🌿Wild Ones #88: Environmental Communication Digest
Environmental keyword🌿: Medialization! + Speaking to the heart of the matter + Teaching Environmental Communication + more!
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F28dcc5e1-d9e8-447b-8e80-24bae4a286e6_1535x1227.jpeg)
Hi everyone, welcome back to Wild Ones, a (usually) weekly digest by me, Gavin Lamb, about news, ideas, research, and tips in environmental communication. If you’re new, welcome! You can read more about why I started Wild Ones here. Sign up here to get these digests in your inbox:
🌱Environmental Keyword
Medialization (of environmental scientists)
“In recent years, the study of scientists' relationships with the media has become dominated by the concept of medialization, a process described as the increasingly intense orientation of science to mass media practices (For an extended explication of the concept, see Rödder et al., 2012). Driven by the increasingly tight coupling of science to political, economic, and media systems, the "medialization" of science suggests that scientists build public visibility and legitimacy by adhering to what "counts" in journalistic work—i.e. novelty, a focus on events, an emphasis on the applied rather than the basic. These adaptations to journalistic work patterns (Bucchi, 2013) may even lead scientists to modify their own behaviors to encourage (or discourage) coverage of their work…”
– Sharon Dunwoody, in When Environmental Scientists Go Public. In The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication. (2nd Edition). Taylor & Francis. (2023, p. 108),
Sharon Dunwoody (1947-2022), a leading scholar in the field of science communication, writes a fascinating essay on the shifting landscape of scientific engagement with public audiences over the past 150 years in her recent chapter, ‘When Environmental Scientists Go Public.’ In telling the brief history of scientists’ views about public engagement, Dunwoody describes how during much of the 20th century, many scientists did indeed seek to share their research with the public through books or documentaries. But the criticism these scientists faced from their peers for doing so always made the decision to 'emerge from their professional cocoon’ a challenging one.
Dunwoody tells the story of Stan Temple, a lifelong wildlife ecologist and now senior fellow at the Aldo Leopold foundation who set out to reconstruct the ‘soundscape’ of the forest that Aldo Leopold could hear whenever he stepped out of his shack in the early morning dawn of 1940s Wisconsin. Reconstructed from recordings archived at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s Macaulay Library, Temple, together with the help of Christopher Bocast, a graduate student in acoustic ecology at the time, produced a 5-minute recording of the diverse species of birds that chorused to the rising sun every morning in the forest surrounding Leopold’s cabin. An attentive Leopold would jot down in great detail what he could hear nearly 80 years ago, leaving behind sketches of now vanished wildlife soundscapes in his notebooks. When the project was published on the University of Wisconsin-Madison website in 2012, Temple noted that,
“Aldo Leopold recognized that you can get a pretty good sense of land health by listening to the soundscape. If sounds are missing and things are there that shouldn’t be, it often indicates underlying ecological problems.”
A same audio recording taken of that patch of forest today, Temple says, would not just be missing the sounds of many birds, but also the presence of another sound now reverberating endlessly through the trees: a “nearby interstate highway, audible at every hour from Leopold’s storied sanctuary, and the other constant and varied noises of the human animal.”
Temple’s reconstruction of the now vanished soundscape engulfing Leopold’s shack led to an outpouring of interest from journalists in the project. As Dunwoody tells it, “Temple’s soundscape captured national attention, and he was inundated with requests for interviews. Although he admits the experience was time-consuming, Temple also feels that interactions with journalists and the public are an important part of his work as a scientist.”
On the one hand, Dunwoody highlights how a pervasive assumption about the negative effects from ‘the fallout from public communication’ has long shaped whether scientists feel sharing their work with the public is worth it. She notes that environmental scientists often ‘calibrate their popularization activities more in response to potential negative feedback than to positive feedback.’ Worries about engaging the public include being ‘burned’ by reporters misrepresenting or sensationalizing their research, the general lack of professional recognition for such labor-intensive public outreach activity in academia, and especially fears about the potential backlash when this research is connected to advocacy for particular environmental policies.
As for Stan Temple, he experienced some of these negative effects of ‘medialization’ of his research when a study he conducted in the 1990s was widely circulated in the media, which found “that feral cats killed at least 7.8 million birds each year in rural Wisconsin alone.” These results fed into failed legislation efforts to delist feral cats as a protected species in order to ‘manage them.’ Even though Temple had nothing to do with the policy efforts, he became the ‘poster boy’ for them because of his research. “It was tough dealing with the nasty calls and ugly hate mail,” he says. “I had no idea uncovering the facts would touch such a raw nerve with cat activists.”
On the other hand, the rewards for scientists’ public engagement efforts include positive effects like ‘a scientist’s research seem[ing] more salient to publics and to policy makers.’ “At the least,” Dunwoody writes, when a scientist’s research gets “medialized” in the news and other forms of media, it works as a signalling mechanism, showing the importance of a particular study or field of research, and that these are ‘worth one’s attention.’ This ‘legitimizing function’ of public engagement in wider society also plays out in a scientist’s own research community. For example, Dunwoody found that her own efforts in public engagement in the 1980s, after some of her studies gained wide media attention at the time, ultimately revealed that most of the people reaching out to her for more information were not journalists, but experts in her own field wanting to learn more about her research.
Stepping back, Dunwoody writes that many in the environmental science community continue to remain cautious or even skeptical about public engagement (and especially environmental advocacy and activism), continuing to maintain a long-held belief “that the cultural authority of science depends on scientists’ efforts to separate what science ‘knows’ from what science ‘recommends.’
In recounting Stan Temple’s relationship with the media over the years, and his at times undesired ‘medialization,’ Dunwoody notes that Temple ultimately views his public engagement efforts to communicate his research beyond the few scientists who might read his peer-reviewed articles “as an important means of leveraging both public understanding and [his] own legitimacy” as a scientist. Public outreach, for Temple was never a primary motivation to do research, but, he says, “If my research resulted in findings the public wanted and needed to hear, I wasn’t shy about getting the word out…” However, and this is probably not surprising, emerging research shows that scientists’ decision-making around how to communicate their findings to the public are becoming much more complex in a time of social media.
As Sharon Dunwoody concludes, the wide range of new media channels that our social ‘medialized’ age presents researchers with will open up a host of new opportunities, but also challenges. In particular, recent debates about whether environmental and climate scientists should engage in climate policy recommendations, let alone climate activism, appear to be rooted in long-held beliefs in various scientific communities about the negative consequences of public communication (like the loss of scientific legitimacy) rather than the growing body of research in environmental communication on this very topic. In my view, the question isn’t whether environmental scientists should engage in environmental advocacy and activism (terms we should probably flesh out a bit more too) but how best to strategize their policy advocacy and activism efforts, guided by empirical research in science and environmental communication. This research gives scientists a much more scientifically-grounded, interesting and complex picture for how best to inform their environmental advocacy and climate activism.
This last point is something I’d like to think more and write more on, so I’ll be delving into research on the topic—about whether environmental scientists should engage in environmental activism—in next week’s digest, so please stay tuned! In the meantime here are some essays/research articles on the study of scientists’ relationships with the media (or ‘medialization’) that I’ve found helpful and have informed my thinking on this environmental keyword so far😊:
Is There a Medialization of Climate Science? Results From a Survey of German Climate Scientists. By Ivanova, A., Schäfer, M. S., Schlichting, I., & Schmidt, A. (2013). Science Communication, 35(5), 626–653.
Exploring attitudes to societal relevance: the effects of reflection on research practices among Swedish environmental scientists. By Joacim Rosenlund, Peter Notini & Giangiacomo Bravo (2017), in the Journal of Responsible Innovation 4(3): 337-353.
Public communication by climate scientists: what, with whom and why? By Entradas, M., Marcelino, J., Bauer, M. W., & Lewenstein, B. (2019). Climatic Change, 154(1-2), 69–85.
Does Engagement in Advocacy Hurt the Credibility of Scientists? Results from a Randomized National Survey Experiment. By Kotcher, J. E., Myers, T. A., Vraga, E. K., Stenhouse, N., & Maibach, E. W. (2017). Environmental Communication, 11(3), 415–429.
The Science of Seasons on an Out-of-Sync Planet. By Jamie Bugel in Edge Effects Magazine.
📚 What I’m reading
Susanne C. Moser, “Speaking to the heart of the matter: The emergence of a humanistic environmental communication.” Chapter 31 in Hansen, A., & Cox, R. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication. (2nd Edition). Taylor & Francis. (2023, p. 456):
I recently checked out a copy of the new edition of The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication, and following a weird habit of mine, I start from the back of the book and read through the chapters in reverse. The last chapter in this case, is Susanne C. Moser’s “Speaking to the heart of the matter,” a wonderful discussion of how to reimagine the role of environmental communication in this moment of ecological crisis.
“It is not unreasonable then to ask whether the environmental communication field may be losing touch with the very heart of communication at a crucial time. Despite all our communication options and opportunities, despite our skill and sophistication, are we still serving the deepest purpose of all communication, namely, to exchange ideas and information, to hear and be heard, to create understanding and foster connection among us (some would extend the circle beyond humans (Peterson et al. 2007), and, ultimately, to ensure survival? This question becomes ever more important to ask of the kind of communication needed most as environmental changes, disasters, and continual degradation of our life world take on a global scale. In such a time, what is called for first and foremost is not persuasion, education, and deliberation (though none of these will lose in importance), but kind and compassionate human support. Not conversion but respect and dignity. Not a battle of the minds, but a meeting of the hearts.”
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fee1a6c97-81ee-42ad-bc2d-1ccf369dbcee_3024x4032.jpeg)
🎧 What I’m listening to
ROSS REID on How We Talk About What Matters. On the For the Wild Podcast:
“Ross shares the journey behind his work as “Nerdy About Nature,” and the passion for education, science, and the outdoors that drives the project. Breaking down what he wants people to get from his content, he considers how to get people to pay attention to the issues that matter without feeding into the seemingly endless loop of the attention economy. Ross and Ayana delve into critical questions about advocacy and activism in times of social media, and consider what it would truly mean to engage in action that connects and protects.”
👀What I’m watching
Also watching: Degrowth as a Response to Climate Crisis. A conversation with Kohei Saito and David Wallace-Wells, moderated by Meehan Crist (April 24, 2024, Georgetown University):
“What is the degrowth agenda, and what are its origins and core tenets? Would slowing growth necessitate a far-reaching transformation of the global capitalist system? How might such a transformation look in practice—and what are the viable alternatives? Kohei Saito and David Wallace-Wells will be exploring these questions in a conversation moderated by Meehan Crist. This event is part of the Georgetown Global Dialogues, which feature leading intellectuals from the Global South in forward-looking conversations with U.S.-based thinkers across a range of topics.”
🔍 Tools & Resources I’m exploring
Teaching Environmental Communication Zine (pdf): “This zine offers a collection of creations, collaborations, and conversations that exemplify environmental communication praxis. Dr. Catalina de Onís designed and edited this resource, in collaboration with many contributors, whose names and work appear throughout the zine. This project is dedicated to environmental communication teacher-scholar Professor Steve Schwarze.”
📰 News and Events
📰News: Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Outnumber National Delegations, Scientists, and Indigenous Peoples at Plastics Treaty Negotiations: 196 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists have registered for the critical fourth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4) to advance a global plastics treaty (April 25, 2024):
“Some may argue that everyone enjoys equal access, but that is simply not true. Lobbyists are appearing on country delegations and are gaining privileged access to Member State-only sessions, where sensitive discussions unfold behind closed doors. Beyond the troubling number of lobbyists present at the negotiation talks, behind-the-scenes industry lobbying activities and events take place around the world in the months leading up to negotiations.” –Delphine Levi Alvares, Global Petrochemical Campaign Coordinator at the Center for International Environmental Law.
📣Upcoming Conferences:
Association for the Study of Literature and Environment (ASLE) Biennial Conference. Conference theme: collective atmospheres: air, intimacy, and inequality. July 8-11, 2025. University of Maryland, College Park.
RIMMA2025 - International Conference on Forecasting, Preparedness, Warning, and Response: Conference Theme: Visualization, Communication, and Information Management. 28-31 January 2025, University of Bern, Switzerland.
Conference on Communication and the Environment (COCE). University of Tasmania Media School. June 23-27, 2025.
(Deadline already passed for submitting abstracts but looks interesting!): Communicating climate hope: Countering eco-anxiety and climate doomism in research and practice. University of British Columbia and Tilburg University, August 15-16, 2024.
📰News: Colorado Communities Defeat Exxon’s Motions to Dismiss Climate Accountability Case: (June 24, 2024): “Boulder now joins a growing number of states and communities — including Honolulu, Hawai`i, and Annapolis and Anne Arundel County, Maryland, as well as the States of Massachusetts and Delaware — whose climate deception lawsuits against major oil and gas companies have prevailed against motions to dismiss from Exxon and other defendants.”
🐝Photo Contest!: Resting cuckoo bees win insect photo competition. (June 25, 2024).
📚New Books in 2024!:
Gaia's Web: How Digital Environmentalism Can Combat Climate Change, Restore Biodiversity, Cultivate Empathy, and Regenerate the Earth. By Karen Bakker. MIT Press.
Brand Antarctica: How Global Consumer Culture Shapes Our Perceptions of the Ice Continent. by Hanne Elliot Fønss Nielsen. University of Nebraska Press.
Sand Rush: The Revival of the Beach in Twentieth-Century Los Angeles
by Elsa Devienne, Oxford University Press. Listen to an interview with the author here:
What is Veganism For? By Catherine Oliver, University of Bristol Press.
📚 Research
Conceptualisations of ‘critical thinking’ in environmental and sustainability education. Marthe Berg Andresen Reffhaug and Jonas Andreasen Lysgaard (2024). In Environmental Education Research (June 2024).
Communicating the links between climate change and heat waves with the Climate Shift Index. By Laura Thomas-Walters, Matthew H. Goldberg, Sanguk Lee, Aidan Lyde, Seth A. Rosenthal, and Anthony Leiserowitz. In Weather, Climate, Society (June 2024).
“Unexpectedly, we also found that just talking about the July 2023 heat wave, without mentioning climate change, was enough to positively impact beliefs that climate change is making heat waves more likely and worse, both for the July 2023 heat wave and heat waves in the US in general.”
Digital Climate Newsletters: The New Alternative for Climate Journalism? By Hanna E. Morris, in The Palgrave Handbook of Everyday Digital Life (pdf). (2024)
“The pointed critiques made by the authors of the three digital climate newsletters under analysis in this chapter underscore the oversights of the mainstream press and reveal the powerful potential of alternative digital climate media. As revealed by the disinformation and conspiracy theories that thrive on platforms like Substack, however, legitimate critiques of mainstream journalism are at risk of being co-opted by a reactionary right and climate deniers that use the very same digital platforms for very different (and contradicting) purposes” (p. 449).
Understanding Nature through Photography: An Empirical Analysis of the Intents of Nature Photographers and the Preparatory Process. By Naoyuki Ohara, Yasuhiro Yamanaka Gregory Trencher in Environmental Communication (2019): “the objective of this study is to build understanding into the specific intentions of nature photographers working in Hokkaido in Northern Japan and the preparatory measures that facilitate this purpose. Specifically, we tackle three research questions: (1) the kind of preparatory measures taken by photographers before shoots and the intent that drives their work, (2) the manner by which these professionals self-identity and attribute meaning to their role as nature photographers, and (3) challenges encountered in conveying their intent to the public through images, and countermeasures to overcome these.”
And here is an interesting interview with Naoyuki Ohara about his postdoctoral research on Japanese nature documentaries and photography. He is looking to connect with other researchers and practitioners outside Japan with interests in nature documentaries and photography, (so if that’s you!), you can reach out to him here: naoyuki.ohara[at]gmail.com.
New ecolinguistics articles out so far this year in the Journal Language & Ecology 2024
Fresh air in a box: An eco-critical analysis of advertisements offering solutions to air pollution by Shreya Parmar and Mona Parakh.
The ‘Ce qui nous concerne’ (‘What matters to us’) project and participative research with Rennes’ civil society narratives: An ecosophical narratology by William Kelleher.
More than a microcosm: Ecology and ecolinguistics in the garden, by Jolyon Kirby.
💡 Ideas
The New Climate Denial Is Based on These Six Terms: The new obstructionist approach doesn’t say global warming isn’t happening. Instead, it argues we don’t need to phase out oil and gas. By Genevieve Guenther in The New Republic (June 24, 2024):
This propaganda is spun out of six key terms that dominate the language of climate politics: alarmist, cost, growth, “India and China,” innovation, and resilience. Together these terms weave a narrative that goes something like this: “Yes, climate change is real, but calling it an existential threat is just alarmist. And, anyway, phasing out coal, oil, and gas would cost us too much. Human flourishing relies on the economic growth enabled by fossil fuels, so we need to keep using them and deal with climate change by fostering technological innovation and increasing our resilience. Besides, America should not act unilaterally on the climate crisis while emissions are rising in India and China.” This narrative is designed to encourage the incorrect and dangerous belief that the world does not need essentially to stop using fossil fuels—either because climate change won’t be that destructive or, in some versions of the story, because the world can keep using coal, oil, and gas and still halt global heating anyway.
What turns a crisis into a moment for substantive change? The disruption nexus:
Moments of crisis, such as our own, are great opportunities for historic change, but only under highly specific conditions. By Roman Krznaric in Aeon. (June, 2024)
Magic Died When Art and Science Split. By Renée Bergland in Nautilus Magazine (June 10, 2024):
As sociologist Max Weber has explained, “disenchantment” is the belief that everything in the natural world can be known and mastered and that mystery, wonder, and other emotions have no place in scientific thought. When I started my research for this book, I assumed that disenchantment was the unavoidable outcome of the development of modern science. As it turned out, the story was far more nuanced. Two hundred years ago, painters, poets, and priests were expected to study the natural world.
Revelator Reads: 15 Random Books That Every Environmentalist Should Read
These aren’t books that will get filed under “climate change” or “wildlife,” but they all offer a glimpse into our changing world:
“Burnout: The Secret to Unlocking the Stress Cycle by Emily Nagoski & Amelia Nagoski — A book every environmentalist should read — or at least keep on the shelf for when they need it. And trust me, you’re probably going to need it. This doesn’t specifically cover environmental topics, and it’s written chiefly for women and the pressures they face, but it contains tips and tools for recovering from burnout that can help us rebuild for the long fight ahead. (Side note: My local library had a 17-week reservation backlog when I first tried to read this, so maybe put in your request early?)”
Images of Climate Change That Cannot Be Missed: Just as we risk becoming inured to the crisis, an exhibition, “Coal + Ice,” serves as a stunning call to action. By Bill McKibben in the New Yorker (May 28, 2024).
🗃️ From the Archive
“Stories are never neutral. At its fundamental level, a story is an assertion—either a reinforcement or a contestation of our interpretations of reality. And today, the contest between competing narratives to explain the present state of our world has never felt so consequential.”
—Jonathan Matthew Smucker, in the foreword to the 2nd edition of Re:Imagining Change.
💬 Quote I’m thinking about
Thanks so much as always for your interest in my work, and if you found this digest useful, please consider sharing with others who might find it interesting too😊 I'd also love to hear from you. Leave a comment to let me know what you think about this digest, what areas of environmental communication you’re involved in/most interest you, or anything you’d like to see more of in Wild Ones:)
If you found this newsletter useful in your own life and work, consider subscribing to receive future Wild Ones posts in your inbox. Wild Ones will always be a free educational resource, but if you’d like to support my writing, consider a paid subscription option too:)
Oh, and here’s some networking advice I came across recently😅