The Influence of Climate Misinformation on Political Discourse and its Impact on Marginalised Communities

Climate change poses detrimental risks to humanity, with scientists suggesting that global average temperatures need to be limited to 2˚C above pre-industrial levels to restrict the impact of these risks caused by anthropogenic processes (Kim, 2019). The achievement of this relies on informed and effective political discourse. However, the spread of climate misinformation circulating on social media threatens this, presenting challenges surrounding justice, particularly for marginalised communities, who are disproportionately affected (Piatek et al., 2024).

Environmental Justice

Adebowale (2008, p.256) defines environmental justice as “the equal or equitable share of the environment, both built and natural, of all humans.” It seeks to ensure fair distribution of environmental advantages and burdens and highlights concerns surrounding who benefits versus who pays the cost of environmental degradation (McClaren, 2003). Due to the unequal nature of societies across and within countries, with marginalised communities facing the most severe impacts of climate change, productive governance must target inequalities and recognise that environmental justice is not just an environmental issue but a fundamental social justice concern (Adebowale, 2008).

However, climate misinformation is a crucial barrier to the achievement of environmental justice. For example, the perpetuation of climate change myths, such as the belief that it is a natural occurrence, unaffected by human activity, are often supported by fossil fuel companies or other powerful entities who have financial interests in the delay of climate change (Piatek et al., 2024). This, if unchallenged, can hinder the implementation of key policy measures and climate action, further exacerbating inequality (Piatek et al., 2024). This indirectly widens the socio-economic gap between wealthy and marginalised communities, and deepens environmental injustices (Piatek et al., 2024; Adebowale, 2008).

Rawlsian Justice

Rawls’ theory of justice denotes justice as fairness (Rawls, 1971). His ‘Liberty Principle’ explains that each person is entitled to equality in the context of climate change, without infringing on the rights of others (Rawls, 1971; Kim, 2019). From this perspective, climate policy should aim to protect marginalised communities with the same urgency and intensity applied to wealthy populations (Kim, 2019). Within a democratic society, this requires voters to educate themselves to understand the global risks climate change poses and resist the injustices presented to vulnerable communities (Kim, 2019).

Rawls also uses the ‘Veil of Ignorance’ concept to further his theory. He argues that if individuals did not know their social or economic position, they would choose a set of guiding principles that are fair to all, ensuring justice for those who are marginalised (Mandle, 2009). However, the spread of climate misinformation could be a barrier to this as it can distort public perceptions (Piatek et al., 2024). Social media algorithms amplify and prioritise content based on a user’s preferences, creating filter bubbles that can deepen misunderstandings of climate issues and remove any potential sense of a ‘Veil of Ignorance’ (Piatek et al., 2024; Pariser, 2011; Kim, 2019). This selective exposure can fragment public consensus, fuel polarisation, and foster support for leaders who lack robust climate plans (Karlova, 2018; Mashamaite, 2023; Dunlap and Bruelle, 2020). As a result, this delay to effective climate action disproportionately affects marginalised groups the most.

At a time when urgent climate action, through effective legislation, is critical to achieving justice, we cannot afford for climate misinformation to continue to spread. Social media platforms must be held accountable for the perpetuation of misinformation through algorithms, influencers, and unverified users, and improve regulation to detect false information (Piatek et al., 2024). The discernment of credible information through the teaching of critical thinking skills at all levels of education is another method for solving this (Piatek et al., 2024).

Reference List

Adebowale, M. 2008. Understanding environmental justice: making the connection between sustainable development and social justice In: Social Justice and Public Policy. Bristol: The Policy Press, pp.251–275.

Dunlap, R. and Bruelle, R. 2020. Sources and Amplifiers of Climate Change Denial In: Research Handbook on Communicating Climate Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp.49–61. Retrieved from: http://doi.org/10.4337/9781789900408.00013

Karlova, N. 2018. Misinformation and disinformation in online games: an exploratory investigation of possible cues. University of Washington. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/42416.

Kim, H. 2019. An extension of Rawls’s theory of justice for climate change. International Theory. 11(2), pp.160–181.

Mandle, J. 2009. Rawls’s A theory of justice: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mashanmaite, M. 2023. The Impact of Misinformation and Fake News on Climate Change Perception and Response: A Comprehensive Review. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review. 6(9), pp.183–193. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.47814/ijssrr.v6i9.1505

McClaren, D. 2003. Environmental space and ecological debt In: Just sustainabilities: Development in an unequal world. London: Earthscan.

Piatek, S.J., Haines, A. and Larson, H.J. 2024. We need to tackle the growing threat of mis- and disinformation about climate change and health. BMJ., pp.q2187–q2187.

Pariser, E. 2011. The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. London: Penguin Press.

Rawls, J. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.