Search Climate Insights Directory

Based on a Fall 2025 survey of 1,146 U.S. adults, the report finds that YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram are the most commonly used social media platforms across all segments of the 'Six Americas' framework. While 23% of Americans hear about global warming on social media at least once a month, this is most frequent among the 'Alarmed' segment (43%). The authors suggest that climate communicators should strategically select platforms and prioritize video content to reach diverse audiences, while noting that platform algorithms may reinforce existing beliefs by exposing users to information aligned with their habits.

Based on a Fall 2025 survey of 1,146 U.S. adults, the report finds that 94% of Americans visit at least one social media platform weekly, with YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram being the most common across all climate-opinion segments. The 'Alarmed' segment hears about global warming on social media most frequently (43% at least once a month), while the 'Disengaged' hear about it least (8%). The authors suggest that climate communicators should prioritize video content and strategically select platforms to reach different segments, noting that algorithms likely reinforce existing beliefs by tailoring climate information to user habits.

The Procurement Toolkit by Clean Creatives is designed to help CMOs, procurement teams, and sustainability leads identify and eliminate fossil fuel conflicts of interest within their marketing and PR supply chains. It argues that the communications industry enables a "creative cover up" for the fossil fuel industry, which is responsible for 80% of global carbon emissions since 2016. The toolkit promotes the use of the 'F-List', a database of 803 agencies and seven holding companies with documented fossil fuel ties, to facilitate ethical sourcing. It outlines a decision-making framework for agency selection based on transparency and commitments to phase out fossil fuel clients, while highlighting that most agencies derive less than 1% of their revenue from such contracts.

The document outlines a comprehensive strategy for state, local, and tribal governments to combat information threats associated with extreme weather. It categorizes threats into environmental, geopolitical, and hate-based vectors, and advocates for a shift from reactive crisis communications to proactive 'trust architecture' built through grassroots partnerships. The guide provides a risk matrix for triaging threats based on immediacy, severity, and prevalence, and offers technical advice on 'pre-bunking' and Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) to ensure high-trust information remains visible in AI-driven search environments.

The report posits that climate justice is unattainable without 'democratic communication and information' that empowers frontline communities. Through case studies in Colombia, Nepal, and Nigeria, it demonstrates how community radio, public dialogues, and community-led data collection bridge the gap between high-level policy and local realities, countering disinformation and ensuring that indigenous and local knowledge inform environmental governance.

The document warns that a record-breaking El Niño event is being leveraged by disinformation campaigns to attribute extreme weather to natural cycles rather than fossil fuel emissions. It highlights the resulting food insecurity risks in Central America, Southern Africa, and South Asia, while arguing that the most effective defense against climate denial is not fact-checking, but the support of community-led information networks in places like Colombia, Nepal, and Nigeria.

The report analyzes the recurrence of climate disinformation during extreme weather events in 2026, specifically focusing on wildfires in Canada, the US, and the UK, and heatwaves in the EU, Spain, and Portugal. It highlights the role of 'participatory disinformation' and the failure of social media platforms to act on advance warnings from organizations like CAAD and EDMO.

QuotaClimat has issued 17 recommendations to the French government to ensure the upcoming national plan on environmental and climate information effectively tackles disinformation. These proposals focus on monitoring media coverage, protecting environmental spokespeople, funding research, and strengthening regulatory frameworks like the Digital Services Act and the roles of VIGINUM and Arcom. The initiative follows France's commitment to the Global Declaration for Climate Information Integrity at COP30 and recommendations from the High Council for the Climate 2025 report.

The provided text consists of appendices to a report by the Center for Climate Integrity. Appendix A lists trade associations, research institutes, and PR firms—such as the American Gas Association (AGA), the Gas Research Institute (GRI), and J. Walter Thompson—that collaborated to promote natural gas. Appendix B outlines a timeline from 1968 to 1996, detailing how the industry was alerted to methane's climate impact as early as 1968, launched a "clean energy" marketing campaign in 1972, and later promoted gas as a "bridge fuel" in 1990 despite internal uncertainties regarding methane leakage rates. It specifically highlights a 1996 GRI/EPA study that reported a 1.4 percent methane emission rate, which the document claims was heavily influenced by the industry and lacked independent technical review by the EPA.

The report finds that while the May 2026 heatwave triggered a spike in media attention, coverage often lacked depth regarding the causes of climate change and structural adaptation solutions. Public broadcasters and specific press outlets like Le Monde and L'Humanité more consistently linked the event to global warming, whereas private channels like CNews and BFMTV frequently omitted this connection. The analysis highlights a preference for palliative adaptation measures, such as air conditioning, over structural solutions like urban greening or thermal renovation, and notes the emergence of climate disinformation narratives on certain platforms.

The briefing identifies a systematic 'escalation of doubt' strategy used by disinformation actors to minimize the role of climate change in wildfires. It details how narratives shift from attributing fires to criminal acts or government mismanagement to more extreme conspiracy theories, such as claims that fires are started to clear land for wind farms or lithium extraction. The document highlights the role of digital platforms' 'attention economy' in amplifying these lies, noting that in Canada, such disinformation has interfered with emergency services and public safety during crises. It concludes that 86% of Canadians support a federal plan to regulate the spread of climate disinformation during extreme weather events.

The document asserts that climate disinformation in Europe is an industrialised threat that distorts public debate, delays clean energy investment, and weakens crisis response. It highlights a failure in regulatory enforcement across the EU and UK, noting that while instruments like the Digital Services Act exist, they are unevenly applied. The authors advocate for limiting algorithmic amplification of misleading content and increasing media scrutiny to protect the conditions necessary for collective climate action.

The report identifies 47 uncontested cases of climate disinformation on six German TV channels from April 2025 to April 2026, noting that both public and private broadcasters are vulnerable. Political figures and guests are the primary sources of this disinformation, with a significant portion of cases focusing on the economic and technical reliability of the energy transition.

The report identifies 47 unchallenged cases of climate misinformation across six German TV channels (Sat.1, ZDF, ProSieben, RTL, Das Erste, and Kabel Eins) from April 2025 to April 2026. It finds that misinformation is often reactive, peaking around political events like the 2025 federal elections and the 2026 Climate Action Programme. The most dominant narratives target the economic and technical reliability of the Energiewende, while others focus on nuclear energy inaccuracies and the deflection of national responsibility. Politicians and guests are the primary vectors, accounting for 70% of cases, though journalists and commentators also contribute nearly 30%. Both public (ZDF) and private (Sat.1) broadcasters show vulnerability, with ZDF's risk linked to political talk shows and Sat.1's to the loosely structured format of morning shows. The report recommends journalist training on obstruction mechanisms, real-time fact-checking for live panels, and the creation of an independent media observatory.

The Council on Strategic Risks describes a workshop in California that explored how extreme weather events, such as wildfires and droughts, can be leveraged by opportunistic actors to spread mis- and disinformation. The report identifies key uncertainties regarding generative AI, institutional capacity, and public trust, and presents three divergent future scenarios for the state: a 'muddling through' crisis, a geopolitical collapse triggered by conflict in the Pacific, and a positive social transformation in water management. It concludes that information manipulation is a persistent risk to disaster response and national security, necessitating cross-sector partnerships for resilience.

The document analyzes a global trend of decreasing climate coverage in news media, particularly in the US, while identifying specific reasons for this decline and offering a prescription for revitalizing climate journalism to reflect the high level of public concern.

The Conscious Advertising Network's Policy Roadmap 2026 calls for legislative action to address the 'monetisation of attention' by digital platforms and AI companies. It argues that self-regulation has failed, leading to the amplification of harmful content, climate disinformation, and risks to children. The roadmap proposes four pillars: enshrining information integrity in law, driving end-to-end transparency in the ad supply chain, establishing financial accountability for the monetisation of harm, and aligning business models with societal interests.

The fact sheet asserts that a small number of fossil fuel corporations are primarily responsible for climate change, having known about the dangers of their products since the 1950s but choosing to mislead the public and lobby against climate action to maintain profits. It highlights that legal action is currently being taken by various US jurisdictions to hold these companies accountable for deceptive practices and climate damages.

The document analyzes how the 'attention economy' and the rapid integration of AI in advertising contribute to a global information crisis by funding disinformation and eroding trust. It highlights a 'governance gap' where regulatory frameworks fail to keep pace with AI adoption, leading to systemic opacity and the financial decline of independent media. The brief provides specific recommendations for advertisers to demand object-level transparency and for policymakers to establish enforceable labeling and auditing standards for AI-generated content.

The report identifies 815 cases of climate misinformation across 44 audiovisual channels in Brazil, Spain, France, and Poland. It finds that private media are significantly more porous to disinformation than public media, with 85% of cases occurring in private outlets. A strong negative correlation exists between the volume of climate coverage and the prevalence of disinformation, meaning media that cover climate issues more frequently tend to spread less misinformation. The study highlights a shift toward 'new climate denial,' which focuses on obstructing climate action and attacking renewable energy rather than denying the existence of warming. Renewable energy is a primary target, often linked to narratives of lost sovereignty, anti-EU sentiment, and social decline. The report recommends improved journalist training, stricter guest selection protocols, and increased accountability for broadcasters.