Whether global warming and climate change or the corona virus: in an increasingly globalized society, journalism has the task of communicating more complex topics than ever before. Another thing these topics have in common is that they are often fact-based and involve uncertainties: In climate reporting, there is a wealth of data and evidence-based positions from climate research, but the forecasts made by experts on this basis always contain only probabilities: The actual consequences could be much worse or even less bad. The situation is similar when it comes to reporting on a pandemic, as is currently the case around Covid-19.
This article takes a theoretical approach to the understanding of the roles and functions of journalism (Burkhard, Wagner, Weischenberg) and focuses on the social functions of journalism, in particular: Empowerment. This means i.e. the task of giving people arguments and options for action through reporting so that they themselves can participate in discussions and act more consciously.
We have tried to gain further insights by using a multi-method design (content analysis, panel group survey and guided interviews).
The starting point was a content analysis: How did selected (German) daily newspapers and journalistic online platforms of daily media with regional and national focus report on climate change and global warming around the climate summit in September 2019 in New York: What was discussed, who had their say, how were arguments put forward? The sample comprised around 500 analysis units. Findings are very much event-centred (climate protests) and person-centred reporting (Greta Thunberg etc.); many media still give little space to constructive elements in reporting (what can I do? Where has something improved?).
A panel group survey with 15 people (age: 20-25) using selected examples of climate reporting showed that this kind of reporting quickly loses audience. A 'reporting overload' means that the topic is less and less taken note of; this also applies to common methods of making a topic communicable via e.g. focusing on prominent people (i.e. Thunberg). The interviewees stated that in topics with far-reaching consequences, research-based reporting would be more important to them and, above all, concrete indications of what they can do.
Guideline interviews with four journalists whose newsrooms have special responsibility for climate reporting led to a number of approaches where they see improvements. They see no need for special guidelines for reporting on climate change, the basic journalistic quality standards are followed as usual. They see the biggest challenge in reporting on climate change as 'being truly constructive. In the wake of these daily bad news stories, a feeling of powerlessness quickly spreads among the people'. (Bastian Schlange, Correctiv). The interviewees describe concepts for a dialogue with the public, also in public events, about climate change; they refuse to give much space to the positions of deniers, but to fact-checks on their allegations. The various positions in climate research, on the other hand, are given a place and are taken up 'with the maximum transparency' about the background of the scientists and the institutes.