat Political beat Sourcing Single source Two contradicting sources Science as process Findings rather than methods Findings (scandalization of process) Pattern of coverage across news items Unexplained flip-flops Unresolved controversies (further elabortion of Stocking (1999))

Studies of journalistic treatment of uncertainties related to climate change • Leaving out uncertainties with regards to future impacts of climate change: FAZ, Spiegel, BILD (Maurer 2011)

Journalists as passive conveyers of the IPCC‘s uncertainty terms • Almost every second article on IPCC reports uses terms „confidence“ and „likelyhood“, but only 15% of articles explain terms (Painter 2013) • Journalists use IPCC’s calibrated language, but rarely explain it and translate it only, if a scientist offers an analogy: “as certain as cigarettes being dangerous to your health” (Collins/Nerlich 2015)

Uncertainties in climate coverage as mirror of (slowly changing) national issue culture, editorial policies • Strong „uncertainty“ frame in the US (Zehr 2000) - „Certainty“ frame in Sweden (Olausson 2009) • Uncertainty mentioned in conservative German newspapers more often than in liberal papers (Haßler, Maurer, Oschatz 2016) • Uncertainty frame highly prominent around 2007 IPCC reports (AR 4) and less so in 2013 (Painter 2013) • “settled science” and „uncertain science“ frames around IPCC reports 2013/14 (AR 5) (O’Neill, Kurz, Williams, Boykoff, & Wiersma, 2015)

Context Routine science coverage Conflict coverage Implications for news item Leaving out caveats „neutral“ assemblage of pro-and contra-claims with regards to uncertainty Contextualization New, surprising finding Conflict Beat Science beat Political beat Sourcing Single source Two contradicting sources Science as process Findings (scandalization of process) Pattern of coverage across news items Unexplained flip-flops Unresolved controversies Internal drivers: Journalistic norms Striving for facts, simplification News value conflict Norm of balance External drivers: Advocacy Science PR Environmental Activism „Merchants of doubt“ (Oreskes/Conway 2010) (elaboration of Stocking (1999))

Take home: Journalistic treatment of scientific uncertainties § Leaving them aside § Translating uncertainties into conflict coverage: duelling scientists § Passive conveyors of scientists‘ communications (IPCC language) without contextualization/translation by journalists § Changing issue culture: over time, dependent on national, political an editorial contexts

3. What Publics make of this

How the public reacts to uncertainty information Science perspective Public perception „Research science“ „school science“ (Painter 2013 vii) Uncertainties as part of science Uncertainty as failure of science Treating uncertainties as probability, confidence intervals, margins of error Interpreting uncertainty as doubt, ignorance § Media messages: producing uncertainty without necessarily talking about uncertainty (Painter 2013): “meta-message” on climate change: “nobody really knows” (Ereaut/Segnit 2006)

Revision: Media effects: Mutual process: media shaping – society shapes media Effects of media content on knowledge – attitudes – behaviour - Dependent on specific content -> different effects for different media content - Dependent on prior knowledge/beliefs – values/attitutes – behaviour; social contexts: group membership) -> different effects for different audience members - Limited short-time effects detected in experiments (agenda-setting, priming, framing; very limited effects on behaviour) - Large cumulative long-term impacts of media use (e. g. cultivation, medialisation)

Uncertainty: A psychological perspective Sources “the conscious, metacognitive awareness of ignorance” (Smithson, 1999) Hillen, Marij A. ; Gutheil, Caitlin M. ; Strout, Tania D. ; Smets, Ellen M. A. ; Han, Paul K. J. (2017): Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. In Social Science & Medicine 180, pp. 62– 75. DOI: 10. 1016/j. socscimed. 2017. 03. 024.

Integrative Model: How people react to uncertainty Definition Uncertainty Tolerance: „the set of negative and positive psychological responses […] provoked by the conscious awareness of ignorance about particular aspects of the world. “ Hillen, Marij A. ; Gutheil, Caitlin M. ; Strout, Tania D. ; Smets, Ellen M. A. ; Han, Paul K. J. (2017): Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. In Social Science & Medicine 180, pp. 62– 75. DOI: 10. 1016/j. socscimed. 2017. 03. 024.

Integrative Model: How people react to uncertainty Definition UT: „the set of negative and positive psychological responses […] provoked by the conscious awareness of ignorance about particular aspects of the world. “ Hillen, Marij A. ; Gutheil, Caitlin M. ; Strout, Tania D. ; Smets, Ellen M. A. ; Han, Paul K. J. (2017): Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. In Social Science & Medicine 180, pp. 62– 75. DOI: 10. 1016/j. socscimed. 2017. 03. 024.

How the public reacts to uncertainty information § Different reactions to information about uncertainties related to risks: increased trust – or - suspicions of incompetence (Johnson/Lsovic 1995; Johnson 2003) … depending on 1. Trust in speaker 2. Prior beliefs about the respective risk § Aversion to uncertainties resulting from disagreement of two sources as compared to uncertainties agreed upon (Smithson 1999)

Impact of falsely balanced coverage (Corbett/Durfee 2004): Study on Arctic Sea Ice – Partly thickening

Misunderstanding the IPCC Uncertainty language Survey in Germany -----71% 56% -----45% 42% ------ Budescu, David V. ; Por, Han-Hui; Broomell, Stephen B. ; Smithson, Michael (2014): The interpretation of IPCC probabilistic statements around the world. In Nature Clim. Change 4 (6), pp. 508– 512.

Role play: Imagine you are different members of „the“ audience: How would you react to uncertainties presented by journalists and scientists concerning the 2 degree limit? What are your demands towards journalists‘/scientists‘ communications? If you were: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A dedicated master student of SICSS (of course you are) A 70 year old former Professor of Physics An 8 year old child in the 3 rd grade of elementary school A 40 year old retailer of VWs A 27 year old owner of a coffee-to-go bar You may come up with a totally different role, or you might slightly modify them!

Homework - 9 Due: June 19 Part I: Next lecture, you are going to engage in the 5 th role-play. The question of that role-play is: "How would you react to uncertainties presented by journalists and scientists concerning the 2 degree limit? What are your demands towards journalists‘/scientists‘ communications? “ The contributing roles are: a 70 year old former Professor of Physics, an 8 year old child in the 3 rd grade of elementary school, a 40 year old retailer of VWs and a 27 year old owner of a coffee-to-go bar. Please prepare for the role-play as described below : 1. Define your role more concretely and prepare a sign stating your definition. Bring this to the role-play. 2. Prepare the arguments for your role in the role-play regarding the question in your role-group. 3. Decide upon the tasks: main speaker. If you run into any problems, please contact Maike Scheffold (maike. scheffold@unihamburg. de) by June 12.

Homework - 9 Due: June 26 Part II: At the end of the semester, you have to write an essay to pass the class. We decided to provide you with two steps of internal reviews in the writing process. To prepare for the review, we ask you to: 1. Read the Essay Guidelines on the blog carefully. Write down questions. 2. Choose topic and title of your essay. Draft a first structure of your essay- think about questions like: What is my hypothesis? What is storyline of my essay? What literature do I want to use? . . . Make sure to be able to explain your ideas to your fellow students and the lecturers on 26 th June. Due: June 23 Part III: Draft a “paragraph”-structure of your introduction. This “paragraph” structure should provide some details on what you want to introduce and discuss in which order in the introduction. In groups of two, you will discuss each other’s drafts on 26 th of June. Further information will be given next class. If you run into any problems, please contact Maike Scheffold (maike. scheffold@unihamburg. de) by June 22.

Panel: Status Quo and Open Questions Thursday, 4 th July 15: 15 to 16: 45 ZMAW building room 22/23 (time slot of the KLIMACAMPUS Colloquium) • Question and moderation • Panellists (more confirmations? ) • Housekeeping: catering, outreach (room for catering? )