2. Key Findings
We identified and analysed all news, features, opinion pieces, letters, and editorials that discussed climate change across four News Corp publications – The Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun, Courier Mail, and The Australian – between April 2019 and March 2020. Here is what we found:
Quantity of climate change coverage
The total of relevant items was 8,612. (Section 4.1)
Nearly half of all items (44%) were in The Australian. (Section 4.1)
Information-based reportage (news and features) was 38%. (Section 4.2)
Nearly two-thirds (62%) of the coverage was commentary (editorials, opinion, and letters). The strong influence of commentary on the overall message about climate change is evident, both in volume, and in seeding and shaping ideas and analysis.
News Corp produces climate scepticism
All of the four News Corp publications produce substantial amounts of material that is sceptical about the findings of climate science. Overall, 45% of all items either rejected or cast doubt upon consensus scientific findings. (Section 4.5)
The Daily Telegraph is the most sceptical of the News Corp publications, with 58% of content discussing climate change being sceptical (Section 4.5)
Most News Corp reporters do not actively promote sceptical views. Reportage (news and features) was less sceptical than commentary (editorials, opinions, and letters), with 89% of reportage accepting climate science findings. (Section 4.5)
Commentary items (editorials, opinions, and letters) drove scepticism in all News Corp publications. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of opinion pieces were sceptical towards climate science (Section 4.5)
Out of a total of 2,309 opinion articles, the top ten opinion writers accounted for 44% of content. All of these opinion writers are either climate change sceptics, promote scepticism in their articles, or are negative towards climate action/efforts. The top five were Andrew Bolt, Tim Blair, Peta Credlin, Peter Gleeson, and Chris Kenny, all of whom are occasional or regular Sky News presenters. (Section 5)
Andrew Bolt, a prominent sceptic, is the largest contributor to stories about climate change with 405 opinion articles, accounting for 12% of all articles (news, features, editorials, and opinion) in the Herald Sun, The Daily Telegraph, and Courier Mail combined. In the Herald Sun alone he had 32% of all articles. He is strongly promoted and prominently endorsed by News Corp. (Section 5)
Of the 55% of stories that accepted climate science, there was negligible reporting of the findings of climate scientists or the impacts of climate change. Misunderstandings about climate science were almost always promoted rather than clarified or explained. (Section 4.4 and Section 6.2)
Attitudes towards climate action/efforts
Of 3,029 items where an attitude to policy was relevant, 57% were negative towards climate action, 16% were neutral, and only 27% were positive. Items were more than twice as likely to be negative than positive. News Corp is an active player on the side of political and economic interests resisting action on climate change. (Section 4.6)
The most negative was the Daily Telegraph with only 22% of items communicating a positive attitude towards climate change efforts. (Section 4.6)
News Corp opinion pieces were more than twice as likely to be negative towards climate change action than news stories, while news items were twice as likely to be positive than opinion pieces. (Section 4.6)
There was a lack of diversity of sources and perspective in climate coverage. The Herald Sun provided the most one-dimensional coverage with 82% of opinion pieces being negative towards climate change action, and 62% of reportage (news and features) having one or two sources only. (Section 4.4 and Section 4.6)
Politics and policy themes dominate the coverage of climate change in the four News Corp publications and are strongly linked to climate scepticism. This reveals how strongly the negative interpretation of climate change science and action is linked to political conflict over energy policy. (Section 4.3)
News Corp provides those readers with an interest in business with a more realistic perspective on climate change and climate science findings. Business-themed reportage (news and features) was more likely to be accepting of climate change science (95%) and was more balanced towards action on climate change. Just over half (55%) of business reportage was positive towards action/efforts. (Section 6.3)
Who gets a voice?
Half of all the news and features had no source or just one source, which demonstrates the superficial nature of much of the reportage. (Section 4.4)
In one year, only 11 or 0.2% First Nations sources were identified in stories relating to climate change. Indigenous people were effectively silenced on matters relating to climate change. (Section 4.4)
Men dominated the coverage of climate change. Where gender could be identified, men were quoted on 76% of occasions, women were quoted on 24% of occasions and <1% were non-binary. (Section 4.4)
Readers of News Corp Australia are receiving almost no information about the impacts of climate change at either the global level or in the Indo-Pacific where Australia claims a regional leadership role. (Section 4.4)
Political sources dominated, at 47% of all sources. This reflects the partisan politicisation and decades-long tussle over policy that dominates coverage of climate change in Australia. (Section 4.4)
Although civil society (environmental groups, NGOs, think-tanks) are often engaged with climate change issues, they represented only 4% of sources. At the same time, civil society groups were often the objects of derision and abuse. They were only occasionally given a voice to respond or state their views. Effectively they were silenced. (Section 4.4)
Financial, fossil fuel and other mining sources accounted for 56% of all business sources, while renewable energy business accounted for 5%. (Section 4.4)
Ten percent of political sources were Australian independent or minor party politicians (other than the Greens). They included Independents at the national, state, and local level. Only 7% of the political sources were Greens at all levels of government, and nearly all articles quoting Greens were negative coverage. (Section 4.4)
Scientists had very little visibility in News Corp’s coverage of climate change. Only 6% of all sources across four News Corp publications were scientists of any kind. Some scientists were also negatively targeted by News Corp publications. (Section 4.4 and Section 6.2)
In a science and environment piece, News Corp is more than twice as likely to quote a politician than a scientist on climate change topics, which is a further indication of the deeply politicised approach to coverage of the science. (Section 4.4)