Should climate journalism be driven by Advocacy or Expertise?

March 8, 2025

“Who speaks for the Silent Sentinels – we refer to as Nature? Who speaks for the climate? Who speaks for the forests? Who speaks for the ocean?”
(Ganapathy, 2020, p.12)

Currently, there is no country that has not yet felt the impact of climate change. There are countless reports of monstrous storms, unseasonal weather, droughts, earthquakes, and other evidence that warn us that climate change is not something that is yet to come but rather one of the present and greatest challenges of contemporary society (Khan et al., 2024). Talking about climate change means talking about those whose lives are impacted daily by the ongoing and growing crisis. It means talking about habitats and species at risk of extinction, communities in the Global South, ethnic minorities, populations in areas especially vulnerable to natural disasters, women, children—it means talking about all of us (Voss, 2008). The climate crisis is primarily affecting communities in the Pacific Islands, which are eroding, “sinking,” and experiencing an increase in the frequency of environmental disasters, as well as indigenous communities in the Arctic Circle, where ice melting is becoming increasingly evident. Talking about climate change is talking about human rights. Inuit leader and activist Sheila Watt-Cloutier states in her book The Right to Be Cold that “when the ice is gone, so too will be the wisdom” (Watt-Cloutier, 2015, p.51). Many communities live in harmony with the land and have always depended on it not only for food but also for the formation of their entire cultural identity. The climate crisis, therefore, poses a direct threat to the cultural preservation of these peoples.

To keep up with this accelerating crisis, climate media coverage is becoming increasingly urgent, as well as increasingly demanding. For many years, the media has played a fundamental role in shaping public opinion—whether by constructing and reinforcing perceptions of events, perpetuating or deconstructing social realities and issues, or mobilizing groups for certain causes. Thus, the media serve as the primary source of information on environmental issues today, as well as the foundation that supports the bridge connecting us to parts of the world beyond our personal observation, allowing us to experience the world, even if indirectly (McQuail, 2009).

The interdependence and symbiotic relationships between living beings and natural systems are of utmost importance for the survival and preservation of society. Therefore, it is necessary to interpret and communicate effectively, with a continuous flow of factual and credible information, about climate issues and their impacts. Consistency in reporting can influence how local entities, non-governmental organizations, and governments perceive signals from the field, helping not only in making essential political decisions but also in promoting active community engagement in these issues (Ganapathy, 2020).

However, as urgent as it may be, “climate change is a notoriously difficult topic for journalists to cover, to maintain editors’ interest, and to capture audiences’ attention” (Painter, 2010, p.3). Reporting on these issues is a complex yet immensely relevant task. Reporters and media outlets covering environmental issues and their consequences not only raise awareness among disconnected and inattentive audiences but also tell the stories of marginalized and vulnerable communities facing the heavy burden of a changing climate and Earth (UNESCO, 2018). But let’s not be deceived—climate journalism is a dangerous field filled with challenges. Journalists covering the climate crisis often find themselves in remote and isolated places, far from immediate help or legal protection, whether they are covering illegal mining in Africa, earthquakes in the Himalayas, deforestation in the Amazon, or ice melting in the Arctic. The remoteness of these locations and the urgency of the climate crisis add significant layers of risk to the profession. These layers characterize these missions as dangerous and highlight the unique vulnerabilities associated with climate journalism (UNESCO, 2018).

Given this complexity, a pertinent question arises: What should be the role of a journalist when reporting on the climate crisis? Should climate journalism take an advocacy stance, defend causes, and encourage political and social action? Or should it focus on being specialized journalism, with a more technical, objective, and rigorous approach? And what are the impacts of these different approaches on public opinion and environmental policies?

To explore these questions, it is interesting to go to the core of the matter, start from the beginning, and allow ourselves to question—without fear—what journalism truly is and what its characteristics and functions are. According to Nelson Traquina (2020), one could poetically say that journalism, in itself, is life—just as it is told. It is life, with all its complexity and dimensions, like an encyclopedia (Traquina, 2020). It is essentially a system of information production that serves the public interest and seeks to generate society’s understanding of itself and the world in general (Traquina, 2020). He further states that journalists should answer that journalism is nothing less than reality. However, many times, the news does not reflect a pure version of reality but rather an engineered version of it, where journalists and editors decide what is relevant, how it should be framed, and how it should be presented (Traquina, 2020). Traquina (2020) highlights the tension between informational pressure and commercial pressure, which often impacts the autonomy and quality of news produced, making impartial journalistic coverage more difficult. It is important to critically analyze who benefits from certain narratives, how they benefit, and who is losing, being diminished, or harmed by them (Ganapathy, 2020). We can reflect on how, due to the climate lobby—composed of groups with economic interests such as fossil fuel companies—media organizations are often pressured commercially, influencing public opinion and potentially weakening environmental regulations (Boykoff, 2008). This challenge can be overcome with constant and rigorous fact-checking.

To debate and characterize what kind of journalism climate journalism should be, it is relevant to first explore the parallel between cause-driven journalism and specialized journalism. Two of the main differences between these types of journalism are intentionality and objectives. Cause-driven journalism does not focus solely on informing but also seeks to raise public awareness and engage audiences in social mobilization and justice promotion (Ward, 2015). It positions itself as an “advocate” for a cause. However, Hulme (2009) states that media outlets covering climate issues often use alarmist narratives to generate empathy. The “catastrophe” narrative is excessively used, which may initially be effective in attracting attention and engagement but can also have the opposite effect—leading to apathy or denial of the problem. In other words, when used carelessly, cause-driven journalism can have unintended negative effects (Hulme, 2009).

On the other hand, specialized journalism aims to inform in a detailed and in-depth manner on a specific topic. This requires precision and technical understanding of the subject. It represents a neutral and objective stance, focused on informing audiences based on data and scientific evidence. A study conducted in the United States showed that over time, climate journalists have significantly increased their climate literacy compared to politicians and representatives of global organizations (Shäfer, 2015), demonstrating the need for these professionals to be in constant learning.
Ganapathy (2020) further states that there is a growing need to integrate and combine both approaches to achieve a more real, transparent, and fair journalistic coverage. Media coverage that highlights success stories and presents concrete solutions can inspire mobilization and capture the public’s attention, while an approach focused solely on disasters and fatality can lead to apathy or despair. Thus, it is crucial to carefully choose the framing and language used for effective climate coverage (Ganapathy, 2020).

According to McQuail (2010), communication theories can be classified into two different perspectives: media-centric and society-centric perspectives. These are distinguished by how the media interact with society and their objectives in transmitting information. In the context of climate journalism, these perspectives can be useful for understanding and questioning the extent to which the media act independently, shaping public perception of climate change, or whether political and economic forces are at play behind the scenes.

The case of advocacy journalism is an example of a media-centric perspective, where the media take on a leading role in shaping public opinion. This approach highlights how, through the sharing of climate narratives, people’s understanding is shaped to influence political decisions or promote behavioral changes. For example, during the coverage of COP21, journalists took on the role of “advocates” of the process, defending and rejecting political decisions that emerged from the conference. This phenomenon helped create a sense of urgency that drove environmental commitments from various governments and corporations (Boykoff, 2011).

On the other hand, specialized journalism is often associated with a society-centric perspective, focusing on how external influences—such as political, economic, or institutional interests—can shape climate coverage. An example of this perspective is the media coverage of illegal mining in the Amazon, which grew significantly between 2019 and 2022. Investigative journalists not only provided statistical information on deforestation but also demonstrated the link between political decisions and agricultural interests in the increase in environmental destruction (Couldry & Hepp, 2017). These reports ultimately sparked international outrage and pressure on the Brazilian government to take action against this reality (Couldry & Hepp, 2017).

Another crucial factor to consider in news coverage is journalistic ethics. Climate journalism is no exception; it is essential to uphold an ethical commitment—not only to report facts based on rigorous scientific data but also to consider the social and moral implications of the stories being told (Ward, 2015). Ward (2015) further argues that journalism is a social practice that requires responsibility to be effectively executed. This is particularly relevant in climate journalism, where misinformation or mismanagement of responsibilities can have alarming consequences for the environment and the most vulnerable populations. Impartiality is one of the fundamental principles of good journalistic practice and should be seen as an ethical and social responsibility. Ward (2015) therefore suggests that, depending on the context, climate journalism should adopt an integrated approach, belonging both to specialized journalism and advocacy journalism.

Climate journalism operates within a multidisciplinary field that simultaneously interconnects natural sciences, public policy, and cultural studies (Wolf, 1995). For this, journalists must not only be proficient in traditional journalistic techniques but also have a deep and detailed understanding of environmental and social dynamics. From this perspective, climate journalism can be seen both as specialized journalism, requiring a certain degree of knowledge and precision, and as advocacy journalism, dedicated to promoting a more just and equitable society. Collaboration between journalists and scientists can be beneficial in translating complex concepts and analyzing data more accurately.

Today, newspapers such as The New York Times and The Guardian already strive to integrate both approaches, ensuring scientific accuracy and detail through complementary data and studies while also highlighting human stories—both of people affected by climate change and of local initiatives seeking to adapt to constant environmental uncertainty. By doing so, they provide narratives that combine technical and scientific processes with inspiring details that generate empathy. Journalists should seek continuous training in environmental literacy to stay up to date on the development of the climate crisis and climate justice. Additionally, forming partnerships with local support networks that minimize risks in the field should be a priority.

After analyzing the topic, I reflect that climate journalism, in my opinion, does not need to be seen solely as advocacy journalism or specialized journalism. It does not require a dichotomy or compartmentalization. Instead, it should incorporate elements from both approaches, making it better suited to meet the needs of modern society and navigate the complexities of this issue. It will be more effective the greater the journalists’ ability to inform with precision while also responding to the emotional needs of the public. Therefore, it is necessary to find a balance between ethical responsibilities and the practical demands of the audience. The role of a journalist is not only to transmit information and report events but also to act as a mediator between society and the various realities that constitute it (Traquina, 2020).

It is expected that the climate debate and the urgency for direct action are only just beginning. “Although it is a beautiful idea to imagine that humans once lived in harmony with nature, it is not clear that this was ever really the case.” (Kolbert, 2014, p.23). In recent decades, humanity’s relationship with the environment has been marked by exploitation and disconnection. However, I hope that future generations will experience greater harmony with nature and greater social justice and equality.

References

Boykoff, M. T. (2008). Media and scientific communication: A case of climate change. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 305(1), 11–18.
https://doi.org/10.1144/SP305.3

Boykoff, M. T. (2011). Who Speaks for the Climate Making: Sense of Media Reporting on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The mediated construction of reality. Polity Press.

Ganapathy, D. (2022). Media and climate change: Making sense of press narratives. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003015673

Hulme, M. (2009). Why we disagree about climate change: Understanding controversy, inaction, and opportunity. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841200

Khan, S., Aslam, M. J., Safdar, A., & Tariq, M. (2024). Reporting climate change: Factors affecting media coverage of climate change in Pakistan. Qlantic Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.55737/qjss.319795411

Kolbert, E. (2014). The sixth extinction: An unnatural history. Henry Holt and Company.

McQuail, D. (2010). Mcquail’s mass communication theory (6th ed). Sage Publications.

Painter, J. (2010). Summoned by science: Reporting climate change at Copenhagen and beyond. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford.

Schäfer, M. S. (2015). Climate Change and the Media. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 853–859). Elsevier. 
Https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.91079-1

Traquina, N. (2020). Porque as notícias são como são (Vol. 1). Florianópolis, SC: Insular Livros

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2018). World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: Global Report 2017/2018. United Nations. https://doi.org/10.18356/9789213632857

Voss, M. (2008). The vulnerable can’t speak. An integrative vulnerability approach to disaster and climate change research. Behemoth, 1(2), 45–56. 
https://doi.org/10.1524/behe.2008.0022

Watt-Cloutier, S. (2015). The right to be cold: One woman’s fight to protect the Arctic and save the planet from climate change. University of Minnesota Press.

Ward, S. J. A. (2015). Radical Media Ethics. Wiley Blackwell.

Wolf, M. (1995). Teorias da comunicação. Editorial Presença.