Garzón, K.P. (2025). Climate Change Disinformation in Digital News Media: A Typology Proposal. In: Ibáñez, D.B., Gallardo-Echenique, E., Siringoringo, H., Diez, N.L. (eds) Communication and Applied Technologies. ICOMTA 2024. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 427. Springer, Singapore.

This study examines how digital news media disseminate disinformation about climate change, distinguishing between misinformation, which typically arises from unintentional errors, and disinformation, which is deliberately crafted to deceive. Findings indicate that the persistent coverage of contrarian sources, despite strong scientific consensus, is a deliberate strategy that negatively affects public understanding of climate change and undermines efforts to address it. This skeptical content, often disguised as objective coverage of sources and data interpretation, plays a role in constructing the ‘climate alarmism’ narrative, which frames climate policies as politically motivated rather than evidence-based. Additionally, disinformation is spread without relying on contrarian voices, particularly through opinion columns, where columnists propagate their own skeptical value judgments. This study calls for a reevaluation of journalistic standards and ethical practices to combat disinformation and foster a well-informed debate on climate change.

Christner, C., Merz, P., Barkela, B., Jungkunst, H., & von Sikorski, C. (2024). Combatting Climate Disinformation: Comparing the Effectiveness of Correction Placement and Type. Environmental Communication, 18(6).

In this study, we investigated whether corrections can combat climate disinformation. Using a preregistered quota-based online experiment in Germany (N = 1401), we tested how the effectiveness of disinformation correction in reducing climate misperceptions was influenced by correction placement (prebunking or debunking) and correction type (focused on facts, logic, or the combination of both). We investigated how populist radical-right (PRR) attitudes moderate the effect of disinformation correction and whether correction alleviates the negative effects of disinformation on efficacy beliefs to mitigate climate change (EBMCC) through reduced misperceptions. All debunking conditions and the logic-focused prebunking condition significantly reduced climate misperceptions. Prebunking was only effective under the logic-focused correction condition. We found no moderating effect of PRR attitudes on climate misperceptions, suggesting that corrections similarly benefitted all participants. In addition, a significant indirect effect of corrections was observed on EBMCC via climate misperceptions.

Lamb, W. F., Mattioli, G., Levi, S., Roberts, J. T., Capstick, S., Creutzig, F., Minx, J. C., Müller-Hansen, F., Culhane, T., & Steinberger, J. K. (2020). Discourses of climate delay. Global Sustainability, 3, e17.

‘Discourses of climate delay’ pervade current debates on climate action. These discourses accept the existence of climate change, but justify inaction or inadequate efforts. In contemporary discussions on what actions should be taken, by whom and how fast, proponents of climate delay would argue for minimal action or action taken by others. They focus attention on the negative social effects of climate policies and raise doubt that mitigation is possible. Here, we outline the common features of climate delay discourses and provide a guide to identifying them.

Gertrudix M, Carbonell-Alcocer A, Arcos R et al. Disinformation as an obstructionist strategy in climate change mitigation: a review of the scientific literature for a systemic understanding of the phenomenon [version 2; peer review: 4 approved]. Open Res Europe 2024, 4:169.

This study examines the scientific misinformation about climate change, in particular obstructionist strategies. The study aims to understand their impact on public perception and climate policy and emphasises the need for a systemic understanding that includes the financial, economic and political roots.

Vivion, M., Trottier, V., Bouhêlier, È., Goupil-Sormany, I., & Diallo, T. (2024). Climate change and related environmental Events Misinformation on social Media: A Scoping Review Protocol (Preprint). JMIR Research Protocols, 13, e59345.

This study aims to assess the current state of knowledge about misinformation concerning climate change and related environmental events that are circulating on social media. More specifically, we will explore past and current themes, actors, and sources, and the dissemination of this misinformation within the Canadian context.

Spampatti, T., Hahnel, U. J. J., Trutnevyte, E., & Brosch, T. (2023). Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries. Nature Human Behaviour, 8(2).

Decades after the scientific debate about the anthropogenic causes of climate change was settled, climate disinformation still challenges the scientific evidence in public discourse. Here we present a comprehensive theoretical framework of (anti)science belief formation and updating to account for the psychological factors that influence the acceptance or rejection of scientific messages. We experimentally investigated, across 12 countries (N = 6,816), the effectiveness of six inoculation strategies targeting these factors—scientific consensus, trust in scientists, transparent communication, moralization of climate action, accuracy and positive emotions—to fight real-world disinformation about climate science and mitigation actions. While exposure to disinformation had strong detrimental effects on participants’ climate change beliefs (δ = −0.16), affect towards climate mitigation action (δ = −0.33), ability to detect disinformation (δ = −0.14) and pro-environmental behaviour (δ = −0.24), we found almost no evidence for protective effects of the inoculations (all δ < 0.20). We discuss the implications of these findings and propose ways forward to fight climate disinformation.

Brulle, R. J., & Werthman, C. (2021). The role of public relations firms in climate change politics. Climatic Change, 169(1–2)

Climate change policy has long been subject to influence by a wide variety of organizations. Despite their importance, the key role of public relations (PR) firms has long been overlooked in the climate political space. This paper provides an exploratory overview of the extent and nature of involvement of PR firms in climate political action by organizations in five sectors: Coal/Steel/Rail, Oil & Gas, Utilities, Renewable Energy, and the Environmental Movement. The analysis shows that the engagement of public relations firms by organizations in all of these sectors is widespread. In absolute terms, the Utility and Gas & Oil sectors engage the most PR firms, and the Environmental Movement engages the fewest. Organizations in the Utilities Sector show a statistically significant higher use of PR firms than the other sectors. Within each sector, engagement of PR firms is concentrated in a few firms, and the major oil companies and electrical-supply manufactures are the heaviest employers of such firms. PR firms generally specialize in representing specific sectors, and a few larger PR firms are widely engaged in climate and energy political activity. PR firms developed campaigns that frequently relied on third-party groups to engage with the public, criticize opponents, and serve as the face of an advertising campaign. Our analysis shows that PR firms are a key organizational actor in climate politics.

Sethi, P. (2024). What are climate misinformation and disinformation and what is their impact? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

Climate misinformation refers to the spread of inaccurate information about climate change that can arise from human error, while climate disinformation is driven by a deliberate intent to spread knowingly false information. Regardless of intent, “scientifically misleading information” can have “negative implications for climate policy”, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has said.