Climate debate fuelled by hearsay and rumour

Very few Reddit posts have reliable science

Opinions formed when young often stay with us for life. Views on climate change are especially strong among this group, which represents a powerful force. However, a new study of Reddit posts – one of the largest social media platforms – concerning climate change shows that just 1 in 25 are linked to scientific sources, indicating a widespread lack of informed scientific debate.

Reddit is approaching its 20th anniversary, but is still highly relevant, as there are only four other social media platforms that receive a larger share of visits. There are over half a billion users, with 44% between 18-29 years old. The average age is 23 years.

European researchers writing in Public Library of Science Climate say that well-informed individual and collective action depends upon the public’s understanding of scientific findings. However, their research shows that in many cases debates about climate are fuelled by hearsay and misinformation.

In a study analysing 14 years of posts, they find only about 4% of links in Reddit posts are to scientific sources, whilst most are to articles in the mass media, which the researchers say peaked between 2019–20. I have often remarked in this column how monolithic and narrow mass media reporting of climate change is.

Additionally, they noticed that those who refer to scientific sources have centre-left political leanings and those with more polarised views are less likely to quote scientific sources.

Perhaps the conclusions of this study are not wholly surprising, but they are worrying nonetheless given that more and more people, of all ages, are moving away from the mass media and relying on social media for their news and information.

The researchers conclude that the study provides, ‘quantitative evidence of the dearth or scientific basis of the online public debate and puts it in context of other, potentially unreliable, sources of information.’